Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
5 hours ago, Mathieub said:

Women are smarter is just a myth of ChatGPT.

There was actually some seriously fascinating research done on this not long ago. Long story short what they discovered is the average intelligence of men and women were almost identical. But, that women tended to all be around that average, where men were spread out on both sides, more frequently being far less intelligent and far more intelligent.

In other words the women were one big ball around the center, whereas men were much flatter and spread out. Or as the lead researcher said women have fewer nobels but fewer dumbbells :) 

I just found it really interesting that the "Hold my beer" Jean in men survived as well as the stephen hawking gene for some reason, whereas women don't deviate as much

Posted
2 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Why are you so soft? Take some responsibility for a change you wuss.

 

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Just as the indigenous should LOL

Ha Ha Ha...don't like it eh??? Give me a downvote Ha Ha Ha

Thing is dude, ya cannot say take responsibility for yourself out of one side of your mouth and then cry if someone tells you to do it too LOL

 

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.

Posted
1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

Funny, considering the reason your tribe is going extinct is because it never feels the touch of a woman. 

Go have sex, incel.  

The last refuge of someone with nothing intelligent or insightful to say… I’ve sired four and have nothing to prove.  Thanks for reminding me why I shouldn’t waste time here.  Mostly armchair critics who are responsible for many of Canada’s problems.  👍

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

Ha Ha Ha...don't like it eh??? Give me a downvote Ha Ha Ha

Thing is dude, ya cannot say take responsibility for yourself out of one side of your mouth and then cry if someone tells you to do it too LOL

Again: I'm not Indigenous you racist dummy.

 

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Again: I'm not Indigenous you racist dummy.

 

Hey puppy...never said you were....any time or any place

Just said you , in another thread, defend the indigenous and say to support them and we, the taxpayer, be responsible for them and in this thread you tell someone to take responsibility for themselves.

You are a major league phony dick LOL

Edited by ExFlyer

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.

Posted
42 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Hey puppy...never said you were....any time or any place

You did in the other thread and implied it here:

Quote

Thing is dude, ya cannot say take responsibility for yourself out of one side of your mouth and then cry if someone tells you to do it too LOL

Quote

Just said you , in another thread, defend the indigenous and say to support them and we, the taxpayer, be responsible for them and in this thread you tell someone to take responsibility for themselves.

Well we have treaty and other legal obligations to the Indigenous peoples, dummy.

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit

Posted
24 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Easily fixed

lmao sure.

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit

Posted
On 10/14/2024 at 10:07 AM, I am Groot said:

Interesting read, and not often you find such candor from a university professor. I wonder what blowback he'll get for mentioning names the way he did. Universities have become, in his words "matriarchal enterprise run by women for women, in pursuit of retribution for the patriarchy of the past". And men are tuning out and refusing to attend as the universities fill their administrative and academic ranks with female social justice warriors and fill their course catalogs with 'studies' courses that are anathema to men.

In the United States, women have long been outpacing men in college graduation, with the proportion of 25-34 year old females holding a bachelor’s degree eclipsing males in the same age category as far back as the mid-1990s. For the academic year that began in the fall of 2021, Statistics Canada reported that enrolment of women was a full 18 percentage points — almost a whole quintile — ahead of men.

What is abundantly clear is that men are steering clear of university programs, even in the traditionally masculine subject areas — and I don’t blame them. In conversation with my new chair in the department of chemical and physical sciences, Prof. Claudiu Gradinaru, I was told that even physics is now showing close to a 50-50 gender split. Women, thankfully, are no longer ashamed to split the atom.

But let me venture a reason for this widespread masculine detoxification of our universities. The pervasive and now deeply entrenched culture of kindness, empathy and academic limp-wristedness, the same culture that has led to so many students receiving accommodations for any number of largely imagined mental ailments, is anathema to the young, testosterone-charged male psyche, governed as it is by genetically embedded tendencies for boundary-pushing and risk-taking.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/the-dark-side-of-the-feminization-of-higher-education

We are listening to way too much anti-male nonsense being spread by the leftist liberal MSM where many women are saying that there is just way too much masculine toxicity around and it needs to be toned down. Sadly, there are way too many wimpy men that have bought into this anti-male nonsense. Our dear Marxist leader in Ottawa has already shown conservative real men as to how real men should never become. The misfit has already said that he is all in for feminism.

It is real men that built up the world that we now live in. What kind of a world will we be living in if women ever takeover? It will be a feminist disaster. Even the most ardent feminist will run to a man if she finds herself in serious trouble. Women who want to play this feminist game will surely lose in the end. No man wants a feminist biotch to have to deal with. Just saying. 

Posted
43 minutes ago, taxme said:

It is real men that built up the world that we now live in. What kind of a world will we be living in if women ever takeover? It will be a feminist disaster. Even the most ardent feminist will run to a man if she finds herself in serious trouble...

Whatever you say Ayn.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
6 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Men choosing not to go to university because they have alternatives is a bit different from women not going to university because they were discouraged or prevented from doing so as was the case in years past.

Women haven't been prevented from taking any course for decades, Grandpa. But any course that was disproportionately male (because some courses attract men more than women and vice versa)  caused the educational establishment and women groups to go into a tizzy to recruit women, to give them special help, even to set aside seats in STEM courses just for women whose marks would otherwise not qualify them.

 

6 hours ago, Black Dog said:

If you didn't think women not going to university was a problem, why do you think men not going to university is? Maybe you can explain because the guy who wrote the piece in your op sure can't.

Maybe you can explain why the number of men going to university is dwindling. Because no, they're not all going to trade school. Barely a fraction are. I think that just as female-oriented K-12 schools turn boys off, female-oriented universities, with rules that disproportionately impact male behavior, turn young men off. They don't see universities as places where they can thrive, grow and learn, but places where their every word and act will be ruthlessly policed. 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Women haven't been prevented from taking any course for decades, Grandpa. But any course that was disproportionately male (because some courses attract men more than women and vice versa)  caused the educational establishment and women groups to go into a tizzy to recruit women, to give them special help, even to set aside seats in STEM courses just for women whose marks would otherwise not qualify them.

Uh huh and if you think that was wrong, why do you want the same for men now?

Quote

Maybe you can explain why the number of men going to university is dwindling. Because no, they're not all going to trade school. Barely a fraction are. I think that just as female-oriented K-12 schools turn boys off, female-oriented universities, with rules that disproportionately impact male behavior, turn young men off. They don't see universities as places where they can thrive, grow and learn, but places where their every word and act will be ruthlessly policed. 

Again: why is this a problem? You can't even articulate the issue here any more than the blowhard in the OP article could.

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit

Posted
58 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

the blowhard in the OP article could.

No shit. He certainly would never admit that women of typical univeristy entrance age are 1,000 times more mature than men of the same age.
And can remember that you go there to learn. Most of the guys went to trade school or into jobs that they were set up in because they'd make more money and that was the most important thing to them. Could make as much on the docks as an engineer. Way more than as a teacher or lab tech.

Posted
2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

They don't see universities as places where they can thrive, grow and learn, but places where their every word and act will be ruthlessly policed. 

If I was a young man looking at a university full of women the thought of seeing it as an opportunity might cross my mind.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
52 minutes ago, herbie said:

No shit. He certainly would never admit that women of typical univeristy entrance age are 1,000 times more mature than men of the same age.

They're not actually. By that age men are starting to catch up with women emotionally and maturity-wise, and they quickly surpass them.

In addition the data says that college women have a very high percentage of mental health issues.

Just a fun fact

Posted
10 hours ago, eyeball said:

If I was a young man looking at a university full of women the thought of seeing it as an opportunity might cross my mind.

I'm curious about what specific words and acts are being "ruthlessly policed" on campuses these days and how that is holding boys back from learning and thriving.

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit

Posted
12 hours ago, eyeball said:

If I was a young man looking at a university full of women the thought of seeing it as an opportunity might cross my mind.

I get what you're saying, but if you could make it sound a little less rapey that would be great

Posted
1 hour ago, Black Dog said:

I'm curious about what specific words and acts are being "ruthlessly policed" on campuses these days and how that is holding boys back from learning and thriving.

Have you not picked up a newspaper?

Speakers who are not approved of by the left often face riots and disorder when they're invited to the campus, and in some cases are denied all together. An entire College lost its flipping mind when somebody put up a sign saying it's okay to be white.

Speaking out against woke ideology at all even in the most practical senses can lead to not only severe academic penalty but even physical attacks.

Whites and especially white males are meant to feel inferior and if they don't act like they are inferior then they are chastised and attacked.

There's a million examples. In America the colleges and universities are no longer strictly a place of learning but rather a very focused place of political activism for the left and that directly impacts the students educational career. There's no doubt about this, a tiny bit of research will very quickly uncover a huge and gaping maw Of political activism that interferes with studies

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Have you not picked up a newspaper?

Speakers who are not approved of by the left often face riots and disorder when they're invited to the campus, and in some cases are denied all together. An entire College lost its flipping mind when somebody put up a sign saying it's okay to be white.

I wondered if there's more to this story than you say it is and sure enough:

Quote

A Tennessee university has opened an investigation after signs saying "It's okay to be white" were placed around its campus, including on a display honoring the first African American students to enroll at the school.

"It's ok to be white" is, of course a popular white nationalist slogan.

Quote

Speaking out against woke ideology at all even in the most practical senses can lead to not only severe academic penalty but even physical attacks.

Again, I asked "what specific words and acts" we're talking about and you respond with vaguery. Give me an example of this happening and what specifically was said because if your example above is anything to go by, the details often matter.

Quote

Whites and especially white males are meant to feel inferior and if they don't act like they are inferior then they are chastised and attacked.

Funny how your ilk never gives a shit about the "feelings" of college and university students unless they're white males.

But again, I asked for specifics, not generalities.

Quote

There's a million examples.

And yet you haven't provided a single concrete one.

Quote

In America the colleges and universities are no longer strictly a place of learning but rather a very focused place of political activism for the left and that directly impacts the students educational career. There's no doubt about this, a tiny bit of research will very quickly uncover a huge and gaping maw Of political activism that interferes with studies

None of these claims are new. They said the same thing in the '60s. My own mom didn't want my sister to go to university back in the '80s because "the only you learn there is how to protest." Colleges and universities have never really been "strictly a place of learning" in modern times.

Edited by Black Dog
  • Downvote 1

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit

Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Black Dog said:

You did in the other thread and implied it here:

Well we have treaty and other legal obligations to the Indigenous peoples, dummy.

Nope...reading comprehension is clearly an issue with you LOL

You claim not to be indigenous yet you say "we"...implying if you are LOL

And if "we" implies Canadian taxpayers, well, that is my issue with this stuff. There is no, and should never be, an endless for as long as the earth survives deal with anyone. All deals have endings and the indigenous welfare society time has or should come to an end.

 

Edited by ExFlyer

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.

Posted
1 minute ago, ExFlyer said:

Nope...reading comprehension is clearly an issue with you LOL

You claim not to be indigenous yet you say "we"...implying if you are LOL

The "we" is quite clearly referring to "Canada," the nation which I am implicitly identifying as a member of, separate from "the Indigenous peoples."

And I'm the one with reading comprehension issues?

Good Gord man.

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit

Posted
11 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

I wondered if there's more to this story than you say it is and sure enough:

uuuhhhhh.....  there isn't though.  It's literally what i said. They freaked because someone posted signs saying it's ok to be white.  In fact they called it 'vandalism".  :) 

LOL  "I wondered if there was more to the story and it turns out you were exactly right! ha! TAKE THAT! "   :)  seriously what is WRONG with you? '

12 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

It's ok to be white" is, of course a popular white nationalist slogan.

Nope, and it certainly wasn't before the left tried to pretend it was in order to justify their outrage when people came back and said why is it not okay to be white?

13 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Again, I asked "what specific words and acts" we're talking about and you respond with vaguery

Again you were given specifics and now you're just making yourself look like a fool

14 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Funny how your ilk never gives a shit about the "feelings" of college and university students unless they're white males.

Funny how that's absolutely not true but you're going to say it anyway because lying is the only way you can defend your points.

Go ahead and prove me wrong, post where I have ever said that non-white feelings specifically are of no interest to me

15 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

And yet you haven't provided a single concrete one.

And you literally posted an article about it. If you're going to lie, maybe you don't provide the proof that you're lying in the same reply where you're accusing someone of lying  ;) 

"It's ok to be white" is, of course a popular white nationalist slogan.

Again, I asked "what specific words and acts" we're talking about and you respond with vaguery. Give me an example of tis happening and what specifically was said.

Funny how your ilk never gives a shit about the "feelings" of college and university students unless they're white males.

But again, I asked for specifics, not generalities.

And yet you haven't provided a single concrete one.

Quote

None of these claims are new. They said the same thing in the '60s. My own mom didn't want my sister to go to university back in the '80s because "the only you learn there is how to protest." Colleges and universities have never really been "strictly a place of learning" in modern times.

They go through there ups and downs but sure, this is hardly the first time in history when colleges and universities have been more about left-wing indoctrination than about actual education

  • Like 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

The "we" is quite clearly referring to "Canada," the nation which I am implicitly identifying as a member of, separate from "the Indigenous peoples."

And I'm the one with reading comprehension issues?

Good Gord man.

Wrong...again.

The discussion was about you... you claim you are not indigenous and then say "we"....you want it to be about Canada, be clear LOL 

If your posts cannot be. understood or clear, that is on you LOL

Take it easy puppy, do not assign your failings to someone else LOL.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

uuuhhhhh.....  there isn't though.  It's literally what i said. They freaked because someone posted signs saying it's ok to be white.  In fact they called it 'vandalism".  :) 

LOL  "I wondered if there was more to the story and it turns out you were exactly right! ha! TAKE THAT! "   :)  seriously what is WRONG with you? '

I'm not surprised a guy who called a Black poster a monkey and gleefully posted the n word in its entirety doesn't see anything wrong with someone putting posters saying "it's ok to be white" up to cover photos of trailblazing Black students at a formerly segregated school, but normal people can see that this was clearly an act of racial provocation.

Quote

Nope, and it certainly wasn't before the left tried to pretend it was in order to justify their outrage when people came back and said why is it not okay to be white?

It was literally popularized by white nationalists on 4chan you dummy. 

Quote

Again you were given specifics and now you're just making yourself look like a fool.

"Speaking out about woke ideology" is not specific. Try again.

Quote

Funny how that's absolutely not true but you're going to say it anyway because lying is the only way you can defend your points.

Go ahead and prove me wrong, post where I have ever said that non-white feelings specifically are of no interest to me

oops looks like someone's reading comprehension problems are flaring up again. I did not claim that non-white feelings specifically are of no interest to you.

But it is funny how you DEMAND proof here when you can't even be arsed to do the bare minimum to support your own arguments.

Quote

And you literally posted an article about it. If you're going to lie, maybe you don't provide the proof that you're lying in the same reply where you're accusing someone of lying ;)

Yes I did. You did not. You made a vague reference to an incident at some unnamed college and I had to do the actual work to provide the specific example because you are a very lazy person chronically incapable of presenting supporting evidence.

It's also funny that of  all the millions of examples you say you could have chosen, the one anecdote you referenced was about a incident of racial incitement and not someone's feelings being hurt by wokeness or whatever.

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

Wrong...again.

The discussion was about you... you claim you are not indigenous and then say "we"....you want it to be about Canada, be clear LOL 

If your posts cannot be. understood or clear, that is on you LOL

Take it easy puppy, do not assign your failings to someone else LOL.

No in this case literally on you for being a dummy who couldn't parse a very simple sentence.

Edited by Black Dog
  • Thanks 2

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit

Posted
22 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I’ve sired four and have nothing to prove.

Then what's with fragile, impotent rage?  Why are you so threatened by women *gasp* pursuing higher education and positions in its administration?  

22 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Thanks for reminding me why I shouldn’t waste time here.  Mostly armchair critics who are responsible for many of Canada’s problems.  👍

Nobody's going to miss you and your bed-wetting.  Bye.  

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...