3 ms·

As the biological features of slavers and slaves put together towards sustaining a plantation.

anthk 6mo ago
You have no idea what you are talking about and it shows. Pop science, you say, from Jorge Laborda? https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Jorge-Laborda-38332521 https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Jorge-... American Social Pseudosciences should shut up their Sokal-like mouth and learn the basics for once and all. They did tests and trials on how human males and females do orient themselves on distinct environments. Females used points and clues from the environment creating some kind of a graph and men used geometry with distances as vectors and rotations. That on average, of course, because there wil always be overlapping edges. Women using 'male' bound orientation schemes and vice-versa. And they also showed how females could find Waldo-finding like tasks much faster on average than males, while the males were better of focusing for long a single point against slighly moving surronding events without distracting themselves. This is not pseudoscience nor male chauvinistic bullshit. It's the pure reality. Hormones drive us, either you like it or not. Discrete math vs linear algebra. Distinct tools to solve the same problem. Which is better? It depends on the case.
- the_gipsy 6mo ago
  Yepp, that blog link you posted, from whoever this Jorge Laborda may be, is just 3 paragraphs recapping snippets from that book, it's right in the first line: "Why Men Don't Listen & Women Can't Read Maps", by Allan Pease. Since you like to appeal the authority of Some Dude, let me give it to you straight from the "About the Author" section from goodreads.com[1] of your sources. Are you ready? > Allan Pease is an Australian author and motivational speaker. Despite having no education in psychology, neuroscience, or psychiatry, he has managed to establish himself as an "expert on relationships". Originally a musician, he became a successful life insurance salesman, he started a career as a speaker and trainer in sales and latterly in body language. This resulted in a popular sideline of audio tapes, many of which feature his irreverent wit. Hahahahahaha, I literally couldn't make this shit up. Good luck out there, buddy! [1]: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/873930 https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/873930
  - anthk 6mo ago
    If you think different sets of hormones do not condition tons of behaviours you are deluded, buddy. It affects me as a man, too, be highly educated or not. As I said, one of my favourite recreational Math authors (like Conway or Gardner) it's a woman, and her favourite Math branch it's discrete Math. Now, please, understand that she was pefectly able to understand the rest, as Mathematician men are able to the same with subjects they don't like much, too. PD: women on average have a more developed language area than men. They can process and send more complex information like men on a single sentence from subtones in every word. If men use more 'complex' language than women on average it's because women already told everything implicitly with every subtone in words driving subtle but different messages women are able to understand but men do not. So, most of what men do it's to add syntactic sugar while women have a much superior context aware syntax.
    - the_gipsy 6mo ago
      YOU are delusional, amigo. I literally give you a link that points out that what you're basing your beliefs on, is from some motivational speaker, pop-science, borderline con-artist author. And you reply with... more anecdotes. Do you not see the irony? Are you incapable of reflecting on this? There are of course some statistical biological (hormonal, physiological, whatever) differences between women and men. But there are also statistical biological differences between... men! And we are not grouping men like this, except in caste systems or believers in racism. So why should we do this for women? Because it's extremely convenient for people like you, to have women classified as child-rearers and general house servants, and then retroactively explain that this is "natural" with anecdata and pseudoscience, and never having to make any real attempt at gender equality. No hay más ciego que el que no quiere ver...
      - anthk 6mo ago
        >No hay más ciego... Le dijo la sarten al cazo. Yes, there are differences, and this is not pseudoscience. Nor hints about castes about races. https://www.uoc.edu/en/news/2023/286-gender-differences-in-visuospatial-abilities https://www.uoc.edu/en/news/2023/286-gender-differences-in-v... >why should we do this for women? Should we ban men from poetry/arts too? That would be dumb. In my case, Discrete Math and combinatorics where hell compared to other Math branches. Yet I could approach them from overlapping subjects. Women do the same, they applied different strategies and then they bound them together. This requieres effort for both genders? OFC, but that's the 'winning' strategy; the most different skills you gather, the better. Men prefer measure and rotate and women use nodes and graphs? How about using both by definning a lattice and placing easy nodes as helping points making orientation a breeze for both genders? Also, if you negate any difference, how come men and women tend to lose different brain sections upon dementia/Alzheimer?

anthk 6mo ago

You have no idea what you are talking about and it shows. Pop science, you say, from Jorge Laborda? https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Jorge-Laborda-38332521 https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Jorge-... American Social Pseudosciences should shut up their Sokal-like mouth and learn the basics for once and all. They did tests and trials on how human males and females do orient themselves on distinct environments. Females used points and clues from the environment creating some kind of a graph and men used geometry with distances as vectors and rotations. That on average, of course, because there wil always be overlapping edges. Women using 'male' bound orientation schemes and vice-versa. And they also showed how females could find Waldo-finding like tasks much faster on average than males, while the males were better of focusing for long a single point against slighly moving surronding events without distracting themselves. This is not pseudoscience nor male chauvinistic bullshit. It's the pure reality. Hormones drive us, either you like it or not. Discrete math vs linear algebra. Distinct tools to solve the same problem. Which is better? It depends on the case.

the_gipsy 6mo ago
Yepp, that blog link you posted, from whoever this Jorge Laborda may be, is just 3 paragraphs recapping snippets from that book, it's right in the first line: "Why Men Don't Listen & Women Can't Read Maps", by Allan Pease. Since you like to appeal the authority of Some Dude, let me give it to you straight from the "About the Author" section from goodreads.com[1] of your sources. Are you ready? > Allan Pease is an Australian author and motivational speaker. Despite having no education in psychology, neuroscience, or psychiatry, he has managed to establish himself as an "expert on relationships". Originally a musician, he became a successful life insurance salesman, he started a career as a speaker and trainer in sales and latterly in body language. This resulted in a popular sideline of audio tapes, many of which feature his irreverent wit. Hahahahahaha, I literally couldn't make this shit up. Good luck out there, buddy! [1]: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/873930 https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/873930
- anthk 6mo ago
  If you think different sets of hormones do not condition tons of behaviours you are deluded, buddy. It affects me as a man, too, be highly educated or not. As I said, one of my favourite recreational Math authors (like Conway or Gardner) it's a woman, and her favourite Math branch it's discrete Math. Now, please, understand that she was pefectly able to understand the rest, as Mathematician men are able to the same with subjects they don't like much, too. PD: women on average have a more developed language area than men. They can process and send more complex information like men on a single sentence from subtones in every word. If men use more 'complex' language than women on average it's because women already told everything implicitly with every subtone in words driving subtle but different messages women are able to understand but men do not. So, most of what men do it's to add syntactic sugar while women have a much superior context aware syntax.
  - the_gipsy 6mo ago
    YOU are delusional, amigo. I literally give you a link that points out that what you're basing your beliefs on, is from some motivational speaker, pop-science, borderline con-artist author. And you reply with... more anecdotes. Do you not see the irony? Are you incapable of reflecting on this? There are of course some statistical biological (hormonal, physiological, whatever) differences between women and men. But there are also statistical biological differences between... men! And we are not grouping men like this, except in caste systems or believers in racism. So why should we do this for women? Because it's extremely convenient for people like you, to have women classified as child-rearers and general house servants, and then retroactively explain that this is "natural" with anecdata and pseudoscience, and never having to make any real attempt at gender equality. No hay más ciego que el que no quiere ver...
    - anthk 6mo ago
      >No hay más ciego... Le dijo la sarten al cazo. Yes, there are differences, and this is not pseudoscience. Nor hints about castes about races. https://www.uoc.edu/en/news/2023/286-gender-differences-in-visuospatial-abilities https://www.uoc.edu/en/news/2023/286-gender-differences-in-v... >why should we do this for women? Should we ban men from poetry/arts too? That would be dumb. In my case, Discrete Math and combinatorics where hell compared to other Math branches. Yet I could approach them from overlapping subjects. Women do the same, they applied different strategies and then they bound them together. This requieres effort for both genders? OFC, but that's the 'winning' strategy; the most different skills you gather, the better. Men prefer measure and rotate and women use nodes and graphs? How about using both by definning a lattice and placing easy nodes as helping points making orientation a breeze for both genders? Also, if you negate any difference, how come men and women tend to lose different brain sections upon dementia/Alzheimer?