5 ms·

In his defense, he's merely speaking out of Bayesian consequences. There's nothing to dare or not dare about. If you hear people get mugged in a neighborhood mo

In his defense, he's merely speaking out of Bayesian consequences. There's nothing to dare or not dare about. If you hear people get mugged in a neighborhood more than another, you'd avoid it and possibly speak out against it, but as a consequence, violate all the good people in the neighborhood. What I feel is lacking, and very much so, is the other side of the perspective. (and by that I don't mean by merely pointing out that opinion is disrespectful; I mean by showing evidence for the opposite of the opinion)

dgabriel 18y ago
Really? He didn't present any evidence, aside from some anecdotal stories about "everyone he knows," and instead presented a series of terrible stereotypes. http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat2.pdf http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat2.pdf More than half of women work, and while that number is lower than the percentage of men who work (74%), it's hard to tell from the data presented whether or not advanced age affects the numbers. http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/families_households/003118.html http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/fa... Out of 49 million women between the ages of 21 and 44, there are only 5.4 million stay-at-home moms (98,000 dads, possibly not including the temporarily unemployed). Honestly, I don't feel like debunking everything. I feel like the onus is on me to disprove specious claims, rather than the other way around. It's akin to arguing with a creationist.
- vaksel 18y ago
  what does women working have anything to do with the discussion?
  - dgabriel 18y ago
    In the course of this discussion, you have indicated that the men you know married women who do nothing, contribute nothing to the marriage, and somehow expected the men to give them half of everything, despite the fact that they are bitchy, lazy, worthless cows who don't put out.
    - vaksel 18y ago
      yes they contribute nothing to the marriage, but that doesn't mean that they don't work. All of them do, except one who got laid off recently
      - dgabriel 18y ago
        How does a working parent contribute nothing to a marriage?
        vaksel 18y ago
        By spending all the money she earns on herself.
        dgabriel 18y ago
        And you know many of these lazy women! In fact, all the American women you know are just like that! This is so far-fetched, so unlikely a scenario, that you have to see how ridiculous you're being. Unless you have their balanced checkbook on hand to prove me wrong, I sincerely doubt any mom is spending all the money on herself. Working mothers don't have the freaking time to spend a whole paycheck on themselves, especially with their husbands hiding at the gym, leaving the bulk of the housework and childcare to her. No wonder these women don't want to sleep with your friends.
        vaksel 18y ago
        not all American women, just the married ones I know. Look I'll be the first to say, that based on the area that I live in the women are most likely slanted into the princess syndrome area. But that doesn't make what I'm saying any less true(at least for this area). And yes they are spending all the money on themselves, they can do that, since their husbands cover all the other expenses.
        time_management 18y ago
- whacked_new 18y ago
  I apologize for being unclear and imprecise. Evidence is not the word I should have used. I'm just talking about perspective. What the OP stated was not evidence, and neither did I have that confused. Those were judgments based on Bayesian reasoning. They are efficient and correct, by probability, in his life. I defended him because in asking "how dare you," you seem to think his opinions violate a basic right of dignity (or something?), when I maintain that it is perfectly reasonable and understandable to have those opinions. Rather than "evidence" I should have said something like, please provide us with priors that may reinforce the opposite belief. That isn't to say that you didn't already provide some, but it was also obvious that you took this personally, which detracts from what we are looking for (balanced priors). Also, from a purely pedantic point of view (which I often take for its own sake, nor am I really partial to a particular viewpoint), I don't think any of those census numbers debunk anything, if we're talking about how a marriage may be a bad decision. Nevertheless, there is only one kind of spurious claim going around here: blanket statements. Whomever believes them makes a fool of themselves, but we -- at least I am -- are still interested in hearing more perspectives :)
  - dgabriel 18y ago
    It is difficult to see oneself repeatedly characterized as such without getting one's dander up a bit. My suspicion is that his friends probably love their wives, and he's using their occasional and exaggerated venting to support his weird misogyny. That, or he knows the two unluckiest and easily fooled men in the country.
    - time_management 18y ago
      I think what he's describing is more common than you'd prefer to admit. It's not universal, but it's not uncommon either, so it's probably more accurate to say that he knows two men in the unluckiest quartile. That said, one can't always place the blame on the women deliberately changing into bad people after marriage; a more likely explanation is that the men ignored warning signs early in the process, because they were in love. The phenomenon of a relationship fizzling out and turning hellish is not unique to the US. No one with a brain will say that all American women are bad. This country is way too racially and culturally diverse for a statement like that to be valid across the board. It's just much harder to find decent women if your selection pool overlaps significantly with the suburban American mainstream, because that section of society is a materialistic, vapid, and alienating cultural wasteland. Decent women exist everywhere, but the proportions are lower.

dgabriel 18y ago

Really? He didn't present any evidence, aside from some anecdotal stories about "everyone he knows," and instead presented a series of terrible stereotypes. http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat2.pdf http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat2.pdf More than half of women work, and while that number is lower than the percentage of men who work (74%), it's hard to tell from the data presented whether or not advanced age affects the numbers. http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/families_households/003118.html http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/fa... Out of 49 million women between the ages of 21 and 44, there are only 5.4 million stay-at-home moms (98,000 dads, possibly not including the temporarily unemployed). Honestly, I don't feel like debunking everything. I feel like the onus is on me to disprove specious claims, rather than the other way around. It's akin to arguing with a creationist.

vaksel 18y ago
what does women working have anything to do with the discussion?
- dgabriel 18y ago
  In the course of this discussion, you have indicated that the men you know married women who do nothing, contribute nothing to the marriage, and somehow expected the men to give them half of everything, despite the fact that they are bitchy, lazy, worthless cows who don't put out.
  - vaksel 18y ago
    yes they contribute nothing to the marriage, but that doesn't mean that they don't work. All of them do, except one who got laid off recently
    - dgabriel 18y ago
      How does a working parent contribute nothing to a marriage?
      - vaksel 18y ago
        By spending all the money she earns on herself.
        dgabriel 18y ago
        And you know many of these lazy women! In fact, all the American women you know are just like that! This is so far-fetched, so unlikely a scenario, that you have to see how ridiculous you're being. Unless you have their balanced checkbook on hand to prove me wrong, I sincerely doubt any mom is spending all the money on herself. Working mothers don't have the freaking time to spend a whole paycheck on themselves, especially with their husbands hiding at the gym, leaving the bulk of the housework and childcare to her. No wonder these women don't want to sleep with your friends.
        vaksel 18y ago
        not all American women, just the married ones I know. Look I'll be the first to say, that based on the area that I live in the women are most likely slanted into the princess syndrome area. But that doesn't make what I'm saying any less true(at least for this area). And yes they are spending all the money on themselves, they can do that, since their husbands cover all the other expenses.
        time_management 18y ago
whacked_new 18y ago
I apologize for being unclear and imprecise. Evidence is not the word I should have used. I'm just talking about perspective. What the OP stated was not evidence, and neither did I have that confused. Those were judgments based on Bayesian reasoning. They are efficient and correct, by probability, in his life. I defended him because in asking "how dare you," you seem to think his opinions violate a basic right of dignity (or something?), when I maintain that it is perfectly reasonable and understandable to have those opinions. Rather than "evidence" I should have said something like, please provide us with priors that may reinforce the opposite belief. That isn't to say that you didn't already provide some, but it was also obvious that you took this personally, which detracts from what we are looking for (balanced priors). Also, from a purely pedantic point of view (which I often take for its own sake, nor am I really partial to a particular viewpoint), I don't think any of those census numbers debunk anything, if we're talking about how a marriage may be a bad decision. Nevertheless, there is only one kind of spurious claim going around here: blanket statements. Whomever believes them makes a fool of themselves, but we -- at least I am -- are still interested in hearing more perspectives :)
- dgabriel 18y ago
  It is difficult to see oneself repeatedly characterized as such without getting one's dander up a bit. My suspicion is that his friends probably love their wives, and he's using their occasional and exaggerated venting to support his weird misogyny. That, or he knows the two unluckiest and easily fooled men in the country.
  - time_management 18y ago
    I think what he's describing is more common than you'd prefer to admit. It's not universal, but it's not uncommon either, so it's probably more accurate to say that he knows two men in the unluckiest quartile. That said, one can't always place the blame on the women deliberately changing into bad people after marriage; a more likely explanation is that the men ignored warning signs early in the process, because they were in love. The phenomenon of a relationship fizzling out and turning hellish is not unique to the US. No one with a brain will say that all American women are bad. This country is way too racially and culturally diverse for a statement like that to be valid across the board. It's just much harder to find decent women if your selection pool overlaps significantly with the suburban American mainstream, because that section of society is a materialistic, vapid, and alienating cultural wasteland. Decent women exist everywhere, but the proportions are lower.