The following internet discussion illustrates how women who "think" they are "intelligent" are the most irresponsible creatures on the planet. Numerous times during this discussion, the magnitude of the serious social pathologies which we are now experiencing were mentioned, and each time this "intelligent woman" deflected the discussion to her own personal problems and accomplishments. Not once in this entire discourse did she appear to be the slightest bit concerened about how the Nineteenth Amendment adversely affected family stability, how the fifty fold increase in the divorce rate has adversely affected the status and condition of American women, what the *negative* personal savings rate in the country means to the future of the country, nor how some of the highest crime and incarceration rates in the world will bankrupt the entire nation.
Each point was met with a rationalization of some sort, the redirection of the discussion to a personal problem, and the reinstatement that she is "intelligent".This is why "half the population of the united states [should be excluded] from making decisions about the political representatives this country has". The female half must be excluded for their own good, and particularly for the good of the nation.
Started on Sun Aug 12 09:13:12 2001
druid 8/10/01 10:06 PM hello
fm 8/10/01 10:07 PM how are you?
druid 8/10/01 10:08 PM i'm fine.
just wondering if you're serious about the
whole repeal of women's suffrage.
fm 8/10/01 10:08 PM absolutely--what do you think about that?
druid 8/10/01 10:10 PM i wonder why the desire to exclude half the
population of the united states from making
decisions about the political representatives
this country has.
i wonder if it's possible to choose a
candidate that will best represent
constituents if half of the consituents cannot
what do you think about that?
fm 8/10/01 10:12 PM you are talking about a social construct which
completely contradicts Christianity, and which
caused our divorce rate to explode--50 fold.
Is it worth all that?
druid 8/10/01 10:13 PM i wonder how you use Christianity as a
political philosophy when the Constitution is
directly prohibitive of establishment of
religion. i.e. the government cannot exist to
promote any religion
fm 8/10/01 10:14 PM this is not quite correct--the Constitution
prohibits the government from prohibiting free
exercise of religion--which is just the
opposite of what you just said.
druid 8/10/01 10:15 PM "Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion,... "
to me, this means that Congress does not have
the power to make law based upon one
do you see it another way?
fm 8/10/01 10:16 PM when the Supreme Court banned school prayer,
it reversed 2 centuries of case law to the
contrary, and *established* its own
fm 8/10/01 10:17 PM that's what our Forefathers wanted to prevent.
druid 8/10/01 10:18 PM i don't agree with the banishment of prayer in
a school, though i do think that a school
which receives federal funding should not be
able to choose a religion and make the
if students wish to pray on a voluntary basis,
i support them.
druid 8/10/01 10:19 PM our Forefathers wanted to prevent a lot of
things, mostly involving the ability of
government to deny someone the natural rights
accorded to them by virtue only of their being
is there just cause to deny women the same
rights as men?
fm 8/10/01 10:19 PM no school should ever receive federal
funding--but even so, the federal government
was prohibited from banning spoken Christian
prayer in public schools for two
centuries--that is when everything went
fm 8/10/01 10:19 PM after school prayer was banned in 1963, that
fm 8/10/01 10:20 PM it's a violation of the HOly Bible to give
women political power.
druid 8/10/01 10:21 PM i'll be honest with you. i am not a
christian. i don't pray. but i also don't
have a problem with christians praying in my
presence, and i'm quite willing to talk to
christians about their faith.
i find serious problem with trying to silence
anyone who doesn't share a particular opinion.
fm 8/10/01 10:21 PM sounds like that's exactly what you want to
druid 8/10/01 10:21 PM right, but the Constitution expressly
prohibits Congress from making any law that
establishes religion, including using
religious doctrine to govern the United
druid 8/10/01 10:22 PM i don't want anyone to be silent. i'd much
rather hear everyone.
fm 8/10/01 10:22 PM you want to tell teachers that they can't
conduct spoken Christian prayers--which is a
complete reversal from 2 centuries of
tradition to the contrary--plus another 1776
years before that.
druid 8/10/01 10:23 PM not at all.
i fully support any teacher who wishes to pray
in school. the only thing i ask is that they
don't force students who are not Christian
(i.e. Jews) to participate.
religion should *always* be on a voluntary
basis for those who believe.
fm 8/10/01 10:25 PM the problem of course is that jews objected to
Christians having spoken Christian
prayers--and they shut the whole country down,
even though they are only 1.9% of the
druid 8/10/01 10:25 PM What I'd like to see are schools in which
there are Christian led groups with teachers
of Christian background speaking to those
students who are are interested, as well as
I'd strongly encourage kids to go and learn
about people, even if they are different,
because knowledge makes one grow, both
intellectually and spiritually.
fm 8/10/01 10:26 PM 1.9% are telling the other 93% how to conduct
their religious affairs--which is completely
contradictory to the Holy Bible.
druid 8/10/01 10:27 PM I don't object at all. I've told you that I
am not a Christian, but I have many friends
who are. We talk about faith, and discuss
beliefs, and they have all told me that they
pray for me. I thank them for this. I do not
share their beliefs, but I understand them.
I do think this country would be much better
off if instead of silencing those we disagree
with, we *all* (Christian and otherwise)
learned a bit about each other and listened to
fm 8/10/01 10:28 PM unfortunately, jews don't have a track record
of doing that--look at what's happening in
Palestine right now.
druid 8/10/01 10:29 PM Well, I do think that any group telling
another how to behave, how to believe, how to
practice belief, is wrong.
It leads to so many closed minds..... and in
this day and age, closed minds are truly sad.
We must all learn to accept one another,
differences and similarities, as we are.
I find it disparaging that Christians and
non-Christians cannot respect each others
fm 8/10/01 10:31 PM that has (unfortunately for the jews) been
their downfall for thousands of years. Our
experiment proved that this won't ever change.
druid 8/10/01 10:31 PM The violence is deplorable, in both
I believe, honestly, that killing fellow human
beings to further religious or political ends
is a travesty.
Working toward understanding is the way to
improve oneself, murder (whether it is an
Israeli killing a Palistinian or the other way
round) solves nothing and serves evil.
fm 8/10/01 10:31 PM brb
druid 8/10/01 10:34 PM I'm not entierly sure what to make of the
situation in the middle east between the
Palistinians and the Israelis, except to say
that I don't think violence is ever going to
I have to say though, I didn't expect this to
be a discussion about Christians vs. Jews,
especially after reading your website.
I thought that the main idea was to change the
recent trend towards fatherless families.
fm 8/10/01 10:35 PM absolutely
fm 8/10/01 10:36 PM the only way to get there is through
fm 8/10/01 10:36 PM what is happening in Palestine is OUR
fault--we are funding this mess, and it is
fellow Christians in Palestine who are
druid 8/10/01 10:38 PM I definitely don't agree with funding such a
war. If history has proven anything, it's
that "holy wars" result in nothing more than
bloodshed. Nothing is solved by the fighting,
and no one acheives anything in being killed.
I'm just not sure where this fits in with
denying women basic human rights.
fm 8/10/01 10:40 PM by giving American women the vote, you are
denying them the right to be married and have
children in legitimate families--there are now
30 million women of marriageable age who are
fm 8/10/01 10:40 PM they still have the natural urge to have
children, so the illegitimacy rate sextupled
fm 8/10/01 10:41 PM and raising children in single-mother
households is the WORST thing that can happen
to both children and women
fm 8/10/01 10:42 PM American women gained absolutely nothing and
lost almost everything because of the 19th.
druid 8/10/01 10:42 PM I have to say that I agree fully with you in
that fathers should always be with their
families, raising their children, instilling
in them the values that can only be given by a
positive male role model.
Where I can't make the jump is from that to
believing that women are not equal. I was
raised by two parents, married to each other.
They have been married for twenty seven years,
and this has never been affected by my
mother's ability to vote or have a job of her
own. In fact, she is a teacher, who for years
did not work so that she could put all of her
children into school. It was only after that
time taht she found a need to fill her days
and began teaching.
fm 8/10/01 10:43 PM it's a huge mistake to claim that men and
women are "equal". They are exact opposites
in almost any way you measure
it--complementary, but not "equal", by God's
druid 8/10/01 10:43 PM I can't imagine my mother's life if she
couldn't vote. She's a very happily married
woman who has been with my father, the only
man ever in her life, for twenty-nine years.
They're happy together, they raised children
who became very happy productive adults. Is
it so terrible that she votes?
druid 8/10/01 10:44 PM How exactly are they not equal?
fm 8/10/01 10:44 PM butwhat you ignore are the 30 million single
women now--both divorced and never
married--whom American men would be absolute
fools to marry under the current arrangement.
fm 8/10/01 10:45 PM http://christianparty.fsn.net/sex.htm
fm 8/10/01 10:45 PM http://christianparty.fsn.net/mf.htm
fm 8/10/01 10:46 PM http://christianparty.fsn.net/menare.htm
druid 8/10/01 10:46 PM i agree that there are women who are
problematic. women who are welfare mothers
who have no idea who the fathers of their
but is it fair to characterize all women by
fm 8/10/01 10:46 PM http://christianparty.fsn.net/genddiff.htm
fm 8/10/01 10:47 PM unfortunately, it's the standard you support
which caused MOST American women to be
undesirable, and even dangerous, to all
druid 8/10/01 10:47 PM there are differences, yes. but i am not
entirely sure that these differences make
either sex more capable of logical and
rational thought than the other.
fm 8/10/01 10:48 PM the divorce rate is much higher than you can
imagine--in many states, there were more
divorces last year than there were marriages
20 years ago.
druid 8/10/01 10:48 PM undesirable and dangerous in what way?
wouldn't you prefer to have a wife that you
could talk to about intelligent subjects?
fm 8/10/01 10:49 PM even women know that women are not capable of
rational thought--that's why women, even
though they are 11.2% more of the vote than
men, have elected less than 10% of women as
fm 8/10/01 10:50 PM a woman having the right to vote doesn't make
her intelligent, at all. none of them
understand the important political issues, by
their own admission. What's important to them
is the color of Clinton's tie, rather than his
ability to tell the TRUTH.
druid 8/10/01 10:50 PM i'm as dismayed as anyone else about the
divorce rate. i think it's horrible that it
happens, and i'd like to know exactly what's
i just don't think that the blame can be
placed entirely on women being able to get an
education and vote.
the reality is that some divorces are caused
by spouses beating each other senseless, some
are caused because the people who got married
did so foolishly.
it's not entirely due to one cause.
fm 8/10/01 10:51 PM men need to control women--they are too
emotional and reactionary, and easily
influenced by sound bytes.
fm 8/10/01 10:52 PM when they vote independently of men, they make
very poor choices.
fm 8/10/01 10:52 PM Japanes women have the vote--but their
religion keeps the divorce rate from getting
out of hand, so women vote according to how
their husbands vote.
druid 8/10/01 10:52 PM it is?
i don't really know about that one. i was
absolutely disgusted by clinton's perjury,
sickened by the fact that he used the oval
office to get a blow job, and reviled at his
treatment of cathleen willey.
if anyone should be in prison, it's bill
clinton. i don't give a damn what kind of tie
someone wears. i'm an engineer, my life is in
the numbers. science is not an emotional
i'm afraid the only emotion i feel about
clintion is embarassment that he was ever
fm 8/10/01 10:53 PM but women supported hiim in record numbers.
druid 8/10/01 10:53 PM i vote according to fact. i suppose being an
engineer has predisposed me to a very narrow
frame of reference that includes logic and
discards any sort of emotional plea.
fm 8/10/01 10:54 PM if women didn't vote, his name would never
have appeared on the political scene.
druid 8/10/01 10:54 PM those who did were fools.
clinton is, was, and always will be slime.
he is a disgrace to america.
fm 8/10/01 10:54 PM so why do women STILL support this KNOWN liar?
druid 8/10/01 10:54 PM the more i talk to you, the more i think it's
not all women that you're in disagreement
with. i'm getting the impression that you
don't like the feminist-apologist "victim
fm 8/10/01 10:54 PM the answer is that most women don't consider
integrity to be an important issue.
fm 8/10/01 10:55 PM they literally get bowled over by a kiss, like
Gore's, rather than an honest man.
druid 8/10/01 10:55 PM i consider integrity (honor if you will) to be
the most important issue in any person's life.
druid 8/10/01 10:55 PM i bet i can flip your lid.
druid 8/10/01 10:56 PM ready for a big surprise?
fm 8/10/01 10:56 PM without women voters, he wouldn't have been
elected the first time, he wouldn't have been
elected the second time, and he would have
been impeached--Clinton rode on that platform.
fm 8/10/01 10:57 PM k
druid 8/10/01 10:58 PM i am an engineer (B.S. degree in computer
engineering from the university of pittsburgh)
i am ranked 'expert' in marksmanship
i am strongly in favor of a mother-father
i voted for george w. bush, and i voted for
i am an extremely logical pragmatic person and
i absolutely despise dateline, 48 hours,
lifetime tv, and all those other 'women's' tv
shows and emotional programming.
oh yeah, and i'm female.
fm 8/10/01 10:58 PM that was a given--where is the lid flipping
druid 8/10/01 11:00 PM i seem to buck your stereotype of women.
i hate clinton, i'm not emotional, i don't
think that 'fathers are unnecessary'...
that's why i wonder about your desire to
repeal the 19th. i can't see a logical reason
that i'm any less qualified than you are to
make rational, well informed, educated
the only difference between you and i is what
set of genitals we've got.
fm 8/10/01 11:01 PM you view the problem in exactly the opposite
direction that I view it.
druid 8/10/01 11:01 PM how so?
fm 8/10/01 11:02 PM you have repeatedly made the claim that there
are women who are qualified to vote, which
means that you ignored my point that most
women are not qualified to vote.
fm 8/10/01 11:02 PM Clinton is just one example of how women vote
differently than men
fm 8/10/01 11:03 PM and how the outcome has been devastating to
druid 8/10/01 11:03 PM there are many who are not.
there are also many men who are uneducated and
incapable of making a rational, logical
decision based on fact.
i see this as no reason to exclude those who
*are* capable of casting a well informed vote.
fm 8/10/01 11:04 PM I know that you want to defend your
position--but there comes a time in a man's
thought process that society takes a higher
position than "equal" or "individual" rights.
fm 8/10/01 11:04 PM this never happens with women
fm 8/10/01 11:04 PM you view this as a women's rights issue--men
view it as a social commentary.
druid 8/10/01 11:05 PM we got bush this time. i'm disgusted that
hitlery is a senator. the uninformed masses
have screwed up again.
but you better believe i'm damned qualified in
any vote i make, because i actually do
researche and i vote on fact and issue not
now i'm asking you why you think i shouldn't
have the right to vote.
fm 8/10/01 11:05 PM no woman I know ever grasps this, even though
many of them agree that the 19th must be
fm 8/10/01 11:06 PM because in reality, Bush would not have been
elected if women didn't vote.
druid 8/10/01 11:06 PM actually i don't.
feminists hate me because i refuse to pander
i believe that fact, logic, values and honor
are above all else. i make decisions in the
voting booth based on only that.
druid 8/10/01 11:06 PM so you'd rather have al gore than have bush,
because women voted?
fm 8/10/01 11:06 PM what do you know about Bush's position on
fm 8/10/01 11:07 PM no, no
fm 8/10/01 11:07 PM we would have had a QUALIFIED candidate, a
Thomas Jefferson type candidate, if only men
fm 8/10/01 11:08 PM Bush is a complete whimp, just like Clinton,
which is what gets people elected now.
druid 8/10/01 11:08 PM i know that the republican position is that
affirmative action is a code for
discrimination agaings the white, able bodied,
by the way, i don't like affirmative action
and i'd like to see it removed from this
fm 8/10/01 11:08 PM do you know what Bush just did?
fm 8/10/01 11:08 PM do you know what he said he would do about aa
BEFORE he got elected?
fm 8/10/01 11:09 PM he is living up to his campaign promise to
extend aa--EVEN THOUGH 91% OF AMERICANS OPPOSE
druid 8/10/01 11:09 PM he lied.
like every other politician has done since the
earliest days of my memory.
in my opinion, we need to get rid of all these
no good liars and start getting people in
there who will do the damn job they're hired
fm 8/10/01 11:10 PM and that requires a Thomas Jefferson, whom
women will NEVER vote for.
fm 8/10/01 11:10 PM I've been through Mr. Jefferson's papers with
a fine toothed comb, and can't find even one
SHRED of a lie in them.
fm 8/10/01 11:10 PM Bush LIES 100 times daily.
druid 8/10/01 11:11 PM be careful with your generalities.
i'll vote for anyone with honor, integrity,
the sack to do something that takes a step
the only thing i ask is that they don't
sarcifice my rights as a human being when they
am i wrong for that?
fm 8/10/01 11:11 PM weren't you misled by Bush?
fm 8/10/01 11:11 PM Bush also won because of the women's vote.
fm 8/10/01 11:12 PM if you're an engineer, then you understand
Gaussian Distribution, which means that you
have an inkling of the overlaps between men
fm 8/10/01 11:13 PM Yes, there are some women who may make
responsible voting decisions, and there are
some men who don't.
druid 8/10/01 11:13 PM hell no
let me tell you what i thought this election
i read the voting records. i looked at all the
statistics. i watched every debate.
and i thought to myself 'i have to choose the
least of the evils here.'
after much consideration, i realized that the
lesser-evil person to get into the white house
would likely be bush, and that voting for
anyone other than bush would give gore a
i *hate* politics now, because it seems
there's no one i'm voting for. i'm always
voting against the greatest evil
druid 8/10/01 11:14 PM as there are some men who make responsible
voting decisions, and there are some men who
i can't say i can collectively deny that right
to either gender based on those who fuck
(pardon my french) it up.
fm 8/10/01 11:14 PM There was a time in this country when people
voted to uphold the US Constitution--they no
longer do that.
fm 8/10/01 11:15 PM the SEcond Amendment is another example: more
than half of men oppose "gun control
laws"--but three quarters of women support
fm 8/10/01 11:16 PM it's strictly because of women voters that the
Second Amendment has been trashed--but not
following Constitutional rules.
druid 8/10/01 11:16 PM i'd die for that constitution.
but it has to treat men and women as *human
neither being the master of the other. i
can't have kids, (medical problem), so i'd be
willing to DIE for the constitution.... so
other parents' children could grow up as free
as i did.
fm 8/10/01 11:17 PM and as long as American women have that
attitude--they are patently unmarriageable.
druid 8/10/01 11:17 PM to me, gun control means a half inch group,
iron sights at 100 yards with an m-16.
i am not 'most women'.
do you see now why you can't lump all women
druid 8/10/01 11:17 PM have what attitude?
fm 8/10/01 11:18 PM that the entire country must cater to an
individual woman, rather than recognize the
fm 8/10/01 11:18 PM you and I are exact opposites on this point,
and neither will change the other's opinion.
fm 8/10/01 11:20 PM there are now 30 million American women who
will never experience what my own mother
experienced--a safe, rich, wholesome family
fm 8/10/01 11:20 PM my own sisters are two of them.
druid 8/10/01 11:20 PM that's for shit.
(i apologize, i talk like a drunken sailor)
political correctness and all this damned
feminist apologist shit need to go out the
men and women must treat each other like human
beings and not ask the other to change.
i know how it is, believe me. i'm an engineer,
and that's a male dominated field.
i go into the lab, i'm the only woman among
thirty or so men. i don't ever ask them to
change how they act. i will either play the
game their way, or go the hell home
fm 8/10/01 11:22 PM what do you make of the Gaussian Curves at:
druid 8/10/01 11:22 PM i'm 23 years old, i graduated from college, i
enjoy my work, and i'm hoping i'll get married
to a man who is every bit as or more
intelligent than me so that we can have great
discussions and treat each other fairly for
the rest of our lives.
i don't understand where the problem is
druid 8/10/01 11:23 PM i'd tell you if i weren't getting a server
error that the domain is unreacable.
lynx will not cooperate.
fm 8/10/01 11:24 PM well, since you can't have children, you can't
think in the terms that 99.999% of parents
think, so how children fit into the equation
becomes a bit difficult to explain.
fm 8/10/01 11:24 PM is it Lynx, or the particular page? could you
get any of the url's to come up?
druid 8/10/01 11:25 PM i have to think in terms of other people's
i think about what i can and must do to make
this a better, safer, more stable world for
them to grow up in.
i contribute to the future by making the road
for other people's children to walk on.
druid 8/10/01 11:25 PM i tracerouted fsn.net and can't get a thing on
it's dying after 8 hops.
fm 8/10/01 11:26 PM wow.
fm 8/10/01 11:27 PM http://members.fortunecity.com/christianparty/
What about this one?
druid 8/10/01 11:27 PM i'm getting 100% packet loss on pings.
it could be a problem with my isp, if a link
somewhere is down it'll knock out my ability
to see any server beyond that link.
the technological world is fraught with
don't worry though, the urls are all in the
history list and i can go back later.
druid 8/10/01 11:28 PM there we go. that page has loaded fine. ooh.
graphics. going to have to move out of lynx.
fm 8/10/01 11:28 PM ah, are you at school?
fm 8/10/01 11:29 PM I got it in 16 hops.
druid 8/10/01 11:29 PM no, i'm running on an sdsl connection in my
i've got a 1 meg synchronous line with static
fm 8/10/01 11:30 PM through your phone company?
druid 8/10/01 11:30 PM i'm looking at the graphs here, and i haven't
seen the statistical analysis, but i can say
for the tests i've taken, i'm far above the
mean for women.
fm 8/10/01 11:30 PM which, of couse, is not the question );
druid 8/10/01 11:31 PM no, i've got a contact who runs an ISP, and
from that ISP i got the line and sixteen
static IP addresses.
it worked out well for me
fm 8/10/01 11:31 PM lot cheaper than this cable modem, for sure.
druid 8/10/01 11:33 PM well, for SDSL with 16 static ips (thirteen
are usable, since one is the router, one is
the nameserver and one is for ineternal
networking), it's more expensive than your
average subscriber cable line, but here i'm
guaranteed my IP, i can run my own nameserver,
i host two domains (my roommate hosts a third
domain), there's a counter strike server, and
it's not shared bandwith. all in all it's
worth the money.
fm 8/10/01 11:35 PM so you keep the system running all the time?
druid 8/10/01 11:35 PM i've got a network of five computers running
out of here that operate 24/7.
two unix boxes, two windows boxes and the
roommate's counterstrike server.
fm 8/10/01 11:36 PM what do you do with all that?
druid 8/10/01 11:39 PM one of the unix boxes is the name server. i
have a windows box for most of my personal
use, web surfing and all, a unix box that i
use for email and playing with new distro's of
solaris, my roommate has a windows box, and he
runs another box that's the counterstrike
we keep all of that on a 100 Mbps fully
switched ethernet in the house and use the dsl
line for outside.
we're both computer geeks, so we basically
have a lot of fun with it. he also likes
porn, so the bandwidth is all his for
downloading . (yes, i said i have a male
roommate. we're practically family and each
have our own bedrooms).
fm 8/10/01 11:41 PM my ex-room mate from years ago married a
billionaire a few years ago--and just got
busted for selling about $100 worth of cocaine
to a narc--made the headlines around here.
fm 8/10/01 11:42 PM it was kind of funny watching them put
handcuffs on her on TV ); man, was she
druid 8/10/01 11:43 PM i'm not into drugs. i drink alcohol and i'll
admit to having smoked some pot, but i'm not a
moron about it.
i know i've got no excuse for the weed. i
just have an amazingly stressful life, often
spending 20 hours a day working, and once
every couple of months a joint is in order to
i'm not gonna be a dip shit though, selling is
not on my table. i've got a hell of a mind,
and i'll be damned if i sell it up the river
to make a quick buck.
druid 8/10/01 11:43 PM can i ask you something?
fm 8/10/01 11:44 PM well, she sure didn't need the money--no idea
why she got caught up in this.
druid 8/10/01 11:44 PM how old are you?
fm 8/10/01 11:45 PM ancient.
druid 8/10/01 11:46 PM i was honest.
is there a reason you don't want to be?
fm 8/10/01 11:46 PM I'm also married--so the question is moot.
druid 8/10/01 11:48 PM it'd only be moot if i were hitting on you,
which i'm not.
i'm in a committed relationship with a very
wonderful man, and i've got no need to flirt
the question was out of curiousity, and
fm 8/10/01 11:50 PM what did you think of those graphs? Are you
familiar with them, or are they a surprise?
druid 8/10/01 11:53 PM they're not a surprise in the least. i'm not
100% convinced that they're due to genetic
difference, at least not until educational
equality is completely achieved.
i went through most of my pre-college
schooling being ridiculed for thinking that a
female could even go to college let alone be
an engineer. i'm sure that has an effect,
and i'd like to see as many variables as
possible removed before i decide that one sex
is inherently 'smarter' than the other.
scientific method after all does include
statics and changing only ONE variable at a
not 'smaller brain and more berating and lets
see how they stack up.'
by the way, i got a 650 on my SAT math.
fm 8/10/01 11:55 PM if you got a 650 on SAT math, then you can
certainly do a better job of that in
interpreting those graphs. which part do you
think is genetic, and which part do you think
druid 8/10/01 11:59 PM until one of the variables is a control and
the other is the difference, i don't think i
can accurately say.
and of course, there will always be outliers
on both sides.
i'm a computer engineer, i deal with binary
systems and i design microprocesors. i'm very
rigid in the control of all variables but one.
i think it'll take some more time to
determine whether 'nature' or 'nurture' plays
a bigger role.
i can't even relate it to my own exprience,
because for as long as i can remember i have
excelled academically. of course, it never
occurred to me that as a "girl" i was supposed
to behave any differently than the boys i grew
fm 8/11/01 12:00 AM one of those charts is cranial capacity--do
you think that is genetic or social?
druid 8/11/01 12:01 AM i recognize that correlation does not
necessarily mean causation.
after all, neanderthal's brain was far larger
than modern day human beings of either gender,
and neanderthal didn't come up with any of the
technological advances that modern humans
druid 8/11/01 12:03 AM capacity as in size is a genetic issue. the
neurologic connectivity that occurs also seems
to be genetic, with females having more
connectiviity across the cerebral cortex than
males (that is, the left and right hemispheres
are more interconnected for females than for
but size alone does not designate
intelligence, as is easily demonstrated by
neanderthal and cro-magnon human, both having
brain capacity much larger than madern human,
but achieving none of the technological
advance of modern human.
fm 8/11/01 12:04 AM Neanderthal wasn't designed with intelligence
in mind. within intelligent humans,
comparisons can easily be made.
druid 8/11/01 12:04 AM is that why 56% of college students are
fm 8/11/01 12:05 AM did you note how closely test scores and
cranial capacity correlate?
fm 8/11/01 12:05 AM no, that's not because of test scores--that's
because of affirmative action.
druid 8/11/01 12:05 AM yes i did. have you taken a statistics class?
if so you would also note that correlation and
causation are not the same thing.
fm 8/11/01 12:06 AM they certainly can be--and in this case they
druid 8/11/01 12:06 AM is it?
i scored 1380 on the SAT and had a 3.944 gpa.
do you think i got in because of affirmative
fm 8/11/01 12:07 AM if you look at all of the other correlations
which show r-squared, you will know that there
is only one exception.
fm 8/11/01 12:08 AM why do you always talk about a single possible
exception rather than the rule? The comment
addressed the rule, not the exception.
fm 8/11/01 12:08 AM if admissions were based only on test scores,
three quarters of college admissions would be
druid 8/11/01 12:08 AM because i'm also looking at these graphs and
the fact that "best fit" curves were applied.
the outliers are still on the graphs. what
should be made of those?
fm 8/11/01 12:09 AM which curve are you referring to?
druid 8/11/01 12:09 AM admissions should be based upon standardized
test scores and grade point average.
do you see me asking for affirmative action?
i don't need it
fm 8/11/01 12:10 AM but that's not even the point I was making.
druid 8/11/01 12:11 AM the bottom 9 graphs all show best fit curves
with significant outliers.
your data would be more impressive if the
outliers weren't there.
fm 8/11/01 12:11 AM do you see which data point is always an
fm 8/11/01 12:11 AM the idea is to show all the data, not to be
fm 8/11/01 12:12 AM the one which is almost always the outlier is
druid 8/11/01 12:12 AM in that case i'd like a look at the raw data.
i see what you're trying to prove, i see a
very vauge trend in it, but i also understnad
that there are other variables in play than
strictly cranial capacity.
fm 8/11/01 12:13 AM but it is only cranial capacity which doesn't
fit--all the other parameters do fit.
fm 8/11/01 12:13 AM there are certainly lots of variables. These
are the ones which have the highest
druid 8/11/01 12:15 AM some of the discrepancy in salary versus
cranial capacity is easily due to the fact
that women were not allowed to hold salaried
jobs for the majority of american history and
have only begun to "climb the corporate
i expect that much of the discprenancy will
play out within the next fifty years as women
begin to gain the seniority to take on the
higher salaried jobs such as CIO, CFO, CTO,
fm 8/11/01 12:16 AM one thing you might consider is that Negroid
males would be a perfect fit if they had a
cranial capacity closer to 1265 cm3
fm 8/11/01 12:16 AM the economy wouldn't survive such a thing.
druid 8/11/01 12:16 AM any inclusion of salary must also include the
blatant fact that high salary white collar
jobs have traditionally not been open to
women, thus there is a major discrepancy based
on the limited ability of women to obtain a
job through no fault of their own.
it's rather easy to look at salary figures and
say 'men have bigger brains and earn more' if
you ignore the fact that women, historically,
have been completely forbidden from competing
for the same types of jobs that men have.
fm 8/11/01 12:17 AM do you thing that giving women these jobs is
going to increase their cranial capacity, or
their GRE scores, or their SAT scores, or
their TIMSS scores?
druid 8/11/01 12:18 AM regardless of the change in brain size, given
another fifty years those graphs are going t
change, big time.
women who were kept in the kitchen, barefoot
and pregnant half a century ago making little
to no money are only beginning to reap the
beneifits of uninhibited advancement up the
corporate ladder. the higher they go, the
more the curves are going to balance out.
druid 8/11/01 12:19 AM i think that women *earning* these jobs will
fm 8/11/01 12:20 AM affirmative action is dead. CAlifornia
outlawed it, which makes it illegal in the
entire country. women will be leaving the
workforce by the millions, unless Bush pulls
his scam off.
fm 8/11/01 12:21 AM do you realize that American family purchasing
power was 3 times in 1973 what it is
today--before women joined the workforce in
druid 8/11/01 12:21 AM i won't be leaving.
i've earned everything i have, from my degree
to my job.
i'm appreciated and respected for my ability,
and if i didn't produce results and working
products, i'd be shit canned.
fm 8/11/01 12:22 AM and that Japan today, with women being less
than 1% of their managers and administrators,
now has family incomes twice American family
druid 8/11/01 12:22 AM and what should i do about that?
it's like you're asking me not to use the mind
i was born with simply because of what set of
genitals i've got.
fm 8/11/01 12:23 AM once people grasp the significance of our
economic collapse, they will be clamouring for
every solution they can find.
druid 8/11/01 12:23 AM japan also has total and complete gun control.
do you want that here?
druid 8/11/01 12:23 AM am i a human being to you?
fm 8/11/01 12:24 AM we have 4 timesa as many Americans in PRISON
for gun control law violations than Japan has
in prison for all crimes combined.
druid 8/11/01 12:24 AM what's the population of japan vs. the united
fm 8/11/01 12:24 AM we DO NOT have the right to bear arms--women
voters eliminated that in the 1960s with
22,000 gun control laws.
fm 8/11/01 12:25 AM half
druid 8/11/01 12:25 AM please answer the question.
am i a human being?
fm 8/11/01 12:25 AM which means that per capita, we have twice as
many people in prison for gun control laws
than they have for all crimes.
druid 8/11/01 12:26 AM what should we do with people who break the
laws, since it is clear that you do not wnat
them in prison?
japan is a completely different culture. what
works for japan is not what will work for
fm 8/11/01 12:26 AM you're back to asking questions that have
nothing to do with the subject of the 19th
fm 8/11/01 12:27 AM what works in Japan today is exactly what
worked for this country a century ago--before
women had the vote, before we had 22,000 gun
control laws, before the divorce rate
increased 50 fold.
fm 8/11/01 12:27 AM Japan's society today is a mirror image of the
US in the 1900s.
druid 8/11/01 12:27 AM actually, i'm not.
if i'm a human being, i can't be denied the
same rights as any other human being in the
united states simply because one is male nad
one is female.
this country has made a guarantee of equal
protection under the law, which means even
*if* the 19th amendment were repealed, as a
citizen and a human being, i retain the right
fm 8/11/01 12:29 AM you're dead wrong. The word "equal" appears
nowhere in the US Constitution, and women lost
the right to vote when the Constitution was
ratified in 1776.
fm 8/11/01 12:29 AM for 145 of our best years, women didn't have
druid 8/11/01 12:29 AM oh no it's not.
japan's society is a totalitarian regime that
does not derive rights from god. rights are
granted by an all powerful government.
the united states has NEVER been such an
institution. rights in the united states
belong to the poeople by virtue of their
human-ness and power is only ON LOAN to the
government from the people.
very, very different.
druid 8/11/01 12:30 AM you really want to go back to the times of
fm 8/11/01 12:30 AM except that right now, today, Japanese people
have far, far more individual rights, and
responsibilities, than Americans.
fm 8/11/01 12:31 AM slavery ended half a century before that.
druid 8/11/01 12:31 AM do they have a bill of rights? do they have a
fm 8/11/01 12:31 AM yes, and we wrote it for them.
druid 8/11/01 12:31 AM except that women in wyoming were voting since
druid 8/11/01 12:31 AM they don't have the right to keep and bear
fm 8/11/01 12:32 AM neither do we.
fm 8/11/01 12:32 AM 22,000 gun control laws make the Second
Amendment an absolute sham.
druid 8/11/01 12:32 AM speak for yourself.
i keep and bear arms that are completely in
line with the constitution, and there's not a
single legal or judicial body in the country
that has been able to deny me those arms.
druid 8/11/01 12:33 AM do they?
i can carry concealed in several states :)
fm 8/11/01 12:33 AM If we had NO Constitution, we would have fewer
gun control laws than that.
fm 8/11/01 12:33 AM you just watch how fast that changes.
fm 8/11/01 12:33 AM we're not done passing these laws--Congressmen
are proposing more and more each and every
fm 8/11/01 12:34 AM once the Second Amendment was violated--all
hel. broke loose.
druid 8/11/01 12:34 AM there are ninety million law abiding gun
owners in the united states who possess two
hundred fifty million privately held firearms.
i fucking *dare* the government to try to
druid 8/11/01 12:34 AM i'll live free or die.
do you have the same balls?
fm 8/11/01 12:34 AM they just did--in South Africa, Zimbabwe, and
we're one step away from that.
druid 8/11/01 12:35 AM if you believe the battle is lost, then it is
i'm not giving away my freedom. are you?
fm 8/11/01 12:35 AM I took an oath to uphold the US Constitution
against ALL enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC.
and I will honor that oath.
fm 8/11/01 12:36 AM there is much more to this than the 19th--but
that is a prerequisite.
druid 8/11/01 12:36 AM the us military has problems with me going
into combat, which makes me a member of the
i will defend the constitution if i have to
die for it. though i'd much rather make some
other son of a bitch die for his beliefs.
druid 8/11/01 12:36 AM you disappoint me.
fm 8/11/01 12:37 AM we can't unload these 22,000 gun control laws
until the 19th is repealed.
fm 8/11/01 12:37 AM not ONE of them can be proven to have saved
druid 8/11/01 12:38 AM these gun control laws have nothing to do with
the 19th amendment.
you're confusing constitutionalism with hatred
fm 8/11/01 12:39 AM you're confusing protection of women with
hatred of women--the best way to destroy
American women is to let them fester in
druid 8/11/01 12:41 AM i am a woman, which means i know, first and
foremost what would destroy me.
the kind of society you're talking about,
where i'd be nothing but a subservient slave,
unable to use my mind, prohibited from using
i'd rather be dead than live there.
what you're asking for, it's no better than
no rights for women, just men to control them.
and if i piss you off, what then? will you
stone me to death?
fm 8/11/01 12:43 AM right now, most American women don't even have
the protection of a family, where they would
have a two fold higher standard of living. But
women in the workforce plunged American
incomes so much that now Japanese women live
in households which earn more than twice of
fm 8/11/01 12:44 AM that's just part of the difference--Japanese
households now have net savings of more than
$1 million each, while American households are
in debt, with a zero personal savings rate.
druid 8/11/01 12:44 AM it's not all about money....
it's about me. i'm a human being, i have a
mind, and i would be tortured if i couldn't
what about me? do i not deserve to have a
career that i am happy with?
fm 8/11/01 12:44 AM even though you claim to be an engineer, you
don't seem to be too impressed about these
absolutely shocking figures.
fm 8/11/01 12:45 AM it's not "all about money", but money measures
the value of a society
druid 8/11/01 12:45 AM you know what's shocking?
that you care more about money than you do
about quality of life.
druid 8/11/01 12:45 AM the hell it does.
fm 8/11/01 12:45 AM right now, ours is in DEBT, incomes are still
plunging, savings are NEGATIVE.
fm 8/11/01 12:46 AM quality of life just 30 years ago in the US
was about what it was in Japan 30 years
ago--today Japan is so far ahead of us that I
can't even begin to describe it.
druid 8/11/01 12:47 AM i'm not in debt. of course to you, i don't
i'm a nothing. a woman who should be
barefoot, in the kitchen, pregnant, unable to
use my mind and totally dependent on a man.
fm 8/11/01 12:47 AM Same with Germany, and even Russia. Ther are
many shortcomings about Russia--but their
quality of life has improved vastly recently.
druid 8/11/01 12:47 AM i don't consider a 'quality' life living with
six people in a 500 square foot apartment in
fm 8/11/01 12:48 AM do you notice how I make a comment about
society, and you retort with claims that you
are an exception to the rule? your exception
is meaningless in the face of $20 trillion in
fm 8/11/01 12:49 AM you also don't know Japan--what they have in
the country would knock your eyes out. the
flats in Tokyo are just for sleepovers.
druid 8/11/01 12:50 AM i've been to japan. i wasn't impressed.
fm 8/11/01 12:50 AM you went to the Ginza, and came home. That's
not even a millionth of Japan.
druid 8/11/01 12:51 AM i went to okinawa as well, and i can't say i
found anything there i'd rather trade my life
in america for.
fm 8/11/01 12:52 AM well, I lived in Okinawa and know lots of
places that you can't even imagine.
druid 8/11/01 12:53 AM places with geisha ?
fm 8/11/01 12:53 AM I watched American tourists tripping through
there as if though they knew what they were
druid 8/11/01 12:54 AM it's not my life, and i never want it to be.
i'm sure you've figured out that i am by far
not a meek woman. i think, and i speak my
fm 8/11/01 12:54 AM lots of different places,though I was
referring to the way Okinawans live--which is
exactly the opposite of your image of 600
square foot apartments in Tokyo.
fm 8/11/01 12:55 AM do you think this is a quality that men want
druid 8/11/01 12:55 AM not all men.
men like you, it seems.
fm 8/11/01 12:56 AM why would you think that?
druid 8/11/01 12:56 AM because everything you've said to me has been
your assertation that women are beneath you
fm 8/11/01 12:59 AM You said:
Im sure you've figured out that i am by far
not a meek woman. i think, and i speak my
And I asked if you thought this was a quality
men want in women, and it seems that you
suggested that this is something that I
appeared to want.
My question is what is it that makes you think
druid 8/11/01 1:00 AM i thought you were referring to the 'geisha'
i don't really think you want a woman like me.
i'm open minded, thoughtful, intelligent,
outspoken and very willing to defend my
i think you're the type of guy who wants a
geisha, and i'm thankful not all men are like
fm 8/11/01 1:01 AM so evidently your betrothed appreciates this
quality in women?
druid 8/11/01 1:03 AM he'd be extremely unhappy with someone who
wasn't at least on his level of intelligence
and didn't have a capacity to engage in
serious intellectual discussion.
fm 8/11/01 1:05 AM do you know for a fact that he regards a
discussion with you as the same as a
discussion with his fellow classmates, or
fellow workers, or fellow athletes, or fellow
fm 8/11/01 1:06 AM iow, do you believe that you really are
capable of a similar class of discussion, as a
druid 8/11/01 1:06 AM hell yes i am. we graduated from university
with the same degree and work in the same
field (though for different companies).
fm 8/11/01 1:08 AM why do you want to be like a man?
why would he want a woman who is like, or
wants to be like, a man?
druid 8/11/01 1:08 AM what do you mean by that?
i'm a woman, i just happen to be a very smart,
independent, capable one.
fm 8/11/01 1:10 AM but you seem to pride yourself as being like a
man to your betrothed? howcome?
druid 8/11/01 1:13 AM i'm not 'like a man'
i know he doesn't see me that way.
i'm 100% woman..... and he can relate to me on
he's my best friend, my partner, my other
half. we've got a good thing going.
fm 8/11/01 1:16 AM do you think that I view you as "intelligent"?
druid 8/11/01 1:16 AM i think you see me as a second class citizen.
maybe i'm intelligent to you, but i doubt you
see me as being just as capable as men are.
fm 8/11/01 1:19 AM men tend to be concerned about the issues we
covered above--you weren't the least bit
interested. Some men have amazing memories
for such things and mention them years
later--but I don't know any women at all who
haven't attempted to make excuses for this
druid 8/11/01 1:22 AM you're not in a position to judge my interest
as far as making excuses, i'm telling you that
until you control everything except one
variable, you can't tell me you've got a
i really don't give a damn that you're going
to call that an excuse. i read your site, i
made an educated guess as to how you'd treat
me when you found out i was a woman, and so
far i've been right on.
fm 8/11/01 1:23 AM the fact that you are a woman was no surprise.
that was obvious right away.
fm 8/11/01 1:24 AM This is what gave you away:
"i wonder how you use Christianity as a
political philosophy when the Constitution is
directly prohibitive of establishment of
religion. i.e. the government cannot exist to
promote any religion"
druid 8/11/01 1:25 AM hence why through this entire discussion you
have tried to describe yourself as "right" and
me as "wrong"
druid 8/11/01 1:25 AM actually, that's because i'm a buddhist. not
because i'm a female.
fm 8/11/01 1:25 AM because if you attempted to build a society
based on the self-centered female ego, it
wouldn't last 3 minutes.
fm 8/11/01 1:26 AM you forget that I grew up with Buddhists--I
know how Buddhists think better than
"Buddhists" like you.
druid 8/11/01 1:27 AM i grew up buddhist
nowhere in the eightfold path or the tipitaka
does it advocate treating any group of human
beings like second class citizens.
that's your schtick.
fm 8/11/01 1:30 AM whew--most Buddhist countries never gave women
the vote--and even in Japan, women really
can't vote independently of their husbands.
and in all of China, regardless of how Mao Tse
Tung attempted to establish "equality" in
China, Buddhism reigns supreme.
fm 8/11/01 1:31 AM how Buddhism works and how you think it's
supposed to work sound like they are opposite
ends of the field.
druid 8/11/01 1:33 AM siddharta would be disappointed.
treating half a population as if they are
non-persons is definitely not in in line with
not that it matters to you.... all you give a
damn about is maintaining your macho power
i bet it bothers you to no end that i don't
need a man to tell me what i think.
fm 8/11/01 1:35 AM how you think is certainly a concern--but not
in the way you think it is.
druid 8/11/01 1:38 AM i'm surprised you admit i can think at all,
what with my brain being smaller than a male's
and the fact that women are just 'emotional'
and don't use logic at all.
fm 8/11/01 1:39 AM how do you account for the difference in the
approach we take to problem solving?
druid 8/11/01 1:40 AM different educations?
fm 8/11/01 1:42 AM you seem to believe that having a negative
personal savings rate is no big deal--you
think this difference is due to different
druid 8/11/01 1:43 AM where did i say that being in debt was no big
fm 8/11/01 1:45 AM you diverted the discussion to the size of
apartments in Tokyo, rather than addressing
the point. even disputing it would have
indicated more interest than just ignoring it.
druid 8/11/01 1:46 AM i don't think that being in debt is a good
thing, in fact i think it's terrible. people
should be saving money, instead of spending
more than they have.
i can't tell you that i (or you) know where
that kind of consumer mentality comes from,
but i can say it's not helped by watching the
boys in washington run a deficit constantly.
fm 8/11/01 1:48 AM it actually has little to do with consumer
spending and everything to do with the boys in
fm 8/11/01 1:49 AM government costs us 42 cents of each wage
dollar, it costs the Japanese only 20
cents--the 22 cent difference is what they put
in the bank (plus some), while we have no
income left over after taxes for personal
druid 8/11/01 1:50 AM my parents, both of whom work, are very
responsible about their money
the only debt they've got at all is the
mortgage on their brand new house. granted,
they're only one example, but i don't think
that because some americans have a massive
tendency to put themselves in hawk, that all
families with working women do the same.
druid 8/11/01 1:51 AM we need to strip government spending like
druid 8/11/01 1:51 AM out with every program that is losing money
and doesn't work.
fm 8/11/01 1:51 AM do you realize that it costs more for working
wives to go to work than they add to family
fm 8/11/01 1:52 AM they all lose money--but some are
necessary--like defense, which ought to be the
only federal program.
druid 8/11/01 1:52 AM usually only if paying child care.
fm 8/11/01 1:52 AM most married couples who work pay child care.
druid 8/11/01 1:53 AM the only cost i have that i wouldn't if
iweren't working is tax.
druid 8/11/01 1:53 AM many do not. my parents never did. i never
druid 8/11/01 1:59 AM ok, it's 5 am. i have to get up in 2 1/2 hours
and be functional.
i'm gonna have to head off and catch a nap now
fm 8/11/01 2:00 AM ok, sleep tight--