'We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases."
But the real trip down the rabbit hole in that story is the fact that people are apparently, with a completely straight face, insisting that straight men and lesbians are supposed to be dating some of these “women with penises.” And if you refuse to do so, you’re transsomethingorother and just generally a bad person.
But some women have penises. ~ from the link by I R A Darth Aggie at February 8, 2018 6:17 AM
Um, not they don't. By definition.
Conan the Grammarian
at February 8, 2018 8:10 AM
In the regular pay gap wherein women earn 80% of what a man does, the Bureau of Labor Statistics which tell us this also tells us that women only work 66% of time men do
.8/.66= 1.21
So women in fact earn 120% of what men do for the same amount of TIME spent on the job
The South Korean government is expanding an investigation into researchers who named their children as co-authors on papers. The extended probe, announced on 1 February, comes after a government report last week identified 82 academic papers on which authors had named their children or relatives — many of them in middle or high school — as co-authors on the publications.
In some cases, the practice is thought to be intended to give the children an edge when applying to university, a highly competitive process in South Korea.
Was it the clip of her screaming at the trans guy?
lujlp
at February 8, 2018 11:48 AM
VW diesel emissions scandal: The rank and file go to prison while the elites skate. Same as it ever was.
Cousin Dave
at February 8, 2018 12:29 PM
Given his music choices does anyone else suspect crud ODed on acid one time too many or spends his weekends pushing Molly? ~ lujlp at February 8, 2018 11:41 AM
Flogging Molly?
Conan the Grammarian
at February 8, 2018 12:41 PM
Raddy had me at Led Zeppelin. Lujlp, cite your study. Also, the real travesty isn't in the gender wage gap, but in the racial wage gap. Now that's something no one seems to be able to rationalize away, why Black or Hispanic women make thousands less per year in the same job as a white woman, much less a white man. Tell me why that is, will ya
gooseegg
at February 8, 2018 12:49 PM
Right on cue, every criticism to her post is met with snark, circular logic, hyperbole, cherry-picking comments out of context.
When you're advancing in a different direction from the Chosin reservoir, the enemy will put you to an endurance test of their own devising. And if you're very fortunate, it won't be faster than you can endure.
In a slight change to the grueling initial stage of the 13-week Infantry Officer Course, Marines will no longer be required to pass the Combat Endurance Test to move on.
The Corps has come under criticism for what some have claimed to be unnecessarily high standards to graduate from the course. To date, only one unnamed female Marine has successfully completed the entire course.
But Marine officials at Training Command contend the changes are not an effort to water down standards.
...because the build list is NOT restricted to what YOU might define. ~ Radwaste at February 8, 2018 2:41 PM
Um, Raddie, you keep trying to sell the argument that a wispy man is a woman, even if he doesn't want to be. And you're claiming that I'm saying musculature defines masculinity - when that's not my argument at all, not even close to it.
I'm not arguing about the build list. But if your build list specifies penis as the genitalia and testosterone as the primary hormone, you've built a man, no matter how effeminate or slight the final product.
If he feels the build list was in error and he should have been a woman, he's free to change that - and more power to him for having the courage to do so. But simply putting on a dress and lipstick will not make him a woman.
"...Amidst the seeming forward momentum of the #MeToo movement, it’s impossible to imagine regressing back to the age of Cosby’s Teflon reputation. The implicit promise of the Hollywood reckoning is a rejection of the old status quo, which doled out endless second chances to Hollywood’s legion of abusive men. In addition to outing abusers, the movement has elevated long forgotten (or deliberately ignored) testimonies of abuse. But Cosby’s efforts to rehab his image—his denials and talk of a racist conspiracy, his 'friends, fans, and loyal supporters'—are all an ugly portent of what’s to come.
"While we might like to think that alleged abusers would have the good sense to stay out of sight and off the stage, Cosby’s campaign is a good reminder that the A-list accused are already fighting back. For every Louis C.K. saying that 'these stories are true,' there’s a Brett Ratner suing an accuser for defamation or a Donald Trump, who threatened to do the same.
"Many columnists have already moved on to tepid defenses of only-sort-of-bad dudes, insisting that an Aziz Ansari shouldn’t suffer the same fate as a Harvey Weinstein, a Kevin Spacey, or a Bill Cosby. But if Cosby’s career isn’t even over—if a comic can spend decades allegedly drugging and raping women and then get a warm reception during a comedy set—then maybe this movement isn’t as fearfully powerful as those op-eds would have us believe.
"If a man like Bill Cosby is able to fight and arguably win in both a court of law and a court of public opinion, what does that say about the future career viability of accused abusers in every industry? Maybe the era of a million free passes isn’t over, after all."
lenona
at February 8, 2018 5:35 PM
"I'm not arguing about the build list. But if your build list specifies penis as the genitalia and testosterone as the primary hormone, you've built a man, no matter how effeminate or slight the final product.
If he feels the build list was in error and he should have been a woman, he's free to change that - and more power to him for having the courage to do so. But simply putting on a dress and lipstick will not make him a woman."
I'm not doing that, although this last post of mine was more cautionary than evidentiary.
The plain fact is that Americans are born without, or with anomalous, gender - and they are still citizens. No, you do not get to classify such people as one or the other gender.
Radwaste
at February 8, 2018 6:03 PM
The plain fact is that Americans are born without, or with anomalous, gender - and they are still citizens. ~ Radwaste at February 8, 2018 6:03 PM
Raddie, first of all, no one is denying citizenship based on gender or even gender-confusion. Nor is anyone advocating stratifying citizenship.
No, you do not get to classify such people as one or the other gender. ~ Radwaste at February 8, 2018 6:03 PM
Second of all, nobody is classifying anybody. This is not Nazi Germany. Or Apartheid South Africa. Nor is anyone advocating the US start classifying people.
We do not get to make up whatever gender we want. Nature is binary and has given us two genders, male and female. We're free to be whomever we want within that paradigm.
The 31 genders recognized by the New York Commission on Human Rights is not a template of tolerance and diversity, it's an act of enabling mental illness.
LinkBoy69 can want to be female and to look feminine all he wants. But when it comes to sex with those who desire to have sex with women, the penis is going to get in the way - for both the straights and the lesbians.
Conan the Grammarian
at February 8, 2018 8:03 PM
No study gooses egg, just plain old math
go to BLS.gov
If you take the total full time earnings of men and women you get the 80% figure feminists like to tout
Dig into the hours worked by full time men and women and do the math yourself
I didnt pay that close attention but from reports it seems he was quite up front with his "victims" when they mutually agreed to trade sex for drugs and money
No, no, luj. You presented that as though women work less than men because they're lazy. They are choosing part-time work versus full-time work -- you know, kids and all. And being paid less. What in the crap are you trying to dig out of those stats? China is around there somewhere, I'm sure. Stop.
gooseegg
at February 9, 2018 5:55 PM
No gooseegg, the reason women work few hours is becuase fewer individual women work full time than men
This is how the wage gap works
Feminists take ALL the money ALL full time men earn and compare it to ALL the money ALL full time women earn.
Given more men work full time than women, and generally work longer hours than women it is no wonder they as a whole make more than women as a whole
What I am digging out of those stats, the exact same stats I've never heard you berate feminists for using, if the stupidity of the wage gap argument.
For the sake of argument let us assume there are only three full time jobs in the world.
Two men working eighty hour weeks at ten dollars per hour figure in over time and the numbers are
Man 1 - 80 hours at $1000 dollars a week
Man 2 - 80 hours at $1000 dollars a week
Men - 160 hours at $2000 a week
Men - $12.50 per hour
Let us assume that the third job is held by a woman working forty hours a week at thirty five dollars an hour
Woman 1 - 40 hours at $1400 dollar a week
Women - $35 per hour
Now according to the way feminists run this math, women earn 7-% of what men do as
1400/2000=.7
But the men in this senario worked 400% longer than the woman did earning under 36% of the womans hourly rate as
12.5/35=0.357
Have you gotten the point yet?
If not Ill make it explicit. The wage gap is a lie. And I fully admit my stat is just as big a lie.
The difference being I am honest about it being a lie, and my lie forces feminists to go digging for the truth. A truth that will dispell their lie just as it will dispell mine.
Okay...
Radwaste at February 8, 2018 12:25 AM
I might be a transsomethingorother.
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02/07/new-transphobia-genital-preferences/
I R A Darth Aggie at February 8, 2018 6:17 AM
Gender pay gap in modelling industry sees women earn 75% more than men
https://www.standard.co.uk/fashion/news/gender-pay-gap-in-modelling-industry-sees-women-earn-75-more-than-men-a3597656.html
Amy Alkon at February 8, 2018 6:17 AM
Um, not they don't. By definition.
Conan the Grammarian at February 8, 2018 8:10 AM
In the regular pay gap wherein women earn 80% of what a man does, the Bureau of Labor Statistics which tell us this also tells us that women only work 66% of time men do
.8/.66= 1.21
So women in fact earn 120% of what men do for the same amount of TIME spent on the job
End the wage gap now, pay men more money
lujlp at February 8, 2018 8:14 AM
The Trump Economy: U.S. jobless claims drop to near 45-year low -
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy/u-s-jobless-claims-drop-to-near-45-year-low-idUSKBN1FS23K
Snoopy at February 8, 2018 8:29 AM
Here's today's elevator music from a drugsex paradise selection. 8mins 34sec
Crid at February 8, 2018 9:04 AM
In some cases, the practice is thought to be intended to give the children an edge when applying to university, a highly competitive process in South Korea.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-01512-5
Sixclaws at February 8, 2018 10:26 AM
Rose McGowan needs to have her meds adjusted.
(Never liked her anyway. She sucked on "Charmed." They should have brought back Doherty.)
Patrick at February 8, 2018 11:16 AM
Given his music choices does anyone else suspect crud ODed on acid one time too many or spends his weekends pushing Molly?
lujlp at February 8, 2018 11:41 AM
Also Patrick you flubbed the link
lujlp at February 8, 2018 11:42 AM
Was it the clip of her screaming at the trans guy?
lujlp at February 8, 2018 11:48 AM
VW diesel emissions scandal: The rank and file go to prison while the elites skate. Same as it ever was.
Cousin Dave at February 8, 2018 12:29 PM
Flogging Molly?
Conan the Grammarian at February 8, 2018 12:41 PM
Raddy had me at Led Zeppelin. Lujlp, cite your study. Also, the real travesty isn't in the gender wage gap, but in the racial wage gap. Now that's something no one seems to be able to rationalize away, why Black or Hispanic women make thousands less per year in the same job as a white woman, much less a white man. Tell me why that is, will ya
gooseegg at February 8, 2018 12:49 PM
Right on cue, every criticism to her post is met with snark, circular logic, hyperbole, cherry-picking comments out of context.
https://twitter.com/alexbertanades/status/961318001743147008
Sixclaws at February 8, 2018 1:45 PM
When you're advancing in a different direction from the Chosin reservoir, the enemy will put you to an endurance test of their own devising. And if you're very fortunate, it won't be faster than you can endure.
https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2018/02/07/passing-combat-endurance-test-is-no-longer-required-for-infantry-officers/
I R A Darth Aggie at February 8, 2018 2:08 PM
"Um, not they don't. By definition."
Again, you will have to investigate closely in some cases, because the build list is NOT restricted to what YOU might define.
Happy checking!
Radwaste at February 8, 2018 2:41 PM
Um, Raddie, you keep trying to sell the argument that a wispy man is a woman, even if he doesn't want to be. And you're claiming that I'm saying musculature defines masculinity - when that's not my argument at all, not even close to it.
I'm not arguing about the build list. But if your build list specifies penis as the genitalia and testosterone as the primary hormone, you've built a man, no matter how effeminate or slight the final product.
If he feels the build list was in error and he should have been a woman, he's free to change that - and more power to him for having the courage to do so. But simply putting on a dress and lipstick will not make him a woman.
Conan the Grammarian at February 8, 2018 2:55 PM
You know they're plotting something
https://twitter.com/WAFB/status/961210414691504129
Sixclaws at February 8, 2018 3:06 PM
"She saw something, she said something and she feels like she got punished for it."
http://www.kykernel.com/news/b-she-saw-something-she-said-something-and-she-feels/article_2b7efade-0790-11e8-9bc9-375984423a4f.html
(I have to admit, I don't see how her name could possibly have been kept out of it. But am I wrong?)
lenona at February 8, 2018 5:28 PM
"Bill Cosby’s Slimy Comeback Attempt Laughs in the Face of #MeToo"
https://www.thedailybeast.com/bill-cosbys-slimy-comeback-attempt-laughs-in-the-face-of-metoo?ref=scroll
Last paragraphs:
"...Amidst the seeming forward momentum of the #MeToo movement, it’s impossible to imagine regressing back to the age of Cosby’s Teflon reputation. The implicit promise of the Hollywood reckoning is a rejection of the old status quo, which doled out endless second chances to Hollywood’s legion of abusive men. In addition to outing abusers, the movement has elevated long forgotten (or deliberately ignored) testimonies of abuse. But Cosby’s efforts to rehab his image—his denials and talk of a racist conspiracy, his 'friends, fans, and loyal supporters'—are all an ugly portent of what’s to come.
"While we might like to think that alleged abusers would have the good sense to stay out of sight and off the stage, Cosby’s campaign is a good reminder that the A-list accused are already fighting back. For every Louis C.K. saying that 'these stories are true,' there’s a Brett Ratner suing an accuser for defamation or a Donald Trump, who threatened to do the same.
"Many columnists have already moved on to tepid defenses of only-sort-of-bad dudes, insisting that an Aziz Ansari shouldn’t suffer the same fate as a Harvey Weinstein, a Kevin Spacey, or a Bill Cosby. But if Cosby’s career isn’t even over—if a comic can spend decades allegedly drugging and raping women and then get a warm reception during a comedy set—then maybe this movement isn’t as fearfully powerful as those op-eds would have us believe.
"If a man like Bill Cosby is able to fight and arguably win in both a court of law and a court of public opinion, what does that say about the future career viability of accused abusers in every industry? Maybe the era of a million free passes isn’t over, after all."
lenona at February 8, 2018 5:35 PM
"I'm not arguing about the build list. But if your build list specifies penis as the genitalia and testosterone as the primary hormone, you've built a man, no matter how effeminate or slight the final product.
If he feels the build list was in error and he should have been a woman, he's free to change that - and more power to him for having the courage to do so. But simply putting on a dress and lipstick will not make him a woman."
I'm not doing that, although this last post of mine was more cautionary than evidentiary.
The plain fact is that Americans are born without, or with anomalous, gender - and they are still citizens. No, you do not get to classify such people as one or the other gender.
Radwaste at February 8, 2018 6:03 PM
Raddie, first of all, no one is denying citizenship based on gender or even gender-confusion. Nor is anyone advocating stratifying citizenship.
Second of all, nobody is classifying anybody. This is not Nazi Germany. Or Apartheid South Africa. Nor is anyone advocating the US start classifying people.
We do not get to make up whatever gender we want. Nature is binary and has given us two genders, male and female. We're free to be whomever we want within that paradigm.
The 31 genders recognized by the New York Commission on Human Rights is not a template of tolerance and diversity, it's an act of enabling mental illness.
LinkBoy69 can want to be female and to look feminine all he wants. But when it comes to sex with those who desire to have sex with women, the penis is going to get in the way - for both the straights and the lesbians.
Conan the Grammarian at February 8, 2018 8:03 PM
No study gooses egg, just plain old math
go to BLS.gov
If you take the total full time earnings of men and women you get the 80% figure feminists like to tout
Dig into the hours worked by full time men and women and do the math yourself
lujlp at February 8, 2018 9:11 PM
Why is Cosby's comeback slimy lenona.
I didnt pay that close attention but from reports it seems he was quite up front with his "victims" when they mutually agreed to trade sex for drugs and money
lujlp at February 8, 2018 10:44 PM
No, no, luj. You presented that as though women work less than men because they're lazy. They are choosing part-time work versus full-time work -- you know, kids and all. And being paid less. What in the crap are you trying to dig out of those stats? China is around there somewhere, I'm sure. Stop.
gooseegg at February 9, 2018 5:55 PM
No gooseegg, the reason women work few hours is becuase fewer individual women work full time than men
This is how the wage gap works
Feminists take ALL the money ALL full time men earn and compare it to ALL the money ALL full time women earn.
Given more men work full time than women, and generally work longer hours than women it is no wonder they as a whole make more than women as a whole
What I am digging out of those stats, the exact same stats I've never heard you berate feminists for using, if the stupidity of the wage gap argument.
For the sake of argument let us assume there are only three full time jobs in the world.
Two men working eighty hour weeks at ten dollars per hour figure in over time and the numbers are
Man 1 - 80 hours at $1000 dollars a week
Man 2 - 80 hours at $1000 dollars a week
Men - 160 hours at $2000 a week
Men - $12.50 per hour
Let us assume that the third job is held by a woman working forty hours a week at thirty five dollars an hour
Woman 1 - 40 hours at $1400 dollar a week
Women - $35 per hour
Now according to the way feminists run this math, women earn 7-% of what men do as
1400/2000=.7
But the men in this senario worked 400% longer than the woman did earning under 36% of the womans hourly rate as
12.5/35=0.357
Have you gotten the point yet?
If not Ill make it explicit. The wage gap is a lie. And I fully admit my stat is just as big a lie.
The difference being I am honest about it being a lie, and my lie forces feminists to go digging for the truth. A truth that will dispell their lie just as it will dispell mine.
Still got any objections to my methodology?
lujlp at February 9, 2018 10:35 PM
Yes?
No?
lujlp at February 11, 2018 8:01 AM
Leave a comment