121–130 of 169 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If lack of female ship captains is a sign that women are far behind, is lack of male school teachers, nurses, and HR professionals a sign that men are far behind?
At least in your first example, yes, it is a sign that men are far behind when it comes to being trusted with children. But that's not really relevant to the ship story.
Q: Why would the captain of the ship be responsible anyway? Don't they use Pilots in the Suez canal?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and captained the Aida IV when it became the first vessel to navigate the newly-expanded Suez Canal in 2015. At the time, she was the youngest and first female Egyptian captain to cross the waterway. It's a bit confusing. From another linked article[0] > “One has to spend many years at sea, studying and taking exams before reaching this level. > I graduated in 2013 and got an MBA, then I was promoted from second of…
I’d guess it is a poor translation of Arabic. ربان Can be translated to “captain” but it means the person piloting the ship which is part of the duties of the first mate when the captain isn’t at the helm. Saying that she piloted the ship through the canal would be consistent with the rest of the facts presented. The point is that the antidote to distasteful fake news isn’t good intentioned fake news it’s factual new…
The antidote to a bad typo is the anecdote of a good typo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very rarely do you see the gender of someone driving incompetently. So, most of this ‘personal experience’ is simply conjecture which can self reinforce.
You don’t know how often I see the face of someone driving. Why make such assumptions?
Now sure, the smaller percentage may still add up to a significant number. But people do a crap job of limiting their mental tallies to only the people they actually verify. If they assume someone is say drunk their going to add that as evidence even if they never actually have any direct evidence for drunkenness/age/gender/ethnicity etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> armies of losers Referring to "them" like this is partially what feeds them. If you are interested.
Again, I don't care to find them excuses. "Somebody called me a loser so I decided to spew bullshit online" is what losers do. I'd much rather empathize with this captain who was targeted solely because she's a woman. That seems like a much better use of my time than caring about keyboard warriors on twitter or 4chan.
I live in a very "purple" area and even though I am "blue" I get along with "red" people easily by, I dunno, not calling them "deplorables" when they say something that offends me.
It's up to each of us if we want to link our identity with a zealous cause and never back down because we're afraid of social penalties from our in-group, or if we want to actually learn how to get along. But if you go around calling people "losers", you should consider how that might be adding to the problem you're trying to solve.
Edit: btw I agree 100% with everything you've said except for the "armies of losers" phrasing. That's all I'm trying to communicate to you. That there may have been a more constructive way to get your (correct) point across.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same in the west, although not to the same extent
Men in China have less rights than women in America. At some point, it becomes shortsighted to lose sight of where we are.
win some, loose some. not really helpful to compare that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d guess it is a poor translation of Arabic. ربان Can be translated to “captain” but it means the person piloting the ship which is part of the duties of the first mate when the captain isn’t at the helm. Saying that she piloted the ship through the canal would be consistent with the rest of the facts presented. The point is that the antidote to distasteful fake news isn’t good intentioned fake news it’s factual new…
> The point is that the anecdote to distasteful fake news isn’t good intentioned fake news it’s factual news. The antidote to a bad typo is the anecdote of a good typo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intuitively, it seems correct that in aggregate, women kill less people on the road. From personal experience, most people can drive well enough regardless of who or what they are, but if someone's driving extremely riskily then it's almost always youngish males. But also, if someone's exceptionally incompetent then it's usually old people or women. The distribution skews at the extremes and that's where the common p…
Very rarely do you see the gender of someone driving incompetently. So, most of this ‘personal experience’ is simply conjecture which can self reinforce.
I'll make an example of how this works between well intentioned people:
My wife is an excellent driver. We live in small town, in a country where infrastructure predates cars. Roads are very narrow, often on steep inclines, and flanked by tall stone walls. My wife regularly complains of large SUVs stuck unable to maneuver. On her account, they are almost always driven by women. Her reaction is invariably: "if you can't drive, just get a nornal-sized car!".
As this happens again and again, with caring frequency etc, occasionally we talk about it ans wonder about this pattern and what may cause it, or whether it is real. My wife's theory is that some women feel unsafe in a car and solve the problem by buying a bigger car instead of getting some practice.
And here we are spreading crappy anecdata. But that's life, that's how human interact.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
good point. but when it comes to slow reaction times, if the guide is giving the wrong order, by the time the captain can counteract that it may be to late. but you are right. we'll just have to wait until we know more about what really happened
Not sure if reaction time plays any role when talking about ship this size. It takes time for it to respond for any command, e.g. course change.
i don't have any experience with ships larger than a small sailing yacht myself and i guess, either you see a problem coming, then you have enough time to react, or you don't see it, and then it's to late either way.
Well, that was probably predictable. If the news coverage of her being the "first female ship's captain" happened near the same time as the Suez Canal incident, those two stories can easily be conflated into a "told you so" narrative to justify condescension towards women aspiring to be ship's captains. It doesn't matter whether the correlation is real because the narrative feeds into existing stereotypes and anyone…
Are you claiming the fake Arab News story was created by accident? No, it was deliberate misinformation intended to generate views and attention. There is nothing predictable about it beyond the fact it is shitty behaviour.
- empathize with a victim of misogyny
- attack sexism as an eternal bugaboo
- virtue signal our personal swellness for fighting sexism
The real power of Woke propaganda is that we can transmute anyone into saint- or hitler-hood at will.