Oct 292014
 

There has been a missing part to the Satya Nadella story, and that is Maria Klawe.  Maria Klawe is the woman who asked Satya Nadella the question about how women should ask for raises.  It’s likely you haven’t heard much if anything about her.  Part of the reason for that is that she hasn’t spoken out much since the Satya Nadella story broke.  Who is Maria Klawe?  She’s a member of the Microsoft board of directors and the president of Harvey Mudd College.  It is highly probable Klawe is the reason that Nadella was even at the Grace Hopper conference about women in computing in the first place.  In an interview, Klawe said that she regularly brings female Harvey Mudd students to it every year, and that this action has spread to companies like Microsoft.

Given that Klawe is likely responsible for Satya Nadella wasting his time at a women in computing conference and asked him the question about women asking for raises, Klawe is at least partially responsible for the uproar about Satya Nadella.  Given that she is on the Microsoft board of directors and is supposed to have a good working relationship with Nadella, one would expect her to do something to defend Nadella.  If Klawe wasn’t on the Microsoft board of directors, she would still have a moral responsibility to help defend Nadella.  However, since she is on the Microsoft board of directors, Klawe has a responsibility to defend Nadella as a member of Microsoft’s board of directors in addition to her moral responsibility.  Her lack of serious action in this case is endangering Microsoft.  People are calling for Satya Nadella’s resignation based on a butchered quote in the media.  In addition, a lot of the demands for Satya Nadella to resign are being driven by anti-Indian racism and xenophobia.  If nothing else she should be speaking out against that.  For all these reasons Klawe should do something to defend Nadella.  This situation proves that she is willing to sacrifice the best interests of Microsoft when a “women’s issue” comes up.  Whether it’s wasting the time of Microsoft executives at a bogus women in computing conference or defending Microsoft against baseless media attacks, Klawe is clearly unwilling to take her responsibilities as a Microsoft board member seriously.  Microsoft shareholders should start demanding Klawe’s resignation since she is endangering Microsoft.

This is not a unique situation for Klawe.  As president of Harvey Mudd College, she has similarly focused on “women’s issues” to the detriment of the college.  Klawe is praised for raising the percentage of women in its computer science program.  Since it is safe to assume that the number of seats in its computer science program was not expanded, women replaced more qualified men.  How can we know this?  The introductory course for computer science was broken up into three sections, the first section for people with no experience in computer science, the second section for people with a little experience in computer science, and the third for people with lots of experience in computer science.  Given that computer science programs tend to have a high percentage of people with at least some prior experience in the subject matter, people (mostly men) with prior experience had to be discriminated against in admissions for people (mostly women) with no prior experience.  (While most of the victims of this policy are men, some women will be victims too.  It is likely that foreign born women, who are more likely than women on average, to have prior experience with computer science will be discriminated against for American born women with no experience in computer science.)  It is difficult to come up with another situation where prior experience and a desire to learn some of a subject on your own is considered bad.  Yet, that seems to now be the case with Harvey Mudd’s computer science program.

The problem at Harvey Mudd goes beyond who is admitted into their computer science program.  People who ask too many questions (most likely to be men) in computer science classes at Harvey Mudd get told to stop asking so many questions about “arcane details” in class.  This is done because other students (presumably women) found such questions “intimidating”.  Supposedly, students with questions about “arcane details” can just ask questions after class, but the net effect of this policy is that students will be less likely to ask questions of their instructors.  (From an academic freedom perspective, this is particularly disturbing.  Anytime an instructor or Harvey Mudd College wants to shut someone up, they can just accuse them of “intimidating women”.)  Personally, when I was getting my degree in computer science, I learned a lot from men who were asking a lot of questions about “arcane details” both inside and outside of class.  They definitely improved the education I received.  Thus, Harvey Mudd students in computer science are now receiving an inferior education.

Defenders of these policies will say that they are designed to bring “equality” or some such to Harvey Mudd’s computer science program.  However, 54% of Harvey Mudd’s seniors in engineering majors are female.  Given that the percentage of computer science seniors at Harvey Mudd is less than 40%, even after Maria Klawe’s “reforms”, other engineering majors must be significantly more than 50% female to get a 54% average across all engineering majors.  Where are the policies and programs to bring more men into those engineering majors that are more than 50% female at Harvey Mudd?  There aren’t any, obviously.  What has been done at Harvey Mudd is to make the college more hostile to men by discriminating against students with prior experience and students likely to ask a lot of questions.  Maria Klawe has helped turn Harvey Mudd’s computer science program from a first rate program to a third rate program just so more women could benefit.  Just as Maria Klawe is endangering the future of Microsoft, she is also endangering the quality of education at Harvey Mudd.

Apr 272013
 

Here is a picture from an anti-Wells Fargo protest at Macalester college:

wellsfargoprotestWhat is missing from this picture?  Men.  The only men in it are the man at the desk who is working there and not part of the protest and some kid who looks like he actually there to see a professor or something like that (and possibly not a part of the protest).  He’s also not screaming like the rest of the women so that makes it more likely he really isn’t part of the protest.

Where are the men?  As men are expected to work, they don’t have time for pointless and meaningless protests like this.  Many men aren’t there because they decided not to go to college after realizing its an anti-male cesspool where protests like these double as protests against men.  (When these girls protest Wells Fargo, they only see the executives, the apex of Wells Fargo, which they imagine to be all men.)  Some of these men may be working to repair damage from superstorm Sandy, a job women aren’t doing.  Men who are going to college major in useful areas of study that require real work like STEM.  Those men are in class or studying since they actually have to work for their grades unlike the girls above who are probably majoring in feminist basket weaving where they will get an automatic A for having a vagina.

Why are the men missing from this picture?  Because they have to work.  Because they don’t have a vagina and thus don’t get free stuff.

 

Mar 022011
 

My latest post for The Spearhead is up. As with all Spearhead posts comments are disabled so comment on the post at The Spearhead.

In my last post I predicted that the University of Cincinnati would collapse due to its embrace of feminism and leftism at the expense of real scientific disciplines like computer science. Several comments brought up the example of Antioch College which had collapsed due to its embrace of feminism and leftism.

Antioch College was originally founded in 1853 in Ohio by the Christian Connection movement and the Unitarian Church.  Beginning in the 1940s it became a hotbed of progressivism and one of the first colleges to experience leftist student activism.  This continued to the 1960s when Antioch College became one of the primary locations of student radicalism, the New Left, the anti-Vietnam War movement, and the Black Power movement in that part of the US.  The 1970s were more of the same for Antioch College, but it expanded to include several satellite campuses under the name of Antioch University.  In the late 1970s Antioch College started having problems with its finances and experienced a decline in enrollment from around 2000 students to around 1000 students.  While Antioch College’s financial situation stabilized in the 1980s it never was able to increase student enrollment beyond 1000 students.

Antioch College started having problems again in the early to mid 1990s when its “Sexual Offense Prevention Policy” received national publicity.  According to the policy, consent for sexual behavior must be mutual, verbal, and reiterated for each new step of sexual behavior.  The original version policy was created at Antioch College’s “Womyn’s Center” due to the agitation of a group of students called “Womyn of Antioch” and called for immediate expulsion of any man accused of a sexual offense with no rights given to the accused.  A revised version of what the “Womyn’s Center” wrote became policy for Antioch College.  Even the revised version was so absurd that it became the basis of a Saturday Night Live sketch called “Is It Date Rape?”

Things continued to deteriorate at Antioch College so that by 2000 Mumia Abu Jamal and transgendered rights activist, Leslie Feinberg, were invited to be speakers at that year’s commencement.  This also recieved national publicity, and in the few years after enrollment declined to 600 students.  By 2003 the situation at Antioch College deteriorated to the point where a renewal plan was started.  This was done alongside deep cuts in staff which included eliminating Antioch College’s Office for Multicultural Affairs.  The led to a student protest called the “People of Color Takeover”.  Antioch College created the “Coretta Scott King Center for Cultural and Intellectual Freedom” in response to that protest but Antioch College still deteriorated.  By 2007 enrollment had declined to 370 students.  Also during 2007 the faculty of Antioch College filed a lawsuit against its Board of Trustees.  Soon after operations were suspended at Antioch College, and it was closed in 2008.

Currently there are plans to reopen Antioch College in the fall of this year.  Even if Antioch College reopens it is unlikely that it will ever regain the status it had.

Feb 192011
 

I had wanted to include this in my most recent post on The Spearhead but it didn’t quite fit.  There was a movie back in 1994 called PCU.  The idea was that it stood for politically correct university and was about a college where political correctness had run amok.  And no, it wasn’t a documentary.

There’s this one part of the movie that takes place at a faculty party.  At the faculty party, some of the professors are talking about how “bisexual asian studies needs its own building”.  The only question is how bisexual asian studies will get its own building.  Either the math department or the hockey team will have to go.

Doesn’t this sound like the University of Cincinnatti’s elimination of their computer science major?  I never thought I would see that part of PCU happen in real life, but it has.

Feb 192011
 

My latest post for The Spearhead is up. As with all Spearhead posts comments are disabled so comment on the post at The Spearhead.

Universities like everyone else are feeling the pinch in the current economy.  This has led to them to look for places where they can cut expenditures.  It would make the most sense to cut the useless parts of a university such as womens studies majors, various ethnic studies majors, “diversity” programs, programs for women, affirmative action, etc. and all of the associated expensive deans and bureaucracy that come along with such uselessness.  The University of Cincinnati has not done this.  Instead the University of Cincinnati has decided to cut its computer science major.

While the university claims that the computer science major is really being folded into other majors so nothing will be “lost”, this is not true.  Computer Science is an independent discipline.  Folding computer science into other majors is like a university trying to eliminate its chemical engineering major into its chemistry major.  Despite the overlap, it makes no sense.

A university has many purposes ranging from preparation for jobs and careers to loftier goals such as expanding the sum total of human knowledge.  The University of Cincinnati by cutting its computer science major instead of its womens studies major and all other useless majors has failed all of these purposes.  What they decide to eliminate and keep sends a strong message about what they think is important.  The University of Cincinnati has sent a clear message that what they think is important is feminist and leftist indoctrination.

Even knowing that the University of Cincinnati has decided to place more importance in feminist and leftist indoctrination than employment and the body of human knowledge, why was computer science chosen as the first major to be eliminated?  Most likely there were several factors in the university’s decision but one of them had to be the pervasive anti-male bias that exists at most universities.  Computer science is a major that is taken by mostly men, and those men are mostly “politically incorrect” men such as white men and asian men.  If the University of Cincinnati cuts more majors they will most likely be other engineering and science majors that are made up of mostly “politically incorrect” men.

In the end this decision really only hurts the University of Cincinnati.  Anyone who wants to major in computer science will go elsewhere along with their tuition and fees.  Many men who weren’t going to major in computer science will still avoid the University of Cincinnati because its anti-male bias is clearer than the average university.  In a few years alumni donations will start to collapse as men who are employed in computer science jobs will be donating to the universities they went to and not the University of Cincinnati.  All the womens studies and ethnic studies alumni will not be able to make up for the lost alumni donations.  The womens and ethnic studies alumni are going to government, quasi-government, and other government mandated jobs that are going to collapse in the near future.  A alumni with no job or a job where they have to say, “Would you like fries with that?” will not be able to donate to their alma mater.  Research grants will fall apart for the University of Cincinnati as they will not be able to make use of them.

In a way it’s good that the University of Cincinnati made this decision.  Instead of hiding what they’re really about, now everyone knows.

Feb 112010
 

My latest post for The Spearhead is up. As with all Spearhead posts comments are disabled so comment on the post at The Spearhead.

When debating feminists or even just reading or listening to their drivel, they are guaranteed at some point to make a reference (really several references) to their “education”.  As we know this is meant to convince us (unsuccessfully) that they are intelligent and have knowledge.  The fact that feminists went to school or received a degree does not mean that they are intelligent or have knowledge.  That is obvious from the fact that they fail to grasp basic concepts such as cause and effect and supply and demand.  (Neither concept really requires that much intelligence, knowledge or education to understand.)  Many of their degrees are in “women’s studies” which is about indoctrination and not knowledge or they got their degrees through affirmative action or some other form of female privilege.  In either case, having a degree does not mean these feminists (and other women) received much if any education.

Since we know that they didn’t receive an education, a new word is needed to describe the process of going to school, receiving a degree without gaining any real knowledge or education.  I propose, credentialation.

They have gone through a process that on the surface seems similar to getting an education, but all they have done is received a credential that is supposed to mean they have received knowledge in a particular subject.   However, no real knowledge was gained, but these women are able to use the “credential” to act as if they actually received the knowledge the credential claims.

Credentialation doesn’t automatically mean some type of indoctrination happened, but in many cases it did.  A degree in “women’s studies” is a good example.  Classes in “women’s studies” do not impart any actual knowledge, but plenty of anti-male propaganda is presented (indoctrination).  Many degrees in liberal arts fields also have indoctrination with anti-male propaganda but to a much lesser extent.  Working for a degree in those fields can also be a credentialation since its possible to skate by on anti-male propaganda.  It’s also possible to get a credentialation in an engineering field or the sciences, but this is more difficult since both those areas deal with the real world and thus require students in those fields to produce real, tangible results.  However, due to “women in engineering” programs and other affirmative action for women, it’s still possible to get a credentialation and not an education in engineering and the sciences.

The are a couple of good ways to test if someone received a credentialation or an education.  The more someone mentions their degrees as an argument the more likely they received a credentialation.  If despite receiving a degree, it’s obvious that person didn’t gain any knowledge (particularly if they don’t understand basic knowledge about how things works), then they received a credentialation.  Feminists are likely to fail the first test and will definitely fail the second.

Jan 312010
 

My latest post for The Spearhead is up. As with all Spearhead posts comments are disabled so comment on the post at The Spearhead.

Recently, I wrote on my blog about about an article from Reason Magazine (found via our own EW’s blog) that said that the primary class war is now between public sector employees and private sector employees.  The article explains how government jobs are now better paid, have better benefits, have platinum plated pensions, and in some cases are even effectively exempt from some laws such as various traffic laws.  I made the observation that this meant the primary class war was now between men and women because public sector employment is now mostly female.  Public sector employment is now a vehicle for promoting female supremacism.

This also means that organized labor has also become a vehicle for promoting female supremacism.  It used to be that organized labor was made up of men working in the private sector.  In fact, unionization of government employees at the federal level wasn’t even allowed until 1962.  Over time, private sector unionization has gone down while public sector unionization has gone up.  For the first last year, a majority of unionized workers have jobs in the public sector (making up 52% of unionized workers) instead of the private sector.  As a result, unions have become more and more about political activism for raising taxes and increasing unsustainable government spending.  There are many examples of this.  In Arizona, the Arizona Education Association (the teachers’ union in Arizona) successfully lobbied against repeal of a $250 million a year statewide property tax and identified another $2.1 billion in tax increases to forestall spending reductions.  In California, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) spent $1 million on a television ad campaign pressing for higher oil, gas, and liquor taxes.  In Maine, the Maine Municipal Association, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the Teamsters, and the Maine Education Association collectively spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to campaign against a ballot initiative in November 2009 that would prevent government spending from growing faster than the combined rate of inflation and population growth and require the government to return excess revenues as tax rebates.  In Oregon last week, there were two ballot initiatives to raise personal and business taxes that passed.  Ninety percent of the advertising promoting a yes vote was provided by public employee unions who also made sure that the money that will be collected from the tax increases will go into benefits for public sector employees.

Knowing that the public sector workforce is predominately female, this means that all of these tax increases with increased spending on public sector employees are effectively acting as a transfer of wealth from men to women.  It’s no surprise that state branches of the National Education Association (the teachers’ union) come up again and again when it comes to increasing taxes to spend on government employees as the teaching profession and by extension the membership of the NEA is predominately female.  These are the reasons why organized labor has become another arm of female supermacism.

Jan 182010
 

(My latest post at the Spearhead is up.  As always comments are disabled here.  Comment about this post at the Spearhead.)

The San Diego Union Tribune reports that an 11 year old boy’s personal science project was mistaken for a bomb. An 11 year old boy who attends Millennial Tech Magnet Middle School in San Diego was working on a personal science project to build some type of motion detector. He made the mistake of bringing it to his school. A vice principal at Millennial Tech saw the boy showing the device to other students at the school, and believing it was a bomb, IED, or some other type of harmful device put the school under lockdown and brought in the San Diego Police. Later the school was evacuated, and the device was scanned and determined to be harmless. The boy’s house and garage was checked by fire officials to make sure there was nothing harmful or explosive. Obviously, there wasn’t. While there will be no prosecutions (since no actual laws were violated), authorities are still “recommending” that both the boy and the parents “get counseling” because the boy supposedly violated some school policy.

One aspect of female supremacism is prosecuting a war on boys. This case is a stellar example of that. It’s safe to say that if an 11 year old girl brought a personal science project to school, it would be held as proof of “female empowerment”. However, since a boy did it, the police were called in, his house was searched for chemicals and explosive materials, and he (along with his parents) was remanded for “counseling” since they couldn’t find anything.

It’s even worse than it seems, because this is a tech magnet school. By definition a tech magnet school will have students who are interested in technology, engineering, and science. Trying to build electronic devices such a motion detector, as this boy did, should be considered typical – and even praiseworthy – for a student in such a school. Instead, any outside interest in science, engineering, and technology by boys is quashed by school authorities. If you wonder why the scientific, technological, and engineering fields are moving to Asia, just consider that what female supremacism is doing to boys is a huge part of it. Of course, with the export of feminism, Asia’s leadership in science, engineering, and technology will be short-lived, because boys will likely be treated with the same distrust and hatred in Asia as they are here in the near future.

Dec 162009
 

This Spearhead article should be up sometime today. As with all my Spearhead articles comment at The Spearhead.

By now you have already heard about the “mancession”, and you know that men are disproportionately losing their jobs compared to women in this recession. Since the official unemployment rate in the US is already in the double digits, President Obama did the only thing he knows how to do, talk, by holding a jobs summit. All that came out of the jobs summit was undeniable proof that all the attendees at the summit should probably be unemployed.

Originally, the “stimulus” (which was supposed to keep the official unemployment rate well below its current level) was supposed to be spent on infrastructure. The I-35W Mississippi River Bridge collapse in Minnesota in 2007 and the DC Metro crash earlier this year in June (which was also covered by our own Roissy on his personal blog) showed that spending on maintaining current and building new infrastructure has been insufficient for a long time. The stimulus would have been a good opportunity to begin to correct this massive error as solid infrastructure is necessary for long term economic growth (not to mention safety), but womens’ (such as NOW) groups objected. They called the original stimulus “burly”, “macho”, and “sexist” demanding that the stimulus be spent on women. This was despite the fact that millions of men were losing their jobs, and education and health care added jobs primarily benefiting women. NOW and the other womens’ groups were successful with the stimulus was skewed towards education and health care leaving infrastructure in the same dangerous state it was before. In addition the gap between male and female unemployment is the largest in the history of unemployment data going back to 1948 when such data began.

This “women oriented stimulus” along with other things has caused the federal deficit for this year to surpass 1.8 trillion dollars, far beyond the deficit of any previous year. This causes more men to be unemployed since this massive federal debt is sucking capital out of the private sector which destroys jobs. Literally, there is no capital for new business creation and business expansion that would create jobs. Given all of the other factors here, effectively the stimulus and other ballooning government spending is causing millions and millions of more men to be unemployed. At least if the stimulus was spent on infrastructure jobs doing badly needed work would be created that would have provided a solid foundation for long term economic growth. Instead we have infrastructure that continues to crumble plus more and more men losing their jobs.

Since government policy is now driving the problems of male unemployment and crumbling infrastructure, only a significant change in government policy will solve these problems. Until then millions more men will become unemployed and there will be more bridges collapsing, metro crashes, electrical grid failures, and other disasters that should never have happened.

May 302009
 

When technology is discussed in terms of how it will free men, the two technologies that come up the most are sex bots and artificial wombs.  This is to be expected as so many of the problems women cause men to have are tied up in dating, relationships, and having kids (i.e. divorce and corrupt family courts).  However, women cause problems to men outside of these areas.

Take schools for instance.  They are run by women and feminist men.  Their employees are mainly women.  It’s no surprise that natural boy behavior is called ADD (attention deficit disorder), ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), or Asperger’s syndrome by female teachers who refuse to understand boys.  If you talk to parents of boys in your community, you will hear plenty of stories of female teachers who will claim that their son has one of these diseases and will refuse to teach them unless they are medicated.

Before anyone gets on me about claiming ADD, ADHD, and Asperger’s syndrome aren’t real, I’m not claiming that.  They are real, but over diagnosed.  Lazy female teachers are motivated to medicate your sons rather than become a better educator.  In the case of Asperger’s syndrome, most people don’t fully comprehend how its a continuum disorder.  It’s not like being pregnant which a woman is or isn’t.  Asperger’s is in the middle of a continuum between what is known as being neurotypical on one end and full blown autism on the other.  As a result its possible to be a little bit Aspergers or autistic and not notice any real problems.  As a result of how nebulous this can be, a female teacher can claim a boy is Aspergers, but the only real problem is that he isn’t interested in American Idol.

The source of this problem is public schools.  When most people think of education, they think of something along the lines of kids receiving the knowledge of previous generations in such subjects as history, math, English, and science.  This is not the case.  While some knowledge is taught, the fact is public schools are nothing but vehicles for propaganda.  This has been true since the beginning of public schools.  Horace Mann who is responsible for the creation of modern public education in America had two goals, create obedient factory workers (since Americans were independent thinkers at the time) and make Catholic immigrant’s kids Protestants.  In other words Horace Mann was not interested educating anyone, but propaganda.  Now, public schools are controlled by other interests which include feminists (hence why public schools are hostile to boys) and other leftist interests.
Private schools may or may not be any better.  Schools the use the Sudbury Model are most likely very good.  However, even schools such as Catholic schools where you would expect to find no feminism whatsoever have plenty of feminism in them.  I went to Catholic schools and while its clear that I received a superior education to a public school (which isn’t that much of an accomplishment), its was still run by feminists.  The teachers went to all of the same education colleges as public school teachers.  They were still primarily female and did not understand boys.  Ironically, some of the worst feminists were nuns.
If you have a boy, and you want to make sure he receives a true education, you probably have to homeschool.  Detractors of homeschooling will claim that your kid won’t receive “social skills”.  However what are “social skills” really?  Mindless conformity, getting their lunch money stolen, being bombarded with feminist propaganda, and if the teacher is really lazy being drugged.  If you’re worried about your homeschooled kid not getting “social skills” you can steal their lunch money and give them placebos instead of real drugs.
As great homeschooling is, it has its limits.  Technology will provide us a solution to these problems, namely the direct neural interface.  What is a direct neural interface?  It’s a interface directly between a computer and the brain.  If you have seen the Matrix, what they were using were direct neural interfaces (although I doubt it will work like that).  What direct neural interfaces will allow is accelerated learning since knowledge can be directly downloaded into the brain.  No longer will teachers be needed who may be motivated to instill propaganda rather than educate.  Since education will be so direct, anyone will be able to learn whatever subject they wish.  For men this will mean complete freedom from feminist schools and colleges.
Translate »