Jul 092016

I found an example that proves that the feminist idea that there is pervasive misogyny in the tech industry is nothing but paranoid propaganda:

Here’s an example I was thinking of after I wrote my original post.

I work at a largish engineering company, and help organize events for summer interns. One of them is an “ask us anything” panel where we encourage interns to ask recently graduated full-time employees about life at the company without managers / HR in the room.

Every year, we get a young woman asking us something along the lines of “I’ve heard the engineering industry is super sexist. How horribly oppressed am I going to be?”

Now, the response they usually get from the ladies on the panel (who I assume are being truthful) is basically “you will very occasionally get some sexist / not-quite-appropriate remarks, almost exclusively from people either within 10 years of retirement (hence self solving) or from the non-college educated techs that have a rougher culture in general. This will be mildly annoying but won’t have a real effect on your career”.

So given that it seems workplace sexism for our engineers isn’t really fake, but is typically a minor irritant at worst, is that female intern really well served by being primed to expect lousy sexist treatment? The potential paranoia that every adverse decision is unavoidable due to your gender, or that today will be the day you’re horribly harassed… can’t that be worse than the actual harm of the intransigent remaining vestiges of professional sexism?

This shows that there is no vile hive mind running an assault mission against women in tech.  In addition, the two examples of “kindly annoying misogyny” in tech are likely to not be misogyny at all.  In the case of the men within 10 years of retirement, that is more likely to be noting more than failing to use the latest SJW approved language than actual misogyny.  For the less educated men, that is likely to be the problem as well plus the (college educated) women being bigoted against men who are not college educated.  Thus, it is clear that there is no misogyny in the tech industry.

Jun 252016

I don’t know how to describe this so let me start off with the words of Sarah Nadav, a startup founder who came up with a new idea:

Let’s talk about an uncomfortable truth, sexual harassment and assault is common in the tech industry. The only reason we don’t hear more about it is because the men who perpetrate it the most are also the ones who hold the “keys to the kingdom”- as investors or powerful industry figures, women don’t want to ruin their careers by speaking out.

So I have come to a conclusion. I am adding a “sexual misconduct clause” into all of my investment agreements. If an investor or employee of the investor/accelerator/incubator makes a sexual advance towards me or anyone in my company (Civilize), then they are stripped of all of their shares in Civilize (even the ones that have vested) and there will be a public notice to shareholders as to the reason why.

Notice the jump from sexual assault to a sexual advance, which could mean anything including asking someone out for coffee.  On top of that, not only is there no due process when an alleged “sexual advance” occurs, but how easily this could be used for fraud.  Want to steal an investors shares in a startup?  That’s easy to do with this since all you have to do is accuse the investor (or one of their employees) of asking someone out.  Who would want to invest in such a scenario?

Or what if the person who is falsely accused of asking someone out is gay?  Or a gay individual actually asks someone out of the same sex?  That will be an immediate fraud lawsuit plus the accusation of discrimination against gays and homophobia.  And that has to be an issue, because she says that ” sexual harassment and assault is common in the tech industry”.  Remember, we keep hearing about how few women are in tech.  For sexual harassment and assault to be endemic in tech, that has to mean the primary victims of this alleged epidemic are men not women.

I don’t know how this would be enforceable.  Take how she listed employees of an incubator as being bound by this clause.  Every employee of the incubator would have to be informed and sign a document to that effect.  Any smart employee of said incubator will just avoid Sarah Nadav and her company.  Another reason that it would not be enforceable is the question of how it would apply to Sarah Nadav herself.  What happens if she (or one of her employees) asks out an investor, an employee of an investor, or an employee at an incubator?  Why does she and her employees have the right to ask people out working for their incubator or investor, but not the reverse.  For that matter, someone who is pissed off at her could use this policy against her by falsely accusing her of sexual advances and threatening to use this policy against the accuser.

Where did Sarah Nadav get this insane idea?  Read her own words:

Let me walk you through my process:

Yesterday I read Lena Dunham’s Linkedin post

We don’t need to continue reading after that, but it gets worse.  She is by her own admission filled with rage about (potential) investors:

While other CEOs are worried about getting funded, I am shit scared that one of them will invest.

Every time I get up to pitch, instead of sharing my vision I am exploding with rage. And then I apologize and promise to do better, and change my pitch to one that is even more antagonizing then the last.

I was literally told that I need to work harder on hiding my thinly veiled contempt for the investors.

The good news is that no one will have to deal with her “sexual advance clause” and its fraud because she will have already scared all investors away.  Despite this, Sarah Nadav is worried that an investor will want to have dinner with her:

Because here is my deepest fear- I am afraid that one of these men, these bad actors will end up investing in Civilize. He will have a board seat, he will own part of my life’s work. One day, he will offer to take me out to dinner and I will think it is professional but he will have another agenda (because in his mind lunch is for business and dinner is for lovers but I didn’t get the memo), he will make an advance, I won’t know what to do, everything will get awkward and I will be afraid of making an enemy of him because he will have the power to oust me from my company.

I have good news for Sarah Nadav.  She never needs to worry about an investor (or any other man) asking her out to dinner.  No investor will invest in her startup after seeing her rage and contempt.  No man (investor or otherwise) will ask her to dinner because they won’t want to be alone with her.  Given her rage, paranoia, and all around crazy, no man will want to be anywhere near her without multiple witnesses.  And that will be true for many women too.  The only conclusion I can draw from this is that Sarah Nadav has decided to shout, “I’m insane.  Don’t invest in my startup.”  We have all gotten the message.

May 212016

As we know, the women in tech movement seeks to remove as many men as possible from the tech industry.  And part of that is targeting Indian men and Asian men working in tech.  Many Asian and Indian men who work in tech are immigrants.  Now, there is a new angle in targeting Asian and Indian immigrants working in tech, using the fact that some visas require their wives to not work.

The article blames “an immigration system focused only on meeting corporations’ needs” which is bullshit by itself since any of these wives of immigrants working in the tech industry could change their visa status.  However, I anticipate that the next target will be the immigrant men working in tech themselves for forcing their wives into an immigration status where they can’t work.  Since the vast majority of immigrant men working in tech are Indian and Asian, this is really an attack on Indian and Asian men working in tech.  Indian and Asian men are already accused of importing “misogyny” into the tech industry, and this visa issue will be used to bolster that attack.  Even with tactics like these, I don’t anticipate this will stop class action racial discrimination lawsuits from Asian and Indian men when the women in tech movement tries to remove them from the tech industry.

May 052016

Ellen Pao is up to her old tricks. She has started a group to “improve diversity” in the tech industry focusing on startups. Since Ellen Pao is involved, this group is nothing but an attempt to shakedown companies in the tech industry over “diversity”. It is telling that Ellen Pao is focusing on startups. Startups don’t have the resources to fight an extended battle against a group shaking them down with mafia style tactics. She’s hoping that startups will pay her off instead of dealing with the negative publicity she could generate.

Of course, there is a built in problem with what Ellen Pao is doing. Anything having to with “diversity” in the tech industry requires that Asian men be fired which will open up Ellen Pao’s group and any company stupid enough to follow her to discrimination lawsuits from Asian men.

Apr 102016

What does “Women in Tech” mean?  This should be self evident, but not when you put male to female transsexuals in the mix.  I found this subreddit called GenderCritical.  It’s a subreddit for feminists who think that male to female transsexuals are a conspiracy by men to oppress women.  One of the posts on this reddit was how male to female transexuals were forcing actual women out of the Women in Tech movement (and out of the tech industry).  This is apparently a plot to keep women out of the tech industry.  The comments are even better such as this one where they believe that male to female transsexuals are getting better jobs than actual womenThe reason why this is happening in the tech industry according to them is because the men who started the tech industry are socially maladjusted guys who really hate women, unlike plain old misogynists:

I don’t see a lot of other industries really hating women. Sure, misogyny has been a part of the fabric for a long time because it’s been a part of the social structure for forever.

Tech was started and built by deeply socially maladjusted males. They used their technical expertise to cover for their massive insecurities. Social media is basically the social version of all of the misogyny and awkwardness of an industry that maintains hatred of women as a cornerstone.

This is an example of why accusations of transphobia should be used against accusations of sexism/misogyny.  Let the male to female transsexuals and women fight over what the women in “women in tech” means.  If they can’t define what “woman” means then there is no need for “women in tech” nonsense, then the tech industry can’t be sexist and can’t be expected to increase the percentage of women in tech because no one knows what a “woman” is.

Mar 212016

An anonymous commentor brought to our attention that the UN is making a push towards mandatory paternity leave.  The key word there is mandatory.  The UN is not saying that businesses that can afford it may want to consider offering paternity leave or that men should have the choice of taking paternity leave if offered.  The UN is explicitly saying that men must be forced to take paternity leave because maternity leave oppresses women due to the fact that maternity leave creates an incentive for businesses to hire men.  The UN has admitted that the only way for men and women to be equal at work is to “handicap” men.

This is not the only case where it is suggested that men need to be “handicapped” in the workplace.  At the Good Mangina Project, which recently has become the Scared Shitless of Donald Trump All The Time Project, a feminist discovered that one of the reasons for the so called wage gap was that men work more hours. This immediately becomes that women are being oppressed by men working “too many hours” because it creates an incentive to hire men.  Again, the solution is to “handicap” men when it comes to working.

I chose the word “handicap” for a reason because what we are seeing is the prequel to Harrison Bergeron.  (For those of you who are unfamiliar with Harrison Bergeron, it is a science fiction short story about a future America where anyone of above average intelligence, strength, etc. has to be handicapped to the lowest common denominator.  For example, anyone who was more intelligent than a moron would be “handicapped” by implants that prevent that person from mentally concentrating.)  Feminists are treating Harrison Bergeron as a how to guide.  Right now, they are trying to “handicap” men by throwing roadblocks in their work and careers by forced paternity leave and forced limits on how much we can work.  When that fails to bring men down to the level of women, the next step will be to try to force men to use the “handicaps” that are described in Harrison Bergeron.  Of course, this will lead to the worst economic depression in history, but feminists will just blame that on men.

Mar 072016

One thing that comes up on places like the KotakuInAction reddit is that if feminists keep saying that the video game and tech industries are hostile to women, women will avoid them.  That makes sense because why would anyone go to a place that they believed was hostile to them if they had a choice.  Feminists keep saying that they want “diversity” in tech and video games, yet lying about nonexistent hostility to women gets the opposite of what they want.  Therefore, feminists must want something else.

What do feminists want from the tech industry?  This article illuminates what feminists really want.  First, take a look at this paragraph from the article:

Trying to force women back into a toxic environment isn’t going to work if the dynamics of the industry remain the same. And women are smart for leaving- because they aren’t giving up, they are moving to other industries that treat them better.

The author says that women should leave tech because it’s hostile to them.  Now, take a look at another part of the article:

It is time for the next wave, and it has to be focused on men. We need gender diversity workshops, sensitivity training, sexual harassment workshops for CEOs, VCs and Angels.

Conference and panel organizers who “can’t find” diverse panel members should be fired. Point blank.

VC’s who “can’t find” women entrepreneurs are not good at deal flow and their investors should pull out. Point Blank.

So if women are correctly avoiding tech because of its alleged hostility to women, then how are conference organizers supposed to find women for conferences, and how are venture capitalists supposed to find women entrepreneurs?  You can’t have women choosing to avoid an industry and have that industry be able successfully find women.  It’s logically impossible.

The author’s demand when the tech industry can’t satisfy her contradiction is that men get fired.  “Point blank”, as she says.  That is what the women in tech movement is all about.  It’s not about ending hostility towards women in the tech industry because even they know it doesn’t exist.  It is about getting men fired, so that they can take the jobs of the fired men.  Of course, that strategy won’t work since getting large numbers of men fired from the tech industry will cause the businesses they employed at to collapse.  There will not be any jobs for men or women since they will be gone.  I suspect that feminists won’t be bothered by that since they got to stick it to men they find nerdy and unattractive.

Feb 282016

GitHub is going to die soon in what is likely to be a massive explosion.  Coraline Ada Ehmke, the June 2015 Entitlement Princess of the Month, is going to work at GitHub on “community management” and “anti-harassment tools”.  I anticipate “community management” means running off men and anyone else who does actual work and that
“anti-harassment tools” means find new ways to attack men.  It can’t have anything to do with actual harassment since no one has provided any evidence (much less even made the claim) that harassment is a problem at GitHub.

We already have a preview of what life will be like at GitHub with Ehmke employed.  Someone put an issue into ContibutorCovenant repository requesting that Ehmke end her association with Shanley Kane, the March 2015 Entitlement Princess of the Month, for her misandrist tweets.  This should remind you of #OpalGate since the same reasoning is being used here.  However, there is an important difference.  With #OpalGate, discussion of the issue was allowed.  Ehmke didn’t do that.  She just immediately censored any discussion of the issue.  Based on this, we can assume that GitHub will become a virtual police state and will start bleeding employees who want to escape the insanity.  It is guaranteed that there will several class action lawsuits against GitHub by employees that become the victims of Ehmke.  I don’t know when GitHub will shut down, but it is likely to be quick and sudden.

There is one good thing about this.  It shows the power and necessity of distributed systems.  Since git, the software behind GitHub is distributed, there are local copies of a user’s repositories on their computers.  Even if GitHub shuts down all of a sudden, the repositories are saved and can still be moved to a new git server.  Ehmke can destroy GitHub, but she can’t destroy the software created with it.

Feb 072016

Millennial women support Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton for President by a wide margin.  Now that the “Berniebros” attack on Sanders supporters has failed, feminists are trying other tactics that clearly won’t work.  Gloria Steinem is saying that millennial women who support sanders are doing so to meet young men.  Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright is telling millennial women that there is a special place in hell for them for supporting Sanders over Clinton.  Specificially, Albright said, “There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.”

Why aren’t millennial women simply voting based on their vaginas?  They shouldn’t need old feminists to tell them to vote for Hillary, right?  It’s not because they are opposed to feminism (even if they swear up and down that they are not feminists).  There are a lot of millennial woman who unconsciously (or maybe consciously) know that the traditional feminist and SJW rhetoric of Hillary Clinton isn’t not good for them.  Sure, Clinton may become President, but that is bad in the long term for women.  A Hillary presidency and her policies will just create more MRAs, more MGTOWs, and will create more fertile ground for more #GamerGates.  Sanders seems like the safer choice for Democrats in this case.

Of course, the only difference between Sanders and Clinton, is that with Clinton will drive us off the feminist cliff at 100 MPH whereas Sanders will do it at 85 MPH.  (That’s because Sanders is against a bit of feminism like rape cases being tried by colleges.)  Sanders won’t save young women.  At most, he will delay the world of hurt young women will be in by a couple of years.

Feb 042016

Yahoo is being sued by a MALE former employee who is accusing the company of discriminating against him on the basis of his sex. Looking at the facts, it’s clear that he (and other men) are being discriminated against for being men.  Despite the facts, I don’t expect this lawsuit to be successful, but the results of the lawsuit won’t matter to Yahoo.  Yahoo is already in a death spiral, and getting rid of their male employees is only making things worse.

This lawsuit is a public announcement for men to avoid working at Yahoo if Yahoo is hiring.  It also gives Yahoo’s male employees more motivation to find a new job (if they weren’t aware already that Yahoo is a misandrist hell hole on the verge of collapse.)  Yahoo won’t be able to replace the men who are leaving or laid off with women who are equally as productive as the men.  It’s time to start a death watch for Yahoo.  The only reason that Yahoo has survived this long was that it made an investment in Alibaba several years ago.  If Yahoo hadn’t did that, Yahoo would have already shut down.

Jan 222016

Twitter has been having a lot of problems lately. The stock has been dropping like a rock. It was offline for many users for an extended period of time. I’m hoping that this is the beginning of the collapse of Twitter because we will better off without Twitter.

Why does Twitter need to die? It’s because Twitter is centralized. Thus Twitter has a monopoly on microblogging, and it’s easy for feminists/SJWs to take over and censor anything they don’t like. There are potential alternatives to Twitter out there which prevent this by design so the death of Twitter would be a good opportunity to replace Twitter with one of the alternatives.

GNU Social is an example of a Twitter alternative. It is decentralized and federated, just like how email works. With email you can choose among many different providers, and it is the same with GNU Social. Thus feminists/SJWs can’t take it over just as they can’t take over email. GNU Social also has the benefit of being open source so you are in control of your microblogging data instead of a bunch of feminists/SJWs in San Fransisco. (This is a reason why feminists have declared war on open source software. Open source software puts software developers and users in control of their software and data instead of feminists/SJWs.)

Killing off centralized social media services will weaken feminism. Any time there is an opportunity to replace social media with a decentralized and federated alternative, we need to take it.

Dec 222015

I found an article about how students in the Women & Gender Studies department of West Virginia University had a fair to show off what they learned in the last semester. This fair was supposed to show “real world applications” of their coursework. “Real world applications” to these women & gender studies students making penis piñatas.  I’m not joking, but I wish I was.

Since the goal of this women & gender studies fair was to show what students learn in those “subjects”, we are forced to conclude from the penis piñata that they learned to attack male genitalia with a bat. And they intend to attack male genitalia with bats in the future because the other purpose of this fair was to show “real world applications” of women & gender studies.

For comparison, let’s take a look at what an equivalent STEM fair would look like. (Put aside the fact that STEM students would be too busy with real work for such a thing.). Instead of making silly piñatas, there would be demos of computer softwaruse hardware and demos of various engineering fields from aerospace engineering to electrical engineering to materials engineering. These would all be things that have clearly improved people’s lives unlike penis piñatas. The only reason that a penis piñata would even be near such an event is because of women & gender studies students protesting a STEM fair. (They would protest because improving people’s lives is misogyny.)

In other words women’s studies is so useless that a penis piñata is considered a real world application of the subject.

Dec 082015

The National Science Foundation is spending money on something that is the complete opposite of science, making “gender sensitive computers”.  So far it has cost US taxpayers $345,000 over the last 2 years and more money will be spent on this between now and 2019.  Here is the stated goal of “gender sensitive computers”:

“The [Principal Investigator] PI’s long-term goal is to create theory to inform [Human-Computer Interaction] HCI design practices, to ensure the production of egalitarian designs that reflect all users’ values,” a grant for the project states. “In particular, she aims to create feminist theory for HCI, which she hopes will close the gap in women’s participation in computing.”

“Previously, the PI has shown how approaches to designing for women are questionable when viewed in light of feminist theory,” the grant continued. “Feminist scholars argue that the lack of women in computing further discourages women from pursuing programming-related careers, and that women are also excluded because technologies created by men better address male needs.”
The research will also explore “gender and technical identities” and the belief that computer system designs “alienate women.”

If the grant proposal was written a year later, I’m sure it would have included attacking #GamerGate as an example of this alleged conspiracy by male nerds to keep women out of the computing field.  Another goal of this waste of money is, “The project will teach middle and high school girls to “create technologies in keeping with their gender identity.”  In other words, we will end up with nothing but more vagina software.  (Hopefully, said vagina software won’t be created after eating vagina bread and drinking vagina beer.)

What is not understood here is that computers don’t have a gender, just as all inanimate objects don’t have a gender.  There is no such thing as a computer for women or a computer for men.  A “gender sensitive computer” is a contradiction in terms.  There is no conspiracy to make “male computers” or anti-female computers because such a thing is impossible.  Computers are already “egalitarian” because a computer will do anything a user tells it to do, and the computer can neither discern any gender characteristics about its user nor understand the meaning of it.  What is driving this so called “research” is not that computers are male or pro-male in any way.  What the feminists involved in this project can’t stand is that computers don’t treat female users any different than male users.  Like with so many other things such as government policy, what these women want is not equality but special privileges.  The problem for them is that a computer does not know how to give special privileges for women.  No matter what they do a computer will never give them what they want.  That will be true even when artificial intelligence is developed.

Nov 142015

Zillah Eisenstein, a professor of politics at Ithaca College, declared that agriculture was a “capitalist racialized patriarchy” in a lecture at Cornell University called “Thinking about Hetero-Racist Misogyny in ‘Agriculture’”. Eisenstein has no experience working in agriculture or even studying agriculture. She also accused the US of being a “fascist democracy”.

Given that the modern agricultural system feeds over 7 billion people now, the only conclusion that can be drawn from Eisenstein’s rantings is that “hetero-racist misogyny” is the most successful system for preventing people from starving that anyone has ever come up with.  During her lecture Eisenstein stated her desire for “revolutionary agriculture”.  Such “revolutionary agriculture” has been tried, and it led to famines and farmers being forced into a new system of serfdom.  In other words, in Eisenstein’s utopia, we will be forced to live in mud huts, and most of us will starve to death.  This is why feminism needs to be kept out of agriculture, just like it needs to be kept out of everything else.

Nov 082015

I watched the most recent episode of Hotel Impossible.  I have talked about this show twice before when it provided an interesting showcase of female filthiness and behavior.  This episode also provided an interesting showcase of female behavior, specifically comparing two sisters in business together with two brothers in business together.

The host, Anthony Melchiorri, went to help a struggling hotel that had a pair of sisters in charge.  One sister owned the hotel while the other sister was the hotel’s general manager.  The sisters had a lot of personal problems, and that was the primary reason the hotel was falling apart.  The sister who owned the hotel avoided the hotel because she didn’t want any contact with her sister.  Anthony Melchiorri realizes that the only way to save the hotel was to get the sisters talking again.  He gets them into the same room, and it quickly turns into an argument.  Melchiorri has to bring in a therapist (who happened to be male) to sort out the sisters because he couldn’t assist them with actual hotel business until the sisters started therapy.

Another thing Mechiorri did to help the hotel was get a business deal setup with a very successful distillery that was next to the hotel.  He met with the owners of the distillery who turned out to be two brothers.  Since he was trying to help two sisters, he asked the owners of the distillery what it was like to work with his brother.  They told him that while they had plenty of disagreements, their goals were the same so they knew how and when to compromise.  The brothers could get things done.  Thus the distillery was very successful unlike the hotel which took multiple men to save it (Mechiorri and the male therapist).  It is a very telling comparison of how men working together vs. women working together.

Oct 082015

Forbes pulled an article called “There Is No Diversity Crisis In Silicon Valley” from its website for allegedly violating Forbes’ terms of service.   The article is now available at TechRaptor (and other websites).  After reading the article, I can only conclude that the Forbes terms of service prohibits talking about how wildly successful Silicon Valley is.  And that is the real issue here.  Lots of feminists and manginas say that Silicon Valley needs diversity (which really means women), but the success of Silicon Valley proves that this is not the case.  There’s this idea that if Silicon Valley doesn’t become “diverse” (a.k.a. hire a bunch of women who have no business working in Silicon Valley), then some sort of vague calamity is going to destroy Silicon Valley in a manner that is somewhat similar to how Godzilla destroys Tokyo in Kaiju movies.  The article’s great crime was showing this to be nonsense.

Sep 122015

Intel is running into financial trouble.  They’re going to have to slash $300 million dollars in spending which has already included $6 million dollars for their sponsorship of the Science Talent Search.  Since Intel needs to slash $300 million dollars from its business, there’s something else Intel could get rid that would not have any negative effect on their business performance, namely giving money to Feminist Frequency/Anita Sarkeesian and other feminists.  Intel has a stark choice here.  It can cut $300 million dollars from relevant productive business units, or it can not give $300 million dollars to feminists, the most unproductive (and anti-productive) group in the history of planet Earth.

Intel probably won’t make the smart choice here so what happen is that this will be the beginning of a death spiral for Intel, similar to what we have seen from Gnome, Mozilla, and other open source projects.  I’m predicting that unless Intel stops giving money to feminists, NVidia will buy up the pieces of Intel so that it can produce its own x86 CPUs (which it can’t do right now due to patents).  If you have wanted to see what NVidia would do if it could make its own x86 CPU, you will probably get your wish.

New Page: How Geolibertarianism Can Stop Redistribution From Men To Women

 Anti-Family Courts, female economic bubbles, marriage strike, MGTOW, socialism  Comments Off on New Page: How Geolibertarianism Can Stop Redistribution From Men To Women
Sep 072015

I have added a new page about how Geolibertarianism, a form of libertarianism, can help stop feminism, in particular government redistribution from men to women.  I’m disabling comments on this post because all of the content is on the new page.  Follow the link or click on the tab at the top of the blog to read the page and comment on it.

Sep 032015

It turns out that women in tech crap is illegal in California, at least if you exclude men from it.  Because a lawsuit was brought against a women in tech company, several women are whining about it and trying to pretend that they were in violation of some sort of old Jim Crow style law.  Needless to say, the article is full of lies.  For starters, the law in question says that there will be no discrimination based on sex (as well as several other categories).  That’s it.  NCFM has documented the rest of the facts about the situation in question.

None of this beats the petition that was created to support the women in tech who are excluding men.  Just look at the title, “PROTECT WOMEN ENTREPRENEURS AND COMMUNITIES FROM ‘EQUALITY-SEEKERS'”.  I know they put scare quotes around “equality seekers”, but this alone makes it clear that these “women in tech” aren’t about equality.  This becomes more clear in this paragraph of the petition:

However, there are many similar lawsuits in California attacking businesses that exclude men from participation, no matter the social good that these businesses promote, and no matter the historical and contemporary gender inequalities that these businesses attempt to remedy. You may find cases against women’s self-defense classes, free mammograms on Mothers Day, promotion of women in sports, special discounts for ladies and many others.

Special discounts for women?  In other words, they’re afraid of losing free money.  I am certain that if a business had special discounts only for men, these women would be the first to use the law they’re complaining about against said business.

We already knew that “women in tech” was filled with hypocrisy.  This is just more proof of it.

Aug 272015

Mozilla, the open source software organization that clearly spends more time on feminist bullshit like “meritocracy misogyny” and purging people due to their political contributions than writing quality software, has started another witch hunt against its employees.  This time its due to a comment at Reddit that Mozilla CEO Chris Beard called hate speech.  Here is the comment in question from Reddit user /u/aoiyama:

Frankly everyone was glad to see the back of Christie Koehler. She was batshit insane and permanently offended at everything.

When she and the rest of her blue-haired nose-pierced asshole feminists are gone, the tech industry will breathe a sigh of relief.

Christie Koehler was another “woman in tech” who never did anything technical and harassed anyone doing real work.  Clearly, she was nothing but a blight on Mozilla so its no surprise Mozilla employees would feel this way about her.  It’s a good thing for Mozilla employees that Christie Koehler quit on her own.  It would have been impossible to get rid of her because any Mozilla employee pointing out her unprofessional and dangerous behavior or lack of actual work would have have gotten fired just like Chris Beard is threatening to do if he finds out who aoiyama is.
This also means that any woman can get a paycheck now from Mozilla without doing any actual work.  Any Mozilla employee who points out a woman’s lack of willingness to do work will be declared guilty of “hate speech” and fired.
I say we help out aoiyama and other Mozilla employees who are unable to speak up.  What we should do is post comments to Reddit and other websites saying that we work for Mozilla and include some comment that will set off Mozilla upper management.  (This is why I made the title of this post, “I Work For Mozilla And I’m A Misogynist”.)  Either Mozilla will be forced to drop the witch hunt against aoiyama (and anyone else who agrees with him) due to a flood of garbage data, or Mozilla will turn into a gulag reminiscent of the Soviet Union under Stalin.  Either way we will have shown how evil feminism in technology is.
Aug 152015

There’s this feminist science fiction movie called Advantageous.  Among other things in the movie, women are increasingly becoming homeless because women can’t get jobs.  The stated reason for this in the movie is that jobs have been destroyed due to technology and since unemployed men are more likely to start revolutions.  Thus it makes more sense to employ men.

This is a good example of how feminist science fiction is a failure.  While preventing revolutions might be the stated reason for not giving women jobs in the future, it’s not the real reason.  The real reason is a combination of women’s work being automated, men being more productive, and men not creating problems in the workplace such as frivolous lawsuits like women do.

On top of this the movie doesn’t address why women (or more women) just don’t become stay at home mothers.  That’s because feminists can’t understand the marriage strike or MGTOW.  What has happened in this movie (even though it can’t explain it) is that the marriage strike has reached critical mass, MGTOW has greatly expanded, and employers have been forced to stand up to women.  The widespread homelessness of women in this movie is not due to misogyny.  It’s because women’s behavior towards men has been so vile that both men and employers want nothing to do with them.  Of course, a feminist science fiction movie can’t understand this.

Aug 102015

There has already been plenty of discussion about this article from the Atlantic that says robots will unemploy men and not women.  The methodology is problematic, but the main fault is the belief that “people skills” can prevent your job from being taken over by a robot which can be seen in this except from the article:

For instance, of the 3 million truck drivers in the U.S., more than 95 percent are men; of the nearly 3 million secretaries and administrative assistants, more than 95 percent are women. Autonomous vehicles are a not-too-distant possibility, and when they arrive, those drivers’ jobs will evaporate; office-support workers suffer no such imminent threat.

This pattern holds for many of the most gender-biased occupations. Men hold 97 percent of the 2.5 million U.S. construction and carpentry jobs. The Oxford study estimates that these male workers stand more than a 70 percent chance of being replaced by robotic workers. By contrast, women hold 93 percent of the registered nurse positions. Their risk of obsolescence is vanishingly small: .009 percent.

Nearly half of today’s jobs are likely to become obsolete in the not-too-distant future.

What is causing this pattern? The skills exhibited by the coming wave of intelligent machines are better suited to occupations currently dominated by men. Many of the jobs held by men involve perception and manipulation, often in conjunction with physical exertion, such as swinging a hammer or trimming trees. The latest mobile robots combine advanced-sensory systems with dexterous manipulators to successfully perform these sorts of tasks.

Other, more cerebral male-dominated professions aren’t secure either. Many occupations that might appear to require experience and judgment—such as commodity traders—are being outdone by increasingly sophisticated machine-learning programs capable of quickly teasing subtle patterns out of large volumes of data.

By contrast, women typically work in more chaotic, unstructured environments, where the ability to read people’s emotions and intentions are critical to success. If your job involves distracting a patient while delivering an injection, guessing whether a crying baby wants a bottle or a diaper change, or expressing sympathy to calm an irate customer, you needn’t worry that a robot will take your job, at least for the foreseeable future.

If jobs that involved “calming an irate customer” were protected then we wouldn’t see ATM machines.  ATM machines are one example of how “people skills” jobs, in this case bank tellers, can and will be reduced in number.  In fact there are even better examples such as this comment to the article:

Seems to me that automation already came to women’s work. I remember a time when every manager had to have a secretary. Secretaries typed memos, opened and distributed internal mail, filed incoming memos in chron files, ordered supplies, scheduled meetings, and so on.

Today, the traditional job of the secretary is largely done through email. Instead of every manager having a secretary, a single admin assistant can support an entire department.

Computers have also affected other clerical jobs. In the early 80s I worked in the patient accounts department of a hospital. There were around 100 employees, mostly women. Today that same department has around 50 employees, with computer systems doing most of the work of billing and collections.

This is something that has already happened.  And yet the article would have us believe that office workers can’t have their jobs eliminated.  (In fact, the only reason even more women in these types of jobs haven’t be unemployed is because the government is keeping a lot of these jobs around as make work jobs for women via unnecessary regulations and unnecessary government functions.)

What the article fails to understand here is that writing computer software is easier than building a robot.  Women are in a lot of paper pushing jobs (which don’t even involve paper anymore).  That is what we have seen happen and will continue to happen.  Women can’t save their virtual paper pushing jobs by dressing them up in “people skills”.  Women haven’t been able to do that so far.

As for commodities traders, there hasn’t been an elimination of those jobs like there has been with secretaries and the like.  So far big data tools have been doing work that couldn’t have been done before instead of replacing work currently being done.  Unsurprisingly, the article fails to understand intelligence augmentation which is what those tools do.

Since building a robot is harder than writing computer software, jobs in the trades (which the article refers to as “swinging a hammer”) aren’t going to be eliminated in the short term.  To build a robot that can replace a man in the trades requires sophisticated vision hardware and software as well the ability to interact with the real world that isn’t required to replace virtual paper pushers.  It will happen eventually, but the virtual paper pushers will get eliminated first as is already happening.  And this doesn’t even being to address the fact that we have a shortage of people in the trades.  If there were robots ready to replace men working in the trades, it will just mitigate the shortage that already exists.

The only area where technology is going to replace men in the short term is self driving vehicles.  In other words, that means cab drivers and truck drivers.  However, while that may happen quickly, it won’t happen that quickly.  The problem will be that, in the case of truck drivers at least, truck drivers act as de facto security guards for the cargo they’re driving.  A self driving truck doesn’t have that kind of built in security system.  While this is a problem that will be solved eventually, it does mean that the elimination of truck drivers will be slowed down.

Even when truck drivers are eliminated, these men will be fine.  First, there is the option of taking a job in the trades since there’s a shortage there.  Second, men are very capable of creating startups in various industries from tech to craft beer.  In fact, because men are so successful at this, women are accusing the craft beer industry of being misogynist and running a sustained campaign against the video game industry and men working in the tech industry.  The latter even includes nonsense accusations that Elon Musk is going to help #GamerGate take over Mars and, ironically, baseless attacks on self driving vehicles.

What we are seeing with the article from the Atlantic is the same thing that happened to Tom Smykowski, the people skills guy in Office Space:

This article is basically women saying the same thing as Tom Smykowski from Office Space.  Women are saying, “We have people skills.  We are good at dealing with people.  Can’t you understand that?  What is wrong with you people?”  Tom Smykowski was the first to be let go.  His “people skills” did not help him, and women’s “people skills” aren’t helping them either.

Aug 082015

The Ada Initiative, a feminist organization behind many of the so called “anti-harassment” policies that led to things like DongleGate, is shutting down.  Why is the Ada Initiative shutting down?  They couldn’t find anyone willing to run it.  Perhaps one reason they couldn’t find anyone to run it was that their plan to keep it funded did not work out:

When it came to supporting our work financially, we figured that companies that benefited from open source software would just hand over giant wads of cash to an unproven new nonprofit run by two former software engineers.

Even if they were being sarcastic about this, this shows that they literally thought that they would get money for having vaginas and being vaguely related to tech.  Regardless, good riddance to the Ada Initiative.  Unfortunately, since it’s guaranteed that there will be more DongleGates in the future, the damage they did will be long lasting.

Jul 142015

When I talked about how misandrists are using the fact of a business having a mostly male customer base/user base as evidence of misogyny, one thing got left out.  Since we’re talking about Reddit, does Reddit actually have a mostly male user base?  It turns out the answer is no.

Alexa says that Reddit’s user demographics have more women than average.  So where did the Reddit’s user base is 74% male come from?  It comes from a three year old article at Ad Week, and it’s possible that the data used in the Ad Week article might be up to a few years older than the article itself.

This goes beyond the idea that having a mostly male user base is equivalent to misogyny.  Even when a site like Reddit doesn’t have a mostly male user base, misandrists will lie about it having a mostly male user base so they can accuse the site of being misogynist.  The Daily Beast has an article that is a really good example of this.  Not only does it repeat the lie about Reddit having a 74% male user base to accuse Reddit of misogyny, it also links to the Alexa report I referenced above.  The article through its own links admits it’s lying!  Even the comments at the end of the article notice this.

I image that they will probably try to get around this by saying Reddit was misogynist several years ago and “once misogynist, always misogynist” or some other garbage like that.

Translate »