Prof: Algebra, geometry perpetuate white privilege

[cronus]

I'm interested in it because it is so stupid that the fact of its publication is rather amazing, as is the fact that otherwise educated people appear to be able to accept such ideas as having merit.

--smart people give dumb ideas more credit than their worth because they tend to do other people's thinking for them. It's why I tend to think everyone else is a fucking genius.

....it's all down to presentation. The suit is the man. We live in a era of increased specialisation where a shortcut to 'trustworthy knowledge' is style and venue.

[Sean Hayden]

....it's all down to presentation. The suit is the man. We live in a era of increased specialisation where a shortcut to 'trustworthy knowledge' is style and venue.

Style's nice. I'd like to have some style. I don't have the energy for it.

But what's style got to do with say engineering? I don't know how far it would get you in engineering. Well, probably pretty far. But at the end of the day you'd still want your bridge to hold up. So it's not everything. I think being an asshole is probably more important to engineering. I mean, have you ever met an engineer who wasn't an asshole?

[Hermit]

You're really going to suggest that I have to make sure I only post on topics of sufficient seriousness (in other people's estimation) that they are of greater "significance?"

Not at all. I suggested that you have an obsession with the fringe loony left to a degree that it seems fair to say that you have your knickers in a knot on the topic, and that is even before going on to consider your enthusiasm with which you contribute on the same subject in other threads, many of which you did start yourself. Do you have a problem with that being pointed out?

[Forty Two]

Well, your suggestion is noted. And, I have explained several times that I do not have an obsession with it, but I have an interest. I find it entertaining. I find it fascinating. I find it fascinating for the same reason I find religious fanatics and creationists, etc., fascinating and interesting - it's not that I imbue them with an overblown importance on the world - I think creationists have little real importance, but I am nevertheless fascinated by what they believe, and why they believe it.

Surely, you can understand that. I discuss lots of fringe topics, because the fringe tends to be the most interesting, to me. Even if one person has a strange and bizarre take on things, I find that far more interesting to delve into than the mainstream, and arguing over slightly left of center vs slightly right of center. I find discussion of the fringe and the loons far more interesting than discussing whether some tweak in legislation that would make something moderate right, or moderate left, one way or the other.

My knickers are not in a knot about the topic -- the topic is, however, all over the place. Not a day goes by where I don't see a new crisis announced from some progressive activist or another. They're rioting in the streets in Berkely to keep a Jew named Ben Shapiro, from giving a presentation, under the rubric of him being a white supremacist and a Nazi. In the grand scheme of things, that's not an issue on which the fate of the world rests, but it's very much of interest to me. And, I've explained that I do not participate in forum discussion boards to discuss issues in order of global importance - I do it for fun, and this is fun.

I do have a problem with it being pointed out - the repeated personal view of other people on what my motives and intent are - and what my state of mind is. You insult me by declaring me "obsessed" with a topic or topics. Some folks, then, won't even accept my explanation as to what my true intent and motive is. None of you is a mind reader. I have seen your point raised, and I have addressed it. When the point is repeated over and over again, on every thread in which an issue is being discussed, what it does is contravene the play nice rule, and also often rises to the level of a personal attack. The basic rule of conduct here is that we're not supposed to go after the individual and make it about personal grousing and griping and barking at each other. Joking is one thing, but this issue is being raised to attack me and, in my view, divert from the issue under discussion because certain people appear to me to get their knickers in a knot about certain topics being discussed.

Lastly, Hermit, why does it even matter to you or anyone else whether I or any other member is "obsessed" with a topic. If there was a person who was "obsessed" with discussing Donald Trump, and would only discuss Donald Trump, and posted everything they could find about Donald Trump here, creating various threads, and contributing to all discussions of Donald Trump, what would be the problem with that? Nobody says you have to go to those threads. Nobody says you have to read any words you're not interested in. The topic of thread is usually quite clear on the thread title, and it's simple to just go to the threads you think are interested in, and let the obsessed people go on obsessing over their unworthy topics, right?

And, even if the obsession is over some other kind of issue, like, say, potted plants or masturbation, or masturbation into potted plants - and that's the only thing or the major point of interest for a particular member to the point where he or she seems "obsessed" with it, in your estimation.... so what? That doesn't change the fact that people interested potted plants and masturbation will go and talk about those topics. You don't have to. What, exactly, would be the point in clogging up every thread about potted plants and masturbation with declarations, over and over again, that the person involved is discussing an issue of no concern or of minimal importance to the world, that there are other more topics that in your estimation warrant more discussion, and that this all seems like an obsession? What, exactly, is gained by badgering that person with repeated calls that they stop talking about potted plants and masturbation?

If you want to take it as read that you and some other people here think I or anyone else is obsessed with this or any other topic, then fine. Take it as read. Now that that's established, we can go on and actually discuss the topics with those who actually want to discuss the topics, and not those who just want to bang on about how obsessed they think other people are with topics that they think are of little or no importance.

[Brian Peacock]

Not a day goes by where I don't see a new crisis announced from some progressive activist or another.

Where are you looking though? Coz I don't come across this kind of click-baity stuff.

[Forty Two]

Not a day goes by where I don't see a new crisis announced from some progressive activist or another.

Where are you looking though? Coz I don't come across this kind of click-baity stuff.

The Guardian, the New York Times, CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, London Telegraph, SkyNews, Washington Post.......

USA Today - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 669071001/ - protesting Jewish moderate/conservative Ben Shapiro for his presentation at Berkeley as an invited guest of a student group, chanting "No Trump, no KKK, No fascist USA..." at him == meanwhile Shapiro was not a Trump supporter during the election, and criticizes Trump to this day, and is Jewish, so the KKK hates his guts, and he's not a fascist in any way, and he does not support "white supremacy" or fascism. Also reported by CNN, FoxNews, LATimes, CBS, NBC, the Washington Post, etc. etc. etc.

That air conditioning is a sexist tool of white male supremacy - reported by The Washington Post, the Telegraph in the UK, the Today Show on NBC, ABC news and other outlets.

Robots are racist and sexist = reported in the Guardian.

Climate change is sexist - reported in the Huffington Post, Toronto Globe & Mail, UK's Independent, and other outlets.

Changing the burden of proof in sexual assault matters - reported in the Washington Post, Time, the New York Times - CBC news in Canada had features on this where the notion of placing the burden on the defendant in rape trials was argued by feminists.

I mean, the list goes on and on. If you follow the news, this stuff is commonplace.

[Brian Peacock]

You read a great variety of news sites. I subscribe to both the Guardian and The Daily Telegraph and I rarely come across these kinds of stories - though The Telegraph is a bit quicker to highlight the 'PC gone mad' stuff than the Gruniad. Then again, I don't really do Facebook or Twitter etc, so I'm not going to get more of these stories floating up the top the more I click on those kind of links.

[pErvinalia]

Not a day goes by where I don't see a new crisis announced from some progressive activist or another.

Where are you looking though? Coz I don't come across this kind of click-baity stuff.

Exactly.

[pErvinalia]

You read a great variety of news sites. I subscribe to both the Guardian and The Daily Telegraph and I rarely come across these kinds of stories - though The Telegraph is a bit quicker to highlight the 'PC gone mad' stuff than the Gruniad. Then again, I don't really do Facebook or Twitter etc, so I'm not going to get more of these stories floating up the top the more I click on those kind of links.

If he gets them via social media then he's essentially circle-jerking himself. Facebook etc basically serve up more of what you've searched for and looked at in the past.

[Animavore]

He's getting it from fucking InfoWars.

[Forty Two]

You read a great variety of news sites. I subscribe to both the Guardian and The Daily Telegraph and I rarely come across these kinds of stories - though The Telegraph is a bit quicker to highlight the 'PC gone mad' stuff than the Gruniad. Then again, I don't really do Facebook or Twitter etc, so I'm not going to get more of these stories floating up the top the more I click on those kind of links.

The Guardian is rife with these kinds of stories, they have Laurie Penny, Jessica Valenti, etc. as columnists for their supposedly respected publication. Those two alone can always be relied upon to publish another installment of leftist-sjw lunacy in their regular columns.

[Brian Peacock]

Really?

[pErvinalia]

We get Clementine Forde here in Australian Guardian. She's fairly full on feminazi. That's not to say I disagree with everything she says, or dont agree in part with a lot of what she says.

[Forty Two]

You read a great variety of news sites. I subscribe to both the Guardian and The Daily Telegraph and I rarely come across these kinds of stories - though The Telegraph is a bit quicker to highlight the 'PC gone mad' stuff than the Gruniad. Then again, I don't really do Facebook or Twitter etc, so I'm not going to get more of these stories floating up the top the more I click on those kind of links.

If he gets them via social media then he's essentially circle-jerking himself. Facebook etc basically serve up more of what you've searched for and looked at in the past.

LOL, I don't read news from Facebook. I don't even get any news from facebook. My wife controls our joint facebook page, and it's just full of marketing posts about some fitness program, meal replacement system or other home-business thing. I see relative's photos and events, and it helps me keep from forgetting some birthdays here and there.

I've posted where I find them, and when I link to the stories in my posts and threads, they are usually involving either mainstream news sources, as I've listed, or feminist sources.

But, again, this is another diversion. Who gives a fuck where I get the stories from? When I make a post about an event, I include a source - and that source is self-explanatory - if there is a problem with the accuracy of the story because the source is unreliable, then that can be addressed in the thread. However, the attempted allegation here that I do not find these stories in reputable media publications is ridiculous. You're really reaching.

And, also, what's the point of trying to suggest that this is only outlandish stuff, which is not mainstream, but only fringe? I said it before and I'll say it again - I like talking about the stuff I think is wacko. This stuff IS wacko. That's why I post it. That's why, I think, whoever created this thread about the Algebra being sexist and white privilege did it. Because it's fucking bizarro. That's what makes it fun to talk about.

So, you're just pissing in the wind with this nonsense about it being published in click-baity sources and being just a loony fringe. I agree, it's loony. And, the sources are mainstream. Cronus started this thread with a link to campusreform.org, which publishes a lot of material like this and is not an unreliable site. On that page cited, another professor, from esteemed Vanderbilt University, had an article published in an academic journal about the masculanization of mathematics -- https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=9544

CNN was way ahead of the curve on this, with an article in September, 2016, more than a year before the article generating this thread, about how mathematics was racist. http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/06/technol ... index.html A University of North Dakota professor published a paper about how Science in general is sexist because it's not subjective, among other things -- http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewconten ... ontext=tqr - that was January, 2016.

There's more.

So, yeah - maybe you folks haven't read up on it, but that's not because it's not readily available or published in mainstream sources.

And, once again - if you aren't interested in the topic, then go discuss topics you are interested in. There is no reason to clog up a thread like this with bullshit about how you think this is not mainstream publication material, or how it's fringe or looney or how people are obsessed with the topic. None of that is relevant. It's just a diversionary tactic and a way to implicitly slur people you don't like, by implying, or even coming straight out and saying, they are "obsessed" with issues you think are nonissues unworthy of discussion.

Many of the posts you folks make are not thought of as interesting, relevant or significant by other people. Most of the time, those other people just move on to things they want to deal with. It's just downright weird that some of you are continuing to grouse on and on about how irrelevant, loony, and fringe you think these issues are, and how "obsessed" you think other people are.

It's understood - you don't want to talk about this issue. You don't think it should be brought up because it's just the loony left fringe, and not anything that matters. Right! Got it! Anything else? Or are you just going to keep repeating it?

[Forty Two]

Really?

Well, yeah - you can go to the Guardian's website and read their material. She, Jessica Valenti, has a recurring column, among other writings, called "This week in patriarchy." LOL. I loved her piece on the sexism of Christmas. Laurie Penny's "robots are sexist" article was fun, and the sexist and racial poison that we spread whenever we hire an Uber driver, well that was quite incisive.