***On topic*** Cool! A food fight. Gee, so much stuff. Where to begin? Well, since you are a psychologist [ex but I suppose you haven't forgotten it all yet], I thought I'd address my post to you as a sensible person who could help Jim Willie who has obviously got emotional problems of a bipolar nature leading to in-denial cognitive dissonance now that his stock has crashed contrary to his mystic incantations just as he has gone in and peed on the boss's desk, telling him to stick his job.
Also, I deny being a sexist. I thought a female, you, [as far as we can tell with these pixelated people we deal with here] would be a good person to send my valuable thoughts about Jim's problems. Since you have a singularly affectionate relationship with Jimmy and can provide counselling to boot, I thought you'd be ideal.
Some of my best friends are women you know! So you can see I'm not a sexist. I have even worked with women as colleagues and they did quite a good job despite the disadvantages they have. I have three daughters, and I treat them well too - sometimes they have trouble with the concept of just what an 'alpha male' is, but they are learning. Women should be treated as human! So there. While they are missing a Y chromosome, that should not mean they forfeit human rights.
They do mature younger, so are at an educational disadvantage as their brains have fully grown 3 years before the average boy's, so they have fewer experiences during neuron growth to puberty. That's a problem for foreign language [and other] learning - which should be done according to the individual child's maturity, not by chronological age. It also means 'maths' is a scary word for girls because their brain is fully grown before they get into the gory details. Boys are just getting heaps of neuron development when they are having maths inflicted on them. So I think you'll find most mathematicians are boys and will be until girls get taught maths at a younger age. [Counting doesn't count as maths - you have to be able to do Fourier Transforms in your head, then quote Shrodinger's equation backwards].
My mother also seemed to think that women were human. Oddly enough, that was before 'sexist' was a convenient label to sling around the place and feminists polluted the planet with sexism. Such as the C-block auction which allowed 'good quality gender and skin color' to be primary determinants of whether you could bid or not.
Call me smug! Call me a racist too if you like [some of my best friends are coloured people so you'll lose that argument too]!
By the way, you didn't explain what Jim meant by 'wearing to the left' and why you found that worth spluttering wine over your screen.
Mqurice
PS: WM explained how JW expressed violence by PM. I had the same experience a couple of months ago after some benign comment he misunderstood. It's not an over-reaction when we see the reaction to 'Showpanties' and other non-moonies.
Also, let's get this quite straight, nobody owes me anything in regard to Qualcomm. I have put in my 2c to SI as have many others and I have got out $100 from everyone's two bits. That's the wonderful nature of The Web in general and SI in particular. However, they can post cheques to my Eketahuna address if they wish. US$ okay.
Actually though, I have been directly responsible for Qualcomm's success. So has anyone else who has provided capital to the company, bought their products and otherwise supported it.
Also, I'm not sexist because I think women are very attractive. Anyway, wouldn't 'sexist' mean one treats somebody according to a stereotype about their gender rather than the particular attributes that particular person exhibits?
I think I'll stay here and help you and Jim work out your problems.
Didn't you think that was an interesting theory on women's brains maturing earlier than boys' which affects the way they learn? Or do you think the maturation of a brain is unrelated to the way that person learns something? Also, notice the cool apostrophes there. |
