Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (251113)	5/26/2014 9:04:50 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541674

No - I think it is hypocritical to NOT discuss it in other areas yet apply it to maleness as a meaningful variable. Given a 150 MM males and an astonishingly small number of killers it has nearly zero predictive value. Let's say that in studying car accidents that we find a correlation to the consumption of chocolate shakes. There very well could be since they are more widely consumed than filet-o-fish. Are we to infer that purchasing chocolate shakes LEADS to car accidents (implicit causation) or that engaging in ANY distraction leads to car accidents (logically a more direct explicit causation) is at play? My experience has led me to conclude that direct causes are easier to address. So while being of a certain minority group may predispose one to a life of crime, it is most likely not a direct cause but rather an indirect causal relationship. We should go to root causes. Relative to your article, Cho's words were very much like those of Elliot Rodger. Both being all or part Asian was not a relevant factor. Being bullied and socially disconnected is more likely to be responsible for the mindset of such acts. So linking misogyny as a direct cause when the first victims were Asian males - seems wrong headed.