Comments by "SepherStar" (@SepherStar) on "VICE Life" channel.

  1. 27
  2. 22
  3. 20
  4. 18
  5. 17
  6. 16
  7. 15
  8. 15
  9. 15
  10. 14
  11. 14
  12. 13
  13. 12
  14. 12
  15. 12
  16. 11
  17. 11
  18. 11
  19. 10
  20. 10
  21. 10
  22. 10
  23. 9
  24. 8
  25. 7
  26. 7
  27. 6
  28. 6
  29. 6
  30. 6
  31. 6
  32. 5
  33. 5
  34. 5
  35. 5
  36. 5
  37. 4
  38. 4
  39. 4
  40. 4
  41. 4
  42. Mark Rudy I believe you are referring to the paper called "The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness" http://www.nber.org/papers/w14969.pdf I don't have time to read the paper thoroughly but if I read correctly, the decline in female happiness was across the board....single working women and married female home makers both had a decline in happiness, and the study could not pinpoint the cause, but rejected various theories on it. They did speculate though that the lives of women have become increasingly more complex and that women might feel they have to meet more standards than in the past. Or it could be that society in general is less happy and women are just more forthcoming with this, or it could have been sample selection bias in that they are just not looking in the right places for unhappy men. I seem to come across disproportionately more unhappy men on the internet than I do women. They are usually unhappy that they are single, or have had a bad relationship. I think men actually get more lonely when they are single than women, which is part of the reason I think it's unfortunate that some single older men are not receptive to dating women closer to their age. I'm not saying they should date a woman they find unattractive...it's imperative they be attracted to her, but they are often looking for women in venues where they do not have a chance to interact with her in person, and there are often dimensions of attraction that only come across in person. They are looking for women on venues that you type an age range in a box, and they might be preventing themselves from meeting a woman they would find attractive and are compatible with, by the number they enter into that box.
    4
  43. 4
  44. 4
  45. 4
  46. 4
  47. 4
  48. 4
  49. 4
  50. 4
  51. 4
  52. 3
  53. 3
  54. 3
  55. 3
  56. 3
  57. 3
  58. 3
  59. 3
  60. 2
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. Mark Rudy I don't know any 35 year old woman who considers herself infertile unless she actually is. We have a large number of older couples in my city starting families past 35. I'm in STEM and the reason women tend to become discontent with their careers as they get into their mid 30's is because they tire of lack of promotions and the culture. I can't speak for women in other fields. But I can tell you, my grandmother, who married when she was 19 and had 5 kids was so miserable that she wasn't smiling in any of the family photos when she was a housewife. If I had married and had a family when I was young, I know I would have been miserable. What if you, as a young man, were expected to marry and settle down in your early 20's before you even had a chance to explore the world and understand who you are a little better? I think most men would go insane. There's no reason to think women are really any different, particularly because through most of human history, marriage and child bearing had often been somewhat of a forced affair for women and this took away any pressure to evolve an actual preference for marrying and baring children young. So do I regret not marrying young and having kids? Heck no, I would have been absolutely miserable! I would have been sitting there thinking of what I could have done with my life, and to be honest, I think it would have been unfair of me to pretend I was attracted to or loved a man who I didn't. Would I like to marry now? If I find someone I like enough to marry and who likes me enough to marry me, but I do prefer to be alone rather than with someone I don't actually have any interest in or who does not have any interest in me. I might be career oriented but if I marry a man I would like it to be someone I could be a good wife to. Would I want kids? I wouldn't mind them but I would not be devastated if I didn't have them.....I would just think it's a little unfortunate for the world. As for those 35+ single career women who do lament that they can't find anyone, we both know that that's hogwash. These women, as always, just can't find someone they like and maybe they need to accept the fact that they are the female version of those lonely old guys who can't find someone because they are only receptive to dating women between 18-25.
    2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. 2
  70. 2
  71. 2
  72. 2
  73. 2
  74. Mark Rudy If a woman does not want a family, if a man does not want a family, they should be aware that they have the option of not having one. I can talk a lot about women being pushed into STEM fields. Mainly, that it rarely happens. At least not in the sense of a girl or woman not having any interest in STEM, pursuing, qualifying for, and graduating from a STEM program. They are very rigorous and competitive and many people just do not have the love to tolerate them, or cognitive capacity for them. I think this "push", at best, can only serve to remind women who might be interested that a STEM field might be an option for them. I'm skeptical that many older single career women had put off marriage and a family for their career, until it was too late. One of the best places to find a mate is a college campus, because you have a high density of young people of the same age group, the most of whom will be marriage ready by the time they graduate...if not with an undergraduate degree, then with a graduate degree. I think the truth of the matter is, that many of these women are the women for whom it just didn't happen. Maybe they were not big on the social scene, or were social misfits. Maybe they had been in a relationship that fell apart. Maybe they just didn't attract many guys or the one guy who was attracted to them never got the nerve to approach her, or maybe he did, and she didn't reciprocate for whatever reason. And then you graduate and get a job and your chances of meeting someone with mutual attraction and compatibility drop off significantly because the population pool you are in shrinks.
    2
  75. 2
  76. Sage Thinker I did read them, and I also downloaded the Excel spreadsheet and had some fun. I would like to make a correction to my previous post. I missed a column on account of small screen size when selecting columns to sum in Excel. The difference between the average male and female scores is about 1.2 points, which is just less than 6% of the average score. The same questions apply. Is that a statistically significant difference? I also did notice that males scored on the ACT, 0.2 points higher on average. But the sections of this test are "Reading, English, Mathematics, and "Scientific Reasoning". Reading is a relatively gender neutral at this level. While more males are affected by dyslexia, those who are either don't get to the point of taking the ACT, or overcome it by the time they do take the ACT, or they might have a "reader", so we would expect males and females to have similar performance levels on this sub test. Males scored, on average about 0.4 points lower than females on reading. You can calculate the P value to determine if that is statistically significant. If we were to consider reading, for the sake of the ACT a gender neutral subject, that leaves English, Mathematics, and Scientific Reasoning, which is also known as Science Reasoning, and seems to be composed of mathematical word problems. I don't object to the idea that males are inherently slightly better at math than females. They might very well be, or not, but we can assume they are if you wish. My claims are that 1. Mathematics alone is not a good measure of human cognition. 2. Females, while they may be outperformed by males, even if slightly, in tasks such as visual spatial reasoning, and perhaps mathematics, outperform males in other tasks, such as critical thinking (aka "English) and social reasoning. Thus, I would like to point out, the ACT does not have a "Social Reasoning" subsection. It has a gender neutral subsection...reading, a subsection which may be inherently favorable to males...mathematics, a subsection which may be inherently favorable to females...English, and then another subsection which may be inherently favorable to males...Scientific Reasoning. So the test may very well be biased against women in that manner. On that note, I will repeat myself. Western females are just not as interested in STEM fields as western males. Even if they do go into STEM fields, many women leave to start families or because they become tired of being a minority in the workplace. Women generally tend to have different interests and priorities than men. They may not be interested in chess in nearly the same numbers, instead preferring to chat with their friends about social situations, and this may be far more relevant to a woman than chess. What you are doing is the equivalent of claiming fish are better than birds because fish are generally better at swimming, when birds generally need to swim more than fly, and so generally excel more at flying. The article you linked to concerning the SATs actually refutes a lot of your claims. It's a 2 part article, and I suggest you read carefully through both the first and second part. Anyway I have address your comments and you still have not addressed mine. Do you intend to at all?
    2
  77. 2
  78. 2
  79. 2
  80. 2
  81. 2
  82. 2
  83. 2
  84. Sage Thinker Actually, most disorders are NOT caused by women having babies when they are older than 35 years of age. The odds of having baby with Down's Syndrome increases with the age of the mother, but there is evidence to show that the odds of other disorders and birth defects decrease with an increase in the age of the mother. Additionally, the combined prevalence of disorders that are not dependent on the age of the mother, such as recessive and dominant disorders, exceeds the prevalence of Down's Syndrome. You are correct that testosterone seems to improve spatial reasoning skills, and this is a factor in the increased IQ scores of men. But that is consistent with my claim that modern IQ tests are less likely to identify gifted women than men, because they are still somewhat biased towards testing for attributes that are more relevant to men. For example, while a man may excel in spatial reasoning, a woman might excel in social reasoning, but while older IQ tests tested spatial reasoning, they did not test for any social abilities. More recent IQ tests have started to include subtests that test social abilities, but they still focus more heavily spatial reasoning. That being said, I disagree that women put emotion above logic. Women simply tend to more often excel at a different type of logic than men. Men are more likely to excel at visual-spatial, and symbolic logic, while women are more likely to excel at social logic and logic pertaining to executive planning. This relates back to primitive roles among humans.
    1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. 1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104. 1