psyopsy

6 ms·

1.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
They're not contradictory in a vacuum. But in this sequence, they show you're backpedaling. You opened with a firm claim, and when confronted with actual data, you retreated to 'we can't know.' Pretending that perfe
2.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
Happily accusing without evidence? Not shocking behavior. What's shocking is to just say it out loud. LMAO. Funny how "believe women" stops applying when their choices contradict your priors.
3.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
You started with “not well explained by biology.” All of the evidence is solidly on one side, so you’ve retreated to “we can neither confirm nor deny.” I guess that’s progress?
4.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
Low bar to accuse. High bar to retract. Classic.
5.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
Shhhhhh… don’t spoil their little hate party. Everyone knows that the whole marketing team really wanted to include every employee’s name in the 90 sec trailer, but Jon said, “absofuckinlutely not!” Like a fascist would! /s
6.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
He ruffles the very sensitive Internet dwellers who have all correct beliefs. Many years ago, during the peak growth of internet cancel culture, Jon made the mistake of saying an uncontroversial truth about occupational interests heavily co
7.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
I’ve never seen a thread so reflective of this meme: “It's amazing how much leftist discourse is just them pretending not to understand things, thus making discourse impossible.”
8.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
Am I supposed to be embarrassed for defending someone against a baseless smear? Anyway, call it "defensive" all you want. It doesn't change the historical thread: You argued, at best, his views made the workplace unwelcoming;
9.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
Congrats! You've made your position unfalsifiable. When the data consistently shows gaps widening as social strictures loosen, and your response is to blame an invisible, unmeasurable "conditioning," you aren't doing s
10.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
They did try to account for social conditioning: parents' education and jobs, local labor markets, school performance, the whole bit. The gap still didn't move much. If socialization were the main driver, you'd expect the mos
11.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
You said, "I don't think he's said exactly that in his own words but..." That's implicitly saying, "well, he hasn't admitted it outright, but yeah, he basically believes it." Now faced with eviden
12.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
Half his employees are women—including leadership, programming, and creative roles. If that doesn’t count as “thinking women have a role,” what would? 51%? 90%? You’re relying on blatant social media mischaracterizations over real actions.
13.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
Sex is the strongest single predictor of vocational interest orientation we’ve found. Nothing else comes close. If that’s not ‘explained by biology,’ you need to tell me what would be. Otherwise you’re operating on faith.
14.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
Gravity isn’t fully understood either. Guess we can’t say things fall down.
15.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
Little bro read the paper title and no further. That study found that when you test 14 monkeys alone in cages where they can’t actually move the toys, you don’t see the same sex differences as when 135 monkeys are tested in social groups
16.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
LOL. You're going to dismiss the study because of the justification for doing the study. Here, let me help you understand: "not fully understood" -> "so we studied it" -> "here's what we found"
17.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
Thekla currently has 10 core permanent employees. 5 of them are women, including their studio manager, creative and art Director, a programmer, and 2 additional artists. You can say whatever the hell you want. Or you could spend 3 minutes a
18.
by psyopsy 9mo ago
When you say, "not well support by evidence," you're either wrong, anti-science, or lying. Numerous studies absolutely show very large average differences in interests based on sex. And those carry over into occupation prefer
19.
by psyopsy 2y ago
Why sad? If he defrauded the government, he’s got bigger problems than losing a trademark.