Around Baseball 2018

[nmrch]

This is great. Thanks! Love the avatar BTW! Rodneys the best:o

 

I love Fernando Rodney because no matter how much change Baseball is going through every year, he's a constant, he just does what he does, both in a good and a bad way.

[nmrch]

No, you are 100% wrong. Any psychologist worth anything knows that there are clear gender-differences in behaviour which ultimately play a giant role in occupational interest, hence why despite massive environmental intervention in Western nations to "push females into STEM", the number of females who are willing to do that type of systemic-based work barely fluctuates.

 

Before Jobs, Gates, Wozniak etc made Tech Nerd Culture cool in the 80's, Computer Science for decades was a field dominated by women. Ofcourse, just empty rage being masqueraded as an intellectual philosophy is more entertaining than real historical analysis though.

[metafour]

Bingo.

 

It’s interesting that in places where woman have the least equality, least freedom and the most oppression, they are represented in STEM fields at a higher rate.

 

Left wing nut jobs can’t get it through their heads that the average woman has no interest in becoming plumbers, construction workers, sanitation workers, software engineers etc etc etc

 

Exactly. It is literally known as the "Scandinavian Paradox", because the more they try to push women into engineering and STEM, the more they end up with female nurses and other female-dominant jobs. The only way you can force someone to do something that they have no biological interest in doing is if you place them in a position wherein their livelihood depends on it; hence why as you mentioned you see females in the least free and most oppressed societies on the planet flocking to STEM.

 

These dumbasses think that if you force girls to play with cars that they will grow to become mechanics. No, idiots: boys naturally play with cars because a large part of male biology revolves around a need to understand how things work, which later develops into an interest in becoming a mechanic. Girls don't want to be f***ing mechanics. The ones that do, are statistical outliers, and I'd bet if you tested them you would find that they ALL possess far greater levels of testosterone than is normal for a female to possess.

 

They've proven this s*** all the way down to chimps (give female and male chimps a choice of toys, the male will choose to play with a truck, the female will start nurturing a doll), yet somehow in 2018 we're living in this delusion wherein its supposedly all a toss-up, because god forbid we come to the unfair conclusion that males and females aren't equal, and their interests vary significantly. You have professors losing their jobs because they dare to bring up the legitimate and factual conclusion that male intelligence falls on the ends of the bell-curve, whereas females are distributed along the median. What this means on a global sense is that the majority of the smartest AND dumbest people on the planet are always going to be males. The ratio is something like 8 to 1 males to females when it comes to genius-level intellect.

[Boxcar]

No, you are 100% wrong. Any psychologist worth anything knows that there are clear gender-differences in behaviour which ultimately play a giant role in occupational interest, hence why despite massive environmental intervention in Western nations to "push females into STEM", the number of females who are willing to do that type of systemic-based work barely fluctuates. No society proves this more than the Scandinavian nations who are ahead of everyone else in "workplace equality" (and have been for decades) and yet somehow possess the greatest ratio of female to male nurses, and male to female engineers on the planet (its like 20 to 1 or 25 to 1 for each). You see, in these first-world nations where there is little poverty, when you give people the option to do anything they want (ie: you downplay environmental factors), you naturally empower biological factors which drive females to jobs that revolve around compassion, caring, nurturing, etc....ie: nursing, teaching, pediatrics, etc. You see far greater female participation in STEM fields in developing nations like India, Southeast Asia, China, etc. which practice far stronger forms of "patriarchy", why? Because there is a giant environmental factor which pushes females to those higher paying fields in those countries: the economic need to provide for your family which may be a bunch of farmers or other poor rural peasants. Girls in these nations aren't "taught" to be IT professionals or engineers, you are talking about societies wherein females are still expected to do nothing but take care of the family, yet alas the economic factor of the environment they belong to gives them a reason to strive for those jobs. That doesn't exist in Canada, or Sweden, or Norway, etc, etc, (or at least it exists at a far less significant rate).

 

We have entered a dark-age in academia wherein biology supposedly no longer exists, all driven by this ******** notion of post-modernist egalitarianism. The idea that everyone, regardless of gender, is some sort of "blank slate" is absurd and utter ********. They have found behavioural differences in infants that are barely weeks old. They've also found significant links between testosterone and behaviour. They know that children with higher levels of testosterone will develop communication and social sense at a slower pace. The reason why males dominate STEM is because the male brain is wired towards interest in those tasks; just like females dominate nursing, primary education, psychiatry, PSW work, etc, etc. Anyone with a working brain should understand why the sex that is tasked with birthing and raising children would have a natural biological preference towards working with kids, for instance.

 

Mic drop

[metafour]

Before Jobs, Gates, Wozniak made Tech Nerd Culture cool in the 80's, Computer Science for decades was a field dominated by women. Ofcourse, just empty rage being masqueraded as an intellectual philosophy is more entertaining than real historical analysis though.

 

Before the 80's Computer Science was a ******** field that led to nothing, hence why males had no interest in it. You think that females have a natural interest in sitting in front of a screen looking at code until their eyes bleed, and this all changed when those meanie males told them they couldn't do it anymore?

[Boxcar]

Reminds me, I saw a video of this female science prof speaking to a room saying things like men, on average are taller and more muscular than women. This triggered a bunch of morons into walking out of the room.

[nmrch]

Before the 80's Computer Science was a ******** field that led to nothing, hence why males had no interest in it. You think that females have a natural interest in sitting in front of a screen looking at code until their eyes bleed, and this all changed when those meanie males told them they couldn't do it anymore?

 

You're conflating between tech bro culture and what people who work in IT, even programmers, actually do everyday in their jobs. So you don't much about the history of Computer Science nor about what the profession is today.

 

BTW, many (probably most) white collar office jobs involve sitting in front of a computer all day, most of the women who work in those profession seem to be happy with their jobs.

[nmrch]

A-Rod in the booth for ESPN on the SF/LA broadcast. He's actually quite personable on the air. I'm pleasantly surprised.

 

I don't know, his post playing career personality is so bland that i wouldn't be surprised if his publicists and PR people invented it, its off putting, kind of like Lebron James.

[Terminator]

A-Rod in the booth for ESPN on the SF/LA broadcast. He's actually quite personable on the air. I'm pleasantly surprised.

 

Yeah his persona has done a 180 since he stopped playing. I saw an article on it today I'll try and find it.

[nmrch]

Yeah his persona has done a 180 since he stopped playing. I saw an article on it today.

I think i'd rather listen to the authentically douchebag A-Rod than this version

[Abomination]

That didn't take long for the first home run to get hit in Arizona this year.

[Hobbs]

Seattle looks like a fun team this year.

[Grant77]

Reminds me, I saw a video of this female science prof speaking to a room saying things like men, on average are taller and more muscular than women. This triggered a bunch of morons into walking out of the room.

 

I'm not sure what scientific value this has, but I always found gender studies on lower primates rather interesting. It seems that our close relatives have gender roles hardwired into their DNA. That doesn't prove that we are the same, but it's a solid assumption.

 

[JFD]

Reminds me, I saw a video of this female science prof speaking to a room saying things like men, on average are taller and more muscular than women. This triggered a bunch of morons into walking out of the room.

 

Ha! You must be talking about this gem.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLRBodKsgTA

 

My favorite part - "Nazzi's are not welcome in civil society"

[Boxcar]

Ha! You must be talking about this gem.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLRBodKsgTA

 

My favorite part - "Nazzi's are not welcome in civil society"

 

That is indeed the exact thing I was referring to.

[byrd]

No, I think you are wrong. Psychologists know that there are gender-differences in behaviour which ultimately play a role in occupational interest, hence why despite environmental intervention in Western nations to "push females into STEM", the number of females who are willing to do that type of systemic-based work barely fluctuates.

 

I've edited your original opening paragraph because the way you came across is biased and overly opinionated. If you are trying to make scientific points, you should make them with logical language choices.

 

I work in academic science research and some of the best PhD students and post-doctoral researchers I have encountered are female. They are brilliant at their work and as good as males.

 

I believe there are differences between people that are, in part, based on gender, but it's not the most significant factor. Promoting female engaging with STEM subjects is a course-correction that will see greater rewards over time. You can't put more money into STEM now and expect everything to be fine 5 years later. These are cultural and generational changes, and will take time.

 

The "male brain" and the "female brain" are points on a spectrum, rather than binary poles in opposition. Think of it as a bell-curve distribution of "male brainness" that overlaps with "female brainness".

 

I agree with the push towards inclusion of females within STEM subjects, because there are many many females who are as capable as males of doing an excellent job, and who enjoy the work. So why not encourage them to learn it?

 

In addition, I have witnessed first-hand multiple examples of male bosses treating females differently, and actively trying to push them out of the course/subject. Needless to say, HR got involved, and are getting involved, but these attitudes exist and are prevalent. In my line of work, right now, in 2018, males are treated better than females, regardless of the quality of the science.

[Maico450]

Is this the place they talk baseball?

[subushi]

Hello guys,

 

off topic, but I realized that they updated mlb.tv features but how can i make the feed start from the beginning of the game and not the live part of the game. Previously they had this option where the feed would start from the start of the game even though you join in the middle of the game

 

help?

[BTS]

Hello guys,

 

off topic, but I realized that they updated mlb.tv features but how can i make the feed start from the beginning of the game and not the live part of the game. Previously they had this option where the feed would start from the start of the game even though you join in the middle of the game

 

help?

 

Every time I turned a game on yesterday I had the option to watch live or from the beginning. That was through a PS4.

[Boxcar]

I've edited your original opening paragraph because the way you came across is biased and overly opinionated. If you are trying to make scientific points, you should make them with logical language choices.

 

I work in academic science research and some of the best PhD students and post-doctoral researchers I have encountered are female. They are brilliant at their work and as good as males.

 

I believe there are differences between people that are, in part, based on gender, but it's not the most significant factor. Promoting female engaging with STEM subjects is a course-correction that will see greater rewards over time. You can't put more money into STEM now and expect everything to be fine 5 years later. These are cultural and generational changes, and will take time.

 

The "male brain" and the "female brain" are points on a spectrum, rather than binary poles in opposition. Think of it as a bell-curve distribution of "male brainness" that overlaps with "female brainness".

 

I agree with the push towards inclusion of females within STEM subjects, because there are many many females who are as capable as males of doing an excellent job, and who enjoy the work. So why not encourage them to learn it?

 

In addition, I have witnessed first-hand multiple examples of male bosses treating females differently, and actively trying to push them out of the course/subject. Needless to say, HR got involved, and are getting involved, but these attitudes exist and are prevalent. In my line of work, right now, in 2018, males are treated better than females, regardless of the quality of the science.

 

You didn't respond to his point about Scandinavia. All you really did was say #notall and made some, I'd assume, anecdotal based assumpions. You said you're a science recesrcher, is that in the social sciences, perhaps?

[Jimcanuck]

I've edited your original opening paragraph because the way you came across is biased and overly opinionated. If you are trying to make scientific points, you should make them with logical language choices.

 

I work in academic science research and some of the best PhD students and post-doctoral researchers I have encountered are female. They are brilliant at their work and as good as males.

 

I believe there are differences between people that are, in part, based on gender, but it's not the most significant factor. Promoting female engaging with STEM subjects is a course-correction that will see greater rewards over time. You can't put more money into STEM now and expect everything to be fine 5 years later. These are cultural and generational changes, and will take time.

 

The "male brain" and the "female brain" are points on a spectrum, rather than binary poles in opposition. Think of it as a bell-curve distribution of "male brainness" that overlaps with "female brainness".

 

I agree with the push towards inclusion of females within STEM subjects, because there are many many females who are as capable as males of doing an excellent job, and who enjoy the work. So why not encourage them to learn it?

 

In addition, I have witnessed first-hand multiple examples of male bosses treating females differently, and actively trying to push them out of the course/subject. Needless to say, HR got involved, and are getting involved, but these attitudes exist and are prevalent. In my line of work, right now, in 2018, males are treated better than females, regardless of the quality of the science.

 

Excellent post. The part about spectrum vs binary poles can be applied to virtually every bias that exists. People tend to apply generalities far more broadly then they should - this is bias. Yes, men are in general stronger than women. But that doesn't mean there are no women out there stronger then most men or even 80% or more men.

[Hobbs]

I see nothing wrong with a woman becoming a scientist. I also see nothing wrong with a woman staying at home and raising a family. This concept is called freedom.

 

 

That Mariners/Indians game was fun.

[BTS]

Excellent post. The part about spectrum vs binary poles can be applied to virtually every bias that exists. People tend to apply generalities far more broadly then they should - this is bias. Yes, men are in general stronger than women. But that doesn't mean there are no women out there stronger then most men or even 80% of men.

 

Literally nobody struggles with this concept.

[Jimcanuck]

Literally nobody struggles with this concept.

 

Not true. Just look at Islamophobia.

[BTS]

Not true. Just look at Islamophobia.

 

The number of people the far left thinks is problematically ‘islamopbobic’ is orders of magnitudes bigger than the people who actually are. It’s basically just religious bumpkins who caught feelings because their pastors say Muslims are the devil.

[BTS]

Also, can a mod please ban me, Boxy, Jim, and terminator for ruining this thread?

[Boxcar]

Also, can a mod please ban me, Boxy, Jim, and terminator for ruining this thread?

 

Are you kidding? I'm learning so much.

I just found out that women are capable of more than making sandwiches and breastfeeding. This is shattering my world. What are you guys going to tell me next, some women are good at sports?

[Terminator]

What the hell is going on here? I wanted to talk about how s***** Fangraphs' new podcast has become and now everyone is chiming in on political stuff. I should have known better so yes, I will accept my ban but can we all just agree to a cease fire? Next time Fangraphs does something s***** I'll start a new thread instead of ruining this one.

[Hobbs]

I've edited your original opening paragraph because the way you came across is biased and overly opinionated. If you are trying to make scientific points, you should make them with logical language choices.

 

I work in academic science research and some of the best PhD students and post-doctoral researchers I have encountered are female. They are brilliant at their work and as good as males.

 

I believe there are differences between people that are, in part, based on gender, but it's not the most significant factor. Promoting female engaging with STEM subjects is a course-correction that will see greater rewards over time. You can't put more money into STEM now and expect everything to be fine 5 years later. These are cultural and generational changes, and will take time.

 

The "male brain" and the "female brain" are points on a spectrum, rather than binary poles in opposition. Think of it as a bell-curve distribution of "male brainness" that overlaps with "female brainness".

 

I agree with the push towards inclusion of females within STEM subjects, because there are many many females who are as capable as males of doing an excellent job, and who enjoy the work. So why not encourage them to learn it?

 

In addition, I have witnessed first-hand multiple examples of male bosses treating females differently, and actively trying to push them out of the course/subject. Needless to say, HR got involved, and are getting involved, but these attitudes exist and are prevalent. In my line of work, right now, in 2018, males are treated better than females, regardless of the quality of the science.

 

This is a thoughtful post, but it's interesting that you smacked someone for being biased and opinionated, only to follow that up with being biased and opinionated. "Some of the best students are females" and "males are treated better than females" are not exactly rigid scientific points, and the latter is a little bit hard to believe when weighing the consequences of men mistreating women in the workplace in 2018.

[BTS]

What the hell is going on here? I wanted to talk about how s***** Fangraphs' new podcast has become and now everyone is chiming in on political stuff. I should have known better so yes, I will accept my ban but can we all just agree to a cease fire? Next time Fangraphs does something s***** I'll start a new thread instead of ruining this one.

 

I guess this is your fault.

 

Mods: please just ban terminator and Jim