Saturday, July 18, 2015
Ray Ban Sunglasses Only 14GBP
Don't want to receive this type of email? Click here to unsubscribe
|
Friday, July 17, 2015
[Re-post] Professor Tim Hunt was teasing but also RIGHT
[Re-post because of junk imposter posting]
Tim Hunt is spot-on.
Forget the fact that he was teasing, and that it was his lifetime of personal experience that is of value to hear ....
Women do take things personally. Ask women! Ask them which sex they prefer for a boss. Look at the various research in the workplace.
Female sociality is wholly different to male. Females form idiosyncratic 'personal networks', which are chains of association out from a closest friend: a twosome/threesome inner circle with themselves always at the centre, which excludes most others in any abstract grouping such as the science lab -- and especially excluding males because of a fourfold female same-sex preference for choosing 'personal-network' members.
By complete contrast, males identify with the whole of the abstract grouping and everyone within it without exception as being their 'in-group', in which they do not place themselves at the centre but, in terms of other males, they are assigned a rank in the hierarchy. As regards the wider in-group beyond the male intra-sexual hierarchy, males have no same-sex preference as females do; and so don't exclude any of the females.
Female sociality is obviously problematic regarding both collaborative and/or competitive efforts in research in a science lab, even before all of the sexual stuff Professor Hunt mentioned -- and never mind different communication modes/styles which may be mutually unintelligible. When the sexes are together, men increase their competitiveness with each other – and, though ostensibly only, with women: this last is actually sexual display. Women instead back off from being competitive because it would compromise their ability to project their femininity; with the result that their effort is still further denuded -- though women's effort tends to be more conscientious than competitive: women usually lack a strong genuine deep drive through actual interest in the research topic; females being socially rather than task orientated.
Overall ... too right there are issues re the sexes in the workplace.
Denying them is idiocy driven by the now ubiquitous extreme political totalitarianism.
We can all have a laugh at the risible contortions the ideo-bigots will go through before the weight of reality caves in on them; and cave in on them it surely will -- the more spectacularly the longer they manage to stave it off. These are going to be interesting times ... unless you're on the Left (in any way as it currently manifests), for which oblivion beckons.
Female sociality is wholly different to male. Females form idiosyncratic 'personal networks', which are chains of association out from a closest friend: a twosome/threesome inner circle with themselves always at the centre, which excludes most others in any abstract grouping such as the science lab -- and especially excluding males because of a fourfold female same-sex preference for choosing 'personal-network' members.
By complete contrast, males identify with the whole of the abstract grouping and everyone within it without exception as being their 'in-group', in which they do not place themselves at the centre but, in terms of other males, they are assigned a rank in the hierarchy. As regards the wider in-group beyond the male intra-sexual hierarchy, males have no same-sex preference as females do; and so don't exclude any of the females.
Female sociality is obviously problematic regarding both collaborative and/or competitive efforts in research in a science lab, even before all of the sexual stuff Professor Hunt mentioned -- and never mind different communication modes/styles which may be mutually unintelligible. When the sexes are together, men increase their competitiveness with each other – and, though ostensibly only, with women: this last is actually sexual display. Women instead back off from being competitive because it would compromise their ability to project their femininity; with the result that their effort is still further denuded -- though women's effort tends to be more conscientious than competitive: women usually lack a strong genuine deep drive through actual interest in the research topic; females being socially rather than task orientated.
Overall ... too right there are issues re the sexes in the workplace.
Denying them is idiocy driven by the now ubiquitous extreme political totalitarianism.
We can all have a laugh at the risible contortions the ideo-bigots will go through before the weight of reality caves in on them; and cave in on them it surely will -- the more spectacularly the longer they manage to stave it off. These are going to be interesting times ... unless you're on the Left (in any way as it currently manifests), for which oblivion beckons.
Wednesday, July 08, 2015
[Re post] Professor Tim Hunt was teasing but also RIGHT
[Re-post because of junk imposter posting]
Tim Hunt is spot-on.
Forget the fact that he was teasing, and that it was his lifetime of personal experience that is of value to hear ....
Women do take things personally. Ask women! Ask them which sex they prefer for a boss. Look at the various research in the workplace.
Female sociality is wholly different to male. Females form idiosyncratic 'personal networks', which are chains of association out from a closest friend: a twosome/threesome inner circle with themselves always at the centre, which excludes most others in any abstract grouping such as the science lab -- and especially excluding males because of a fourfold female same-sex preference for choosing 'personal-network' members.
By complete contrast, males identify with the whole of the abstract grouping and everyone within it without exception as being their 'in-group', in which they do not place themselves at the centre but, in terms of other males, they are assigned a rank in the hierarchy. As regards the wider in-group beyond the male intra-sexual hierarchy, males have no same-sex preference as females do; and so don't exclude any of the females.
Female sociality is obviously problematic regarding both collaborative and/or competitive efforts in research in a science lab, even before all of the sexual stuff Professor Hunt mentioned -- and never mind different communication modes/styles which may be mutually unintelligible. When the sexes are together, men increase their competitiveness with each other – and, though ostensibly only, with women: this last is actually sexual display. Women instead back off from being competitive because it would compromise their ability to project their femininity; with the result that their effort is still further denuded -- though women's effort tends to be more conscientious than competitive: women usually lack a strong genuine deep drive through actual interest in the research topic; females being socially rather than task orientated.
Overall ... too right there are issues re the sexes in the workplace.
Denying them is idiocy driven by the now ubiquitous extreme political totalitarianism.
We can all have a laugh at the risible contortions the ideo-bigots will go through before the weight of reality caves in on them; and cave in on them it surely will -- the more spectacularly the longer they manage to stave it off. These are going to be interesting times ... unless you're on the Left (in any way as it currently manifests), for which oblivion beckons.
Female sociality is wholly different to male. Females form idiosyncratic 'personal networks', which are chains of association out from a closest friend: a twosome/threesome inner circle with themselves always at the centre, which excludes most others in any abstract grouping such as the science lab -- and especially excluding males because of a fourfold female same-sex preference for choosing 'personal-network' members.
By complete contrast, males identify with the whole of the abstract grouping and everyone within it without exception as being their 'in-group', in which they do not place themselves at the centre but, in terms of other males, they are assigned a rank in the hierarchy. As regards the wider in-group beyond the male intra-sexual hierarchy, males have no same-sex preference as females do; and so don't exclude any of the females.
Female sociality is obviously problematic regarding both collaborative and/or competitive efforts in research in a science lab, even before all of the sexual stuff Professor Hunt mentioned -- and never mind different communication modes/styles which may be mutually unintelligible. When the sexes are together, men increase their competitiveness with each other – and, though ostensibly only, with women: this last is actually sexual display. Women instead back off from being competitive because it would compromise their ability to project their femininity; with the result that their effort is still further denuded -- though women's effort tends to be more conscientious than competitive: women usually lack a strong genuine deep drive through actual interest in the research topic; females being socially rather than task orientated.
Overall ... too right there are issues re the sexes in the workplace.
Denying them is idiocy driven by the now ubiquitous extreme political totalitarianism.
We can all have a laugh at the risible contortions the ideo-bigots will go through before the weight of reality caves in on them; and cave in on them it surely will -- the more spectacularly the longer they manage to stave it off. These are going to be interesting times ... unless you're on the Left (in any way as it currently manifests), for which oblivion beckons.
[Re-post] Professor Tim Hunt was teasing but he was also RIGHT
[Re-post because of junk imposter posting]
Tim Hunt is spot-on.
Forget the fact that he was teasing, and that it was his lifetime of personal experience that is of value to hear ....
Women do take things personally. Ask women! Ask them which sex they prefer for a boss. Look at the various research in the workplace.
Female sociality is wholly different to male. Females form idiosyncratic 'personal networks', which are chains of association out from a closest friend: a twosome/threesome inner circle with themselves always at the centre, which excludes most others in any abstract grouping such as the science lab -- and especially excluding males because of a fourfold female same-sex preference for choosing 'personal-network' members.
By complete contrast, males identify with the whole of the abstract grouping and everyone within it without exception as being their 'in-group', in which they do not place themselves at the centre but, in terms of other males, they are assigned a rank in the hierarchy. As regards the wider in-group beyond the male intra-sexual hierarchy, males have no same-sex preference as females do; and so don't exclude any of the females.
Female sociality is obviously problematic regarding both collaborative and/or competitive efforts in research in a science lab, even before all of the sexual stuff Professor Hunt mentioned -- and never mind different communication modes/styles which may be mutually unintelligible. When the sexes are together, men increase their competitiveness with each other – and, though ostensibly only, with women: this last is actually sexual display. Women instead back off from being competitive because it would compromise their ability to project their femininity; with the result that their effort is still further denuded -- though women's effort tends to be more conscientious than competitive: women usually lack a strong genuine deep drive through actual interest in the research topic; females being socially rather than task orientated.
Overall ... too right there are issues re the sexes in the workplace.
Denying them is idiocy driven by the now ubiquitous extreme political totalitarianism.
We can all have a laugh at the risible contortions the ideo-bigots will go through before the weight of reality caves in on them; and cave in on them it surely will -- the more spectacularly the longer they manage to stave it off. These are going to be interesting times ... unless you're on the Left (in any way as it currently manifests), for which oblivion beckons.
Female sociality is wholly different to male. Females form idiosyncratic 'personal networks', which are chains of association out from a closest friend: a twosome/threesome inner circle with themselves always at the centre, which excludes most others in any abstract grouping such as the science lab -- and especially excluding males because of a fourfold female same-sex preference for choosing 'personal-network' members.
By complete contrast, males identify with the whole of the abstract grouping and everyone within it without exception as being their 'in-group', in which they do not place themselves at the centre but, in terms of other males, they are assigned a rank in the hierarchy. As regards the wider in-group beyond the male intra-sexual hierarchy, males have no same-sex preference as females do; and so don't exclude any of the females.
Female sociality is obviously problematic regarding both collaborative and/or competitive efforts in research in a science lab, even before all of the sexual stuff Professor Hunt mentioned -- and never mind different communication modes/styles which may be mutually unintelligible. When the sexes are together, men increase their competitiveness with each other – and, though ostensibly only, with women: this last is actually sexual display. Women instead back off from being competitive because it would compromise their ability to project their femininity; with the result that their effort is still further denuded -- though women's effort tends to be more conscientious than competitive: women usually lack a strong genuine deep drive through actual interest in the research topic; females being socially rather than task orientated.
Overall ... too right there are issues re the sexes in the workplace.
Denying them is idiocy driven by the now ubiquitous extreme political totalitarianism.
We can all have a laugh at the risible contortions the ideo-bigots will go through before the weight of reality caves in on them; and cave in on them it surely will -- the more spectacularly the longer they manage to stave it off. These are going to be interesting times ... unless you're on the Left (in any way as it currently manifests), for which oblivion beckons.
Tuesday, July 07, 2015
Ray Ban Sunglasses Only 14.42GBP
Don't want to receive this type of email? Click here to unsubscribe
|
