Thoughts?
>>25265082The median American college student is female. This aligns with reasonable expectations.
>>25265082Expecting more is bigoted.The only way to be fair is to make sure all students graduate from school as retarded as possible.
>>25265082Americans can read?
>>25265089I hate having female colleagues at university so fucking much it's unreal. this website is basically just where I go to vent.
>>25265115Where did you get that impression?
>>25265120reality.
>>25265124No I mean the student in the OP almost certainly didn't read anything to write that shit. Americans can't read.
>>25265127citation fags are worse.>anon, your academic paper stated 2+2=5 without providing at least ten peer reviewed references written in the last ten years. see me after class.
>>25265082No this is better than 80% of current college students because it was clearly actually written by the student instead of ChatGPTt. former TA
>>25265082At least it doesn't look like something churned out by a chatbot.
>missing some punctuation>missing some capitalization>missing some focusAnd yet the text remains soulful through and through.This author is, dare I say it, /ourauthor/.
>>25265119The problem isn't women themselves per se, it's the number of women and how male institutions are reformed to suit them. Women aren't a problem when they're expected to conform to the male standards of male institutions. High standards naturally keep female participation low because women are grouped more closely around the mean than men. The slippery slope to hell begins when standards are lowered. At first it's for women without broadly affecting the larger group, but that encourages increased female participation, which begins to affect standards for everybody. Eventually, female participation reaches parity with men and the institutions are fully reformed around their needs at the expense of men. This problem is more pronounced in education settings and particularly higher education because their original intended target demographic is the high end of human cognitive ability which is almost exclusively male. These high-ability men by definition do not conform to the mean of society in terms of their thoughts, ideas, and behaviors. They are outcasts and mavericks, and these institutions serve as a safe harbor for them to develop their thoughts and ideas because these are the thoughts and ideas that change society for the better and raise the mean. Centering these institutions around the mean excludes them, and centering them around women even more so. Women are highly concerned with conformity and consensus and less tolerant of outcasts and mavericks, those who these institutions were designed to enable. So rest assured, hating women in college is one of the surest signs of intelligence and that you belong in that institution as it was originally designed. That you're still there after it's been sabotaged against you does raise questions, though.
>>25265100Expecting more is constructive. You wish to make excuses and further degenerate society. Let it be known that this here faggot's sheer existence - his inborn wish to kill us all off through unthinking retardation - is the reason my children will attend a Waldorf school, and not some Masonic institution like your state-sponsored Carnegie public churches of economics and twerking.
>>25265394your effortpost is much appreciated. I'm not calling for prejudice against people but it's so fucking frustrating having to constantly walk on eggshells and cater to everyone else while being shat on by them.- if you try to educate and correct women you're mansplaining.- if you say anything even remotely negative about gays the gay mafia (every university has one) will find you...- if you acquire a reputation for being racist some meat head there will use it as a reason to bash you without any consequences.- etc.
>>25265082they should use more ChatGPT
>>25265270Maybe /yourauthor/, illiterate. When I was in my early years of undergrad I had professors with actual academic pedigree praise my work.
>>25265434I certainly understand your frustration. I'm frustrated myself. It won't get better by ignoring it.>I'm not calling for prejudice against peopleThat's a dire mistake. Prejudice is not only justifiable and warranted but in fact the only condition that prevents these things from happening. These behaviors are all prejudicial toward men, straight men, and white men, respectively. Prejudice then cannot be avoided, so the only question that remains is who is willing to wield it. Should it be wielded against the people whom created the institutions, perpetuated them, and for whom those institutions were designed to enable for the greatest good of all? Or should it be wielded against the people who have no business participating in them but would eagerly use those same institutions to crush the the people to whom they rightfully belong for nothing but their own immediate interests and without a second thought about the morality and consequences? Keep in mind, the former creates the conditions that have allowed Western civilization to progress beyond medieval serfdom with its aspirations of freedom and equality, and the latter is creating the conditions that will, left unchecked, cause it to collapse to something much worse. The morality of prejudice isn't thoroughly examined absent of that context. It's great that you have moral inhibitions about wielding it, that's what makes for responsible leadership, and that's exactly why they won't be responsible leaders. If we allow our morality and our empathy to continue to be weaponized against us, then they will lose all value and their place in institutions and society, both will ultimately cease to exist, and we will be pushed until we cease to exist. All hope is not lost, though. We had to know the limits of our empathy to find its center and practice it in moderation. We have. It's time to push back. Talking about it is the first step.
>>25265533I'm too low in the pecking order to make any changes but one good trend I've recently noticed is the administrators of my university have wizened up about the dangers of hiring Indians. some other groups like Jews are nepotistic too but Indians have the numbers to cause real damage. t. an Australian
>>25265580No one is too lowly. Again, talking about it is the first step. We can all do that much. Taking larger steps before that is careless, you won't have support. Talking about it creates that support, and that support creates courage, and the courage of one creates courage in more and so on. You either change things quickly and violently (not necessary physical violence) or you change them quietly, before anyone has noticed so that by the time they do it's too late. If we learn nothing else from our opposition, it should be that. >the dangers of hiring IndiansThis seems to be almost universally recognized. That is a fantastic, moralizing signal that things can still move in the right direction. I wouldn't assume that most people will apply the lesson without help to other groups that have already done exactly the same, but it is a starting point.
