Biological Science™ statistics only understood by brain geniuses like Jonathan Blow
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Jonathan Blow (The Witness, Braid) thinks women are biologically less interested in tech than men
- Thread starter Muffin
- Start date
- Status
Excuse me? Don't try insulting me in this manner. Reply with constructive criticism and not like a "5-year-old".
you know what is ridiculous? statments like yours..where he is saying "women belong in the kitchen"? he can be wrong of course but post like yours dosnt help at all
BIOLOGICALLY.
AKA an appeal to authority in the form of Pop science
Is an extremist PC proponent like the guys on the PCMasterrace subreddit?
Do they propose a final solution to the console problem?
"Biologically less interested" LOL!
That's one of the worst takes I've ever seen.
Ada Lovelace's translations and notes are extremely important to the history of computing and programming and she completed that work in the 1840s.
His opinion is immediately invalidated.
That's one of the worst takes I've ever seen.
Ada Lovelace's translations and notes are extremely important to the history of computing and programming and she completed that work in the 1840s.
His opinion is immediately invalidated.
Ben Carson is apparently a brilliant neurosurgeon. He's also a fucking idiot regarding anything else. Blow is out of his depth. And so are you.
You find no issue in someone claiming without proof that women don't like tech because they are biologically programmed to like knitting or other girly stuff?
Don't you think that the fact girls don't like tech is because of social and cultural reasons?
It wouldn't be offensive if the reasoning was societal, or cultural, because we have studies showing women are less inclined to pursue those fields because of sexism and other negative experiences, but implying it's biological as if women are inherently uninterested is absurd
What the fuck, he talks like some sort of robot that came right out of the 50s.
Blow, you clearly need to get out more and meet more people.
Blow, you clearly need to get out more and meet more people.
Blow also said we should defeat nazis by engaging them in debate, because obviously sound arguments work against fascists. That was dumber than this, and this is dumb as shit. Blow is an ass.
Please show some respect to your fellow users and don't try to trigger or provoke using this kind of behaviour.
You think anyone with a little bit of intelligence would not think these things much less think it is a good idea to say these things in 2017.
Or that women do like tech but every time they try to get into it some fuckin weirdo writes a manifesto about how they're not actually interested in it.
Pretty much. Biology is so simple but still so complex for some people.
If he said "statistically" he could probably (?) he right if the numbers supported him. But "biologically"? Hahah.
No, but he came out and said that women dont go into tech for biological issues in his initial post. He tried to back track abit by saying was statistical, but that inital claim is still HYPER sexist by implying women werent born to do tech work.
No no no, of course not. No one is that much of an asshole to suggest that women are only good enough for cooking food!
It's just that since they're not good enough to do anything else because their genetics say so for some random ass reason, then of course they're going to settle on less complicated things. You know, like not associating with assholes who think that women can't do something just cuz.
OP
OP
Do you spent your entire life without knowing what the word "biologically" means?
If anyone has heard this guy speak, it only makes sense that he has this point of view. I couldn't give him money for Witness because of his views, and his holier than thou attitude.
It's never not going to be controversial, and the fact that social/cultural/biological motivations are nigh impossible to tease out.
But I have no idea why people are so aghast at the idea of that A) men and women are biologically different and B) these biological differences likely lead to an increased or decreased likelihood of interest in certain fields or topics.
Stripped of social conditioning do we really think men and women are identical?
But I have no idea why people are so aghast at the idea of that A) men and women are biologically different and B) these biological differences likely lead to an increased or decreased likelihood of interest in certain fields or topics.
Stripped of social conditioning do we really think men and women are identical?
Yeah, or how are they pushed out by creepy nerds, maybe...
Homeboy needs to do a Braid rewind on these tweets. Fuck was he thinking? Nobody wants to hear your opinions on biology. If your controversial statement begins with an "I believe it is likely" hypothesis and no empirical evidence to back it up, spare yourself the persecution and shut the fuck up.
Goddamnit. Yeah he always seemed like a bit of a dick but this is ridiculous.
Night, Blow. See you again never.
Night, Blow. See you again never.
Thats like saying that generally men are more interested in cars than women. I dont see a problem here.
It's baffling to me how people like Blow seem to entirely lack that kind of perspective or empathy. Like, isn't he aware of how shitty women in tech have it?
Blow is one of those independently wealthy people that blast their hot takes that arise from being sheltered rich weirdos and then are surprised that most people think they are fucking stupid, see also: Brianna Wu, Palmer Luckey, etc.
Don't worry, I'm sure /pol/ will be there to support him against the evil SJWs soon enough.
Sure.
But he pulled that conclussion from his ass. There's no proof whatsoever.
- Status