A Cadao Rain Production “Women Innovators”: A Damaging Assignment for Women and Society I have raised my objections to Prof. Golden’s women-only assignments to him privately multiple times, and appealed as best I could, but to no avail. So I thought that for this assignment, I would be forced either to compromise on my principles, or sacrifice my grade, like I did for the last assignment. But I realized there was a third option: complete the assignment, but also articulate my concerns with it so that I might mitigate the damage I’m doing to women and society by participating in it. Here goes: Women can create so much better than techy gizmos, capitalist widgets, or oh- so-similar services Through the process of natural selection, women became endowed with the miraculous ability to not only create new human life, but to care for it and raise it in a way that only a mother can. The role of the father in the family and raising of children is also crucial and irreplaceable, but his role in his children’s lives involves less of a time commitment than his wife. This means that a father can be successful in pursuing innovation and be a successful father, while a mother attempting the same will almost invariably fall short in one role or the other. Nature isn’t fair! Unfortunately, in our increasingly lonely and individualist society, we can forget how special women’s gift of life creation and raising is, and denigrate it up in favor of shiny things like working a 9 to 5 job, or trying to make techy gizmos, capitalist widgets, or oh-so-similar services. Lessons from my grandmother: Political agents pushing “progress” are like lemmings nearing a cliff My grandmother has shared with me that she often shakes her head at the “crazy” path our modern society is taking. She remembers a better time, “Where men used to be men, and women used to be women.” Women today are being lied to and lead down the wrong path, all under the insidious guise of “women’s empowerment”, “women in STEM”, “women innovators”, etc. Large corporations, which spend millions to fund this “progress”, have played a truly miraculous trick: they’ve convinced many women, and society at large, that working a 9-to-5 job is “empowering” for women. The result? According to U.S. govt. and Pew Research data, more than 9 million American mothers with children under 18 alone (about a quarter of this group) wish that they could be full time mothers and homemakers, BUT CAN’T because of increased social and economic pressure on women. Professor Golden, I hope you can see now how this assignment is contributing to this problem? Lessons from my grandmother: The greatest women of all don’t seek recognition! My grandmother’s story is inspirational: she married her high school sweetheart, and worked hard to make ends meet, as neither her nor my grandfather had much money. They eventually saved enough to buy a house, and started a family. They faced many challenges, but they were able to overcome them together, and they’re still married. They didn’t have a lot going for them, but they also didn’t have an anti-motherhood culture going against them, poisoning the well and bombarding my grandmother with propaganda about how it’s better to be an “innovator” than a mother, or some other such nonsense like we have today. She’s an amazing woman, and she continues to serve as a huge positive influence on my life, my sister’s life, my mother’s life, my uncle’s life, and my grandfather’s life. But she doesn’t seek recognition or Wikipedia pages. She’s very humble, and she often reflects praise that she receives onto others. I don’t think “women innovators” deserve Wikipedia pages. I think humble family women like my grandmother deserve them far more. This assignment, which forces me to proselytize for a “woman innovator,” is an insult not only to male innovators who are left in the background, but also to all the amazing mothers like my grandmother who deserve credit for their real accomplishments in their family. Distractions prevent women from realizing their greatest innovation of all: raising children To innovate is loosely defined as “to make changes in something,” with the idea that these changes are impactful and meaningful. Few change are more impactful than the one mothers make when they bring a new child into the world and shape his/her life as he/she grows into adulthood! My grandmother knows this most of all, and like most good mothers, her biggest innovation she’s brought to the world has been her positive effects on her children and grandchildren’s lives. It makes me sad to think of all the distractions which are working to prevent women from the same joy my grandmother had of raising children in a traditional marriage. I object to this assignment, which not only discriminates against men, but also harms women by encouraging them to waste their lives in pursuits they will later regret – think of the sad, lonely “cat ladys” you know who would give anything to go back in time and start a family! Professor Golden, will you take responsibility for the consequences of this assignment, if it prevents a young woman in this class from starting a family and causes her to live a life of regret? If you can’t give this woman her life back, you shouldn’t have made this assignment! No old woman looks back on her life and thinks, “I wish I’d spent more time at the Maker lab.” 1 honest signal beats 1,000 virtue signals I understand that to many of you reading this, you’ve been told the opposite of what I’ve written perhaps 1,000 times: you’ve heard people say so many feel-good virtue signals like “a woman can do anything a man can do!”, “We need more women innovators!” or “Women are more the same than they are different.” Consider the fact that the people telling you these things have no downside for saying them: in fact, they’ll gain clout in their social circles. It’s called virtue signaling for a reason. Me, on the other hand? I have nothing to gain from telling you this, I expect to be criticized in fact. This is an honest signal, and should be much more believable than all of the virtue signals you hear from people who may seek to benefit from feeding you white lies. Here’s a handy table I’ve developed for this post with a few of my responses to virtue signaling statements. You’ll notice most of my replies are very long and not very witty, I think this is a large part of why the virtue signaling lies are so popular in the first place – they’re easy to spread and sound catchy, whereas it takes a lot of words and mental energy to debunk them. My responses which disprove the virtue signaling statements aren’t catchy, can’t be turned into slogans, and are way too large to put on a bumper sticker. If anyone has shorter or better responses, please let me know! Virtue signaling statement Evidence-based reply Yes, but at what cost? Studies show that stay-at-home mothers are happier than A woman can do anything a man can do! women in any other career, so why would you want to take that away? Why’s that? [If they reply about how “we need equality”/etc.]: The combinatory effects of natural selection and social conditioning have endowed men and women with different desires and abilities. In economics, there’s an example where you have a nation which can allocate its resources to produce either 1 bread or 2 fish, and another nation which can produce either 2 bread, or 1 fish. Because each nation desires a mix of bread and fish, they can work together to We need more women [innovators / CEOs produce the best outcome for both of them / entrepreneurs / representatives / in by specializing, with one nation only STEM / etc.]! fishing, and the other nation only making bread. The fish and bread are then traded between each nation, producing a large improvement for both of them. If those nations instead stuck to the rigid and illogical notion of “equal industrial representation”, they’d be poorer and hungrier as a result. Similarly, men and women have different abilities and desires, and as such should specialize accordingly, producing a net benefit for everyone involved! Of course there are exceptions, but encouraging people to believe they’re one of the rare exceptions to a well- established rule is damaging: it’s much more likely they’re not the exception, and you’re leading them into a world of hurt! That’s true in some areas, we’re all humans after all. But as clinical psychologist Dr. Jordan B. Peterson explains, small differences in many areas of personality between men and women at the micro level compound into large difference in the decisions men and women make at the macro level. This is seen when you look at Scandinavian countries, which are widely considered to have most completely destroyed all remnants of traditional gender roles. These countries are a lot like a leftist utopia, where boys and girls are raised almost Women and men are more the same than identically, and it’s acceptable to give they are different / hormones and operations to depressed Differences between men and women are and confused young boys to turn them into largely the result of culture and not girls! Men and women have very little biology. societal pressure to behave according to their gender, anything goes in these countries. But as Dr. Peterson explains, these countries have MORE gender- stereotypical career distributions, NOT more “gender-equal” distributions. In other words, women in these countries go into nursing, teaching, and other female- oriented professions at a higher rate than most other countries, and vice versa for men. This shows that men and women have substantial biological differences, and that these differences are in fact magnified without the additional moderating effect of culture. That would make sense assuming the same standard deviation of ability between It’s plain to see that women are men and women, but science is discriminated against, because while they increasingly showing that underlying make up [x% of profession / industry / assumption to be false. The collective body group], they only constitute [x% of top of work debunking this assumption is achievers in that area / accolade winners / called the Greater Male Variance people in leadership roles / etc.]. Hypothesis. This science shows that for many areas, men and women have the same average performance, but that men have a higher standard deviation in performance, meaning that men will be overrepresented at the top as well as a the bottom. We see this is true at the bottom of our society by looking at prisons, which are home to a population of 93% men, as well as the homeless population which is overwhelmingly men. The most common reason put forward to explain why this phenomenon occurs is that men are more evolutionarily expendable. Studies of our DNA show that throughout human history, for every 2 woman who has had children, only one man has done the same. Because of this, nature can afford to take more risks with men: while the most evolutionarily successful woman can only have 20-30 children at most, the most evolutionarily successfully man can be like Genghis Khan, who is thought to be an ancestor of 25% or more of all Asia! The end result is that there are more unlucky men who were dealt a poor biological hand, and so are stuck at the bottom of society, but also more genetically lucky men who are overrepresented at the top of most areas of our society as well. Nature isn’t fair! A bonus! (Cadao’s response to one of the group presentations) I don’t like that this team brought race into their presentation when I don’t see how that’s relevant to learning better? It sounds like this team is more focused on SJW politics than on making something useful Problems sharing screen, rather unprofessional. Ironic! In my personal opinion, this would make the classroom worse, not better. We don’t need even more race-based policies like affirmative action in the classroom, which is how I interpreted this group. We need the opposite of this group, a project to get rid of “diversity consultants”. It’s a crazy stat that $100 million is thrown away to stuff like this each year, I would rather if Universities and colleges literally burned my tuition money at the local bible burning bonfire. But hey, I have to give you credit for having the stat!