Black Myth: Wukong shows very clearly Valve are selling a lot of Steam Decks

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: TheBard

QuoteSo then, how about Fortnite on Linux / Steam Deck? Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney said when it hits "tens of millions of users" that it "would actually make sense to support it". We must be pretty close by now right? Why ignore a platform that's sold multiple millions, and is clearly just continuing to fly off the shelves?

I've seen more consistency in /dev/random's output than Tim Sweeney's statements.

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: Cato-the-youngerIt also has further downstream knockon social effects that dont end up benefitting you.

Which ones?

The current ones that seem to be popping up is where certain people can't get promotions or hired because of their ethnicity isn't 'diverse' enough. There are lawsuits, for example, against IBM for not promoting someone who has been at the company for decades, but was told more or less that he would not be promoted because he wasn't diverse enough... then you have Gina Carano suing Disney for wrongful termination, etc. If you go looking through various codes of conduct (Gnome for example) and they're clearly racist against people who are white.

'Woke' is basically an ideology that says the minorities should be the majority and that the majority should bend the knee for being awful.

When you can show me a place where white males make less money on average than minorities, or have less wealth on average than minorities, I'll start to care. If you look at the stats, you will notice that there are NO signs of this coming close to happening. And despite all the anecdotal whining, they've done experiments in the US: They do sets of loan applications and job applications in pairs that are identical except one has a typically "white-sounding" name attached to it and the other has a typically "black-sounding" name attached to it. The ones assumed to be white get hired more often, get the loans more often, and if both get the loans the "black-sounding" name on average gets charged a higher interest rate. So for now all the bitching and moaning from white males about how terribly they're treated because of wokeness and reverse discrimination is going to get from me a sad song on the world's smallest violin.

God, I just get so ashamed of what fucking wimps many of my fellow white males are.

Ah, so what you're saying is the cure for racism is more racism? I believe that the answer to it is fairness across the board. There's a culture issue going on, it has less to do about what color your skin is and what culture you're from. There are a lot of individuals who escape that culture, and others do not.

If people are getting screwed over based on what color their skin is, than it is wrong, period. That's the whole purpose of discrimination laws.

Discrimination laws might get the job done in much of Europe, where the class system is relatively compressed, social programs exist and pretty much work, education is cheap or free and fairly equally delivered, unions are widespread and sectoral bargaining means most people not in a union still pretty much have a union contract. And where, far as I can make out, people take such laws fairly seriously. I have doubts, but sure, maybe.

In the US, such laws do little.
(hidden is explanation of why)

Spoiler, click me

Hierarchy is much steeper there and natural opportunities for class mobility much more constrained. So for instance, in the US, most people can be fired from their job for no reason. So it's illegal to fire someone because they are from some race or religion, or because they're trying to start a union, but it's not illegal to just fire them without saying why. Similarly, as long as you don't say why you didn't hire someone, or didn't give them a loan, or whatever . . . and indeed lots of people charging a black family higher interest for a loan or not hiring a black for a management job aren't being consciously racist; they're just white people who have a "sense" for who's higher risk or who's not a "fit", which sense somewhere at the back of their mind involves blackness as a risk factor. And of course, nearly all the people making these decisions are white. They're not going to notice this stuff--it has no impact on anyone they know. Incidentally, when there's talk about AI doing racist stuff, it's because they fed the AIs on data from this kind of decision maker and it took in the tacit bias from the data it got fed.

Or if you look at education--in the United States, primary and high school education are locally funded by property taxes, and property values vary wildly, so poor neighborhoods have very crappy schools. But wait, there's more! Federal funding tends to go preferentially to schools which are already performing well (not by accident, by design; it's supposed to be an incentive to compete), which is to say not the poor ones. And of course for the rich there are lots of private schools. And just having gone to schools known to be bad makes you less hireable. Since neighborhoods are also very segregated, and blacks are much poorer than whites on average, functionally "black schools" suck and make people less able to get hired.

There's a whole constellation of this kind of stuff all kind of working together.

To make antiracism laws perform effectively, you'd have to do massive witch hunts. You think people bitch about affirmative action, discrimination laws strong enough and strongly enforced enough to work in the US would be just insane police state shit. It's probably less intrusive just to have a quota. And the idea is that once the numbers are about in tune with population sizes, it also won't be just whites (or males) making the hiring decisions and so forth . . . there will be people in the decision-making part of the system to whom the whole setup isn't invisible. I would agree that there are drawbacks, but if you're going to have a steeply hierarchical and unequal system in the first place, nothing is going to work really well when it comes to trying to make people equal.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 1 September 2024 at 6:11 pm UTC

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: TheBard

QuoteSo then, how about Fortnite on Linux / Steam Deck? Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney said when it hits "tens of millions of users" that it "would actually make sense to support it". We must be pretty close by now right? Why ignore a platform that's sold multiple millions, and is clearly just continuing to fly off the shelves?

I've seen more consistency in /dev/random's output than Tim Sweeney's statements.

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: Cato-the-youngerIt also has further downstream knockon social effects that dont end up benefitting you.

Which ones?

The current ones that seem to be popping up is where certain people can't get promotions or hired because of their ethnicity isn't 'diverse' enough. There are lawsuits, for example, against IBM for not promoting someone who has been at the company for decades, but was told more or less that he would not be promoted because he wasn't diverse enough... then you have Gina Carano suing Disney for wrongful termination, etc. If you go looking through various codes of conduct (Gnome for example) and they're clearly racist against people who are white.

'Woke' is basically an ideology that says the minorities should be the majority and that the majority should bend the knee for being awful.

When you can show me a place where white males make less money on average than minorities, or have less wealth on average than minorities, I'll start to care. If you look at the stats, you will notice that there are NO signs of this coming close to happening. And despite all the anecdotal whining, they've done experiments in the US: They do sets of loan applications and job applications in pairs that are identical except one has a typically "white-sounding" name attached to it and the other has a typically "black-sounding" name attached to it. The ones assumed to be white get hired more often, get the loans more often, and if both get the loans the "black-sounding" name on average gets charged a higher interest rate. So for now all the bitching and moaning from white males about how terribly they're treated because of wokeness and reverse discrimination is going to get from me a sad song on the world's smallest violin.

God, I just get so ashamed of what fucking wimps many of my fellow white males are.

Ah, so what you're saying is the cure for racism is more racism? I believe that the answer to it is fairness across the board. There's a culture issue going on, it has less to do about what color your skin is and what culture you're from. There are a lot of individuals who escape that culture, and others do not.

If people are getting screwed over based on what color their skin is, than it is wrong, period. That's the whole purpose of discrimination laws.

Discrimination laws might get the job done in much of Europe, where the class system is relatively compressed, social programs exist and pretty much work, education is cheap or free and fairly equally delivered, unions are widespread and sectoral bargaining means most people not in a union still pretty much have a union contract. And where, far as I can make out, people take such laws fairly seriously. I have doubts, but sure, maybe.

In the US, such laws do little.
(hidden is explanation of why)

Spoiler, click me

Hierarchy is much steeper there and natural opportunities for class mobility much more constrained. So for instance, in the US, most people can be fired from their job for no reason. So it's illegal to fire someone because they are from some race or religion, or because they're trying to start a union, but it's not illegal to just fire them without saying why. Similarly, as long as you don't say why you didn't hire someone, or didn't give them a loan, or whatever . . . and indeed lots of people charging a black family higher interest for a loan or not hiring a black for a management job aren't being consciously racist; they're just white people who have a "sense" for who's higher risk or who's not a "fit", which sense somewhere at the back of their mind involves blackness as a risk factor. And of course, nearly all the people making these decisions are white. They're not going to notice this stuff--it has no impact on anyone they know. Incidentally, when there's talk about AI doing racist stuff, it's because they fed the AIs on data from this kind of decision maker and it took in the tacit bias from the data it got fed.

Or if you look at education--in the United States, primary and high school education are locally funded by property taxes, and property values vary wildly, so poor neighborhoods have very crappy schools. But wait, there's more! Federal funding tends to go preferentially to schools which are already performing well (not by accident, by design; it's supposed to be an incentive to compete), which is to say not the poor ones. And of course for the rich there are lots of private schools. And just having gone to schools known to be bad makes you less hireable. Since neighborhoods are also very segregated, and blacks are much poorer than whites on average, functionally "black schools" suck and make people less able to get hired.

There's a whole constellation of this kind of stuff all kind of working together.

To make antiracism laws perform effectively, you'd have to do massive witch hunts. You think people bitch about affirmative action, discrimination laws strong enough and strongly enforced enough to work in the US would be just insane police state shit. It's probably less intrusive just to have a quota. And the idea is that once the numbers are about in tune with population sizes, it also won't be just whites (or males) making the hiring decisions and so forth . . . there will be people in the decision-making part of the system to whom the whole setup isn't invisible. I would agree that there are drawbacks, but if you're going to have a steeply hierarchical and unequal system in the first place, nothing is going to work really well when it comes to trying to make people equal.

Most of this I agree with. But people always forget to mention the vast swaths of poor white people too. You know, the ones who are referred to as white trash, have 8 kids out of wedlock from different fathers. It is a cultural thing. Yes, the lack of decent education in poor areas is definitely an issue, but there are those who simply were taught from generations of 'skul ain't dun nuttin' fur me.' types. I grew up somewhat poor, inherited clothes from my older brother, father and brother are mentally ill. I still managed to turn my interest in computers into a well paid career. The USA is one of the few places where that is perfectly possible.

I have seen some videos of a black guy where he explains that playing Dungeons & Dragons was said to be 'something white people play, and no self-respecting black person would do that." But he also went on to say that they are also not encouraged to do well in school, etc. It definitely is a cultural thing. Ha, basically what I am saying is there are idiots and smart people of all shapes and colors, and we should probably give hugs and handshakes more and stop concentrating so much on how people look.

At this point, I try to just treat people like they are brains in jars.

Quoting: slaapliedjeI grew up somewhat poor, inherited clothes from my older brother, father and brother are mentally ill. I still managed to turn my interest in computers into a well paid career. The USA is one of the few places where that is perfectly possible.

Would you believe this is actually even more likely in countries where education is free or at least very affordable? Saying this as a fellow professional nerd who grew up relatively poor.

Statistics on complex issues like this are tricky, but you might consider the social mobility index to be relevant.

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: slaapliedjeI grew up somewhat poor, inherited clothes from my older brother, father and brother are mentally ill. I still managed to turn my interest in computers into a well paid career. The USA is one of the few places where that is perfectly possible.

Would you believe this is actually even more likely in countries where education is free or at least very affordable? Saying this as a fellow professional nerd who grew up relatively poor.

Statistics on complex issues like this are tricky, but you might consider the social mobility index to be relevant.

The bonus for me is I'm basically self-educated. Ha, learning how to compile XFree86, because back in those days not all Linux distros shipped with an X11 server, and having a history of working with other operating systems of varying levels of difficulty before getting into Linux because Windows95 looked crappy... that's pretty much where my education is. Ha, from what I've seen of some younger people with computer science degrees, I wonder if they just learn how to flip the switch on... they barely know anything about computers, it seems.

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: TheBard

QuoteSo then, how about Fortnite on Linux / Steam Deck? Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney said when it hits "tens of millions of users" that it "would actually make sense to support it". We must be pretty close by now right? Why ignore a platform that's sold multiple millions, and is clearly just continuing to fly off the shelves?

I've seen more consistency in /dev/random's output than Tim Sweeney's statements.

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: Cato-the-youngerIt also has further downstream knockon social effects that dont end up benefitting you.

Which ones?

The current ones that seem to be popping up is where certain people can't get promotions or hired because of their ethnicity isn't 'diverse' enough. There are lawsuits, for example, against IBM for not promoting someone who has been at the company for decades, but was told more or less that he would not be promoted because he wasn't diverse enough... then you have Gina Carano suing Disney for wrongful termination, etc. If you go looking through various codes of conduct (Gnome for example) and they're clearly racist against people who are white.

'Woke' is basically an ideology that says the minorities should be the majority and that the majority should bend the knee for being awful.

When you can show me a place where white males make less money on average than minorities, or have less wealth on average than minorities, I'll start to care. If you look at the stats, you will notice that there are NO signs of this coming close to happening. And despite all the anecdotal whining, they've done experiments in the US: They do sets of loan applications and job applications in pairs that are identical except one has a typically "white-sounding" name attached to it and the other has a typically "black-sounding" name attached to it. The ones assumed to be white get hired more often, get the loans more often, and if both get the loans the "black-sounding" name on average gets charged a higher interest rate. So for now all the bitching and moaning from white males about how terribly they're treated because of wokeness and reverse discrimination is going to get from me a sad song on the world's smallest violin.

God, I just get so ashamed of what fucking wimps many of my fellow white males are.

Ironic you said that "nobody cares" in your previous post, about "wokeness" and yet Concord shut down in 2 weeks (a lifespan sjorter than that of a fly). So clearly people care.

Sure. Currently white males are starting to fall out of college - more women than man are getting degrees, most campuses are filled with more women than men and more women are getting high paying fields than men. This leads to a large "leftover male" population that wont be able to find a mate, it will also lead to a further declining birthrate. Thats not even mentioning how laws favor women (minority women in particular) where women get a much smaller sentence for the same crime, women win the majority of cases, etc. In college if you qre currently a white male - particularly in areas in Medicine and law, there is quite significant discrimination as program directors are now largely minorities and will not higher white men because "they have the advantage" and because there are numerous programs favoring minorities (they can get same position with a much smaller score). This is just one of the many ways whites get discriminated against.

Prior to encountering woke people that started shoving their agenda fown everyones throat, it never crossed my mind to discriminate whites, blacks, asians, etc and I'd hire anyone if they qualified. I guess Wokes are the true racists.


Last edited by Cato-the-younger on 15 September 2024 at 2:25 pm UTC

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: TheBard

QuoteSo then, how about Fortnite on Linux / Steam Deck? Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney said when it hits "tens of millions of users" that it "would actually make sense to support it". We must be pretty close by now right? Why ignore a platform that's sold multiple millions, and is clearly just continuing to fly off the shelves?

I've seen more consistency in /dev/random's output than Tim Sweeney's statements.

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: Cato-the-youngerIt also has further downstream knockon social effects that dont end up benefitting you.

Which ones?

The current ones that seem to be popping up is where certain people can't get promotions or hired because of their ethnicity isn't 'diverse' enough. There are lawsuits, for example, against IBM for not promoting someone who has been at the company for decades, but was told more or less that he would not be promoted because he wasn't diverse enough... then you have Gina Carano suing Disney for wrongful termination, etc. If you go looking through various codes of conduct (Gnome for example) and they're clearly racist against people who are white.

'Woke' is basically an ideology that says the minorities should be the majority and that the majority should bend the knee for being awful.

When you can show me a place where white males make less money on average than minorities, or have less wealth on average than minorities, I'll start to care. If you look at the stats, you will notice that there are NO signs of this coming close to happening. And despite all the anecdotal whining, they've done experiments in the US: They do sets of loan applications and job applications in pairs that are identical except one has a typically "white-sounding" name attached to it and the other has a typically "black-sounding" name attached to it. The ones assumed to be white get hired more often, get the loans more often, and if both get the loans the "black-sounding" name on average gets charged a higher interest rate. So for now all the bitching and moaning from white males about how terribly they're treated because of wokeness and reverse discrimination is going to get from me a sad song on the world's smallest violin.

God, I just get so ashamed of what fucking wimps many of my fellow white males are.

Ah, so what you're saying is the cure for racism is more racism? I believe that the answer to it is fairness across the board. There's a culture issue going on, it has less to do about what color your skin is and what culture you're from. There are a lot of individuals who escape that culture, and others do not.

If people are getting screwed over based on what color their skin is, than it is wrong, period. That's the whole purpose of discrimination laws.

Discrimination laws might get the job done in much of Europe, where the class system is relatively compressed, social programs exist and pretty much work, education is cheap or free and fairly equally delivered, unions are widespread and sectoral bargaining means most people not in a union still pretty much have a union contract. And where, far as I can make out, people take such laws fairly seriously. I have doubts, but sure, maybe.

In the US, such laws do little.
(hidden is explanation of why)

Spoiler, click me

Hierarchy is much steeper there and natural opportunities for class mobility much more constrained. So for instance, in the US, most people can be fired from their job for no reason. So it's illegal to fire someone because they are from some race or religion, or because they're trying to start a union, but it's not illegal to just fire them without saying why. Similarly, as long as you don't say why you didn't hire someone, or didn't give them a loan, or whatever . . . and indeed lots of people charging a black family higher interest for a loan or not hiring a black for a management job aren't being consciously racist; they're just white people who have a "sense" for who's higher risk or who's not a "fit", which sense somewhere at the back of their mind involves blackness as a risk factor. And of course, nearly all the people making these decisions are white. They're not going to notice this stuff--it has no impact on anyone they know. Incidentally, when there's talk about AI doing racist stuff, it's because they fed the AIs on data from this kind of decision maker and it took in the tacit bias from the data it got fed.

Or if you look at education--in the United States, primary and high school education are locally funded by property taxes, and property values vary wildly, so poor neighborhoods have very crappy schools. But wait, there's more! Federal funding tends to go preferentially to schools which are already performing well (not by accident, by design; it's supposed to be an incentive to compete), which is to say not the poor ones. And of course for the rich there are lots of private schools. And just having gone to schools known to be bad makes you less hireable. Since neighborhoods are also very segregated, and blacks are much poorer than whites on average, functionally "black schools" suck and make people less able to get hired.

There's a whole constellation of this kind of stuff all kind of working together.

To make antiracism laws perform effectively, you'd have to do massive witch hunts. You think people bitch about affirmative action, discrimination laws strong enough and strongly enforced enough to work in the US would be just insane police state shit. It's probably less intrusive just to have a quota. And the idea is that once the numbers are about in tune with population sizes, it also won't be just whites (or males) making the hiring decisions and so forth . . . there will be people in the decision-making part of the system to whom the whole setup isn't invisible. I would agree that there are drawbacks, but if you're going to have a steeply hierarchical and unequal system in the first place, nothing is going to work really well when it comes to trying to make people equal.

Most "equality" movements are actually supremacy movements masquerading as a "equality" movement to make it more palatable. Take Feminism, it has achieved "equality of females" (though if you know history females werent at all oppressed and were celebrated all throughout human history) and is now trying to "win" women more rights compared to men. Same with BLM - there is little discrimination of Blacks at an institutional level - some holdouts like tech still exist, but broadly blacks have more advantages should they wish to use them.

Next those claims of "education being unequal due to income" makes no sense. I know plenty of immigrants from Eastern Europe who came to the US with nary a penny and were able to become rich. They have Eastern European names (by the logic of the studies you cite, they should not have been hireable as their names are too foreign and would scare someone hiring) and yet they were able to get hired. They speak English with an accent too. And yet they did better than many locals who speak better English and have American names.

Those studies you mention miss on crucial points - education doesnt help if the communities do not value them. This is why poor Asian communities are able to do well, because parents will put all their money into their childs education, whereas black families dont - even when in many cases they live in similar neighborhoods. The question we should be asking why is it that some cultures value education over others.

For the Asians its likely Confucian values. For the Eastern Europeans its due to Communist legacy. Americans dont value education as much culturally.


Last edited by Cato-the-younger on 15 September 2024 at 2:39 pm UTC

Quoting: Cato-the-youngerthough if you know history females werent at all oppressed and were celebrated all throughout human history

In my country (Germany), women weren't allowed to
* attend university 130 years ago,
* make politics 120 years ago,
* elect 110 years ago,
* decide how their own money is used in marriage 70 years ago,
* work without their husbands allowance 70 years ago.

But I guess they were celebrated, huh?

I'm still surprised by people saying such obvious lies.


Last edited by Eike on 15 September 2024 at 4:28 pm UTC

Quoting: Cato-the-youngerMost "equality" movements are actually supremacy movements masquerading as a "equality" movement to make it more palatable.

Well that's a whole lot of projection. The only movement I'm aware of that is like that is the white one.

So here's the thing: Pretty much everything you're saying is objectively false. The statistics, when not cherry-picked carefully, make this clear. Also the history--that stuff about women, WTF?! So, you are either deeply but aggressively ignorant, or you are lying like a rug on the assumption that your audience is ignorant. In either case, I'm really not interested in talking to you any further.

There is one true thing--it seems these days that more women than men are going to college. And yet, the wage gap between men and women, with men getting paid more, remains pretty steady. But none of this implies that women somehow owe men relationships. If you're an incel (maybe you're not, maybe you're just promoting their stupid memes for other reasons), what you should do is quit whining and bitching about women and instead try learning to be a decent person that women won't have strong reasons to dislike . . . which might require exiting a culture that seems to actively promote being a total racist sexist asshole that most women, and decent men, are unlikely to want to spend time with. Because you get in relationships with women when they want to be in a relationship with you.

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: Cato-the-youngerthough if you know history females werent at all oppressed and were celebrated all throughout human history

In my country (Germany), women weren't allowed to
* attend university 130 years ago,
* make politics 120 years ago,
* elect 110 years ago,
* decide how their own money is used in marriage 70 years ago,
* work without their husbands allowance 70 years ago.

But I guess they were celebrated, huh?

I'm still surprised by people saying such obvious lies.

And in your country (Germany), men of low socioeconomic status weren't allowed to:
*attend universities 130 years ago (lack of money)
*make politics 120 years ago (they werent landowners or rich so their opinions didnt matter)
*elect (see above reasons)

So maybe it had nothing to do with being women, and everything to do with low socioeconomic class?🤔 of course people ignore that, either to push an agenda or due to ignorance.

And yes, if you study ancient history - there were plenty of festivals and events celebrating womanhood, fertility and motherhood. Indeed, many civilizations like the Babylonians had MULTIPLE festivals dedicated to women and fertility. They even had a goddess for women they celebrated and had her statues all over the city. This was also true of the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, etc. So stop spreading absolute and utter lies about women being oppressed. Actually, midwifery was very common in the Hellenic world, and was primairly practiced by women with women writing numerous treatsies on the matter with many exclusively female schools dedicated to the subject.

At least do proper research before and think about what you write before writing nonsense

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: Cato-the-youngerMost "equality" movements are actually supremacy movements masquerading as a "equality" movement to make it more palatable.

Well that's a whole lot of projection. The only movement I'm aware of that is like that is the white one.

So here's the thing: Pretty much everything you're saying is objectively false. The statistics, when not cherry-picked carefully, make this clear. Also the history--that stuff about women, WTF?! So, you are either deeply but aggressively ignorant, or you are lying like a rug on the assumption that your audience is ignorant. In either case, I'm really not interested in talking to you any further.

There is one true thing--it seems these days that more women than men are going to college. And yet, the wage gap between men and women, with men getting paid more, remains pretty steady. But none of this implies that women somehow owe men relationships. If you're an incel (maybe you're not, maybe you're just promoting their stupid memes for other reasons), what you should do is quit whining and bitching about women and instead try learning to be a decent person that women won't have strong reasons to dislike . . . which might require exiting a culture that seems to actively promote being a total racist sexist asshole that most women, and decent men, are unlikely to want to spend time with. Because you get in relationships with women when they want to be in a relationship with you.

What is false exactly? That the rhetoric of say BLM if used by whites would get them labelled as "white supremacists"? Are you going to deny that? Or how about the rhetoric we hear from Feminists in regards to men - if whites used such rhetoric against any other race they would be called supremacists, and rightfully so. But we are somehow supposed to believe that neither of those are supremacist movements? Riiiighhtt

And what is false about women? Do you deny that many ancient Civilizations celebrated womenhood, fertility and motherhood? Is that why the Babylonians had statues of Ishtar all over their cities and even a temple dedicated to Her? Or is that why the Hellenistic world had all female schools dedicated to midwifery with women writing extensive treatsies on the matter that survive to present day? Or how about basically every ancient civilization having numerous festivals dedicated to women? Are those lies too? Or how about elderly women having very high social status and playing crucial roles in their communities in early human societies? Or how about the first all womens monastic college that opened in America in 1637, a year after Harvard?

Sounds like you havent done your research or thought abt it much lol.

Wage gap remains steady? You must be living in an alternate universe lmao. Heres statistics from the Brookings institute:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F58c2d3fc-40b0-4a21-a270-9b1b7669c4bd_1629x1185.png

I see no wage gap. Do you?

Heres more

https://time.com/3222543/wage-pay-gap-myth-feminism/

And nobody said anybody owes anyone relationships. Did you not read what I wrote? Or did you let your own preconcieved biases and emotions cloud your ability to reason. The statistics on this is pretty clear - highly educated women have a harder time dating because they price themselves out of the market and raise their own standards too high that they can no longer find a partner they view as "suitable" due to differences in male and female mating psychology. At this point the data on this is pretty overwhelming. It has nothing to do with childish notions of anybody "owing" anyone relationships

Another thing is clear as well, its that Blacks in America have different cultural values compared to different minority groups which is what is holding them back. Most institutional barriers have long been removed - something you did not address in your rather childish response. How else do you explain the success of Asian, Indian or Eastern European immigrants when they have difficulties with the language, foreign sounding names and even look different.

You need to do better research and learn to seperate bias from preconcieved emotion.


Last edited by Cato-the-younger on 30 September 2024 at 4:14 pm UTC