Admittedly this is off Facebook and I do not have a link, but opera singer Julie Fuchs was just fired by an opera company in Hamburg because it "violates their artistic integrity" to have a pregnant singer in the performance. (emphasis mine)
As you can imagine, I am very disappointed as I am feeling vocally and physically in top form. I am fully committed to fulfilling my contracts as planned and previously announced. I was very much looking forward to making my debut in this role, and singing for all of you in Hamburg. My apologies to those of you who already booked tickets. Whilst I respect the artistic vision of the theatre, I am saddened that we were not able to find a solution to accommodate this slight physical difference which does not negatively affect my vocal or artistic performance. It was my strong desire to find small production changes to make my appearance possible. As is the case with most women, in this second trimester of my pregnancy, I am happy to report that I am feeling full of energy and my good health has been confirmed by my doctors. I look forward to returning to the stage in June to sing Poppea at the Opernhaus Zürich.
That kinda reminds me about that Idol thing where they are have to maintain a certain facade.
Here are two articles going more in depth with the darker aspects of Idol culture.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35368705
edited 20th Apr '18 6:05:11 PM by Kakuzan
Don't catch you slippin' now.The Idol thing is even worse, given that they aren't allowed to do anything beyond being the waifu to all their fans, something which is just not possible unless you're a abstract being.
Watch me destroying my countrySo LessWrong has been shady and culty for years (Eliezer Yudkowsky’s incredibly creepy OKCupid profile was always a huge warning sign - yes, I’ve seen the original, so I can confirm that Reddit thread didn’t make it up), but things appear to have reached a head. Kathy Forth, the lady that the Effective Altruism community assigned to reduce their problem with sexual assault and background misogyny, committed suicide after being unable to deal with all the sexual assault and background misogyny, and it’s resulted in an increasing number of women coming forth about their own experiences within the LW/EA community. Jacqueline Bryk started things off with two pretty harrowing Twitter threads, but there’s also been a whole lot coming out of the Reddit thread on the topic. It’s pretty grim reading.
What's precedent ever done for us?What's LessWrong?
TV Tropes's No. 1 bread themed lesbian. she/her, fae/faerAn internet rationalist community that had a fair amount of crossover with this site a few years back. Most notorious for scamming Silicon Valley techbros with cons based around hostile AI and cryogenics, and for starting the genre of ‘rationalist fanfic’.
What's precedent ever done for us?Everything you need to know about their attitude and general bearing comes from the fact that their name is taken from the phrase "I don't claim to be right, but I'm less wrong than you".
It's been fun.Yeah, I always found that the term "rationalist" also implies a real sort of arrogance.
Even Rationalwiki (a site with its own many issues) is somewhat critical of them.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/LessWrong
Less Wrong is an embodiment of the sheer pretentious arrogance of Silicon Valley techbros.
edited 21st Jun '18 11:32:13 PM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprisedWhat particular issues does Rational Wiki have?
Eh, the same as pretty much any Wiki (including this one). The fact that just about anyone can edit things can lead to edit warring.
Disgusted, but not surprisedHuh, I was assuming, and given relevance to the current topic, similar problems of misogyny among their own wiki community, which I'd think to be out of place given my memory of it (at least what I can remember from 2013-15) being their strong support of liberal/leftist causes and/or at least sympathetic to feminist causes, a definite split from the current 'skeptic' community (see: Sargon of Akkad, thunderf00t)
They're definitely very pro-feminism, although much more towards the liberal feminist side of things, causing radical feminists to hate them. Likewise far leftists hate them because of their leaning towards social democracy, when apparently they used to be much more sympathetic to the far left, which said people accuse them of becoming cowards over. Even though their stance is more anti-tankie than anti-far left, as they're very clinical on the subject of far left ideologies instead of immediately shutting them down.
If I had my own issues with them it's that there's a Sandersnista faction who keeps spouting the usual $hillary nonsense while giving only token acknowledgement to Sanders' flaws.
This mirrors my experience, it's generally good but sadly there is some of the annoyingly common anti-HRC bias that can infest a number of left sites.
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -HylarnI have read some Rational Wiki articles and while is not as bad as Conservapedia (ugh, that trend of Left wingers being better than right wingers even when both are being bad is eternal), I just find it...smug. Like, really smug. I know that is not mean to be 100% serious but...still.
Watch me destroying my countryThat is not surprising, there is always this sense of "being smarth of self aware means you can be smug about it", it happen before with the atheist comunity which explain why many went to the alt right, since they feed their pretentions of trolling.
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"The thing about prosecuting someone for something is that you have to be sure. Innocent until proven guilty goes both ways: Neither not sure whether the rape happened nor whether the accusation was false should lead to a guilty verdict. A case where the accused is acquitted isn't automatically proof of innocence (although proof of innocence automatically leads to acquittal); it's proof that guilt is not certain. Well, that's how it should work, if that makes sense.
Check out my fanfiction!Mens' Rights Activists are fighting back against the scourge of feminist networking by suing women-only groups designed to help women succeed in business. And in far too many cases, the MRA is winning. Full article text
That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - SilaswThat sounds too similar to the protest in Japan when a group of douchebags protest the women-only train car for discriminating against and excluding them.
I'm not as witty as I think I am. It's a scientifically-proven fact.I'm confused. Where in the article does it specify that these men are MR As?
The last thing you hear before an unstoppable juggernaut bisects you with a minigun.I’ve seen this come up before, it is generally anti-feminist groups who calls themselves MR As that bring such lawsuits. Note how they target specifically groups trying to build women up, they’d get sympathy from me if they say targeted nightclubs with constant gender discrimination policies, or even found sympathetic people to sue on behalf of (take the breast cancer discount, if a male breast cancer suffered was denied it I’d be all for the lawsuit, because anyone who denies a breast cancer suffered a discount because they’re the ‘wrong’ gender is an asshole), but that’s not how they operate, they’re specifically trying to bring down women empowerment groups.
The only valid thing in there is that it’s kinda shady for these groups to be for-profit, but let’s not for a moment pretend that the people behind the lawsuits would be happy if the groups switch to being non-profit.
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ CyranFair enough. I'm against any and all gender discrimination in general, but I'd probably take more offense to the situations you described than something like this too.
The last thing you hear before an unstoppable juggernaut bisects you with a minigun.Thing is the programs are designed to give women a much needed helping hand addressing issues that women face, that’s much more difficult to do if men are present and also not something men gain anything from being there for.
Personally for seminars and stuff I’d like to say let the men just sit in and listen, but the men who try and turn up to these things aren’t there to listen, they’re there to disrupt and waste the funds of the organisation.
Let’s use another example, there’s an organisation in my area that provides support to adult with mental health disabilities, should someone without such a disability be able to demand that the organisation give them support or be shut down? No. Now they might well have an argument to be made that the government has a duty to also provide a service that provides them with support, but that’s an argument for an expansion of service, to a reduction.
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
The bigots were not the one dieing..... So while I agree with the sentiment, especialy since thats.... not all that suprising.....
In this case it is not really applicable.... the wrestler was dieing, not the ref.
Yes, they have before.
As in, it has happened, and they did.
edited 6th Apr '18 4:57:12 PM by Imca