ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Women ruin everything: DEFCON edition

From atheist conferences to hacker conferences, women are complaining about them:
[E]veryone at DEFCON benefits from more women attending. Women “hackers” – in the creative technologist sense – are everywhere, and many of them are brilliant, interesting, and just plain good company (think Limor Fried, Jeri Ellsworth, and Angela Byron). Companies recruiting for talent get access to the full range of qualified applicants, not just the ones who can put up with a brogrammer atmosphere. We get more and better talks on a wider range of subjects. Conversations are more fun. Conferences and everyone at them loses when amazing women don’t attend.

When you say, “Women shouldn’t go to DEFCON if they don’t like it,” you are saying that women shouldn’t have all of the opportunities that come with attending DEFCON: jobs, education, networking, book contracts, speaking opportunities – or else should be willing to undergo sexual harassment and assault to get access to them. Is that really what you believe?
Yes. Absolutely. The conference should do everything it legally can to dissuade "amazing women" from attending. Because what this foolish woman, in her obvious ignorance of cause-and-effect, is asserting that the absolute highest priority of the conference should be that women feel comfortable. The problem is that once that principle is established, the seeds of the conference's destruction will have been planted, because women will always find a reason to claim they are uncomfortable. No one at DEFCON would benefit in the long term from more women attending, at least not under that principle, because it only creates more opportunities for women to feel uncomfortable. Therefore, more female attendees would eventually eviscerate DEFCON as the small core of male attendees who actually make the conference valuable would stop attending as their activities increasingly infringed upon female comfort. History is very clear on the way women degrade every male institution they successfully invade that they do not succeed in destroying entirely.

Lest you think I exaggerate, consider the policy statement recommended by one of her commenters: “This conference is for everybody and everybody visiting this conference should feel comfortable, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, or religion.” That's not a hacker conference policy, that's one establishing a comfort conference. The priority defines the purpose.

And lest you think I exaggerate concerning what might be erroneously dismissed as a slippery slope argument: "These guys can rationalize until they’re blue in the face but IT IS NEVER OKAY TO GIVE A LADY THE HEEBIE JEEBIES!"

We're not even 100 years into the great equalitarian experiment and Western civilization is already on the verge of economic and demographic collapse. This is not a coincidence. Consider that it only took 79 years for the United Kingdom to go from granting all women over the age of 21 the franchise to voluntarily surrendering its national sovereignty in the Lisbon Treaty. When the Sports Guy said "the lesson, as always, is this: women ruin everything", he spoke nothing but the bitter truth.

Labels: ,

109 Comments:

Anonymous Josh August 15, 2012 1:37 PM  

But what about that lesbian Swedish hacker in those books all the women and gays were reading?

Oh, wait.

That was fiction.

Anonymous Mr. Nightstick August 15, 2012 1:38 PM  

The ilk would love that chick's homepage.

Blogger ray August 15, 2012 1:46 PM  

When the Sports Guy said "the lesson, as always, is this: women ruin everything", he spoke nothing but the bitter truth.

not bitter enough yet to millions in amerika, an empire so flush with wealth and resources that women havent succeeded in destroying it utterly yet

just a matter of time tho

and when they do, theyll pass new laws blaming and punishing men for the disaster, while demanding that males "take responsibility" for the "failure of the patriarchy"

so far the harshness of the Feminist Follies has fallen only on boys and men, but that will change

Blogger Crude August 15, 2012 1:48 PM  

I recently read an article over at Rock Paper Shotgun (a great online gaming news site, but when they editorialize, man do they ever become harpies) about how some site was talking about an easy class in upcoming Borderlands 2. Apparently someone referred to this as the "Girlfriend Class" or something (As in, a class your girlfriend can play, because she's probably bad at FPS games so will appreciate this.)

Naturally people went ballistic. And all I can think is, what... we have to pretend that there's not a gender skew in FPS games now? Really? It's horrible to point out that most people playing FPS games tend to be guys, or make a joke about the comparative (not exclusive, but comparative) lack of female interest?

Blogger Crude August 15, 2012 1:51 PM  

And for the record, I don't think women ruin everything. Or at least, there is no way in hell that the women responsible would be able to do as much damage as they do if it wasn't for complicit men. Does the whole righteous rage 'feminist man' thing result in a lot of dates or something?

Anonymous VD August 15, 2012 1:56 PM  

Or at least, there is no way in hell that the women responsible would be able to do as much damage as they do if it wasn't for complicit men.

It's true, women would not be able to wreak the havoc that they do if men did not permit them to wreak it. On the other hand, even if ultimate responsibility rests with the individual who left open the front door and permitted the raccoon to ravage the refrigerator, that doesn't change the fact that the raccoon ravaged the refrigerator.

Women will always degrade and destroy male institutions. They don't mean to do so, but they can't help it. It's simply what results from their differing priorities and preferences. That is why men have a responsibility to prevent women from doing it.

Anonymous Noah B. August 15, 2012 1:56 PM  

"At a recent DEFCON, while leaning over to get her drink at the bar, someone slid his hand up all the way between her legs and grabbed her crotch."

Thus highlighting the glaring security deficiencies of skirts. Epic win, anon.

Anonymous The Anti-Gnostic August 15, 2012 1:57 PM  

Silly women. Now that the focus is no longer hacking but making women feel comfortable, the most talented hackers (who will all be men) will find another place to meet.

Same with the military. The hardcore warriors go SF or merc.

Same with the churches. Put women in the pulpit, and the men leave.

Same with the AKC. Now that Westminster is just women and their gay friends, men who actually use and rely on dogs have developed their own competitions and bloodlines.

Women change the dynamic, every single time. I do think healthy men should have a lot of interaction with women, but not in what should be "guy-space."

Blogger Crude August 15, 2012 2:09 PM  

It's true, women would not be able to wreak the havoc that they do if men did not permit them to wreak it. On the other hand, even if ultimate responsibility rests with the individual who left open the front door and permitted the raccoon to ravage the refrigerator, that doesn't change the fact that the raccoon ravaged the refrigerator.

And I'm not so sure the line draws so neatly to "women" on this one, to the exclusion of men. Yes, God knows feminism largely cashes out to harpydom and stupid ideas. On the other hand, do you think no man benefits from advancing the feminism idiocy? Is it simply 'when feminism wins, all men lose'?

Anyway, at best it's a minor point. Like you said, the raccoon ravaged the refrigerator. I just like to call attention to the idiot who didn't close the door when it was his responsibility.

Women will always degrade and destroy male institutions. They don't mean to do so, but they can't help it. It's simply what results from their differing priorities and preferences. That is why men have a responsibility to prevent women from doing it.

How about Phyllis Schlafly? I'll absolutely agree men have a responsibility to prevent women from doing it - that's actually part of why I said what I did. Some women agree with the sentiments you're advocating on this one. They just happen to be in the minority now.

Anonymous Suomynona August 15, 2012 2:13 PM  

I got to the part about handing out colored penalty cards and couldn't go on. If some bitch attempted to card me for behavior she deems inappropriate, I wouldn't be responsible for my actions.

I'll stop here because there's only a lot of cursing going through my head right now.

Anonymous BAJ August 15, 2012 2:14 PM  

And in the meantime, the US Army has commissioned its first openly gay general, M(r?)s. Tammy Smith.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/meet-brig-gen-tammy-smith-us-first-openly-211521611.html

Conclude what you will.

Anonymous DarthToolpodicus August 15, 2012 2:17 PM  

I get a kick out of how she name-drops, as if all of the women dissuaded are of that "top-shelf" caliber and thus the conference is impoverished by their absence...Incidentally, the only one on the list warranting mention as having real hardware chops is Jeri Ellsworth.

Anonymous Feh August 15, 2012 2:19 PM  

"do you think no man benefits from advancing the feminism idiocy?"

Of course, the elite males benefit. And some elite females.

The non-elite males and females suffer, but the elites simply don't care about the them.

Anonymous Lilburne August 15, 2012 2:20 PM  

"Same with the AKC. Now that Westminster is just women and their gay friends, men who actually use and rely on dogs have developed their own competitions and bloodlines."

... yeah... I was thinking EXACTLY this same thing. First they ruined the country. Now the AKC!!!!!! The horror....

Anonymous VD August 15, 2012 2:22 PM  

I just like to call attention to the idiot who didn't close the door when it was his responsibility.

That's fine, but consider how the ravaging of the refrigerator by the raccoon is so predictable that we consider a failure to prevent sufficient to render the idiot culpable.

Blogger Joshua_D August 15, 2012 2:24 PM  

Not all raccoons are like that!

Anonymous Stickwick August 15, 2012 2:25 PM  

Vox, do you think there are exceptions to this rule? As you know, I work in a male-dominated field, but I am also very male-friendly and believe that it is my duty to adapt to the environment, not the other way around. In fact, I very much prefer the male working environment, and my male colleagues seem to enjoy having me there. Or am I deluding myself, and my place of work would be better off without me?

Anonymous Feh August 15, 2012 2:28 PM  

"How about Phyllis Schlafly?"

Hey, less than 10 posts before some white knight shouts "NAWALT!"

Does the claim that there is one useful female conservative political activist, does this discredit the argument that women ruin everything? No. Women screw up conservatism just like everything else.

Put another way, if you add one delicious chocolate chip and one large steaming dog poop to your bowl of ice cream, is your sundae improved or ruined?

Blogger WATYF August 15, 2012 2:29 PM  

You gotta love this little disclaimer right above the comments section:

"Edited to add: We did not approve some abusive or nasty comments, but in the interests of showing the full range of responses without creating a hostile environment, we’ll replace them with summaries and publish them."

No, they don't stop at the petty tyranny of deleting anything that they don't agree with... they have to go that extra mile and replace your words with something else. :^D

WATYF

Anonymous Pablo August 15, 2012 2:30 PM  

"I'll see your card and raise you a finger".
Can't imagine she'd want to go all in after that.

Anonymous Josh August 15, 2012 2:34 PM  

Vox, do you think there are exceptions to this rule? As you know, I work in a male-dominated field, but I am also very male-friendly and believe that it is my duty to adapt to the environment, not the other way around. In fact, I very much prefer the male working environment, and my male colleagues seem to enjoy having me there. Or am I deluding myself, and my place of work would be better off without me?

Snowflake.

Anonymous VD August 15, 2012 2:36 PM  

Vox, do you think there are exceptions to this rule? As you know, I work in a male-dominated field, but I am also very male-friendly and believe that it is my duty to adapt to the environment, not the other way around.

It's hard to say. On the one hand, there are always exceptions. On the other, even if you don't intend to disrupt the previous behavioral patterns, you can't know if you are causing them to self-police. I wouldn't worry about it, as a general rule, men are quite capable of differentiating between disruptive and non-disruptive women.

As with minorities, it's usually a case of the numbers getting past the critical point before the problems erupt. DEFCON has had women there since the beginning and women have played computer games since the beginning, it's only when critical mass is reached that we start hearing all the whining. In your field, I think they'd have to dumb it down considerably before that will become an issue.

Of course, with the application of Title IX to science, they're working on it....

Anonymous VD August 15, 2012 2:37 PM  

Women screw up conservatism just like everything else.

What? You can't mean that! What about Ann Coulter? What about Michele Bachmann? WHAT ABOUT MICHELLE MALKIN?

Blogger Joe A. August 15, 2012 2:39 PM  

Would a male ever think of bringing up a laundry list of unrelated crap like that to focus on if he was at a convention dominated by women? I rather doubt he'd think of irrelevantly pointing out all of the awesome and amazing men present either.


OT: Surprise! Gary North has a Mises daily debunking deflationists now. It's like he's the opposite of Vox in every way... mentally and physically.

Anonymous robh August 15, 2012 2:42 PM  

Lmao

Anonymous Stickwick August 15, 2012 2:45 PM  

As with minorities, it's usually a case of the numbers getting past the critical point before the problems erupt.

I figured that was the case. There has always been a tiny minority of women in the hard sciences, but for the most part they didn't seem to upset things too much. If my field ever gets to that critical point, I'm quitting.

Of course, with the application of Title IX to science, they're working on it....

ARGHHHH!!!! I have to hope that even the mushiest liberal mushpie male scientist realizes on a level he has hitherto not allowed himself to acknowledge that this will mean the utter destruction of science in this country.

Blogger The Deuce August 15, 2012 3:05 PM  

"This conference is for everybody and everybody visiting this conference should feel comfortable, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, or religion."

vs

"These guys can rationalize until they’re blue in the face but IT IS NEVER OKAY TO GIVE A LADY THE HEEBIE JEEBIES!"

Soooo... what if your sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race or religion GIVES A LADY THE HEEBIE JEEBIES and she responds in a way that makes you feel uncomfortable? Paradox.

Blogger Giraffe August 15, 2012 3:06 PM  

I figured that was the case. There has always been a tiny minority of women in the hard sciences, but for the most part they didn't seem to upset things too much. If my field ever gets to that critical point, I'm quitting.

I was just going to say that it is a point of pride for some women to hang with the men, on the men's terms.

Blogger Professor Hale August 15, 2012 3:10 PM  

I don't believe women ruin everything. Heterosexuality sucks without them.

Anonymous kh123 August 15, 2012 3:13 PM  

"Paradox."

Nay; hamster wheel.

Blogger Spacebunny August 15, 2012 3:13 PM  

Soooo... what if your sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race or religion GIVES A LADY THE HEEBIE JEEBIES and she responds in a way that makes you feel uncomfortable? Paradox.

Well, feminists are too self-centered and yet, conversely not self aware enough to recognize this paradox.....or any other ;-)

Anonymous Anonymous August 15, 2012 3:25 PM  

In support of the above thread, just two words:

Episcopal Church

Anonymous fnn August 15, 2012 3:27 PM  

It's true, women would not be able to wreak the havoc that they do if men did not permit them to wreak it. On the other hand, even if ultimate responsibility rests with the individual who left open the front door and permitted the raccoon to ravage the refrigerator, that doesn't change the fact that the raccoon ravaged the refrigerator.

Women will always degrade and destroy male institutions. They don't mean to do so, but they can't help it. It's simply what results from their differing priorities and preferences. That is why men have a responsibility to prevent women from doing it.


Ha, ha. Replace "women" with YKW. Not the exact same thing-but pretty close.

Anonymous Stickwick August 15, 2012 3:30 PM  

Well, feminists are too self-centered and yet, conversely not self aware enough to recognize this paradox.....or any other ;-)

Or the hypocrisy. What if something a woman does gives a man the heebie jeebies? It doesn't seem to cross their minds that true equality means men have the right to feel comfortable in their work environment, too. Or maybe it does cross their minds, but they just insist that while that may be true, any man who is uncomfortable because of something a woman does must have "issues."

Anonymous mark August 15, 2012 3:40 PM  

Reminds me of the Simpsons.

Bart: Why do women have to ruin everything?
Homer: Oh Bart. Today you say that out loud but tomorrow you'll just think it.

Anonymous cheddarman August 15, 2012 3:40 PM  

All this conflicts with my Christian sensibilities, Why not combine DEFCON with some aspect of porn, and then say the conference is all about empowering women?

That would at least keep the feminist harpies away.

Sincerely

Cheddarman

Anonymous Feh August 15, 2012 3:41 PM  

"I don't believe women ruin everything. Heterosexuality sucks without them."

Oh I dunno women have done a pretty good job of ruining dating and marriage in the past few decades. That's why so many guys - like a lot of the hacker geeks! - have retreated into asexuality.

Blogger James Higham August 15, 2012 3:45 PM  

Yes. Absolutely. The conference should do everything it legally can to dissuade "amazing women" from attending. Because what this foolish woman, in her obvious ignorance of cause-and-effect, is asserting that the absolute highest priority of the conference should be that women feel comfortable.

Save us from them please.

Anonymous FP August 15, 2012 3:53 PM  

I hereby award this thread a red card for a Creeper Move!


Creeper Move... misogynists aren't born, they're made.

Anonymous Redjack August 15, 2012 3:54 PM  

Stickwick

You are having an effect on the men you work with. In todays world, they will be very careful what they say to you, about you, or around you. They have to or run the risk of getting sued. They may be more comfortable around you than most women, but they will self regulate.

If you are the only one, or one of a few, it may not be to bad. But I am very confident your working there has changed what your male coworkers do.

Funny thing is I once worked in a lab being the only guy. As time went on, I notice the women were more vulgar than the men, but in different ways. I never want to hear another converstion about menstral cycles again.

Blogger Crude August 15, 2012 4:14 PM  

Stickwick,

For the record, you've long been one of my favorite people to read the comments of here - always with a well-written, interesting physics perspective.

Personally, I don't doubt there are women who are entirely OK to deal with, just as I don't doubt there are men who are jackasses. I don't know anything about how you conduct yourself RL, but if it's anything like how you conduct yourself here, you're fine.

That said, I agree that nowadays, just the presence of a woman, no matter how she behaves, can put various guys on edge. Of course, if it's a woman who's really causing no problems, then they need to learn to stop flinching just because a harpy screamed at them once.

Anonymous Jimmy August 15, 2012 4:32 PM  

I'm not aware of any exclusively male institutions. Thus, I have not experienced the pinnacle of excellence. However, where I work, it is largely male dominated although there are many women who work there at all positions and the company tries very hard at diversity so it is unlikely that it will gravitate towards males with attrition. I do happen to notice that as women leave from positions for various reasons, a younger version appears.

It is funny how at DEFCON women are making a stink about feeling comfortable when I have never felt comfortable at technical conferences and avoid them if I can. They are so above my technical level that they are not useful for my daily tasks. Nonetheless, I have attended a few for no reason than my company is willing to pay me to attend. It does end up being a social club. Many don't bother keeping up with the seminars and presentations. Many just collect the materials and bring them back as proof of being awake.

Anonymous and women make sure they do August 15, 2012 4:43 PM  

"misogynists aren't born, they're made. "

'tis a social construct!

Anonymous Stilicho August 15, 2012 4:43 PM  

Not all raccoons are like that!

But all pigs in the azaleas are

Blogger tz August 15, 2012 4:56 PM  

Ann Coulter is at least honest, she turns Ron Paul off because he makes too much sense and if she continued listening she would convert.

I read the article. Some of the brutish behavior is actually criminal so I would tell the bitch to call the cops and file a complaint or shut up (which I would do if a Gay hacker did such things to me - or at least if I didn't have my usual set of tools so couldn't vent his spleen). Modest dress would discourage most brutish behavior. Somehow I don't have sympathy for a woman wearing an electro-luminescent Tron bikini flashing "Hi, I'm a Slut" at alpha rhythm frequency that would give no resistance to a crotch grabber (v.s. a full length skirt and a petticoat or two, much less crinolines - Southern Belle, cellular edition).

It was some mob movie where one of the men said women are either Madonnas (as in Virgin Mary, on this solemnity of the Assumption) or Whores. In the 1950s, if you don't think too deeply about the thought process of marrying a good provider, and assume children were part of the deal, the majority were Madonnas. Today they are whores except the payment is indirect.

In some ancient commentary I pointed out Rape Shield laws for me work backwards. We have feminism that tells women to be promiscuous, being as bad or worse than men by default, or the statistically most probable view, v.s. the old fashioned ideas on virginity or at least chastity. OK, if statistically I have to assume you are a slut, and they can't poke into your past history to prove you aren't...

Chaste women civilize and improve everything calling men to side with their spirit instead of the flesh. Feminists ruin everything for both sexes.

Blogger Pope Cleophus I August 15, 2012 5:06 PM  

She must have gotten tired of working for the man and decide to become a professional busybody.


Already an activist for women in open source, she joined Mary Gardiner and members of the Geek Feminism blog to develop anti-harassment policies for conferences[3][4] after Noirin Shirley was sexually assaulted at ApacheCon 2010.[3] Aurora quit her job as a Linux kernel developer at Red Hat and, with Gardiner, founded the Ada Initiative in February of 2011.[5] The organization is named after Ada Lovelace, who worked with Charles Babbage and is considered to be the world's first computer programmer.



Valerie Aurora

Anonymous Stickwick August 15, 2012 5:10 PM  

Thanks, Crude. I'm very easy-going at work. The only difference between here and there is that I tend to be a lot quieter and a lot less opinionated at work.

It's really unfortunate that women have made the workplace such a minefield for men. I don't much like working with women, either, so I sympathize. Just last week I got a woman irked at me for simply pointing out an obvious error in something she said. It wasn't even done in a mean or competitive way. But she took it very personally, and now she won't talk to me. That almost never happens with men. Y'all are way more fun to work with.

Blogger Lovekraft August 15, 2012 5:11 PM  

Speech codes in the workplace will come around to affect everyone, even the professional victims, because they will either realize on their own that offensive is offensive, or they will self-destruct under their own hubris.

Once some language is banned as offensive, then all language is banned. The trick is to stay out of their way as they feebly try to find a reason to justify their antics.

The conference in question should follow this pattern: eventually enough harpies will push out the true thinkers, become stale, which will lead to a new branch emerging.

What the mens movement is trying to do is set out a set of clear principles to adopt for the next wave.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 August 15, 2012 5:30 PM  

It's times like these that I'm glad I work from home and barely have to show up to the office. I can make all the sexist comments I want to my wife.

Anonymous Idle Spectator, Hero Feminist August 15, 2012 5:36 PM  

I don't think this is so bad. Computers and hacker culture definitely need it. It's like, HEL-LO? Amazing woman's touch! And why are they dressed like that? The t-shirts are so angry. Who is this Metallica thing?

Try altering the outer shell of the computer when participating at DEFCON. Perhaps a pink, or maybe mauve. Then someone is fabulous. I find that adding post-it notes or stickers on the edge of the monitor with affirmations really helps me when I hack.

Then we just have to work on the programming languages. So cold, and unfeeling, even when the female hacker is trying really hard.
"Error. Your program did not compile correctly."

"WORK DAMNIT WORK! If you were a real computer you would work!"
"My computer can act like such a bitch sometimes!"
"Stop being afraid of my strong l33t programming skillz!"
"My compiler is undermining me on purpose. This is a hostile work environment."

Perhaps a programming HR can be developed at DEFCON for compiling complaints. Patriarchy ruins everything.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 August 15, 2012 5:41 PM  

The fact that feminists have yet to hit the nerd/hacker circuit is probably the reason why nerds are so attractive to women these days.

Anonymous Ruthie "Pig-Face" Draper August 15, 2012 5:41 PM  

Including blogs...

Anonymous Kriston August 15, 2012 6:00 PM  

Stickwick August 15, 2012 2:45 PM

Of course, with the application of Title IX to science, they're working on it....

ARGHHHH!!!! I have to hope that even the mushiest liberal mushpie male scientist realizes on a level he has hitherto not allowed himself to acknowledge that this will mean the utter destruction of science in this country.


It has already started. Those "scientists" already support CAGW and there is not much science to support that position. Once you replace science with politics all things are possible.

Anonymous Kriston August 15, 2012 6:08 PM  

And once women get into those management positions it get even worse. My former job was writing simulators for fighter jets. I inherited a mess of around 1 million lines. When finished it was down to 600,000 and had over 3 times the capability.

I offered it to the new group that I was transferred into. The women in charge turned it down due to "risk". They still brag about their 9.7 million lines of code that runs like a dead pig.

The manager left for another job. They appointed another woman to her position. Same issue, would not take a risk, even when the reward was so great.

Anonymous Stickwick August 15, 2012 6:17 PM  

The women in charge turned it down due to "risk".

This is arguably the greatest difference between how men and women operate. Men are much less averse to risk, and it's why 99.9% of the great innovators are men.

Anonymous Retrenched August 15, 2012 6:21 PM  

Once an organization reaches this point - once they decide to make ensuring female comfort their main priority - there is literally no limit to the number and types of male behaviors that can potentially be declared "criminal" by the powers that be.

Anonymous Zartan August 15, 2012 6:21 PM  

I attended DEF CON this year. First, note that the article was about a previous DEF CON with lots of hearsay.

At this years event KC had made up YELLOW/RED cards

They were a Joke. A small metric ASSTON were made from the picture I saw on twitter - never saw one given out that wasn't a joke.

Not to say "they bring it on themselves" but those that show up wearing a very small bikini w/ a loose fitting white T and 4" heels well... not sure all these women don't want the attention.
Or the one dancing on the bus pole "I used to do this routine when I stripped" (She was a Goon too!)

More fail ideas:
A wall of pervs - this one is likely to bring the lawyers

It's VEGAS for crying out loud - not like you have to look around to find other (much more attractive) pretties than the ones that show up to DEF CON with "the chip".

Anonymous Lysander Spooner August 15, 2012 6:25 PM  

The Femdomapocolypse is upon us, created and delivered by the wimminz, hooorah !!

Anonymous Zartan August 15, 2012 6:29 PM  

For those that want to know, DEF CON is dead.
They allow cameras and video in the conference now.
Most of the talks are the same ones given at Black Hat earlier in the week, and the same ones that were given at B-Sides Vegas, and will be the same ones given at a dozen other conferences.
The cult of "celebrating diversity" is in full flower.
There will be no more Ninja parties - vendors are dropping major $$$ on events.

Anonymous Zartan August 15, 2012 6:31 PM  

Try altering the outer shell of the computer when participating at DEFCON. Perhaps a pink, or maybe mauve. Then someone is fabulous. -Idle Spectator, Hero Feminist

...sounds like someone went to the queercon event at DEF CON

Anonymous Lysander Spooner August 15, 2012 6:35 PM  

Fempocalypse!!



http://www.youtube.com/embed/w__PJ8ymliw

Anonymous George August 15, 2012 8:41 PM  

" That's not a hacker conference policy, that's one establishing a comfort conference. The priority defines the purpose."

And with this bit of "logic" and "reasoning" we understand why VD's desire for recognition among the smarter crowd will never be realized.

Anonymous Proffet August 15, 2012 8:52 PM  

Oh yes, how Marie Curie ruined everything!

Anonymous harry12 August 15, 2012 9:04 PM  

Proffet August 15, 2012 8:52 PM
Oh yes, how Marie Curie ruined everything!


She didn't do much for Nagasaki. Altho I understand it is now better looking than Detroit.

Blogger Crude August 15, 2012 9:22 PM  

Speaking of attempting to ruin things...

LGBT volunteer shoots guard at Family Research Council office.

Anonymous Tom O August 15, 2012 9:35 PM  

Isn't gay sex the logical conclusion of sexism?

(•) Men and women are intellectually unequal
(•) A relationship between two equals is deeper than otherwise.
(∴) A relationship between two men is deeper than that of a man and a woman.

If you disagree with the former syllogism because it is God's design for a man and a woman to be together, then you admit that it is God's design for two distinct unequals to be together. But let's suppose, to the contrary, that God blessed both male-female and male-male relationships, and gave no inclination toward one or the other. Which one would you rather choose, and why?

"Homosexuality, is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." ~ Plato

Anonymous MendoScot August 15, 2012 9:39 PM  

My mother entered university at 16, had her MD at 21, and was FRCSE at 25. She did her residency under Britain's top GI surgeon of the time, and then went off to India to run a teaching hospital and finally a small clinic in the tea growing area of the Himalayan foothills, for which she was awarded the MBE, all before I was born.

I don't remember what incident caused me to ask her about discrimination against women, but I was in my young teens and we were living back in Britain. She said, "I was the only woman in a class of 100. I loved it. I never experienced any discrimination. In my field, the only women who complained about discrimination were incompetent."

The ones who are complaining of sexual harassment in that article seem to be suffering under a delusion regarding the balance between their competence and attractiveness. They are brilliant women who would improve DEFCON and none, obviously, were trying to use sexuality to attract attention.

It's not just women, it's that the women who are most effective at using the tactic are predominantly mediocre. They would be the death of DEFCON, if it has not already died.

Anonymous tiredofitall August 15, 2012 9:43 PM  

"That's not a hacker conference policy, that's one establishing a comfort conference. The priority defines the purpose."

And with this bit of "logic" and "reasoning" we understand why VD's desire for recognition among the smarter crowd will never be realized. - George

Yeah, that's a brilliant tactic. Walk into the lion's den and poke it in the eye with your half-inch erection. That'll work out great for you, keep up the good work.

Anonymous MendoScot August 15, 2012 9:50 PM  

Crude August 15, 2012 9:22 PM

Speaking of attempting to ruin things...

LGBT volunteer shoots guard at Family Research Council office.


Clear evidence that all LGBT volunteers should be required to take a Federal arms handling course, so they don't just wing 'em.

I'm curious as to the race of the security guard.

Anonymous The other skeptic August 15, 2012 10:02 PM  

You sexist racist assholes just don't recognize how brilliant I am so I am going to whine about sexism and harassment and anything else until you recognize my potential!

(Meanwhile, lots of men just get on with it and build shit.)

Anonymous MendoScot August 15, 2012 10:03 PM  

(•) Men and women are intellectually unequal

Correct, but the intergroup difference is small compared to the intragroup variance.

(•) A relationship between two equals is deeper than otherwise.

Naked assertion and contrary to what many would say is the foundation of a during relationship.

(∴) A relationship between two men is deeper than that of a man and a woman.

Non sequitur. You have not shown that intellectual capacity is the definitive difference between genders.

Anonymous The other skeptic August 15, 2012 10:16 PM  


"(•) Men and women are intellectually unequal"

Correct, but the intergroup difference is small compared to the intragroup variance.


Yes, and the fact that the male variance is larger than the female variance. I have seen it suggested that the white male IQ variance is around 16 points while the female variance is around 12.

This means that at the margins there are orders of magnitude more men than women.

Note, that means both stupid men, which strangely, most women shed nary a tear for, and intelligent men. Women mostly complain that it's unfair that brilliant men outnumber the number of brilliant women by orders of magnitude and quietly forget the number of dumb-asses out there.

Anonymous Salt August 15, 2012 10:34 PM  

OT-

Mitt Romney and The Onion.

enjoy

Anonymous Salt August 15, 2012 10:35 PM  

oops... here's the link

Anonymous Tom O August 15, 2012 10:48 PM  

Correct, but the intergroup difference is small compared to the intragroup variance.

Vox believes that the difference between men and women is like the difference between adults and children. If what you say is what Vox and his Ilk were believing, I wouldn't seek a debate, or even care for that matter.

Non sequitur. You have not shown that intellectual capacity is the definitive difference between genders.

I don't see how any other difference is relevant.

When we are in a relationship with someone, we share thoughts and feelings with that person. And from where do our thoughts and feelings, if not the intellect? This is also why it is possible for so many relationships to originate over the Internet, even if both people never see another, since communicating thoughts and feelings requires only words. This evidence should be strong enough to convince one that intellectual differences are the only ones that are relevant.

Naked assertion and contrary to what many would say is the foundation of a during relationship.

Let's assume that God created both woman and woman--. Woman is very pleasurable with respect to sex, and she is your intellectual equal. Woman-- is equally pleasurable with respect to sex, but her intellectual capacity ends with amazing sex. She is incapable of forming speech or any level of abstract thought. Which one would you choose and why?

Anonymous The other skeptic August 15, 2012 11:06 PM  


while males are more tuned for slotting into large co-operative groups.


Hmmm, large, co-operative, all-male groups. We don't need no stinking females in our army!

Anonymous MendoScot August 15, 2012 11:26 PM  

Vox believes that the difference between men and women is like the difference between adults and children.

Even if you don't agree that "woman" is a legal form of child in the United States...[Vox]

The argument is a legal one, not an intellectual one.

I don't see how any other difference is relevant.

No offence, but have you actually had a relationship with a woman? A deep one, I mean, when you grind your minds together.

Which one would you choose and why?

In the case you describe, the former, for the obvious reason. There are, however, several ways in which the latter could be the better choice. You have posited nothing of the former's personality, morality, sanity or STDs. If sex is held constant, there are always other women available to me according to my criteria for what I seek in a mate.

Now a question for you; do you think that women seek relationships on the basis of intellectual equality or on some other basis? If some other, which?

Anonymous Luke August 15, 2012 11:42 PM  

Vaguely related, especially in terms of 1) future trends of more of this, and 2) that THIS WAS NOT PUNISHED IN ANY WAY:

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/08/15/great_news_new_black_panther_party_members_plan_to_put_their_boots_on_the_necks_of_republicans

"Great News: New Black Panther Party Members Plan to Put Their Boots on the Necks of Republicans

Going to the Republican National Convention in Tampa at the end of August? If so, watch out for New Black Panthers who plan to put their boots on your neck.

"We are under siege in Tampa because of this Republican National Convention."

"The Republicans hate black people."

"You better believe I'm going to put my God damned boot on their motherf****** necks!"


If that woman's voice, Michelle Williams, sounds familiar, it's because it is familiar. Williams called for a Red Sea of violence and bloodshed back in April.

They also have plans to put King Samir Shabazz, the man who was caught on video intimidating voters outside of a Philadelphia polling station in 2008, in charge of a new militia dedicated to killing white babies and skinning white people.

"If you want to be free you're going to have to get out here and kill some of these God damn peckerwoods (SP.) You're going to have to kill some of these babies just born three seconds ago. You're going to have to go into the God damn nursery and just throw a damn bomb in the nursery and kill everything white in sight."

"I want nothing more than to come home with a cracker's head in my book bag."
"

Anonymous Tom O August 15, 2012 11:58 PM  

The argument is a legal one, not an intellectual one.

Granted, but laws are orthogonal to reality. So in order for him to say what he said, there must be something in reality that makes women and children similarly awful in decision-making, so that those two can be legally classified as distinct from adult.

No offence, but have you actually had a relationship with a woman? A deep one, I mean, when you grind your minds together.

...no.

Now a question for you; do you think that women seek relationships on the basis of intellectual equality or on some other basis? If some other, which?

I think that the vast majority of women (and men) seek relationships because we desire physical, intellectual, and spiritual companionship. Humans, like God, comprise a trinity of body, soul, and spirit, so it is only natural that we seek companionship which complements our physical, intellectual, and spiritual basis. It is obvious how women physically complement men, and spiritually, women are equal to men, since there is no distinction of gender in the spirit. (Galatians 3:28, Joel 2:29)

I do not know how a woman can satisfy one's mind, unless she can reason with him. If the intellectual gap between women and men is very large, then companionship between one and the other is as futile as same-sex companionship.

Anonymous scoobius dubious August 16, 2012 12:09 AM  

Interesting statistical blip-aberration (and probably nothing more) but in my experience, certain types of lesbians are able to interact creatively and usefully with the manosphere, without ruining things. Not all lesbians are the stereotypical thought-police enforcers one tells jokes about; some have that admirable, even-handed, level-headed free-spoken mentality that one thinks of as a masculine quality. Not always, but I've come across it enough times to come to think of it as a regularly-recurring sub-type. There's something interesting (and I daresay refreshing) about coming across the occasional woman (nearly always lesbian) who has the coolness and frankness of the genuine masculine demeanor. It makes one appreciate life's endless variety.

Anonymous Anonymous August 16, 2012 12:35 AM  

Men have a greater degree of brain-hemisphere specialization than do women. This is the definitive difference between male and female intellects, and their interaction with the world. There is a difference in the typing of thought between the two.

There probably are other physical differences between the brains of the two that reflect maleness-femaleness in other, general, ways.

IQ may or may not reflect this, and frankly tests created by hippies are bound to mindless drivel at the core - but men simply think better. Or stated more properly: find it easier to think well - over time, the effects add up.
I do not think that IQ-test variance will matter as much as this does.

Or one should rather say, men have the potential to think better: when it comes to the mindless annihilation of all things, nothing, but nothing, outperforms a hippie. If anything, male hippies are more insanely irrational than female hippies.
While there most certainly is a difference between men and women when it comes to fucking up, the fact that a great portion of the general population is naturally MUCH more fucked up, should not be ignored.

-CB

Anonymous The other skeptic August 16, 2012 12:39 AM  


"If it took the Germans less than four years to rid themselves of 6 million Jews, many of whom spoke German and were fully integrated into German society


You seem to be jumping all over the place.

Are you aware that the Jews have been shopping that claim of 6M Jews exterminated since before WW1?

Anonymous Stephen J. August 16, 2012 1:25 AM  

"This is arguably the greatest difference between how men and women operate. Men are much less averse to risk, and it's why 99.9% of the great innovators are men."

Women also tend, I've noticed, to be much more hypersensitive to potential danger. As an example, almost all feminism-motivated laws and cultural mores concerning sexual harassment, assault and rape are predicated on the assumption that the line between what might be called "creepishness" (non-violent, non-injurious but intimidating harassment, which simply requires sustained personal effort to shut down, ignore or avoid) and violent, injurious, dangerous assault (anything from physical restraint leading up to full-on rape, beyond the ability of the woman to physically defend herself) is much shorter and more direct than the statistics bear out -- that the man who makes inappropriate comments or touches today is the same man who'll grab you in a stairwell and rape you tomorrow, and that the former is for all intents and purposes an infallible predictor of the latter.

This is an understandable perspective given women's general disadvantage in our sexually dimorphic species as the physically less powerful sex, and the true and real horror of rape; it is not rational, but it is not *supposed* to be rational -- it's a self-defense reflex designed to err on the side of paranoia: better a thousand overreactions to a danger not there than one failure to react when it is. Its compatibility with basic principles of justice, however, is always problematic, because it is a fundamental contradiction of the innocent-until-proven-guilty thesis that applies in consideration of any other crime. Combine this natural urge to overreact against potential threats with the Alinskyite tactic of taking anything less than perfection as an excuse for total moral rejection and condemnation, and much of the mindset driving feminism is explained, I think.

Anonymous Idle Spectator, Hero Feminist August 16, 2012 1:34 AM  

...sounds like someone went to the queercon event at DEF CON

Gay, gay, it's okay. <3 <3

I'm just trying to help, you know? Too much testosterone in the DEFCON event is poisoning it. It needs some sprucing up, like when you accessorize with a non-knockoff Louis Vuitton handbag.

If you want to cry when the program does not work, it's alright.

Anonymous Tom O August 16, 2012 1:37 AM  

Are you aware that the Jews have been shopping that claim of 6M Jews exterminated since before WW1?

Honestly, given the propaganda I've been fed (like that the Irish were considered to be a distinct race from white people, a blatant lie), I wouldn't be surprised.

Anonymous Idle Spectator, Tough Manly Man August 16, 2012 1:38 AM  

//sips bourbon

//shoots nun with a BB gun

Yeah, that's right.

Anonymous MendoScot August 16, 2012 1:44 AM  

I do not know how a woman can satisfy one's mind, unless she can reason with him. If the intellectual gap between women and men is very large, then companionship between one and the other is as futile as same-sex companionship.

A husband and wife are meant to satisfy each other sexually to the exclusion of others.* Neither intellectual nor spiritual satisfaction is so constrained. Don't conflate faithfulness with exclusivity - they are two faces of the same coin.

*[Ilk] No, I don't want to rehash the monogamy argument. And yes, I know about mothers and suckling babes.

Anonymous dikes on bikes August 16, 2012 2:04 AM  

Very true. I've sold many motorcycles to the type.

Anonymous Idle Spectator, Hero Feminist August 16, 2012 3:15 AM  

Very true. I've sold many motorcycles to the type.

I don't understand why it's always Dikes on Bikes. That's so agressive. Motorocycles are a mechanical symbol of cold masculine logic. Very patriarchical.

It should be Dikes on a Hike as they see the great outdoors. Or Dikes Taking Care of Their Tike for the alternative family structure of two mommies. Much more romantic.

Blogger Vox August 16, 2012 5:45 AM  

Vox believes that the difference between men and women is like the difference between adults and children.

No, he doesn't. The statement about women being legal children is a simple statement of fact which in itself says nothing about my opinion of female capabilities. It is an observation which is easily confirmed and has absolutely nothing more to do with me or my beliefs than if I were to observe that Mount Everest is higher than the equator.

Granted, but laws are orthogonal to reality. So in order for him to say what he said, there must be something in reality that makes women and children similarly awful in decision-making, so that those two can be legally classified as distinct from adult.

This is false and illogical. For me to say what I said, it merely needs to be observed that the law holds women to be responsible for their actions in a manner more similar to the way it holds children responsible for their actions than it does men.

I do not know how a woman can satisfy one's mind, unless she can reason with him. If the intellectual gap between women and men is very large, then companionship between one and the other is as futile as same-sex companionship.

Another logical error. Intersexual companionship is not primarily concerned with satisfying one's mind, as there are large differences between intellectual companionship, sexual companionship, and other forms of companionship. Companionship is seldom intellectual; I valued my relationship with my deceased Viszla far more than I valued most of my relationships with humans.

This should be obvious. Love is not reason.

Anonymous BabelFish August 16, 2012 6:39 AM  

My own stories from DEFCON seem tame compared to what these women went through, but I couldn’t take the constant barrage of sexual insults and walked out halfway through DEFCON 16, swearing not to return if I was going to be harassed like that again

TRANSLATION:

I'm fairly unnattractive compared to other women that turn up to these things and am simply trying to co-opt the attention. I am being unintentionally honest by qualifying the nature of the comments as "insults" instead of "propositions".

Anonymous A.Handle August 16, 2012 7:04 AM  

And yet the idiots in bizness ie... owners and managers keep hiring them hand over fist.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza August 16, 2012 8:03 AM  

Women ruin more than everything - what are they doing at defcon anyways?

Anonymous The other skeptic August 16, 2012 9:35 AM  


And yet the idiots in bizness ie... owners and managers keep hiring them hand over fist.


Because of the EEOC that is a cost of doing business.

Anonymous The other skeptic August 16, 2012 10:18 AM  

Scalzi on how not to be a creep or something

Anonymous VD August 16, 2012 11:46 AM  

I have never had a problem being a creep. I don't want to touch anyone else and I damn sure don't want them touching me. It's funny to see how handsy girls react when they touch your arm and you give them the "get that hand off me before I rip it off" look.

Anonymous Tom O August 16, 2012 12:36 PM  

... I recant whatever I was pontificating.

Anonymous Stickwick August 16, 2012 2:20 PM  

Women also tend, I've noticed, to be much more hypersensitive to potential danger. As an example, almost all feminism-motivated laws and cultural mores concerning sexual harassment, assault and rape are predicated on the assumption that the line between what might be called "creepishness" ... and violent, injurious, dangerous assault ... is much shorter and more direct than the statistics bear out -- that the man who makes inappropriate comments or touches today is the same man who'll grab you in a stairwell and rape you tomorrow, and that the former is for all intents and purposes an infallible predictor of the latter.

Note that this applies mostly to white, Western women, and especially American women. Here's the thing. As a reasonably well-adjusted and mature woman, I take the normal precautions against putting myself in obviously dangerous situations, but other than that I don't put a lot of thought into the possibility of rape. With some women, however, the possibility of rape is a borderline obsession. Take, for instance, feminist author Marilyn French's assertion that "all men are rapists and that's all they are." While she's perhaps more extreme than your garden-variety feminist at work obsessing about your occasional glance in her direction, it's all on the same spectrum. You are correct in characterizing this sort of thing as an irrational reflex, but it's actually far beyond the normal sort of female irrationality and squarely in neurosis territory.

This is an understandable perspective given women's general disadvantage in our sexually dimorphic species as the physically less powerful sex, and the true and real horror of rape ...

Believe it or not, this neurosis does not arise from our relative physical weakness. Ironically, this obsessive fear arises from the fact that we're the most pampered, protected, and entitled people in existence. This is based on the rule that the more easily someone acquires something, the more obsessed they become with losing it. That's why it's no surprise that feminism has the biggest foothold with a spoiled group rather than a truly downtrodden group. This rule is part of a larger truth: the not-well-understood but easily observable irony of human existence is that things almost always produce their opposite. A woman who is used to living a hard-scrabble sort of existence with minimal protections doesn't tend to obsess about personal safety. However, a woman who is used to an easy existence with unprecedented levels of personal safety is likely to become obsessed with not being safe. All you have to do is look at the statistics for female mental health during times of war, with husbands off fighting and the women left to run and protect the home. Incidence of neurosis and psychosis are significantly lower during such times. Ironically, it is our relative peace and prosperity that have created the fertile ground in which the weeds of feminism have been allowed to overgrow.

Feminism-motivated laws are based on neurosis, not on an understandable fear of something horrible. The reason these laws seem crazy to more well-adjusted people, is that they literally are crazy. This is why men should not cater to such fears, and should resist such laws and policies.

Anonymous A.Handle August 16, 2012 3:30 PM  

"Because of the EEOC that is a cost of doing business."


Is the EEOC really on the case of businesses that don't have very many women working there? The business could just put a few
women as secretaries or something for window dressing. They seem to be taking extra special efforts to comply with the EEOC if that really is the reason.

Anonymous Stephen J. August 16, 2012 3:59 PM  

"Feminism-motivated laws are based on neurosis, not on an understandable fear of something horrible."

What shifts in attitude, custom or legal structure would you recommend to get things back towards a reasonable level of genuine threat prevention?

If this makes me a White-Knighter, so be it (I should mention that as a married man myself I have no stake in trying to win any other woman's affection for this), but I do think some of the male behaviour described at DEFCON is rude beyond the bounds of simply "not indulging fragile egos", and would like to see it decreased.

Anonymous tiredofitall August 16, 2012 8:59 PM  

Yeah, don't even bother trying to post on Scalzi's blog. Apparently if you're not gonna parrot back what he wants to hear you aren't gonna be allowed to participate.

Anonymous Stickwick August 16, 2012 10:00 PM  

What shifts in attitude, custom or legal structure would you recommend to get things back towards a reasonable level of genuine threat prevention?

The shift will happen on its own after everything inevitably collapses. Strong, faithful Christians just need to be ready to put civilization back together again.

Anonymous the first programmer August 16, 2012 10:52 PM  

"members of the Geek Feminism blog "

Quite an ingenious lot, they are quick to recognize male privilege.

If you were hacking since age 8, it means you were privileged.

Anonymous The other skeptic August 17, 2012 12:15 AM  


Is the EEOC really on the case of businesses that don't have very many women working there? The business could just put a few
women as secretaries or something for window dressing. They seem to be taking extra special efforts to comply with the EEOC if that really is the reason.


EEOC can audit any public company with more than 50 employees, and any woman with a grudge can report a company to EEOC.

Think of it as insurance.

Blogger Vox August 17, 2012 3:15 AM  

Apparently if you're not gonna parrot back what he wants to hear you aren't gonna be allowed to participate.

Perhaps not on his blog. But we can certainly continue the conversation here.

Blogger Justthisguy August 17, 2012 4:02 PM  

Yeah, I am very disappointed in re Mr. Scalzi. For instance, he complains about White Male Privilege and has ensconced himself in a Census District which is 98.something% White.

Anonymous Anonymous March 14, 2013 2:03 PM  

You suck.

Blogger hajjandumrah March 25, 2013 5:31 AM  

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first
comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog.
I will keep visiting this blog very often.
flights to Umrah
cheap flight to jeddah
flights to jeddah
umrah jeddah flights
umrah flights from London
cheap flights to umrah

Blogger hajjandumrah April 11, 2013 8:58 AM  

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first
comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog.
I will keep visiting this blog very often.
flights to Umrah
cheap flight to jeddah
flights to jeddah
umrah jeddah flights
umrah flights from London
cheap flights to umrah

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts