Insane SJW examples of bullshit "microaggressions"

[Broxi]

The title of the article?

"Muslim model makes swimsuit issue history"

For christs sake just call it a dress. She wore a dress into the water. If you're wearing the same shit outside of the water as you do inside the water then it's not a swimsuit. I'm not saying I don't like it, I'm saying call it what it is. Make a wet dress issue and be done with it. Leave the swimsuit issue for those who wear swimsuits.

I have no problem flat out saying I don’t like it, I can’t stand when you’re at the beach and there’s 2-3 Muslim women paddling around in soaring heat dressed head to toe in black while their husbands and male relatives splash around cavorting with each other 20ft away from them in some budgie smuggler 80s swimming trunks.

No fucker is telling me those women wouldn’t be happier in a swimsuit lazing on the beach and I’m disgusted that here in the West we don’t criticise this behaviour a bit more openly and are now promoting it as empowering to women.

 

[Bratwurzt]

Oh they are so special aren't they.

 

[Nigelbro]

The title of the article?

"Muslim model makes swimsuit issue history"

For christs sake just call it a dress. She wore a dress into the water. If you're wearing the same shit outside of the water as you do inside the water then it's not a swimsuit. I'm not saying I don't like it, I'm saying call it what it is. Make a wet dress issue and be done with it. Leave the swimsuit issue for those who wear swimsuits.

Looks like a drowning suit

 

[Strike]

The title of the article?

"Muslim model makes swimsuit issue history"

For christs sake just call it a dress. She wore a dress into the water. If you're wearing the same shit outside of the water as you do inside the water then it's not a swimsuit. I'm not saying I don't like it, I'm saying call it what it is. Make a wet dress issue and be done with it. Leave the swimsuit issue for those who wear swimsuits.

More to the point, the entire purpose of covering up is so men DO NOT look at you. It's about women being "modest" so that men do not see them in a sexual manner and they do not draw attention to themselves. So being a fucking model, who is supposed to look beautiful is the antithesis to the entire point of modest dress, the hijab, burka and whatever.

 

[Strike]

Here's a classic from the BBC...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-48121840

Unis need to tackle the "attainment gap" in ethnicities, because white students are, on average, more likely to get a 1st or 2:1. Notice how they chuck all non white groups under the "BAME" headline? Apparently 81% of white students achieved this level, compared with 68% of BAME students...so obviously a problem with the Unis.

No link to the report, in case you wanted to actually study it yourself. And Unis have now got a target to eliminate the gap by 2024/25. I can't find the report anywhere, but I found this one from 2015/16

https://www.ecu.ac.uk/guidance-resources/student-recruitment-retention-attainment/student-attainment/degree-attainment-gaps/

So, students of Chinese origin were actually at 72.2% for the top two grades, compared with white students (in that year) being at 78.8%. Indian students were at 70.7%.

So not quite the gap that it looks when you just put every single group bar white people under the "BAME" heading. Also...this is interesting from the report...

"Notably, the BME degree attainment gap is narrower for those studying science, engineering and technology (SET) subjects than those studying non-SET subjects."

And then this..."Minority ethnic students comprise nearly 20% of the student population..."

So BAME students make up 20% of the Uni population, and yet in the UK they only account for around 14% of the population, so they are over represented in further education, and white people are under represented. Maybe, this means that a greater proportion of white people who are not academic, don't go to Uni...but take up vocations, and therefore a larger percentage of BAME students who are not really cut out for Uni do go there anyway, perhaps due to parental pressure or the belief that it is necessary.

That is one possible explanation off the top of my head as to how a gap could exist through nothing other than the fact that BAME students are over represented in numbers and whites the reverse.

In addition, if you're not very academic, what degree will you choose? Hmm...not STEM is it? Probably not English or Law, or History...it's going to be media studies or gender studies or something that seems more accessible and less cut and dry. So it's pretty telling that in STEM fields the gap is lower still...in fact, they don't even report it, why? Maybe in maths, we're seeing Chinese students ahead of white? Maybe in chemistry, Indian students are dead level with white...we don't know, as they refer to it, but don't give numbers.

There are more males of Uni age in the UK than females, and yet last year 98,000 more young women applied to Uni than men. Shock horror.

According to the data in this report from 2008, by the age of 19, of those in Higher Education....for white people it was 39% and for Ethnic minorities it was 60%.

https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/8717/1/DIUS-RR-08-14.pdf (page 23 of the report).

But you know....racist etc.

 

[NSFW]

Here's a classic from the BBC...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-48121840

Unis need to tackle the "attainment gap" in ethnicities, because white students are, on average, more likely to get a 1st or 2:1. Notice how they chuck all non white groups under the "BAME" headline? Apparently 81% of white students achieved this level, compared with 68% of BAME students...so obviously a problem with the Unis.

No link to the report, in case you wanted to actually study it yourself. And Unis have now got a target to eliminate the gap by 2024/25. I can't find the report anywhere, but I found this one from 2015/16

https://www.ecu.ac.uk/guidance-resources/student-recruitment-retention-attainment/student-attainment/degree-attainment-gaps/

So, students of Chinese origin were actually at 72.2% for the top two grades, compared with white students (in that year) being at 78.8%. Indian students were at 70.7%.

So not quite the gap that it looks when you just put every single group bar white people under the "BAME" heading. Also...this is interesting from the report...

"Notably, the BME degree attainment gap is narrower for those studying science, engineering and technology (SET) subjects than those studying non-SET subjects."

And then this..."Minority ethnic students comprise nearly 20% of the student population..."

So BAME students make up 20% of the Uni population, and yet in the UK they only account for around 14% of the population, so they are over represented in further education, and white people are under represented. Maybe, this means that a greater proportion of white people who are not academic, don't go to Uni...but take up vocations, and therefore a larger percentage of BAME students who are not really cut out for Uni do go there anyway, perhaps due to parental pressure or the belief that it is necessary.

That is one possible explanation off the top of my head as to how a gap could exist through nothing other than the fact that BAME students are over represented in numbers and whites the reverse.

In addition, if you're not very academic, what degree will you choose? Hmm...not STEM is it? Probably not English or Law, or History...it's going to be media studies or gender studies or something that seems more accessible and less cut and dry. So it's pretty telling that in STEM fields the gap is lower still...in fact, they don't even report it, why? Maybe in maths, we're seeing Chinese students ahead of white? Maybe in chemistry, Indian students are dead level with white...we don't know, as they refer to it, but don't give numbers.

There are more males of Uni age in the UK than females, and yet last year 98,000 more young women applied to Uni than men. Shock horror.

According to the data in this report from 2008, by the age of 19, of those in Higher Education....for white people it was 39% and for Ethnic minorities it was 60%.

https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/8717/1/DIUS-RR-08-14.pdf (page 23 of the report).

But you know....racist etc.

I read that about 5 mins before you posted it and thought wonder what @Strike would think of it. Thought better of posting it. Then pop back here and you done this.

I actually critiqued it as I read it in what I expected your response to be which was odd.

 

[Broxi]

Here's a classic from the BBC...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-48121840

Unis need to tackle the "attainment gap" in ethnicities, because white students are, on average, more likely to get a 1st or 2:1. Notice how they chuck all non white groups under the "BAME" headline? Apparently 81% of white students achieved this level, compared with 68% of BAME students...so obviously a problem with the Unis.

No link to the report, in case you wanted to actually study it yourself. And Unis have now got a target to eliminate the gap by 2024/25. I can't find the report anywhere, but I found this one from 2015/16

https://www.ecu.ac.uk/guidance-resources/student-recruitment-retention-attainment/student-attainment/degree-attainment-gaps/

So, students of Chinese origin were actually at 72.2% for the top two grades, compared with white students (in that year) being at 78.8%. Indian students were at 70.7%.

So not quite the gap that it looks when you just put every single group bar white people under the "BAME" heading. Also...this is interesting from the report...

"Notably, the BME degree attainment gap is narrower for those studying science, engineering and technology (SET) subjects than those studying non-SET subjects."

And then this..."Minority ethnic students comprise nearly 20% of the student population..."

So BAME students make up 20% of the Uni population, and yet in the UK they only account for around 14% of the population, so they are over represented in further education, and white people are under represented. Maybe, this means that a greater proportion of white people who are not academic, don't go to Uni...but take up vocations, and therefore a larger percentage of BAME students who are not really cut out for Uni do go there anyway, perhaps due to parental pressure or the belief that it is necessary.

That is one possible explanation off the top of my head as to how a gap could exist through nothing other than the fact that BAME students are over represented in numbers and whites the reverse.

In addition, if you're not very academic, what degree will you choose? Hmm...not STEM is it? Probably not English or Law, or History...it's going to be media studies or gender studies or something that seems more accessible and less cut and dry. So it's pretty telling that in STEM fields the gap is lower still...in fact, they don't even report it, why? Maybe in maths, we're seeing Chinese students ahead of white? Maybe in chemistry, Indian students are dead level with white...we don't know, as they refer to it, but don't give numbers.

There are more males of Uni age in the UK than females, and yet last year 98,000 more young women applied to Uni than men. Shock horror.

According to the data in this report from 2008, by the age of 19, of those in Higher Education....for white people it was 39% and for Ethnic minorities it was 60%.

https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/8717/1/DIUS-RR-08-14.pdf (page 23 of the report).

But you know....racist etc.

Another example of a "study" finding the result it wanted to find rather than honestly trying to represent the reality.

It would actually be really interesting to see a study like this broken down in a meaningful way, by race and gender ... like what is the attainment gap between Chinese males and females in STEM studies?

What is the attainment rate between white males and females or white males and black males, etc etc ... you might even find something meaningful out of that data.

But I wonder just what methods they expect Unis to apply in order to remove this "attainment gap", I saw something recently where they were suggesting punishment for Universities that failed black students, I'm sure that won't be a motivator for a completely unexpected negative outcome.

 

[Strike]

Another example of a "study" finding the result it wanted to find rather than honestly trying to represent the reality.

It would actually be really interesting to see a study like this broken down in a meaningful way, by race and gender ... like what is the attainment gap between Chinese males and females in STEM studies?

What is the attainment rate between white males and females or white males and black males, etc etc ... you might even find something meaningful out of that data.

But I wonder just what methods they expect Unis to apply in order to remove this "attainment gap", I saw something recently where they were suggesting punishment for Universities that failed black students, I'm sure that won't be a motivator for a completely unexpected negative outcome.

Exactly. Oxford University already gives female maths students an extra 15 minutes in exams in order to try and close the gap for firsts in maths to men.

It's fucking pathetic.

There could be problems for certain students from certain backgrounds and there might be benefits to finding these, but this study does nothing of the sort and penalising a Uni for not having a given demographic do as well is horrendous.

Take that to its logical conclusion and it means any individual failure is the fault of the Uni.

 

[Haggis]

Exactly. Oxford University already gives female maths students an extra 15 minutes in exams in order to try and close the gap for firsts in maths to men.

What the fuck????? That seems like lawsuit territory to me.

 

[Strike]

What the fuck????? That seems like lawsuit territory to me.

Actually, turns out this was poor journalism from The Telegraph. That was the original article I read, but looking up the link again, it turns out they extended exams by 15 minutes to help women, as they believed time constraints adversely affected women more.

But all students got the extra time, so no discrimination. The idea was to close the gender gap on first class degrees. It didn't work.

[URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/oxford-university-gives-students-extra-time-to-finish-exams-2018-1[/URL]"]www.businessinsider.com/oxford-university-gives-students-extra-time-to-finish-exams-2018-1[/URL]

 

[Haggis]

Actually, turns out this was poor journalism from The Telegraph. That was the original article I read, but looking up the link again, it turns out they extended exams by 15 minutes to help women, as they believed time constraints adversely affected women more.

But all students got the extra time, so no discrimination. The idea was to close the gender gap on first class degrees. It didn't work.

[URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/oxford-university-gives-students-extra-time-to-finish-exams-2018-1[/URL]"]www.businessinsider.com/oxford-university-gives-students-extra-time-to-finish-exams-2018-1[/URL]

Ah, OK. That seems more appropriate.

 

[Strike]

Ah, OK. That seems more appropriate.

It is, but it remains pathetic. They've seen a gap in attainment and automatically seen that as problematic. Why? Most people don't get firsts. Most people don't go to Oxford and most people don't do maths at degree level. If you've graduated from Oxford with a 2:1 in maths, you're in an elite group of people.

The idea that more men getting the top scores needs to be "fixed" is the very crux of why bollocks like the pay gap continues to be believed and embraced.

So they attempt to find an explanation that is anything other than "maybe, on average there are more men who are in that tiny percentage of humans who are elite mathematicians".

All that happened is more people got 2:1's and fewer got 2:2's.

The gap between men and women for firsts stayed the same.

 

[Haggis]

It is, but it remains pathetic. They've seen a gap in attainment and automatically seen that as problematic. Why? Most people don't get firsts. Most people don't go to Oxford and most people don't do maths at degree level. If you've graduated from Oxford with a 2:1 in maths, you're in an elite group of people.

The idea that more men getting the top scores needs to be "fixed" is the very crux of why bollocks like the pay gap continues to be believed and embraced.

So they attempt to find an explanation that is anything other than "maybe, on average there are more men who are in that tiny percentage of humans who are elite mathematicians".

All that happened is more people got 2:1's and fewer got 2:2's.

The gap between men and women for firsts stayed the same.

One of the most infuriating things about this SJW poison (and there are many infuriating things) is the total refusal to acknowledge that equality of OUTCOME is not the goal, and in fact is not even really relevant. Equality of OPPORTUNITY is the goal, and none of these cunts is honest enough to admit that this means fewer male low-paid kindergarten teachers, and fewer high-paid female obsessively competitive workaholic CEOs.

 

[Strike]

Ah, OK. That seems more appropriate.

It is, but it remains pathetic. They've seen a gap in attainment and automatically seen that as problematic. Why? Most people don't get firsts. Most people don't go to Oxford and most people don't do maths at degree level. If you've graduated from Oxford with a 2:1 in maths, you're in an elite group of people.

The idea that more men getting the top scores needs to be "fixed" is the very crux of why bollocks like the pay gap continues to be believed and embraced.

So they attempt to find an explanation that is anything other than "maybe, on average there are more men who are in that tiny percentage of humans who are elite mathematicians".

All that happened is more people got 2:1's and fewer got 2

One of the most infuriating things about this SJW poison (and there are many infuriating things) is the total refusal to acknowledge that equality of OUTCOME is not the goal, and in fact is not even really relevant. Equality of OPPORTUNITY is the goal, and none of these cunts is honest enough to admit that this means fewer male low-paid kindergarten teachers, and fewer high-paid female obsessively competitive workaholic CEOs.

Exactly. And there's nothing wrong with choosing a lifestyle over earnings. I'd love to have millions, but not if the only way to get it was by working in a manner which meant I only got to spend time with my missus one day a week and where I was never available to see friends in an evening or for a Sunday lunch etc.

There's more women graduating in medicine now than men, but fewer women in physics is some evil that needs fixing even though doctors will earn more than the vast majority of physicists.

 

[Haggis]

Exactly. And there's nothing wrong with choosing a lifestyle over earnings. I'd love to have millions, but not if the only way to get it was by working in a manner which meant I only got to spend time with my missus one day a week and where I was never available to see friends in an evening or for a Sunday lunch etc.

Yep I am exactly the same. Sure I'd love to make six figures, but that's not the be-all and end-all. I'm not going to be pulling 70 hour weeks doing something I don't really enjoy, just to chase the money. As long as I can keep a comfortable, secure place to come home to, cover bills and expenses, indulge hobbies and go on holiday a couple of times a year, I'm good. I enjoy my work and once I clock off, my boss will never, ever text or call me unless there's a full-fledged International breaking news level national emergency. And that's valuable to me. I have a friend who earns six figures, he's tired all the time, stressed all the time, has to manage half a dozen people, and you can't play cards with him for four hours on a Saturday night without him getting a text or a call that something's gone wrong somewhere. I can't be bothered with that shit - it's not worth it to me. My friend is a muso and he has a home studio in his garage with $20k worth of gear in it - and no time to record or even play.

Also, as far as society goes, we could use a lot more honest primary school teachers, and a lot fewer shithead City trader greedy cunts.

 

[Primate]

 

[Nigelbro]

Exactly. Oxford University already gives female maths students an extra 15 minutes in exams.

What the fuck????? That seems like lawsuit territory to me.

Sandwiches don't make themselves.

 

[Mexi-Box]

Read the last post in the article. Fucking landwhales are mad that no one wants to see them try on these ridiculous clothes. There is no reason to be that fucking fat where you can fit two women into your one leg!

https://www.mtlblog.com/news/us/company-called-plus-size-baby-is-getting-called-out-for-an-ad-that-humiliates-plus-size-women

 

[Knox Harrington]

Read the last post in the article. Fucking landwhales are mad that no one wants to see them try on these ridiculous clothes. There is no reason to be that fucking fat where you can fit two women into your one leg!

https://www.mtlblog.com/news/us/company-called-plus-size-baby-is-getting-called-out-for-an-ad-that-humiliates-plus-size-women

It is ridiculous. There are plenty of plus sized women who look decent in lingerie. The average clientele will be repulsive, but the models do exist and are not hard to look at.

 

[Mexi-Box]

It is ridiculous. There are plenty of plus sized women who look decent in lingerie. The average clientele will be repulsive, but the models do exist and are not hard to look at.

I have strong doubts there are ones that can fit a whole lady in one of their leggings and look good, man. That's just massively fat. Probably requires hours of photoshop to make them look decent.