Jessss's Comments
The Spotlight Effect:
"People tend to assume their features and behaviours are more salient to others than what they generally are. This is termed the Spotlight effect, the tendency to believe that other people are paying closer attention to one's appearance and behaviour than they really are."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_%28psychology%29#Spotlight_effect
"People tend to assume their features and behaviours are more salient to others than what they generally are. This is termed the Spotlight effect, the tendency to believe that other people are paying closer attention to one's appearance and behaviour than they really are."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_%28psychology%29#Spotlight_effect
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Neatoramabot is waaaay too sensitive.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
What scum!
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
They should embrace the name!
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Slow news day?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
ted
I said "criticising" because of your quote:
"On the one hand, they would be criticized for not emphasizing women if they were on the same ruler as men. On the other hand, they're criticized for trying to emphasize the importance of scientific women."
It just seemed like the relevant and appropriate word to use.
I did notice your pun, but your whole comment was pretty patronising e.g. "Wow, Jessss. Wow." You forgot to insert the "I can't believe how much of an idiot you are" afterwards. Anyway, it was more the use of "I'm so sorry..." that I found to be sarcastic.
To be honest, I never really cared about justifying each of my comments and the use of certain words to you, and I think I can safely assume that you never truly cared to do so either. Yet somehow we continue pretending to care. It appears that this has become a tit for tat dance of nit-picking.
What can I say? I will do anything to procrastinate.
I said "criticising" because of your quote:
"On the one hand, they would be criticized for not emphasizing women if they were on the same ruler as men. On the other hand, they're criticized for trying to emphasize the importance of scientific women."
It just seemed like the relevant and appropriate word to use.
I did notice your pun, but your whole comment was pretty patronising e.g. "Wow, Jessss. Wow." You forgot to insert the "I can't believe how much of an idiot you are" afterwards. Anyway, it was more the use of "I'm so sorry..." that I found to be sarcastic.
To be honest, I never really cared about justifying each of my comments and the use of certain words to you, and I think I can safely assume that you never truly cared to do so either. Yet somehow we continue pretending to care. It appears that this has become a tit for tat dance of nit-picking.
What can I say? I will do anything to procrastinate.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
edit: appropriate, not relevant.
And lulu makes a great point.
And lulu makes a great point.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@ ted, so it wasn't inherently obvious that a "jess" and a "katy" were female? And even with your quote, I still don't see how your use of the word patriarch was relevant.
Where I come from (Australia), the word bitch is generally only used in regards to women. For men, people tend to say things like "winging" or "carrying on". So forgive me for that one.
"I'm so sorry the rulers didn't measure up to your standards."
There is no need to be so sarcastic or patronising.
Where I come from (Australia), the word bitch is generally only used in regards to women. For men, people tend to say things like "winging" or "carrying on". So forgive me for that one.
"I'm so sorry the rulers didn't measure up to your standards."
There is no need to be so sarcastic or patronising.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@ Doug
Maybe they used the term "holy grail" to be ironic, implying that no such thing really exists. Okay, not likely, but there's a thought.
Maybe they used the term "holy grail" to be ironic, implying that no such thing really exists. Okay, not likely, but there's a thought.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
So the whole novelty is in the tag that is removed upon first use? And then it's just a tiny $10 whisk.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
25% of future cruises? That is a freaking JOKE! They would still make a profit out of those poor people with another cruise. As mentioned, if their furniture was anchored, there wouldn't have been as many injuries. I'm guessing though that they probably freed themselves of any responsibility of injury in the fine print. However they could have at least refunded 25% of the ticket cost as a sign of goodwill.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@ted
I wouldn't criticise them for including just a few women. There's no denying that the achievements of men throughout the history of science far outweigh those of women due to the historical discouragement of women receiving education. But as iSAWiWASi pointed out, the achievements of at least a select few woman scientists are certainly on par with those of men, meaning that they should be included on the ruler.
Now I can't read the entire rulers of science ruler, so if I am wrong and there are at least a couple of women included, then I'll be happy.
Somehow I wonder if it were men criticising a product, it wouldn't be referred to as bitching.
And perhaps you should check your use of the word "patriarch".
From Dictionary.com:
Patriarch:
1. the male head of a family or tribal line.
2. a person regarded as the father or founder of an order, class, etc.
I wouldn't criticise them for including just a few women. There's no denying that the achievements of men throughout the history of science far outweigh those of women due to the historical discouragement of women receiving education. But as iSAWiWASi pointed out, the achievements of at least a select few woman scientists are certainly on par with those of men, meaning that they should be included on the ruler.
Now I can't read the entire rulers of science ruler, so if I am wrong and there are at least a couple of women included, then I'll be happy.
Somehow I wonder if it were men criticising a product, it wouldn't be referred to as bitching.
And perhaps you should check your use of the word "patriarch".
From Dictionary.com:
Patriarch:
1. the male head of a family or tribal line.
2. a person regarded as the father or founder of an order, class, etc.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@Katy
Agreed. Why can't a few women just be included in the rulers of science too? Does the other one say "great male rulers of science"?
Agreed. Why can't a few women just be included in the rulers of science too? Does the other one say "great male rulers of science"?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@Zhoen
"...it looked ridiculously unprofessional..."
Are students supposed to look like professionals?
"...it looked ridiculously unprofessional..."
Are students supposed to look like professionals?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
I guess that's why happiness increases up to a point.
This study makes me glad that I'll be earning around $75,000 in a few years when I finish studying, but sad that I'll probably never reach $75,000 US.