Do you ever have a problem where you just don’t know how to reply to an argument, not because you don’t know the answer, but you just don’t know where to begin? Like, the foundation of knowledge you’d need to impart to this person before you could even begin to drag them out of their sinkhole of ignorance would cost thousands of dollars if it were coming from a university?
"you don’t have the prerequisites for this course"
when girls think they are better than other girls because they are tomboys who engage in stereotypically “male” activities it makes me want to actually gouge my own eyes out because they are pretty much reinforcing the patriarchal idea that men are better than women without even realizing it and that is just incredibly sad
I remember all the Doctor Who fanfics I used to read where Rose often got badly stereotyped as a damsel in distress whom the Doctor had to swoop in and save and smooch but the way I remember Doctor Who 90% of their relationship was the Doctor just setting Rose loose on people who had done something to offend them and sitting back giggling in the corner as she shouted
You want to say Hi to the cute girl on the subway. How will she react? Fortunately, I can tell you with some certainty, because she’s already sending messages to you. Looking out the window, reading a book, working on a computer, arms folded across chest, body away from you = do not disturb. So, y’know, don’t disturb her. Really. Even to say that you like her hair, shoes, or book. A compliment is not always a reason for women to smile and say thank you. You are a threat, remember? You are Schrödinger’s Rapist. Don’t assume that whatever you have to say will win her over with charm or flattery. Believe what she’s signaling, and back off.
If you speak, and she responds in a monosyllabic way without looking at you, she’s saying, “I don’t want to be rude, but please leave me alone.” You don’t know why. It could be “Please leave me alone because I am trying to memorize Beowulf.” It could be “Please leave me alone because you are a scary, scary man with breath like a water buffalo.” It could be “Please leave me alone because I am planning my assassination of a major geopolitical figure and I will have to kill you if you are able to recognize me and blow my cover.”
On the other hand, if she is turned towards you, making eye contact, and she responds in a friendly and talkative manner when you speak to her, you are getting a green light. You can continue the conversation until you start getting signals to back off.
The fourth point: If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.
There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail?
Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.
This man scores higher on the threat level scale than Man with the Cockroach Tattoos. (Who, after all, is guilty of nothing more than terrifying bad taste.) You see, Mr. E-mail has made it clear that he ignores what I say when he wants something from me. Now, I don’t know if he is an actual rapist, and I sincerely hope he’s not. But he is certainly Schrödinger’s Rapist, and this particular Schrödinger’s Rapist has a probability ratio greater than one in sixty. Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.
So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.
For women, who are watching you very closely to determine how much of a threat you are, this is an important piece of data.
Can every one of my male followers read this? And please, before you get defensive (“I would never rape anyone!”) keep in mind, women being afraid of Shrodinger’s Rapists (oh my god i still can’t get over the encompassing brilliance of this phrase) is a conditioned, learned response from being immersed in rape culture and the evolution of sexism and sexual violence in our society from the day we’re born. And unfortunately, it’s very difficult to unlearn without the efforts of all genders to dismantle it. Which is where you come in.
A bit complicated. Hamilton did seem to have some respect for Smith. They both thought industrialization and manufacturing were necessary for national prosperity, and that there should be no animosity between manufactures and agriculture. They knew selfishness and avarice was not something that could be destroyed in people, but it might be re-directed for the common good (Smith thought the market itself would magically take care of it, Hamilton thought the government needed to provide initiative and direct the outcomes in a way beneficial to the country). But where they differed was on laissez-faire.
Hamilton thought if we lived in the best of all possible worlds, laissez-faire might have a shot of working. But he was also too much of a realist to be that philosophical, especially given the economic situation of the United States at the time. He didn’t necessarily believe that left to their own devices, that each person’s private gain would be directed to the public interest via the “invisible hand.” And because he was a believer in positive liberty versus negative liberty, he didn’t think an individual was necessarily “freer” the further removed they were from the state. So he thought government interference was often necessary to guide the national economy. Workers and producers left to their own devices, he believed, in an unregulated market would lead to a stagnant economy where few people would take the initiative to improve. In short, things had to be regulated to a degree because when people were allowed to just run free with their avarice, nothing good would come from it.
"There is at the present juncture a certain fermentation of mind, a certain activity of speculation and enterprise which if properly directed may be made subservient to useful purposes; but which if left entirely to itself, may be attended with pernicious effects."