The narrative for feminist STEM poster child Elizabeth Holmes and her company Theranos continues to unravel. Last week the WSJ published an article titled Agony, Alarm and Anger for People Hurt by Theranos’s Botched Blood Tests (paywall warning). As the title suggests, the article shares examples of the anguish caused by inaccurate Theronos test results. And the inaccurate test results were themselves due to a focus on image over substance and rigor. One expert the Journal discussed the situation with explained:
They were just going through the motions.
This shouldn’t come as a surprise. Feminism is in many ways a cargo cult, with the pervasive belief that if women just ape the dress, language, and mannerisms of men, the accomplishments they see men achieving will magically follow. Indeed, play acting the role of a famous man is all it takes to become a true feminist hero. This is why all it took for Amelia Earhart to be nicknamed Lady Lindy and Queen of the Air and be thrown a ticker tape parade was to cut her hair short, don a flight jacket, and ride as a passenger on a transatlantic flight.
The same could be said for Holmes and Theranos. What exactly did Holmes accomplish besides mimicking the dress and mannerisms of Steve Jobs and declaring that she was going to change the world? In both cases, all it took was a coat and a hairstyle, and feminists around the world swooned.
Just a few days before the WSJ piece, Jonathan Gottschall published his own devastating Theranos piece at Harvard Business Review titled Theranos and the Dark Side of Storytelling (emphasis mine):
Holmes constructed an inspiring hero narrative starring herself—a precocious girl-genius who, at nineteen years of age, began pioneering medical technologies that could potentially save millions of lives around the world. Despite abundant warning signs, and despite the Silicon Valley company’s refusal to provide real evidence that their technology worked, journalists didn’t skeptically evaluate Holmes’s story—they simply repeated it. They told and re-told Holmes’s story until she began to seem less like an actual person, and more like a living symbol—of progress, of innovation, of female empowerment. The problem, as The Wall Street Journal’s John Carreyrou has reported in more than a score of articles, was that there was little to Theranos beyond its story—and that story was mainly fictional.
Gottschall blames this on a general willingness of venture capitalists and the media to fall for a good story. This certainly is a human weakness, but in this case the bolded part above is quite important. This was the story they desperately wanted to believe, and it is a story feminism has primed all of us to believe from a young age. Holmes was the messiah feminists had foretold for many decades. Here she finally was, the pretty young woman who one day decided to pull back her hair, don a lab coat and some glasses, and poof! A miracle occurs. As Oppenheimer Funds puts it:
So there!
The same story of Earhart and Holmes has repeated countless times, and we can be assured of falling for it in the future. Just because Holmes is turning out to not be the feminist messiah, it doesn’t mean feminists are giving up on the narrative. One day soon, a young pretty girl will pull her hair back, put on a lab coat and some glasses*, and change the world!
*Either glasses or fashionable safety goggles.
Appropriate perhaps that the background music for that ad is Flight of the Bumblebee.
Pingback: Going through the motions. | Aus-Alt-Right
For all of the storytelling, she was good at raising VC funds, which is a skill unto itself. However, as a low-20s blonde-haired White Woman, does it REALLY take people that much effort to figure out how she managed to raise funds so quickly? A roll in the hay with the right connections (which she already had access to via friends’ family) can go a long way in Silicon Valley. Especially when she’s a solid 10 compared to most Women in Tech/VC.
Also, the tech had been known to not work for a while. That’s the real scandal.
Abstract Algebra. E. Noether. I am still a fan.
Looking Glass: Is that true, really? All the pictures I can find of her are with her Jobs costume. She’s not bad looking, but if I was going to blow $1MM on a roll in the hay, I’d aim my sights higher. But, I know this is a California thing, especially in the film industry.
Look at the faces on those kid actors. Is that supposed to be showing pride or derision?
@ DeNihilist
Yes.
Are any of the women in that video real?
I’ve known a few actual girls in STEM. Most work as techies while others work in labs. None seemed super enthusiastic. A lab one wanted to work in an office and two computer ones admitted they wanted to marry a rich man instead.
Generally related #1
Fighting women is like no other war that has been waged. All other wars are external to self. Since “it is not good for man to be alone” and “the two shall become one flesh” this is an internal war, like fighting cancer: rogue cells expanding rapidly in rebellion to God’s creation, His orderly design. And remedy is initially counter-intuitive: taking a knife to self or digesting deadly drugs or radiating your own flesh, to kill —to remove part of your body.
Similarly, I knew a woman that was fearful and vain and lost her life over her fear and vanity. She had injured her knee skiing and needed relatively simple surgery. Somehow the knee became infected and each time medical attention was needed she resisted thorough medical attention because she wanted to keep her knee looking good and feared the radical treatments really needed. Doctors reluctantly compromised. Bad became worse and it lead to amputation and she was still resistant to radical removals, each time agreeing only after it was too late. She died of the infection at age 50. She resisted dealing with the true depth of the problem.
So with marriage. And most times you have to remove some good tissue to be certain you get all the deadly rogue cells. Only then will abundant life be restored.
Generally related #2
In one of the Dalrock posts [I can’t remember] I saw the phrase “The ultimate division between humans is between men and the helpmeets that God created for them.” A true statement but I would argue more depth: that ‘The ultimate division between GOD AND MAN STARTS between men and the helpmeets that God created for them. By definition, when we are out of unity with another human, at least one of the humans is out of unity with God.
My point: the source of all disunity is woman, the helpmeet —all unity, whether with God or with fellow mankind. I’m not just playing the ace in the hole of Eve taking the first bit. I’m talking about ongoing Gen 3:16 in ALL women: today.
Consider Zech 5:5+ “I have placed a woman in a basket …She is wickedness …her image has resemblance all over the earth [personifies all wickedness in the world].” The angel pushes her into the basket and places a heavy lead lid over her and the basket is carried to Babylon – Sin City
.
Next consider Rev 17+18: The woman is sitting on [supported by] ‘names of blasphemy’, holding a golden cup full of abominations and filth of her fornications; she is drunk on the blood of the saints, the martyrs of Jesus. She is the city of Babylon, the ‘mother of harlots’ and the governing city of abominations on the earth: of adultery, fornication, blasphemy; She is abundant in luxury and glorified herself saying “I sit as queen and am no widow and will not see sorrow [I have no need for a man with my level of wealth].” She is the great city that reigns over kings of the earth.
I just heard this week John G. Whitcomb’s phrasing on these scriptures and they curiously mirrored my experience and thoughts: “Terrifying, nauseating, ominous …reeks of rottenness in the basket …consider the weight of the lid [to hold in the evil] …The [false] church will be dominated by women, the apostate; ecumenical blasphemy …Women epitomize evil ..the woman: the antichrist.”
My own wife I have thought for some time as “rotting flesh.” The puzzle pieces are coming together. Women have been against the Word since the beginning.
Vigilance to His Word is the price of liberty, in Him.
Gottschall blames this on a general willingness of venture capitalists and the media to fall for a good story. This certainly is a human weakness, but in this case the bolded part above is quite important. This was the story they desperately wanted to believe, and it is a story feminism has primed all of us to believe from a young age.
I have to believe that most VCs go into investments like this knowing that they are going to LOSE money, big time. So why do they do it?
Social pressure. The fear of being branded “misogynists” if they don’t pretend that SIWs CanDoAnythingAManCanDoButBetter[TM]. The fear of boycotts, backlashes, abandonment by their own partners, legal sanctions, adverse publicity, and a whole host of other nasty outcomes from not playing PC that will cost them far more than several million dollars over the long run. The loss of a few million dollars in malinvested capital is simply “a cost of doing business” in today’s femcentric bizarro world where not only is inversion of economic logic law of the land, but complete economic implosion is the ultimate outcome regardless of any individual’s (or individual business’s) economic choices.
Would a male “scientist” making the same claims have had his assertions vetted, reviewed and scrutinized before any product would’ve gone to market?
You bet your ass he would. And much of it would’ve come from his colleagues and the teams he would need to help him produce and market it. It wasn’t just journalists who weren’t skeptical, there were a lot of other working professionals who either unquestioningly wanted to believe the Fempowerment narrative, or else they were too fearful of being labeled ‘misogynists’ for just attempting to be critical.
This is the scope of the Feminine Imperative, that educated people would put their professional reputations on the line without an afterthought so long as it followed the Fempowerment script they’ve been conditioned to accept and believe.
@Helmut Schmidt:
VCs normally are only investing a small part of their own money. Also, track down pictures of her in her low-20s. VCs may have money, but you’re talking mid-level money guys. They aren’t pulling Models. So she would have been extremely pretty among the Silicon Valley set. But she still managed to get into Stanford, so it’s not like she only traded on her image. But she had ways to really move up the connections circle. (She was also friends with family of the hyper-involved in the VC set in Silicon Valley.) So quite a number of relationships made certain aspects of the company building process much easier than others have the option available to them.
And what connections. The Theranos Board was kind of nuts. If you were running a Chemical Weapons company. But no one really with the knowledge of the questions to ask about the technical issues.
Hmm Rollo, gotta disagree with the total femcentric nature of your point. I see it as being far wider in scope. More about PC then femcentrism. Though femcentrism is an important part of the PC culture, it is still just a part in a much wider subterfuge on the true human condition. This eruption of femcentric and PC “lifestyles” is just as cyclical as the earth’s journey around the sun. It comes along, disrupts nature, then cedes to the dark parts until it can rise again.
Hey, Laura in the video is an expert in Science, Technology, Engineering, AND Math. All four of them. Expert. I watched it twice just to make sure.
All the men I know who are good at these things have tended to claim expertise in only one of them.
So There!
I am still puzzled by what Kissinger saw in Theranos to join its board the first time there were rumblings. He’s surely too smart and too sinister to have fallen for any feminist hype.
VCs normally are only investing a small part of their own money. Also, track down pictures of her in her low-20s. VCs may have money, but you’re talking mid-level money guys. They aren’t pulling Models.
Yeah, and the Valley is a total sausage fest as well, so given the extreme degree of thirst there in general, she would have been bid up in looks above where she would be in Orange County or South Beach. The Valley is one of the largest prostitution markets in the country for the same reason — lots of guys with money, no Game and not many girls.
Feeriker – Maybe not though. Look at the august set of “advisors” Theranos had (Schultz, Kissinger, et al). I think many of the VC firms felt that it would at least hold together until an IPO before the Narrative collapsed, along with the company.
By the way, the Theranos website is hilariously bad, in design, execution, and content. It’s about nothing but vague “mission statement” type twaddle and having females front and center, no matter what.
And watch the video of the baritone Holmes rambling about her own greatness, made by an Oscar-winning director, then try to imagine the totally true story that at 9 yo, she wrote a C++ compiler that was sold to some slack-jawed idiots at a Chinese company.
Meh. At least Amelia Earhart actually attempted to fly around the world. True, she hasn’t been heard of, but at least she tried. I just don’t see your average modern feminist doing the same.
Dr. Laura Bottomley.
http://www.engr.ncsu.edu/theengineeringplace/about/bio-bottomley.php
http://www.engr.ncsu.edu/about/contact/aa-contact
A real “Doer” I tell you. She spent a grand total of 2 WHOLE years at Bell Labs! Then back to Academia. She of course is director of Women in Engineering at NC State.
What a bunch of TOTAL HORSE SHIT.
SHE SPENT 2 FRICKIN’ YEARS at Bell Labs and they are giving her credit for GPS.
But of course she has ‘consulted’ with Lockheed, IBM and others until (the money dried up) she returned to Academic Affairs.
Bet she can’t even make a proper ‘samish.
Worthless waste of oxygen.
http://www.infogalactic.com/info/Theranos
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/09/elizabeth-holmes-theranos-exclusive
Early details of the company in the Vanity Fair piece. The company had raised quite a lot of money before having a solid enough science base to actually start work on their projects. Fascinating, that.
Also, the Vanity Fair piece can barely hide the point with the “(white men)” mentions. FI + sex goes a long ways.
What I want to know is why the FDA didn’t have her prosecuted for fraud. The FDA is known for taking a dim view of slip shod medical products with falsified testing and has been known to arrest medical company CEOs for this kind of behavior. I suppose that we already know the answer to that question, not even the FDA can undermine the narrative. They did have to “punish her” so instead of having her serve time, she was slapped on the wrists and was merely “banned” for two years, after which she can fire up another start up that makes products that don’t work and endanger people’s lives.
OT; Your daily motivational quote for all the husbands out there:
“Just because Holmes is turning out to not be the feminist messiah, it doesn’t mean feminists are giving up on the narrative.”
The most frustrating part of feminism. No evidence or demonstration can convince them otherwise, not even men who are otherwise rational. This proves both that feminism is a religion and that Original Sin is a real thing.
…
sipcode @ 12:55 pm:
“The ultimate division between GOD AND MAN STARTS between men and the helpmeets that God created for them.”
Co-sign. Human sexuality is the strongest demonstration of both ideal and fallen human nature. This is why the Bible places so much more weight upon sexual immorality than other sins like anger or sloth. Pushing sexual equality is therefore a more evil act than ritually sacrificing a chicken.
…
The Interpreter @ 1:56 pm:
“I am still puzzled by what Kissinger saw in Theranos to join its board the first time there were rumblings. He’s surely too smart and too sinister to have fallen for any feminist hype.”
Money laundering, bailout scams and straight-up looting are also reasons VC firms do ‘stupid’ things. It’s comparable to the Federal Deposit Insurance Commission. If the bank/VC loans do well then the banksters pocket the profits; if the loans go bad then the little investors get hosed and the gov’t (sometimes) rescues them at taxpayer expense.
Heads I win, tails you lose.
Not sure if anyone else posted this, but you can get around the WSJ’s paywall by pasting the article’s title into Google, then clicking on the WSJ link in the results.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Agony%2C+Alarm+and+Anger+for+People+Hurt+by+Theranos%E2%80%99s+Botched+Blood+Tests&oq=Agony%2C+Alarm+and+Anger+for+People+Hurt+by+Theranos%E2%80%99s+Botched+Blood+Tests&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60.925j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&safe=active&ssui=on
The Valley is one of the largest prostitution markets in the country for the same reason — lots of guys with money, no Game and not many girls.
It is, however, where Game has the highest upside. There are some hotties, and they are so drenched in inept betatude that a man with even a slight amount of Game is a huge relief to these women. A lot of gold-diggers from Russia/Ukraine are also flooding into the Bay Area.
I have long believed that Game works even better on a woman who elsewhere endures too much betatude…
Dumb question time. What does FI mean?
@White Guy:
That seems really odd to bring up. Why do I feel like you don’t seem to be in the correct place? (With the utter infestation of Soros-paid trolls in political realms, my trust-vectors aren’t high right now.)
@Novaseeker:
Apparently, she hadn’t gone blonde yet, at that point. (The Vanity Fair writer obviously couldn’t get anyone to go on record about her exploits, but the guy sure isn’t trying to hide the implications.)
One thing the VCs did do correctly, is make her shares junior to their own. Hence, when the valuation of Theranos fell from $9B to $1B, her 50% share fell from $4.5B to $0.0000.
How, you may ask? Because her 50% share was subordinate to a 2x liquidation clause that VCs use, so the straight percentage works only above a certain previously-agreed floor. That is standard, but their betatude might have made them waive even that. Fortunately for them, they did not.
Apparently, she hadn’t gone blonde yet, at that point. (The Vanity Fair writer obviously couldn’t get anyone to go on record about her exploits, but the guy sure isn’t trying to hide the implications.)
Yeah I picked up the same thing. In any case, she’s the type that would make guys like that feel good about what they were doing “because at least she’s brilliant, you know, not like some trampy ho” type of thinking that’s very common among a certain class of men, which includes most of the men in that set.
Dumb question time. What does FI mean?
Female Imperative.
The human brain is hardwired to place the well-being of the scarcer reproductive resource ahead of the less-scarce one. This is why almost any society in any century was quite willing to send 50 men to die before even a single woman faced harm. This is innate to both male and female psychology. It is why a woman murdering a man just does not evoke the same reaction in most people as the reverse…
Anyone who thinks ‘feminism’ began in 1858 in the US, or is due to a community that is just 2% of the US population, does not understand that the FI is a much deeper and hardwired element of human psychology, which is only now beginning to be obsolete (women no longer contribute the one thing that they were placed at high importance for).
Pingback: Going through the motions. | Reaction Times
Frank:
FI: Feminine Imperative.
Rollo Tomassi first identified it and coined the term. Essentially, the FI is the concept that women expect all of society, its various sectors, and apparatuses of power and wealth, to serve women’s interests.
Essentially, the FI is the concept that women expect all of society, its various sectors, and apparatuses of power and wealth, to serve women’s interests.
Most men expect this too, or at least acquiesce to it. The few that oppose it are immediately attacked by the other mangina/whiteknight men (who outnumber them).
There’s another article linked from the WSJ entitled “The Real Culprit Behind Theranos Failure” that says it’s not really her fault.
Looking Glass:
Watch the video from Chevron that Dalrock posted, it ‘features’ – Dr. Laura. (And the pumps continue to hum as he says). It does fit. It’s all part of the Narrative. My ears perked up when I heard she help ‘develop’ GPS, so I looked her up for the group.
Dealing with women ‘engineers’/technocrats almost daily gets my BP up at least 20 points, I can’t even quantify how much money is wasted by our clients by us having to deal with “WOMEN in STEM” like Theranos, thankfully no one has died (that we know of) because of the crap.
This thing stinks of a Bohemian Grove money laundering a scheme. The board of directors tells a story in their collective titles. More to this than the exposes are revealing.
@God is Laughing:
Medicare approval & don’t ask a lot of technical questions. That one isn’t actually that hard.
You can also blame the Clinton DoJ. When they went after Microsoft, they set off the “Lobbyists as Insurance” method of political spending, since the case was mostly about their competitors buying a prosecution. (There was some merit for some fines, but that was about it.) As a result, from the very early going, a company is going to need either lobbying money or DC connections if they deal with the government a lot. And that’s most of where the money is in Medicine.
The Question: See, I have a hard time refuting something like that. It sounds biblical. It sounds like a mix of “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them … Not so with you” and “Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her.”
But husbands get told so much about sacrificing, giving up, and washing feet that the meaning of authority is never made clear.
I was just talking about this chick and the feminist fraud with a guy today.
@TheQuestion
I’ll see your Sproul and raise you a Thompson:
Churchianity will not be complete until both the husbands and the single men are made beta in the name of the Lord!
Ah, but you see PATRIARCHY!!!!!
https://www.bustle.com/articles/189443-no-2016-nobel-prizes-went-to-women-and-thats-total-bullsht
Anon @ 2:29 pm:
“The human brain is hardwired to place the well-being of the scarcer reproductive resource ahead of the less-scarce one.”
The scarcer reproductive resource is Beta men because the reproductive bottleneck for humans isn’t the nine-month gestation, it’s the following 10-18 years of heavy investment.
“This is why almost any society in any century was quite willing to send 50 men to die before even a single woman faced harm.”
Or because women make useless soldiers…
Holmes simply pulled a Hilary. Just on a smaller scale.
The problem with women entrepreneurs is that they will let emotion cloud their judgement time and again.
There is always an emphasis on the dramatic and the emotional, as well as the “here and now”. It is practically impossible to build scalability and redundancy into a system, because such concepts are foreign to them. One thing they will definitely do is that if they see a group of men doing something successfully, they will put a woman amongst them, to “break up the Boys Club”, irrespective of whether the woman involved is competent and capable or not.
The sad thing is that if an idea has merit and scientific value, it becomes more difficult to attract investment as a result.
More proof that the GOPe was just an ally of the Democrats following a script to create a WWE-style illusory contest :
Mitt Romney : I did not want to tell my grandkids that I did nothing to stop Trump.
Gee….. he never said that about Obama….
Cuckservatives are exposed. The problem is, Trump is a Hillary shill too…. In effect, the GOPe is whining that their contract was not renewed, in favor of Trump as the new talent scripted to lose to the annointed WWE champion.
Anon says:
October 21, 2016 at 6:29 pm
I’ve now reached the point where I’ve become downright rude and insulting to people (including members of my own immediate family) who continue to insist on taking this now-obvious farce of a presidential election seriously.
Feministas want war. But they want your sons who they despise to die for them. Alex Jones w/guest Micheal Savage.
Frank,
They still might. Its early.
I’m a 57 yo professor of medicine and biochemistry. The push for women in my field is bringing a level of incompetence that astounds me. I’m interested in joining this community. After 35 years of hearing my Christian wife tell me my 250K income is not enough (hers, 0) while I drive a 16 yo car and buy my clothes at the Goodwill I’m fed up. I will not divorce but I’m very unhappy. Im also unhappy with the increasing feminism of my PCA Church.
Abstract Algebra. E. Noether. I am still a fan.
She was a genuine genius; a standout STEM talent among the greats of the 20th century. But she doesn’t get that much press among feminists, because her actual story pretty much fits the themes of this site.
For instance, from Wikipedia, note this story of her behavior (and that of her female students):
“Mostly unconcerned about appearance and manners, biographers suggest she focused on her studies. A distinguished algebraist Olga Taussky-Todd described a luncheon, during which Noether, wholly engrossed in a discussion of mathematics, “gesticulated wildly” as she ate and “spilled her food constantly and wiped it off from her dress, completely unperturbed”.[52] Appearance-conscious students cringed as she retrieved the handkerchief from her blouse and ignored the increasing disarray of her hair during a lecture. Two female students once approached her during a break in a two-hour class to express their concern, but they were unable to break through the energetic mathematics discussion she was having with other students.”
Famously, the mathematician Edmund Landau was asked if Noether was an instance of a great female mathematician and he replied humorously – “I can testify that Emmy is a great mathematician, but that she is female, I cannot swear.”
In short, she really was one of the greats – and she did it not by aping masculinity feminist-style, but by pretty much actually living without the Feminine Imperative by in a sense basically being one of the guys. It was just her personality. She was extremely homely, she never married, never had kids. I’m not trashing her or making fun of her; I’m a genuine fan of her and her work. But it’s worth saying that she was in absolutely no sense a feminist STEM heroine because she never used being a woman to her advantage.
GunnerQ,
The scarcer reproductive resource is Beta men because the reproductive bottleneck for humans isn’t the nine-month gestation, it’s the following 10-18 years of heavy investment.
If the human brain has evolved FOR civilization, yes, that would be true.
But the human brain is still hardwired for the first 99% of human and proto-human existence, so women are seen as the scarcer reproductive resource. Remember that only by the 20th century did total fertility rate fall from 7+ to under 2…
Note that it is once again manginas whining about ‘misogyny’ :
How many of those Nobel Prizes to women are for Literature, Peace, or even Economics, as opposed to for the hard sciences?
I don’t want to defend her here, cause I believe in the validity of your posts. But, I can’t help notice that many men, including myself, go through the same process of buying into their own success while they’re still terrified and insecure inside. It doesn’t seem like anything unique to women here.
Thanks Matt for that information about Noether. I saw her name come up all the time in my studies but knew almost nothing about her life and personality.
@MJD:
True to a point, But before a man is handed a few billion dollars to play with, he must prove himself on a smaller scale first. As far as I can tell, Holmes has never done anything else than this, and never succeeded at anything on her way..
To me, Theranos is a perfect storm brought about by the colliding elements of feminism, a beautiful, intelligent woman, a high vision, and a large degree of wish fulfillment on the part of her enablers.
Back when Ms Holmes was making headline news for her ostensible “brilliance”, I was enraged.
I recognized it all as a scam by the fact that they’d basically produced nothing. The premise was a great idea but nothing every phlebotomist/ lab tech with a functioning frontal lobe hadn’t thought of before.
I brought the subject up at dinner a couple of years back. The conversation went something like this:
Me: “I’m so annoyed with the person who has produced nothing and….longwinded blah blah”
Husband: “So, she has produced nothing and, based on that, has conned everyone so well she is a billionaire? Well…that’s brilliant.”
I guess there is truth to that.
She has to be the best grifter/con artist EVER.
(her voice is really deep, I hadn’t heard it before)
re: Female Imperative
girlwriteswhat of Youtube fame posted a video that explained how far back the bias (?) society had in protecting females over males. Opened my eyes to the depth of feminism’s manipulation.
So puzzling for anyone not realizing this when they hear women are special and as equal as men (think 6′ 6″ WNBA players) then in the same breath having the deep-rooted instinct that they are to be protected.
Pingback: All Linked Up – Inconceivable!
There are no surprises that Theranos didn’t live up to the hype, but I was always kind of surprised that people put so much money into such a specific, unproven technology, especially after Enron, et al. Holmes was previously said to be one of the youngest billionaires, and I guess the youngest female billionaird, period, but from my understanding, that was all based on her company’s stock prices. How much money does Holmes actually have in the bank, though? Could she go down to her local bank branch and actually still withdraw $1 million? $50,000? $1000? How much liquid cash or how many paid for assets does she actually own at this point?
Anon,
Evolution is not a required explanation. The curse on Eve is completely sufficient.
Feminism is in many ways a cargo cult, with the pervasive belief that if women just ape the dress, language, and mannerisms of men, the accomplishments they see men achieving will magically follow…now THATS a great quote
Anon@ 11:57 pm:
“If the human brain has evolved FOR civilization, yes, that would be true.
But the human brain is still hardwired for the first 99% of human and proto-human existence, so women are seen as the scarcer reproductive resource. Remember that only by the 20th century did total fertility rate fall from 7+ to under 2…”
And 6 of those 7 children starved if Beta husband or his swift replacement wasn’t there to provide. It’s human biology, not civilization, that infants and young children need far more care & resources than one parent can provide.
Which means the instinctive female hatred for Steady Eddie is a disproof of evolution, because mating with Dark Triad instead has proven to be a toxic way to reproduce. We are therefore flawed creations.
Also, until Christianity came along women were regularly viewed as subhuman because they lacked male strength and social instincts. “The strong must sacrifice to protect the weak” is a specifically Christian belief. Do not give evolution credit for our accomplishments.
…
Matthew James Davis @ 12:53 am:
“…Many men, including myself, go through the same process of buying into their own success while they’re still terrified and insecure inside. It doesn’t seem like anything unique to women here.”
True, the situation is universal but the sexes react differently. Men either try to rise to the occasion or honorably step down. Women (and manginas) try to escape responsibility while keeping up appearances. We know honesty is the best policy but women are simply not wired that way.
Worked for IBM in the Silicon Valley (San Jose) for twelve years. Was there when the “dot.com” boom was blooming in 1993 / 1994. Was there when it went into hyperspace 1997-1999, and was there when it crashed during the summer of 2000. The wreckage afterward took awhile to bounce back, and I thankfully left in 2005………..
Saw it even back in the late 1990’s…this type of behavior. VC’s investing 10 million dollars in companies like “cheesegraters.com” or whatever. Women working as a ‘booth bunny’ at a trade show and thinking she’s “changing the world” because she works for a “dot.com” and in “high tech” but could not even tell you what HTML was. Being paid outrageous sums of money for entering data into a computer, or answering a phone……..when the crash came…a lot of MEN in the Silicon valley were actually happy. We thought that people would be humbled, or at least THINK about their actions. No, Wall Street was blamed, mean old white men, and smugness of “people just didn’t understand or get the amazing vision we had for the world”
All this money back then (like now) is like a bad cocaine habit. It just made people ruder, meaner, nastier, badder….and inflated their egos to the size of God.
People still say to me “Oh, the 1980’s…that decade of GREED and horrible people”
They should look in the mirror. The VC of today, the persona of this woman, and countless like her make the 1980’s, even the 1990’s look like childsplay by today’s standards.
It’s perception. If you are Donald trump you are evil. If your “heart-is-in-the-right-place-and-your-feelings-line-up-with-the-liberal-mindset” you’re given excuses, victim-hood and platitudes.
Saw it back in 2000, and it’s playing out now….AGAIN, and a TON of more money is involved. She’s banned form “labs”
Big whoop. So many people are DEFENDING her, it’s sickening.
Well, that’ll learn em to do their due diligence. First off, all the peers called B/S on the whole thing from the near-start. Soon as I heard they were leasing conventional labs when they discovered their miracle wasn’t working out I knew it was over. But she still continued the scam because even knowing it wasn’t as advertised, she continued lining up guilty White male board members (we have our value after all, as usual, our money) and their money. Then, the nerve, sitting with Chelsea as late as this past April or May being celebrated as a woman in STEM.
And now? It’s over. I’m sure SHE’S covered, but a lot are toast. Reeks of Mister Ponzi to me. Maybe Wiki should release some of these? Did Theranos donate to the Clintons? Is there a bailout in the offing from Hillary? Can this story be saved? Will she snatch (heh) victory from the jaws of defeat? Tune in next week!
@David Bradshaw
Thank you.
I do have to give credit to Anonymous Reader for first making the observation.
JR,
Welcome to the community.
GunnerQ,
Which means the instinctive female hatred for Steady Eddie is a disproof of evolution, because mating with Dark Triad instead has proven to be a toxic way to reproduce. We are therefore flawed creations.
Not really. We see this among gorillas and chimpanzees too. It is not disproof of evolution, but rather proof that women are starting to become obsolete. Just like gilled fishes became obsolete since they could not colonize the land or air.
Also, until Christianity came along women were regularly viewed as subhuman because they lacked male strength and social instincts. “The strong must sacrifice to protect the weak” is a specifically Christian belief. Do not give evolution credit for our accomplishments.
This is not true. Greek mythology predates Christianity, yet women are valued over male lives. How many men died in Perseus’s quest to save Andromeda? Or in the various quests of Hercules? Indian mythology predates even that. The Mahabharata (900 BC) and Ramayana (3000 BC) both have a constant theme of armies of men dying to rescue ONE princess….
Regarding that Chevron video, I’m just happy hear to them referring to those career fields as “STEM” instead of the annoying, politically correct “STEAM.” Some people are so eager to include women in STEM that they want to add an extra letter to it.
JR says:
October 21, 2016 at 9:26 pm
“I’m a 57 yo professor of medicine and biochemistry. The push for women in my field is bringing a level of incompetence that astounds me. I’m interested in joining this community. After 35 years of hearing my Christian wife tell me my 250K income is not enough (hers, 0) while I drive a 16 yo car and buy my clothes at the Goodwill I’m fed up. I will not divorce but I’m very unhappy. Im also unhappy with the increasing feminism of my PCA Church”.
JR: I think you may have taken a dose of what’s called “The Red Pill” in this ‘Sphere. You may be sick at the moment, but that’s not the effect of the Red Pill. It’s the horrible process of getting all of that Blue Pill toxin out of your system. It’s a bitter process, but there’s a good thing about it: You’ve woken up.
I too am a worker in the sciences and I see what you mean. Work-related criticism is taken as personal attack. Women exposed in incompetence will respond in a variety of ways tat you will find about about here. The 3 that immediately come to mind are: 1. the emotional outburst, 2. Running to the Authority Figure in order to get the critic beaten up and 3. Play “Let’s you and him fight”, getting a compliant man(gina) to beat you up on their behalf.
When it comes to your wife, note that she isn’t , never has been, nor ever will be, the spiritual head of your household. She isn’t even the spiritual head of herself. Actually, you are. So start living the life of the Red Pill.
A good place to start on this blog is an older Dalrock post entitled “So Your Christian Wife Cheated On You”. While the circumstance probably doesn’t apply to you, a read of this will make you aware of the manipulation “Christian” wives do, and how you can avoid falling for it.
Regarding the $250K you make: That’s good. It’s well above the average wage and a testament to your hard work, work you undoubtedly drove yourself to do in order to provide for your family. If your wife is thankless, don’t ignore her. The next time she tells you it isn’t enough, do what I did: Tell her to live within a budget just like everyone else. She might go apeshit on you, but don’t apologise. Instead, make it about her: WHY can you not live within your means? WHAT are you spending our money on? Would it be better if I controlled the finances? ….In other words, make it about HER, not about YOU. You have done what your upbringing has told you to: make yourself exceed in your chosen area so you can provide for your family. So understand: There isn’t ANYTHING fundamentally wrong with you, which is what feminists – and I hate to tell you but your wife is one – constantly tell men. They tell us that we need to be lectured like schoolboys and herded like farm animals by them. Don’t take it anymore.
Welcome, brother.
After 35 years of hearing my Christian wife tell me my 250K income is not enough (hers, 0) while I drive a 16 yo car and buy my clothes at the Goodwill I’m fed up.
I feel your pain, brother. I heard the same complaint for over 20 years, also from a woman who seldom ever worked or contributed a dime to the household income (my income was less than half of yours, but still more than sufficient to maintain a comfortable home and provide for all of our needs (as opposed to all of her wants).
Women are simply hopeless at grasping even the basics of economics. That and their insatiable greed is what leads to their chronic discontent, even as they’re provided with everything they need and far more of what they want than they deserve. A friend of mine finally had enough of his (now ex-)wife’s whining and told her “Bitch, you want more money? Then you either go get a job, or go put on a see-through dress and go stand on a street corner and turn as many tricks you can get away with! Otherwise STFU and learn to live within OUR means!”
I’m personally all in favor of buying such wives one-way tickets to Venezuela, Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti, Sub-Saharan Africa, or some other shit hole where they’ll learn to appreciate what REAL privation is.
God be with you, brother.
@JR
Find yourself a new church among the OPCs which are good; as well as many PCAs also they are many different denominations and pastors and you should find another church among them that have not been compromised.
If heresy is taught from the pulpit its time to leave.
If heresy is taught from the pulpit its time to leave.
Yes. Unfortunately, you’ll be doing a lot of leaving.
Regarding that Chevron video, I’m just happy hear to them referring to those career fields as “STEM” instead of the annoying, politically correct “STEAM.” Some people are so eager to include women in STEM that they want to add an extra letter to it.
“STEAM,” as in “ephemeral vapor?” Why would that NOT perfectly describe women’s involvement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics?
Anon @ October 22, 2016 at 7:53 pm:
“It is not disproof of evolution, but rather proof that women are starting to become obsolete.”
The only way women can become obsolete per evolution is if men gain the ability to either breed with animals or reproduce asexually.
“Also, until Christianity came along women were regularly viewed as subhuman because they lacked male strength and social instincts. …
“Greek mythology predates Christianity, yet women are valued over male lives.”
Yes. which is why I said regularly, not always. If men have a hardwired evolutionary instinct to protect women, however, then there should be zero instances of institutional mistreatment.
Which is it? Does evolution think women are becoming obsolete or women are so critically valuable that men should have no choice but to white-knight? If current trends in human behavior are being driven by evolution then why is our birth rate lower than ever? Can you show me the recent genetic mutation that is driving this dysgenic behavior?
Nobody ever valued women over men because they believe women are as strong or capable as men. It’s too easy to prove otherwise. We see this today with women receiving fast-track promotions BECAUSE they can’t do the daily work and Pentagon desk-drones spending way too much effort cooking the books to be honestly ignorant of female inferiority. Valuing women over men has always been a religious compulsion not a practical one.
Which is how most ancient civilizations could be misogynist while worshiping fertility goddesses, until they eventually shifted to worshiping women directly. Including Greece.
OT: Chuck Baldwin decries The Donald’s, American society’s “sexual objectification of women,” but, being a typical American evangelicuckservative, fails to note American women’s pivotal role in birthing this phenomenon:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/Articles/tabid/109/ID/3523/Donald-Trump-Trounced-Hillary-Clinton-In-Second-Debate-But.aspx
I get a newsletter from a large construction company in my area, and it is hilarious to see how their lady PR staffers – I’ve counted three in the last few years – looove to byline their articles with images of themselves grinning in hard hats.
Only the women pose like this, not the men. Of course, the women aren’t doing any actual heavy lifting or risk-taking, but it’s so fun to show off and play dress-up!
Feeriker, good find. The guy that wrote that drivel should change his name from Chuck Baldwin to Chump Baldwin. His acknowledgement of the problem is accurate (which is no big deal since it’s obvious, but sadly,”stating the obvious” is a near-revolutionary act these days), but his diagnosis of the cause of the problem is about as wrong-headed as anything I’ve read on the subject.
He’s just another Churchian cuckservative blaming men for the faults of women. Either women have moral agency or they do not – and the only way to blame men for their faults is to accept the notion that they do not. Yet blame men they do (feminists do the same). It makes you wonder… since these guys act as though they think women have the agency of children, why are they so blasé about them wielding the rights and power of adults?
I can understand it from feminists – giving women the rights of adults and the responsibilities of children isn’t a bug, it’s a feature, but one would think Christian men – in leadership positions, no less – would see the double-standard for the unsustainable mess that it is.
JR said :
After 35 years of hearing my Christian wife tell me my 250K income is not enough (hers, 0) while I drive a 16 yo car and buy my clothes at the Goodwill I’m fed up.
Just when I think that maybe the ‘sphere exaggerates how bad things are, and I missed out by not becoming a family man, I see a sentence like this, and I feel grateful for having avoided the whole thing…
Women are simply hopeless at grasping even the basics of economics.
The subjects in which female competence is the absolute lowest (i.e. even lower than engineering) :
Economics
Any Quantitative form of Finance
Astronomy
It’s worth pointing out that RC Sproul, Jr. (NOT his more famous father) had an account on Ashley Madison.
It makes you wonder… since these guys act as though they think women have the agency of children, why are they so blasé about them wielding the rights and power of adults?
Because they’re terrified of them, as well as captive to them.
Every single one of these guys is married to a woman who could tear his marriqge to shreds and destroy everything he has ever stood for – and on a whim at that. Maybe his wife will, maybe she won’t, but he has no way of ever knowing for sure (if he were an honest man, Dr. Charles Stanley would testify publicly to this, having been a prominent victim from among the evangelical pastorate).
Each of these guys knows, even if on just a visceral level, that his wife could not only destroy him and his career, but worse still, expose him in front of other Christian men for the impotent, hollow shell that he is. If Pastor can’t lead his own wife like Christ leads the church, then what hope do laymen have? No pastor EVER wants to be in this position, so he supplicates to his wife in order to forestall the threat point. If he were to ever even THINK about preaching biblical marriage and the proper roles of husbands and wives to his congregation, he’d find himself sleeping on the couch for the foreseeable future, just for starters.
@feeriker
Then they truly lack faith even if Jesus himself said that if such things happen to them they are blessed for great is their reward in heaven.
They may end up calling Lord Lord and he will say “I never knew you”
@feeriker
Then they truly lack faith even if Jesus himself said that if such things happen to them they are blessed for great is their reward in heaven.
They may end up calling Lord Lord and he will say “I never knew you”
That’s EXACTLY what it all boils down to: they lack FAITH. They preachfaith, they ridicule and excoriate others from their (bully) pulpits for not having it, and yet through their overtly craven and cowardly behavior, on this issue and on so many others, they prove that they fear MAN more than they fear God, that they don’t believe for a second that God has their backs when it comes to preaching unpopular truths that don’t comport with the culture or the prevailing political ideology.
I sometimes wonder how the original First Century apostles would have reacted to such men, and the only conclusion I can reach based on Scripture is thst they would have cast them out of their midst.
For a lot of feminists, the cargo cult analogy is literally true. They don’t realise that they are ignoring the hard work of STEM while they “ape the dress, language, and mannerisms of men” – they genuinely believe that this is all it takes to invent something and then bring it to market. They literally believe that the men just have to show up and act the part, and then money will be handed over to the ones who look most like Haven Monahan. If women don’t get an equal share, it can only be because the VCs are biased against them.
@feeriker
”13 Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.”
1 Corinthians 16:13
A command by God through his apostle to Christian men.
Concerning the Nobel Prize in Literature;
13 women have won the Nobel Prize for Literature, starting in 1909 (Oppression! Patriarchy!) Three years before 1347 men died and only 103 died on the Titanic. (Misogyny!)
Just glancing at this list;
https://www.freshessays.com/infographics/female-nobel-laureates.html
It seems pretty legit outside of the hilarious, early-era PC fission bomb of Toni Morrison
Black female, abuse victim, ‘wise negro,’ feminist, all men are bad, slavery is bad, black girl wants to be white because of all the bullying, kill whitey, women are heroes for sleeping with married men, children are wonderful so don’t hurt them EVER, etc.
Laughable bitch. Mix leftist canards, early 90’s ‘victim triumph’ with “Deep Thoughts” by Jack Handey and add a dash of numinousness and you get that silly bitch.
“You wanna fly, you gotta give up the shit that weighs you down.”
“You are your own best thing.”
“Someone has to take responsibility for being a leader.”
“All water has a perfect memory and is forever”
Her ‘great’ quotes are just pseudo-eloquent wraparound sentences that almost all use the ‘tautology as wisdom’ gimmick. What a silly, silly jerk. But she allowed the early PC hysterics to just absolutely erupt. Like how baby rattlesnakes will unload all their venom before they learn to safeguard it a little.
The latest winner, Alice Munro, is really skilled master of the short story. I’m no huge reader of Alice Munro but I see her as a someone who simply excels at her job. She doesn’t come bashing her way in with sacred Leftist stuff as a shield as far as I know.
The others on the list seem to be decent and don’t want to make me vomit. I’m sure there is a bit too much identity politics/feminism but it doesn’t seem too overwhelming.
Jelinek’s Piano Teacher was hated by people I never read it. Herta Muller seems like a legit story-teller.
Pearl Buck, real storyteller. She won it long before identity politics blew up.
It could be a lot worse, I think.
“If I tried to write a universal novel, it would be water.”
—Toni Morrison
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHAAAA
@Matthew James Davis
“I don’t want to defend her here, cause I believe in the validity of your posts. But, I can’t help notice that many men, including myself, go through the same process of buying into their own success while they’re still terrified and insecure inside. It doesn’t seem like anything unique to women here.”
That’s coming from left field. When was the conversation even about internal terror and insecurity in response to success?
If anything, it’s men who are ‘insecure’ because they know that they are judged on their merit and their work. That insecurity is part of equation of success, especially in the field of innovation. Your product must work, better to worry about it until works. Holmes feasibly has a near sociopathic lack of insecurity for all we know. She knew she would never be called out or blamed in any way for this massive disaster. Already there are articles explaining away her culpability. A guy posted a link somewhere above. What points to insecurity on her part? Only an iron-clad infallibility could drive this scandal. The FI brainwashes women as thoroughly as it does men.
Why do you;
—immediately read the story as being about female ‘insecurity’ and then absolve them (we men are insecure too!)?
—assume she suffered from terror and insecurity when her actions seem to display just the opposite. She was confident enough to very publicly sell billions of dollars worth of snake oil to the health industry. I didn’t follow the story that closely but I don’t remember any contrition at all either.
“If I tried to write a universal novel, it would be water.”
—Toni Morrison
That probably clinched her prize, the above being judged “lamest literary line ever written by a non-mentally retarded adult, and one not likely to ever be matched or repeated.”
I’d like to say that this was a one-shot award, like the late Belgian performer Marcel Lotito (“Monsieur Mangetout”) who was awarded ONE Guinness record for having literally eaten an entire bicycle over a period of weeks. Guinness awarded him the record, along with a notice to the world that no further records would be documented for this feat, because it was obvious that no one else would be stupid enough to repeat the accomplishment or challenge the record. Thus it probably was with Morrison’s “literature;” no one else is likely to ever again write anything that bad and have the balls to put it before a Nobel committee and the NPC isn’t about to review any more as considerations for a prize.
After 35 years of hearing my Christian wife tell me my 250K income is not enough
Very insulting. Hope you can position yourself to put your foot down about such things.
I will point out another angle, that of the holier than thou Christian wife. The kind that wants to give money away because “we have plenty”. Also gives away her time to church, sunday school, charity, hobbies, etc, b/c the husband is self-sufficient, “he takes care of himself”. But notice God did not say the man needed the woman, or that he was incapable w/o her, rather that it wasn’t good for him to be alone, and his job of taking dominion would benefit with a helper.
A whore isn’t a whore for what she does, but rather b/c of with whom she does it: not her husband. Thus a woman who gives away time and money that belongs to her husband is doing the same thing. It’s not adultery (although it’s one major path toward it), but it most certainly is cheating on him. This is the sort of thing older women are to teach younger women, but too many church leaders are using the fruits of other men’s labor to further their own ambitions.
I will point out another angle, that of the holier than thou Christian wife. The kind that wants to give money away because “we have plenty”.
This is another manifestation of the “what’s yours is ours” mindset that ALL wives have, but that some embrace more heartily than others. It’s especially prevalent among wives who don’t work outside the home and who take their husbands’ earnings for granted.
Also gives away her time to church, sunday school, charity, hobbies, etc, b/c the husband is self-sufficient, “he takes care of himself”.
I.e., neglects her wifely responsibilities to the home and family, or, alternatively, views her husband as HER helpmeet.
This is the sort of thing older women are to teach younger women, but too many church leaders are using the fruits of other men’s labor to further their own ambitions.
Once again, there are so few older women (i.e., “Titus 2 Wives”) in today’s churches that they are for all intents and purposes non-existent, an extinct species of bygone ages (of that dreadful “patriarchy”). Most of today’s “older women” are early-generation Boomers who came of age during 2WF’s ascendancy, were poisoned by it in their formative years. If they are “teaching” the younger women in the church anything at all, it is the propagation of feminist rebellion, even if only the “soft” kind.
As for church “leaders,” most of those of my acquaintance are control freaks who severely limit the scope and type of productive labor of other men in their churches for fear that such men will show them up as lacking or otherwise challenge their authority. They then use the resulting dearth of male leadership and labor contributions to the church mission as fodder for bashing the men of the church in their Sunday sermons. So very convenient for the AMOG.
The folded arms, or the infamous “woman akimbo” stance exudes “We’re totally serious you guyz!”
It’s becoming increasingly difficult not to laugh out loud.
feeriker @ 12:37 am:
“I’d like to say that this was a one-shot award, like the late Belgian performer Marcel Lotito (“Monsieur Mangetout”) who was awarded ONE Guinness record for having literally eaten an entire bicycle over a period of weeks.”
Also a Cessna 150 aircraft.
Didn’t see this comin,…wait, yes we did:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/06/technology/theranos-layoffs-41-percent/index.html?iid=ob_homepage_tech_pool
Pingback: Have faith in self esteem. | Dalrock
Pingback: Have faith in self esteem. - Top
feeriker says:
October 23, 2016 at 1:54 am
“Regarding that Chevron video, I’m just happy hear to them referring to those career fields as “STEM” instead of the annoying, politically correct “STEAM.” Some people are so eager to include women in STEM that they want to add an extra letter to it.”
“STEAM,” as in “ephemeral vapor?” Why would that NOT perfectly describe women’s involvement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics?
Apt enough, but the “A” refers to “Art”. The femtards are trying to shoehorn in a field into a place of honor it does not merit, one with little economic value in which they can seemingly perform. IMO they might as well refer to STEAMDWSLPS, for Science Technology Engineering Art Math (sometimes Medical) Drama Women’s Studies Psychology Sociology. Nope, keep it to STEM, and send the rest to Starbucks/waitressing/minimum wage retail/cleaning corporate offices after hours.
Apt enough, but the “A” refers to “Art”. The femtards are trying to shoehorn in a field into a place of honor it does not merit, one with little economic value in which they can seemingly perform. IMO they might as well refer to STEAMDWSLPS, for Science Technology Engineering Art Math (sometimes Medical) Drama Women’s Studies Psychology Sociology. Nope, keep it to STEM, and send the rest to Starbucks/waitressing/minimum wage retail/cleaning corporate offices after hours.
Point taken. I also remember some truly pathetic public “service” ads on both TV and radio from a few years back in which people were being mocked for focusing all their interests and attention on economics/finance/business, technology, and sciences, and not “the arts.” Very obviously a desperate attempt by people incapable of productive contributions to society (and probably holders of worthless post-graduate “arts” degrees that map to no form of gainful employment) to shame the productive class into recognizing –and subsidizing– something the marketplace held no demand for. Guess which sex is overrepresented in that demographic group?
STEAM = Stupid Twats Envying Able Men
Pingback: They built the airstrip, but no cargo appeared. | Dalrock
Pingback: Go ahead; try to make this stuff up. | Dalrock