Topic: Ladies In The Community (Read 11544 times)

ChuckOne · « **Reply #20 on:** June 18, 2014, 04:55:20 pm »

Quote from: 2Kool4Skewl on June 18, 2014, 04:32:59 pm

Quote from: ChuckOne on June 18, 2014, 04:26:57 pm
Let me make you feel safe.

Btw. only 4 girls here. Why so less? I talked to a girl-friend lately and she said that crypto is too abstract to her. She is a visual guy and about crypto, there is nothing to touch or to look at. So, is this perception true for other women?

And more importantly: if so, what do we do about it? I cannot think of a way to make it more vivid.

NXT Diamond / Jewelry Gateway

cobaltskky · « **Reply #21 on:** June 19, 2014, 02:58:43 am »

Quote from: ChuckOne on June 18, 2014, 04:26:57 pm

Btw. only 4 girls here. Why so less? I talked to a girl-friend lately and she said that crypto is too abstract to her. She is a visual guy and about crypto, there is nothing to touch or to look at. So, is this perception true for other women?

And more importantly: if so, what do we do about it? I cannot think of a way to make it more vivid.

No, not too abstract at all for me. I work in IT though, so I'm accustomed to thinking of the world in abstract terms.

It's probably cognitive differences. You'd have a more accurate answer by polling a cross-section of women(and men too!) to ask them if they thought crypto was as valuable as fiat. I bet you'd get similar answers from both demographics: no. lol I understand that value doesn't come from a tangible item - it's from people's faith and confidence in that item. Look at collectibles...

I think when people realize that they can use cryptocurrency to purchase tangible goods, and the diversity of worthwhile goods is expansive, then they'll realize the value behind the currency. Until then, maybe instead of educating them on why cryptocurrency doesn't need something tangible to be worth money, educate them how something tangible isn't worth anything except for the faith/confidence that they place in it?

Ludom · « **Reply #22 on:** June 19, 2014, 04:17:56 pm »

Welcome cobaltskky.

No difference here: male or female, if you post a meme, you get MIC!

cobaltskky · « **Reply #23 on:** June 19, 2014, 04:55:36 pm »

Quote from: Ludom on June 19, 2014, 04:17:56 pm

Welcome cobaltskky.

No difference here: male or female, if you post a meme, you get MIC!

TOTALLY! I have been forging HARDCORE on the MIC block chain! lolol Now to think up this thematic's brain child...

NXTGRL · « **Reply #24 on:** June 19, 2014, 08:48:56 pm »

Quote from: ChuckOne on June 18, 2014, 04:26:57 pm

Quote from: ChuckOne on June 16, 2014, 06:25:11 pm
Quote from: cobaltskky on June 15, 2014, 05:40:43 pm
I want to feel safe here, just as any other male participant would feel safe - as in, they don't have to deal with people judging them based on their physical appearance, but by their character and their intellect and the value that they add to achieving our goals.

This can only be from a woman.

Let me make you feel safe.

Btw. only 4 girls here. Why so less? I talked to a girl-friend lately and she said that crypto is too abstract to her. She is a visual guy and about crypto, there is nothing to touch or to look at. So, is this perception true for other women?

And more importantly: if so, what do we do about it? I cannot think of a way to make it more vivid.

Bwahahaha! I laughed out loud at those responses! I think that there are a few reasons why most girls aren't interested in cryptos. Women want security and resources. It makes sense, considering that women were traditionally either pregnant or breastfeeding. That takes a lot of resources. also, women aren't typically risk takers. men tend to take more risks, which makes sense since they would need to take those risks to get resources for themselves and their families. Since women were usually with the children, it makes sense that they seek security, and don't like to take risks. And right now cryptos are risky. Once you can show women that cryptos are a secure way to store and tranfer wealth (and a good way to get wealth), they will be much more enthusiastic. Or, if you could appeal to the average woman's vanity, like selling makeup for cheaper. I know! We'll make a 'Sexy NXT Guys" calender!

NXTGRL · « **Reply #25 on:** June 19, 2014, 09:02:22 pm »

Quote from: joefox on June 15, 2014, 06:27:31 pm

Your presence is welcome and very much needed, and the onus is on the rest of us to ensure that welcoming environment is always present.

Try not to white-knight.

Ludom · « **Reply #26 on:** June 19, 2014, 09:15:35 pm »

Ok, stop with this stereotypical discourse. You can think what do you want but on a public space as this forum, I don't like that.

If you make a sockpuppet only to troll, I think it is sad.

We are civilised and we can make abstraction of the gender, the skin color and differences. We can't judge persons on stereotypes. A lot of men don't like cars and sport. A lot of girl don't care about dressing and makeup.

We are a community of NXTers and I don't car about this things.

NXTGRL · « **Reply #27 on:** June 19, 2014, 10:03:46 pm »

Quote from: Ludom on June 19, 2014, 09:15:35 pm

Ok, stop with this stereotypical discourse. You can think what do you want but on a public space as this forum, I don't like that.

If you make a sockpuppet only to troll, I think it is sad.

We are civilised and we can make abstraction of the gender, the skin color and differences. We can't judge persons on stereotypes. A lot of men don't like cars and sport. A lot of girl don't care about dressing and makeup.

We are a community of NXTers and I don't car about this things.

Somehow I think that english might not be your first language, so maybe look up the term 'white-knight' as it applies to psychology. In fact, I think that you may have misunderstood that whole post. I'm talking about statistical probabilities in both men's and women's psychology. I very specifically used words like 'most' and 'tend'. That is not the same thing as saying "all". I suspect that you're white-knighting now too, which is funny considering I am a girl (I guess that makes me #5

). I've been following the forums since december, but I haven't posted anything. If you don't believe me, then PM me and I'll link you to my facebook.

Jacinto · « **Reply #28 on:** June 19, 2014, 10:07:26 pm »

Quote from: NXTGRL on June 19, 2014, 10:03:46 pm

Somehow I think that english might not be your first language, so maybe look up the term 'white-knight' as it applies to psychology. In fact, I think that you may have misunderstood that whole post. I'm talking about statistical probabilities in both men's and women's psychology. I very specifically used words like 'most' and 'tend'. That is not the same thing as saying "all". I suspect that you're white-knighting now too, which is funny considering I am a girl (I guess that makes me #5 ). I've been following the forums since december, but I haven't posted anything. If you don't believe me, then PM me and I'll link you to my facebook.

Hey NXTGRL! Nobody believes you! You are just a sockpuppet (as 85% members here)

You must show public proof that I am wrong

Ludom · « **Reply #29 on:** June 19, 2014, 10:28:41 pm »

I don't want to debate. No, I'm not english native speaker. Sorry if I misunderstand something.

I don't protect somebody. I protect my self from stereotypical discourse in general.

You can think what do you want about me. My identity is public but I don't want to know yours if it's not public (I don't care about your identity if I don't need to trust you or to work with you).

Good night

NXTGRL · « **Reply #30 on:** June 19, 2014, 10:35:01 pm »

Quote from: Jacinto on June 19, 2014, 10:07:26 pm

Hey NXTGRL! Nobody believes you! You are just a sockpuppet (as 85% members here)

You must show public proof that I am wrong

Haha, why? So you guys can see which one of us is hotter to help you decide who to suck up to?

cobaltskky · « **Reply #31 on:** June 19, 2014, 11:00:53 pm »

I agree with Ludom - can we get away from the stereotyping BS, statistical or not, and talk about individuals as people instead of their characteristics?

NXTGRL · « **Reply #32 on:** June 19, 2014, 11:09:31 pm »

Quote from: cobaltskky on June 19, 2014, 11:00:53 pm

I agree with Ludom - can we get away from the stereotyping BS, statistical or not, and talk about individuals as people instead of their characteristics?

He asked why more girls (in general) weren't interested in NXT, and I gave him my best answer. I was talking about groups, not individuals. Obviously there are exceptions to general trends. The fact that I even have to say these things is disappointing.

VanBreuk · « **Reply #33 on:** June 19, 2014, 11:19:10 pm »

Reminding people about why things have been traditionally one way or another is always helpful, it helps understand how we got here.

But the fact things have been like that in the past doesn't justify acting like this now, and I think that's the issue. Explaining is not the same as justifying, and the way NXTGRL talks about trends sounds to some of us like a justification of stereotypes.

You could use an objective argument to justify a tradition if biology was the sole cause for tradition. And I think we all know that now, in our species, cultural evolution clearly outpaces biological evolution. Biology is not the sole cause, or not anymore.

NXTGRL · « **Reply #34 on:** June 19, 2014, 11:41:50 pm »

Quote from: VanBreuk on June 19, 2014, 11:19:10 pm

But the fact things have been like that in the past doesn't justify acting like this now, and I think that's the issue. Explaining is not the same as justifying, and the way NXTGRL talks about trends sounds to some of us like a justification of stereotypes.

You could use an objective argument to justify a tradition if biology was the sole cause for tradition. And I think we all know that now, in our species, cultural evolution clearly outpaces biological evolution. Biology is not the sole cause, or not anymore.

I would argue that culture IS a product of biology. Culture is just another word for human behavior. Do we say animal behavior is seperate from biology? Biological evolution is the result of the fittest males winning the fittest females. By 'fittest' scientists only mean 'best able to succeed and reproduce in an environment'. They doesn't mean 'best' in any moral way. Since human beings are group animals, 'fittest' means adapting to the other humans around you. Different adaptations resulted in different cultures, which are constantly changing. This is all biological evolution. Why do people try and constantly seperate themselves from nature? We are a product of nature, therefore anything we do or make is a product of nature...

cobaltskky · « **Reply #35 on:** June 20, 2014, 12:49:24 am »

PS I'm still waiting for a response to the PM that I sent you...

NXTGRL · « **Reply #36 on:** June 20, 2014, 01:54:22 am »

Quote from: cobaltskky on June 20, 2014, 12:49:24 am

PS I'm still waiting for a response to the PM that I sent you...

PS. I responded to your PM

forkedchain · « **Reply #37 on:** June 20, 2014, 04:22:58 am »

Quote from: cobaltskky on June 20, 2014, 12:49:24 am

PS I'm still waiting for a response to the PM that I sent you...

i think the fact that there are *women* in here arguing about this shit, and that you felt the need to reply to her in such a manner is proof enough of the culture/biology thing at work here. ive seen it go down exactly as it is here many times times between women.

(assuming you both are women, you never can tell on the internet, and frankly the truth of that matter doesnt really concern me, but the points on culture/biology were salient, and stand alone until someone feels they can defend another position with actual words and not a cute picture.)

Jacinto · « **Reply #38 on:** June 20, 2014, 07:00:23 am »

Why don't you discuss these important topics at Ludom's NXT BBQ on 28th June?

VanBreuk · « **Reply #39 on:** June 20, 2014, 12:27:12 pm »

Quote from: NXTGRL on June 19, 2014, 11:41:50 pm

Quote from: VanBreuk on June 19, 2014, 11:19:10 pm
But the fact things have been like that in the past doesn't justify acting like this now, and I think that's the issue. Explaining is not the same as justifying, and the way NXTGRL talks about trends sounds to some of us like a justification of stereotypes.

You could use an objective argument to justify a tradition if biology was the sole cause for tradition. And I think we all know that now, in our species, cultural evolution clearly outpaces biological evolution. Biology is not the sole cause, or not anymore.
I would argue that culture IS a product of biology. Culture is just another word for human behavior. Do we say animal behavior is seperate from biology? Biological evolution is the result of the fittest males winning the fittest females. By 'fittest' scientists only mean 'best able to succeed and reproduce in an environment'. They doesn't mean 'best' in any moral way. Since human beings are group animals, 'fittest' means adapting to the other humans around you. Different adaptations resulted in different cultures, which are constantly changing. This is all biological evolution. Why do people try and constantly seperate themselves from nature? We are a product of nature, therefore anything we do or make is a product of nature...

This is a nice topic but following it can result in a massive derailing of the OP... there's however a few points I'd like to make about your comments.

"Culture is a product of biology" and "this is all biological evolution" are by no means facts. The fact reductionism has been the default assumption doesn't make it always true, and in spite of how useful genetics are to describe some apparent causal reasons for animal behavior, currently we cannot attribute everything to genetics and biochemistry. You have context-dependant processes. You have emergent processes. You have non-local processes. Something as essential as protein folding cannot be fully explained by aminoacid structure. And the larger the picture, the more factors you have that escape reductionism.

Nevertheless, this is by no means intending to separate humans from nature. That would be a big contradiction in terms, and imo we as a species are still falling very short when it comes to acknowledging how deep the connection between humans and other species goes. But nature (or culture) does not equal biochemistry and classical physics only.

News:

Author Topic: Ladies In The Community (Read 11544 times)