It is becoming serious, not just annoying due to the unfairness. On a more trivial scale, watch the MASTERMIND quiz show. A pattern is clear of systematically favouring the female candidates. I am not saying men are smarter than women. I an saying the questions are usually easier for the female contestants. The "random" general knowledge…
It is becoming serious, not just annoying due to the unfairness. On a more trivial scale, watch the MASTERMIND quiz show. A pattern is clear of systematically favouring the female candidates. I am not saying men are smarter than women. I an saying the questions are usually easier for the female contestants. The "random" general knowledge questions are hard ro fudge but it is still happening, Where it really shows up is in the special knowledge questions. Very often one of the females gets mickey muse questions and tops the scores half wat at about 15. Then in the general knowledge she has already a start of about 5 points often. Don't take my word for it. Have a look. It won't be long and young men will start to just give up on society where they cannot get fair treatment, and even in marriage can be dumped with no assets or access to their children.
I wouldn’t be surprised if that occurs. Google Wimbledon tennis or any grand slam. Always lands on the women’s tab as default. Not even the wife watches the women’s tennis. Btw objectively I would think men are generally smarter if one was inclined to do such testing. 😉
well I wouldn't knw if one of the sexes is smarter than the other on average, but it is pathetic that when a situation arises that might demonstrate a difference, it is subverted. as for female tennis players, football players etc payments. why wouldt the payments be based on the gate income for the matches? after all it IS really show business.
I know. We are either in a capitalist society or communist. Sure, throw some extra to the girls to take into account physical limitation’s, and as a father of girls, if they can make ok living in pros sports great. but in the long run something going to give - some sports won’t make enough to pay everyone at the same level. Then I expect Governments, federal or state will chip in (bail out)(womens ministers). No male player is going out on a limb calling it out - particularly when they may already be on 10x the average worker eg football. Individual sports will be ok as their is only limited numbers in both sexes that make the money. Most just get by.
"Google Wimbledon tennis". I did it, and this time I got mostly men's pictures. I do know what you mean though - in general women's news dominates.
However, I use Bing as my default engine (because google as a company makes me puke), and "wimbledon tennis" made it look like a women's tournament, with snarling, athletic women dominating, with the public clinging to their daily results.
Apart from men/women, the google result was much superior to Bing.
I use brave as a browser. Though still google while brave develops their search engine. We can go deeper, and say you cannot find results in google that are considered “alternative”, conspiracy or whatever. It is quite alarming. For example research negative to covid, many other topics the Gov /MSM don’t like.
As a software developer I'm always interested in these discussions, and have tried many browsers and search engines over the years. My setting of Bing as the default balances several factors, but is always subject to review - and the recent "Wimbledon" search was a black mark.
When I've tried alternatives to the big two (google and bing) in the past, I've quickly given up because localisation has been weak, being centred on the US, but checking Brave I see that it's done a good job there.
Yes, getting around "shadow bans" on information can be tricky, and, in my observation, is getting harder and harder with Bing.
DuckDuckGo was first suggested to me about 10 years ago, and I've tried it several times but each time it's been poor for "localisation" and seems to be built for the US. When I search "Thai restaurant" I want to find the ones near me, not in New York.
Some people may like this because it means DuckDuckGo isn't collecting user info (as it promises) but for me practicality wins.
For normal use I recommend google or Bing because they've put so much $$$ into great search and a dynamic user-interface. Google is slightly superior, but Bing is good enough for me.
The problem with both of these is that their results have a left/woke/feminist slant which is not admitted and not quantified. I was quite surprised by Bing turning Wimbledon into a women's tournament! They also collect huge amounts of data about you, which again is unknown and unquantified.
Sometimes I've been able to find information with DuckDuckGo that I couldn't get from google or Bing. I'll also try Brave in the future.
@Charlie - that's very interesting about DuckDuckGo and "disinformation"! I'm seeing the usual suspects among friends and relatives talking more about "disinformation". It's the next wave, and terrifies me.
DuckDuckGo had been a long time favourite. Mid last year they vowed to cut down on “disinformation”?!. So Many of us moved to Brave. Firefox is another option.
I sometimes enjoy the ABC's "Hard Quiz". In one episode I noticed that a young woman's "specialist" knowledge questions were much easier than the man who stood out as a likely winner, and when the two faced off in the "hard" specialist knowledge round she got through with apparentely easier questions.
I felt that on this occasion the bias was clear, but I suspect that it's common. (I try to switch off from these issues for a couple of hours at night!)
While the show can be entertaining I find that Tom Gleason's smarmy humor has a left/feminist slant which irritates me too much to watch it regularly.
I distinctly recall him comenting once "Maybe it's because men are shits". Grin and wink.
Whatever it takes to switch off at the end of the day!
The "Hard Quiz" format is entertaining and stimulating, and Tom Gleason's humor is very sharp.
However, having seen the favouritism to a female contestant once, it will be hard to "unsee" it in the future.
Another factor I've seen is that when female contestants are introduced they can be more boastful of their success in a particular field, with Gleason grinning along with how they stuck it to the men.
The discrimination against men is everywhere in the media. It is also being weaponised in families where the husband (assuming a male) is lied about and accused of violence if he even protests, so that the children are turned against him.
But it is no surprise that the MSM is biased against men and particularly straight white men over say 35, and if these unfortunate souls are also "working class' well forget any notion of fair and equal treatment.
This is a paradox because the big corporate media barons ie. Murdoch , Conrad Black , etc are themsleves old white men , the likes of who also control much of the corporate world as well as high government positions.
So why do they willingly discriminate against their own gender and age group? This was a question posed by Bettina years ago in her Weekend Australian articles .
This is a class issue and the feminist movement has always been as much to do with class inequality as gender inequality, and poor working class men have been an easy target.
It is becoming serious, not just annoying due to the unfairness. On a more trivial scale, watch the MASTERMIND quiz show. A pattern is clear of systematically favouring the female candidates. I am not saying men are smarter than women. I an saying the questions are usually easier for the female contestants. The "random" general knowledge questions are hard ro fudge but it is still happening, Where it really shows up is in the special knowledge questions. Very often one of the females gets mickey muse questions and tops the scores half wat at about 15. Then in the general knowledge she has already a start of about 5 points often. Don't take my word for it. Have a look. It won't be long and young men will start to just give up on society where they cannot get fair treatment, and even in marriage can be dumped with no assets or access to their children.
I wouldn’t be surprised if that occurs. Google Wimbledon tennis or any grand slam. Always lands on the women’s tab as default. Not even the wife watches the women’s tennis. Btw objectively I would think men are generally smarter if one was inclined to do such testing. 😉
well I wouldn't knw if one of the sexes is smarter than the other on average, but it is pathetic that when a situation arises that might demonstrate a difference, it is subverted. as for female tennis players, football players etc payments. why wouldt the payments be based on the gate income for the matches? after all it IS really show business.
I know. We are either in a capitalist society or communist. Sure, throw some extra to the girls to take into account physical limitation’s, and as a father of girls, if they can make ok living in pros sports great. but in the long run something going to give - some sports won’t make enough to pay everyone at the same level. Then I expect Governments, federal or state will chip in (bail out)(womens ministers). No male player is going out on a limb calling it out - particularly when they may already be on 10x the average worker eg football. Individual sports will be ok as their is only limited numbers in both sexes that make the money. Most just get by.
"Google Wimbledon tennis". I did it, and this time I got mostly men's pictures. I do know what you mean though - in general women's news dominates.
However, I use Bing as my default engine (because google as a company makes me puke), and "wimbledon tennis" made it look like a women's tournament, with snarling, athletic women dominating, with the public clinging to their daily results.
Apart from men/women, the google result was much superior to Bing.
I use brave as a browser. Though still google while brave develops their search engine. We can go deeper, and say you cannot find results in google that are considered “alternative”, conspiracy or whatever. It is quite alarming. For example research negative to covid, many other topics the Gov /MSM don’t like.
Thanks for the tip on Brave.
As a software developer I'm always interested in these discussions, and have tried many browsers and search engines over the years. My setting of Bing as the default balances several factors, but is always subject to review - and the recent "Wimbledon" search was a black mark.
When I've tried alternatives to the big two (google and bing) in the past, I've quickly given up because localisation has been weak, being centred on the US, but checking Brave I see that it's done a good job there.
Yes, getting around "shadow bans" on information can be tricky, and, in my observation, is getting harder and harder with Bing.
I've been told to use DuckDuckGo but haven't really tried it very often. Have other people any experience of this?
DuckDuckGo was first suggested to me about 10 years ago, and I've tried it several times but each time it's been poor for "localisation" and seems to be built for the US. When I search "Thai restaurant" I want to find the ones near me, not in New York.
Some people may like this because it means DuckDuckGo isn't collecting user info (as it promises) but for me practicality wins.
For normal use I recommend google or Bing because they've put so much $$$ into great search and a dynamic user-interface. Google is slightly superior, but Bing is good enough for me.
The problem with both of these is that their results have a left/woke/feminist slant which is not admitted and not quantified. I was quite surprised by Bing turning Wimbledon into a women's tournament! They also collect huge amounts of data about you, which again is unknown and unquantified.
Sometimes I've been able to find information with DuckDuckGo that I couldn't get from google or Bing. I'll also try Brave in the future.
@Charlie - that's very interesting about DuckDuckGo and "disinformation"! I'm seeing the usual suspects among friends and relatives talking more about "disinformation". It's the next wave, and terrifies me.
DuckDuckGo had been a long time favourite. Mid last year they vowed to cut down on “disinformation”?!. So Many of us moved to Brave. Firefox is another option.
Just flick through the channels on your TV and compare how many female presenters there are compared to males at any given time.
I sometimes enjoy the ABC's "Hard Quiz". In one episode I noticed that a young woman's "specialist" knowledge questions were much easier than the man who stood out as a likely winner, and when the two faced off in the "hard" specialist knowledge round she got through with apparentely easier questions.
I felt that on this occasion the bias was clear, but I suspect that it's common. (I try to switch off from these issues for a couple of hours at night!)
While the show can be entertaining I find that Tom Gleason's smarmy humor has a left/feminist slant which irritates me too much to watch it regularly.
I distinctly recall him comenting once "Maybe it's because men are shits". Grin and wink.
Admitting you enjoy ABC 😉 the ABC kids is great though. Bluey have saved them.
Whatever it takes to switch off at the end of the day!
The "Hard Quiz" format is entertaining and stimulating, and Tom Gleason's humor is very sharp.
However, having seen the favouritism to a female contestant once, it will be hard to "unsee" it in the future.
Another factor I've seen is that when female contestants are introduced they can be more boastful of their success in a particular field, with Gleason grinning along with how they stuck it to the men.
The discrimination against men is everywhere in the media. It is also being weaponised in families where the husband (assuming a male) is lied about and accused of violence if he even protests, so that the children are turned against him.
But it is no surprise that the MSM is biased against men and particularly straight white men over say 35, and if these unfortunate souls are also "working class' well forget any notion of fair and equal treatment.
This is a paradox because the big corporate media barons ie. Murdoch , Conrad Black , etc are themsleves old white men , the likes of who also control much of the corporate world as well as high government positions.
So why do they willingly discriminate against their own gender and age group? This was a question posed by Bettina years ago in her Weekend Australian articles .
This is a class issue and the feminist movement has always been as much to do with class inequality as gender inequality, and poor working class men have been an easy target.
Wow. That is interesting. I never watch the show but will take a look.