Feminism And Male-Female Relations, New Book

[From article]
Tied Up in Knots by Andrea Tantaros discusses relations between men and women in America, and how they have become dysfunctional. The changes within the feminist movement have affected how each gender reacts towards each other regarding intimacy, authenticity, kindness, respect, discretion, and above all commitment. Readers should know her as one of Fox News most informative commentators and a co-host of the show Outnumbered.
[. . .]
The book shows the hypocrisy of those claiming women's rights. Tantaros feels the glass ceiling is being chipped away, "being replaced by a glass floor. There are females who stand in the way of their own. I write in the book about Madeline Albright's treatment of women when she said, 'There's a special place in hell for women who don't help other women.' Then there was feminist Gloria Steinem who actually insulted women, claiming 'Young women back Bernie because the boys are with Bernie.' I guess women do not have a right to choose when it comes to our political choices. If you disagree with Hillary Clinton and do not want her to be President you appear either sexist or self-loathing."
[. . .]
The chapter, "Twisted Sister," is very compelling. Tantaros feels "women summits, sisterhood, everyone sticking together, just does not exist. I put the quote in the book, 'Men, don't bother trying to understand women. Women understand women and they hate each other.' Historically women competed for other women over a man. But now the cattiness has exploded because we are all competing not just in our personal lives, but also in our professional lives. We talk about 'mean girls' as we listen to these hypocrites say that women need to stick together. The sisterhood is such a sham and never existed. We all don't have to get along or be friends, but we should not treat each other as enemies. We should respect one another."
Yet, how many feminists speak out against radical Islam? When asked, she noted, "I think it is so disgraceful that we have heard so little from the women's movement in this country against radical Islam. We heard very little from Hillary Clinton's State Department, not a peep from women's magazines, and nothing from this administration. We have ignored what happened in Germany, Sweden, and England. Law enforcement and the media covered it up. Remember the female reporter who was gang raped in Egypt? Where is she now and what happened to her? The press would rather ignore stories like this and focus on how terrible are Republican men. It makes my blood boil."
The book also goes into a lot of detail about how women are sending mixed messages to men. She writes of Girls actress Zosia Mamet comments in Marie Claire about the loss of romance and old-time dating rituals. Mamet wrote, "Not that long ago a guy spent the night with me. We went to breakfast the next day. The check came. I went to the bathroom, came back. It was still there… Seeing my confusion, he said he didn't want to offend me by paying on 'my side of town'-So he's thinking I'd be offended, and I'm thinking, if you've already Lewis-and-Clarked my body, maybe buy my oatmeal."
She commented, "Women need men. We want a soulful, sexy, and inspired union that can help us realize our full potential in life. We want our mate to be our best friend, an emotional and spiritual confident, an intellectual counterpart, and who loves us with a passion. As I write in my book, I agree with both Sheryl Sandberg who said in her book, Lean In, the most important thing a woman could do is to choose the right husband, and Patti Stranger, the famous matchmaker, who echoes this thought when she said, 'women, you cannot have your penis and eat it too.'"
Tied Up in Knots is a shocking, funny, and honest narrative about today's gender gaps. It is insightful, informative, and relevant to what is happening currently in the world. Anyone wanting to understand women of the 21st Century should read this book.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/05/a_look_at_the_dysfunctional_relations_between_women_and_men.html

May 9, 2016
A Look at the Dysfunctional Relations between Women and Men
By Elise Cooper

Science Research Is Flawed, Needs Freeing From Stagnation

[From article]
Science is broken.
That's the thesis of a must-read article in First Things magazine, in which William A. Wilson accumulates evidence that a lot of published research is false. But that's not even the worst part.
Advocates of the existing scientific research paradigm usually smugly declare that while some published conclusions are surely false, the scientific method has "self-correcting mechanisms" that ensure that, eventually, the truth will prevail. Unfortunately for all of us, Wilson makes a convincing argument that those self-correcting mechanisms are broken.
[. . .]
In 2011, the pharmaceutical company Bayer looked at 67 blockbuster drug discovery research findings published in prestigious journals, and found that three-fourths of them weren't right. Another study of cancer research found that only 11 percent of preclinical cancer research could be reproduced. Even in physics, supposedly the hardest and most reliable of all sciences, Wilson points out that "two of the most vaunted physics results of the past few years — the announced discovery of both cosmic inflation and gravitational waves at the BICEP2 experiment in Antarctica, and the supposed discovery of superluminal neutrinos at the Swiss-Italian border — have now been retracted, with far less fanfare than when they were first published."
[. . .]
In a 2011 survey of 2,000 research psychologists, over half admitted to selectively reporting those experiments that gave the result they were after. The survey also concluded that around 10 percent of research psychologists have engaged in outright falsification of data, and more than half have engaged in "less brazen but still fraudulent behavior such as reporting that a result was statistically significant when it was not, or deciding between two different data analysis techniques after looking at the results of each and choosing the more favorable."
[. . .]
Less famous is a similar hoodwinking of the very prestigious British Medical Journal, to which a paper with eight major errors was submitted. Not a single one of the 221 scientists who reviewed the paper caught all the errors in it, and only 30 percent of reviewers recommended that the paper be rejected.
[. . .]
This gets into the question of the sociology of science. It's a familiar bromide that "science advances one funeral at a time." The greatest scientific pioneers were mavericks and weirdos. Most valuable scientific work is done by youngsters. Older scientists are more likely to be invested, both emotionally and from a career and prestige perspective, in the regnant paradigm, even though the spirit of science is the challenge of regnant paradigms.
[. . .]
Why, then, is our scientific process so structured as to reward the old and the prestigious? Government funding bodies and peer review bodies are inevitably staffed by the most hallowed (read: out of touch) practitioners in the field. The tenure process ensures that in order to further their careers, the youngest scientists in a given department must kowtow to their elders' theories or run a significant professional risk. Peer review isn't any good at keeping flawed studies out of major papers, but it can be deadly efficient at silencing heretical views.
All of this suggests that the current system isn't just showing cracks, but is actually broken, and in need of major reform. There is very good reason to believe that much scientific research published today is false, there is no good way to sort the wheat from the chaff, and, most importantly, that the way the system is designed ensures that this will continue being the case.
[. . .]
This is a big problem, one that can't be solved with a column. But the first step is admitting you have a problem.
Science, at heart an enterprise for mavericks, has become an enterprise for careerists. It's time to flip the career track for science on its head. Instead of waiting until someone's best years are behind her to award her academic freedom and prestige, abolish the PhD and grant fellowships to the best 22-year-olds, giving them the biggest budgets and the most freedoms for the first five or 10 years of their careers. Then, with only few exceptions, shift them away from research to teaching or some other harmless activity. Only then can we begin to fix Big Science.

http://theweek.com/articles/618141/big-science-broken

Big Science is broken
Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry
April 18, 2016

Venezuelan Tribes' Lives Contradict Dominant Paradigm, Book Review

Book Review
Noble Savages: My Life Among Two Dangerous Tribes—The Yanomamo and the Anthropologists, by Napoleon A. Chagnon

(Simon & Schuster, 544 pp., $32.50)

[From review]
Their language is unwritten and unrelated to any others spoken in South America, a testament to their long isolation. They didn’t even have a clear sense or delineation of individual words when Chagnon began working with them. He struggled to find symbols for sounds in the Yanomamo language that had no equivalent in English. Math was an issue, too. Chagnon was conducting a detailed study that included compiling extensive demographic data to understand how Yanomamo culture operated. But the Yanomamo have no numbers past two, and they don’t use calendars, so they have little idea how old they are, or how far in any unit of measure one village might be from another. Compiling a census of a single village was a time-consuming chore.
[. . .]
He determined that as many as 30 percent of all Yanomamo men died in violent confrontations, often over women. Abductions and raids were common, and Chagnon estimated that as many as 20 percent of women in some villages had been captured in attacks.
[. . .]
In a 1988 Science article, he estimated that 45 percent of living Yanomamo adult males had participated in the killing of at least one person. He then compared the reproductive success of these Yanomamo men to others who had never killed. The unokais—those who had participated in killings—produced three times as many children, on average, as the others. Chagnon suggested that this was because unokais, who earned a certain prestige in their society, were more successful at acquiring wives in the polygamous Yanomamo culture.
[. . .]
protestors attacked the eminent Harvard biologist Edward O. Wilson when he rose to speak, knocking him down and dousing him with cold water. Critics, meanwhile, charged Chagnon with faking his data and branded him a racist.

http://www.city-journal.org/2014/bc0413sm.html

STEVEN MALANGA
Welcome to the Jungle
Napoleon Chagnon’s study of human nature in the Amazon—and the academy
13 April 2014

Einstein Wrong? Particle Faster Than Light

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484

22 September 2011 Last updated at 13:28 ET
Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern
By Jason Palmer Science and technology reporter,
BBC News

How Google Search Works

search quality engineer Patrick Riley says “'Essentially all the queries are involved in some test.' In other words, just about every time you search on Google, you’re a lab rat."

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/02/ff_google_algorithm/all/1

Exclusive: How Google’s Algorithm Rules the Web

• By Steven Levy
• February 22, 2010 |
• 12:00 pm |
• Wired Magazine
• March 2010