FWIW, I use it all the time on a dock and have no problems. I used to have HDMI issues, but it turned out it was an old cable (issue=TV connection didn’t work at all). I also had to change controllers as apparently cable controllers drivers can’t work with read-only filesystem. 8bit controllers work without issues. Me and my wife are super happy with it over all.

That said, maybe my standard is pretty low, but I just turn on the thing, open a game and play.

and you brought in another issue caused by the same toxic masculinity

To be clear, someone else did.

The fact that someone answered to “actually males are more likely to experience violence” with “eh, but go look who does that violence” prompted my comment.

And it almost sounds like somehow the focus switched from the victim to the cause, when the victims are men. This is the cause why I decided to comment. Almost like violence and protection of who experiences matters depending on who is experiencing it, as if there would be any difference from a woman or a man experiencing violence, whether it is from a man or a woman.

However what you are doing here is either trying to derail the conversation, or making it about something that wasn’t the original convo

If this is your argument, it is a weak one, because I specifically commented in a child thread about this very topic, in response to a very dismissive comment (from my POV). There is no conversation that I am hijacking nor it was me who brought up violence on men on the first place.

However doing it by attacking/derailing women complaining about the same issues is not

Thankfully neither happened.

what “held to a higher standard” might actually mean?

What do you mean, what can actually mean? It means that women are held to a higher standard, which means that to achieve a given result, they need to perform at a higher level compared to people not held to the same standard (males). There is no standard that women are expected to meet to sign up to - say - computer engineering, exactly like there is no standard for males to sign up to -say- psychology. In both cases though there are social pressures that make sure that the people within the spectrum of “I have vague interest in this” will be pushed one side or another depending on their gender.

In the specific case, the frame of the discussion was the women studying subjects which are male dominated (I am generalising from the specific context of computer engineering). I don’t believe “higher standards” play a role here (in general), because otherwise we could not explain many data points.

What in your opinion means being held to a higher standard in this context? And if that’s the case, how do you explain the fact that women seem to make plenty of independent educational choices in many (most, in fact) other fields, and that they generally have a higher success than men? Is this standard only applied for male dominated fields? Does it mean that males are held to a higher standard in psychology, medicine, literature etc.? Because if that’s the case, then I find this concept of standard really redundant to what I consider social pressure to adhere to gender roles.

because that’s exactly what you are doing.

Contesting the general validity of one’s experience is not at all talking about that experience, let alone contesting it. So no, I am not doing it and I don’t have any interest in doing that.

Sure, but that’s not the perspective of someone who is experiencing violence.

Someone said “men are more likely to experience violence” and the fact that this violence is also coming from men doesn’t change much. There is no ‘men convention’ where it’s put up to votes the way men collectively will act - unfortunately.

unless you’re really just tellin a woman “this unrelated data doesn’t match your life experience”

I am saying that the very relevant data (ironically, gathered as part of the respect-stop violence project) indeed doesn’t match that lived experience. Which means that perhaps that experience cannot be generalized?

If someone claims that women are held to a higher standard, I think asking “how is it possible that on average, at all levels, they get higher grades and they are the majority of students?” is a fair question. The hypothesis that women are held to a higher standard in this context would imply the obvious conclusion that only the “best” would make it, which is in direct opposition with the data that women are a substantial majority of students everywhere.

On the other hand I perfectly acknowledged that gender stereotypes exist and these do explain both sides of the equation that I presented with “unrelated data”: they explain both having a mere 13% of females in IT faculties and having 8% of males in education faculties. The same exact dynamic applies to males and females, which both - due to peer pressure, and fixed gender roles - end up being discouraged to pursue certain careers.

If “women get discouraged their whole life” was a generally valid statement, then asking “why then they are the majority of medicine students, a faculty with the toughest admission exam, a scientific faculty and also a long and hard one - 11 years in total” is also a valid question in my opinion.

So yeah, despite what you might think, while I have no interest to debate or invalidate one’s experience, maybe this cannot be generalized if there are quite glaring issues with statistical data. Why would you consider data about gender distribution in the education sector in Italy irrelevant in the context of gender dynamics in education (in Italy, since that’s what my comment discussed), is a mystery to me. It’s even more of a mystery considering that that very same data was gathered specifically within the contest of a project about women equality.

That genuinely sucks. I think that school is far from perfect even in my experience, and yet reading this I can’t help but feeling so disconnected from it. My experience has been so different.

To give some different anecdotal experience:

• scientific school in suburb of Rome
• majority males

My class of 31 in first grade saw 5 new students over the course of the 5 years. 10 people graduated. In the class, 2 female students were genuinely encouraged to be point of almost be privileged in subjects like technical drawing or math. They are the only ones that ended up leaving school with the highest grade (both of them Physics PhD now). In comparison a male student was objectively brilliant. The kind of guy who could figure out physics formulas on his own, great at math Olympics etc. Didn’t pass the last year, among other reason due to absences. No teacher ever encouraged him, and he was treated like just a guy who didn’t want to do anything. Had a strange family situation, but anyway, ultimately now works in the family bar (which is nothing bad, of course, but a massive waste of potential).

I think despite all the limitations, all the problems, my school experience was not one where these kinds of stereotypes were present. Our study groups have always been mixed etc. All our math, physics, biology, chemistry teachers have been female but one.

But what you are saying doesn’t match much the data (at least in Italy). In Italy females consistently get higher grades than miles, in all levels of school, and they do that from other women teachers (including STEM subjects).

How this matches “being held to a different standard”, for example?

They are the vast majority of schools in humanities (languages, classical studies, etc.) and all “licei” (=high schools created with the purpose of forming the ruling class back in 1920s) and they are the minority only in technical schools (which are generally lower quality schools more oriented toward professions than university) and in the scientific high school.

This also doesn’t seem to suggest any encouragement or discouragement in one direction or another, BUT it does match perfectly the culturally rigid gender stereotypes about women being more creative and fitting roles of care.

Also worth noting that women attend university in a higher % (56%) compared to men (also a result of gender stereotypes IMHO) and with higher grades on average. They are also the majority of PhD students (59%).

So my question I guess would be: why medicine and psychology are mostly and overwhelmingly women faculties, while engineering etc. are the opposite?

any interest or persuasion being dismantled and/or dismissed for decades before uni.

I wouldn’t say “any”, but I would absolutely say that interests in fields that are traditionally male-dominated are discouraged for women and viceversa (I have written in another comment, the imbalance in educational science is even higher than the one in engineering).

So I do see gender roles, I do see cultural influences about what is " for men" and “for women”, I don’t see the different standard women are held up to.

It’s quite hard to make connections between statements about adult society (I.e. workplace, reproductive rights) and what happens in teenagers in a completely shielded (and tbh, fairly inclusive) environment like schools (mostly, high school as that’s when people decide to sign up in university). Actually, possibly what happens even earlier, as many people who go to STEM faculties in university come from the “scientific high school” which is the only “liceo” where males are more than females.

On average females earn also higher grades, in all levels of school (which is why I don’t find solid the argument that women have to abide higher standard of excellence in this context).

So all this to say, I definitely think there is a cultural issue that pushes women away from STEM subjects (a phenomenon quite common in all the West), but I don’t think is what my interlocutor suggested - that is another expression of women having to meet higher standards. This wouldn’t explain the corresponding imbalance in other areas.

To make an example: 91.8% of students in teaching sciences are females. 87% of students in computer science are males. I would say that culture stereotypes and fixed gender roles are responsible for both, and instead this idea of “higher standards” seems fuzzy and explains only one side of the equation.

Curious also to note that women are absolutely the vast majority of teachers in kindergarten (99.3%!), primary school (97%), secondary school (77%) and high school (65%). While women are perfectly capable of reproducing gender oppression, it’s also fair to assume that there are plenty of women role models in STEM subjects.

Anyway, besides this long thing, I can’t find solid connections between what you posted and the topic, can you maybe elaborate your point?

Absolutely…but how does that relate to the previous topic?

Tbh, in Italy there is no much “before university” in terms of “being excellent”. The admission test was extremely easy, with a very high number of admitted students and on topics that are common to all high schools (we have a completely different school system in Italy). In fact, the vast majority of people in my class never studied those topics in high school. Also university costs were low (from 0 to ~2k/year depending on family income).

But I think that a mix of stereotypes (I.e. gender stereotypes), peer pressure (do you want to go study in a class 90% men) and other social issues definitely discourage all but the most motivated women to join, which is a shame.

The same exact thing applies to many other faculties of course. Psychology and “educational sciences” (literal translation) are basically just women (at least in Italy), which is exactly the same phenomenon.

Nice, does it depend maybe on the terrain as well (NL is flat, but I was in southern towns and they were a bit hilly).

Anyway, I 100% agree that safe infrastructure is a necessary condition for bike usage. But I look at Rome for example and I can’t imagine elder people biking (even if there was infrastructure) without ebikes, due to so many hills - let alone smaller towns in the inland.

You’re feeling unsafe because of social class or nationality or another factor.

Not in this case. I just do not feel safe because crime exists, and I can become a victim roughly as much as anybody else (probably slightly less than an elder person, in some cases for example). Some other people might have additional worries (like being attacked for racial motives), of course.

That does not mean you do not benefit from being male in a world ultimately built around men.

Which is something I have never claimed. What I challenged is the view that such privilege materializes in being able to roam free and fearless everywhere and whenever.

I’m just not exactly worried about someone stalking or kidnapping me over it.

Of course, there might be a qualitative difference in which worries I have vs someone else, but the original comment suggested “not worrying”, which I find it absolutely unrealistic.

I went biking in NL last summer (great vacation!) and I was completely amazed by the number of elders biking using ebikes. Ebikes absolutely make cycling available to a vast range of people who wouldn’t or couldn’t bike otherwise.

I do have and use a traditional bike, but I will consider in the future a (cargo?)ebike.

after all, I don’t feel afraid to walk home at 1am

That is not because you are part of a “class”. It might be your fully personal thing, it depends on your previous experiences, it depends on where you live or go (and this can also be an expression of being in a privileged social class), etc.

Depending on where I go, I do not feel safe walking alone all the time. I do not consider being sexually assaulted among the possibilities, but instead perhaps being mugged, or be bothered by someone looking for trouble or wanting to feel “alpha male” (as someone who grew up in rough neighborhoods, this is way too common during teen years).

I really don’t understand where this idea that males have the privilege of going outside without ever worrying about anything comes from. I have seen it multiple times in discussions around this topic.

Yep, if the number was not given specifically to connect that is what makes it inappropriate for me. But overall, an invite to a date besides being old fashioned is not necessarily creepy, even after long time. Of course, I don’t know if there were additional clues that made the whole thing creepy (tone of voice, phrasing etc.).

I studied computer engineering in Italy, and I can relate with the number of women being very low. I think there were maybe <10 women in the whole class on a ~60 people total after the first semester (starting with 250 people). Most of them were top of the class, which to me always suggested that while many men signed up and then “see how it goes”, only women who knew exactly what they wanted signed up.

Is that … a bad thing? I am missing something, did he take the number from somewhere or you gave it to him? But otherwise calling someone and asking out is a pretty harmless thing to do.

For amybody experiencing violence, how is that important?

It is generally used similarly to “life goes on”. Even if with more pessimism about the fact that certain things don’t change (sometimes for good though).

It is still going to be a big deal for a few weeks though…

A very old one indeed. It’s never certain how conclaves will go.

Not to talk about annotations. Take screenshot, click preview, click edit, click rectangle tool, make rectangle (repeat), click done. Instead with flameshot it’s literally 2 clicks. Thanks for writing documentation BTW, on behalf of whomever you work with.