Arvestaked

Had you recognized that I said that, you would not have said: "Your observations are not sufficient enough." Nor would you have said "It's the same thing. You claim that studies can be biased. How is your "opinion" not biased. You state something to be true based on your "observations" without any facts." Most of your reply was arguing the fact that I was stating an opinion. That means nothing since I had already mentioned it was so and that my aim was not to convince you of my opinion but yours is unfounded.

Here is a supplement: Conan O'Brien: "A study in the Washington Post says that women have better verbal skills than men. I just want to say to the authors of that study: 'duh.'" Bill Maher has addressed the issue: "All men in television these days are bumbling idiots while the women are all smart and sensible. The only men not made out to be morons are h0m0's, I mean come on, Frasier Crane is gayer then christmas." Do you ever watch "Everybody Loves Raymond?" Most of the time, who is the intelligent one in control: Raymond or his wife?

You want an example? Here's one from a comic I actually like a lot. "Women are smarter than men and I can prove it. It's simple. How many women have you heard say, 'Yeah, I lost these two fingers trying to make a bomb out of a tampon." [laughter & applause] I have heard that stuff from Jay Leno, from Robin Willliams, etc. How many internet joke lists have you seen that make fun of women and call them stupid. None! I cannot believe the excessive amount of excruciatingly mediocre jokes that float around people's inboxes that are just a bunch of feminist ego boosters. I am not saying that I would enjoy the opposite but so it is.

Nice try. Apparently you missed "I am not seeking to convince anybody of anything but rather, by expressing my opinion, show that any claims of intellectual equality that are automatically surrendered to are potentially unreasonable and are being accepted because of political correctness and not unbiased studies or observations. " I never said women were unintelligent! Unbelievable! This shows that you will believe what you want, no matter what! I never belittled women! My original point was that the genders are equal in terms of their positive and negative roles in society and that they succeed in being so in different ways. Somehow people got the idea that intelligence, whatever it may be, is the deciding factor in a gender's success. That is a load of horse pucky.

There you have it! What a wonderful book that is.

Ignorance of what? What exactly do you feel I am in the dark about here? Nothing. You just want to view me as ignorant because I disagree with you. Really? Conditioned by who? Their own race? Their own cultures? Exactly. You are not proving anything here. You, as anybody else would be, are only showing me that women have been kept from acting at their full potential but this says nothing of what that potential is. This is a big logical flaw. And it isn't about history. It's about now. It's about how people give speeches and when they get applauded. It's about how stand-up comics formulate certain jokes and how they get applauded. You are not paying attention because you are female. It is so easy to dismiss someone's opinion by saying things like this.

No. I never suggested that anything I said was factually based. It is my opinion based on my observations. I am not seeking to convince anybody of anything but rather, by expressing my opinion, show that any claims of intellectaul equality that are automatically surrendered to are potentially unreasonable and are being accepted because of political correctness and not unbiased studies or observations. Studies seeking to illustrate female intellectual equality were probably mostly initiated after it became more socially acceptable, when speaking publically, to praise women. Reading studies on something like this is completely useless, in my opinion because they will always be biased, regardless of the sides taken. That is why I give more importance to my observations. My observations have shown that women have the tendency to be less logical, less analytical, and less creative and this is observed along with the fact that men can be stunningly stupid and destructive. I hate the "this is what I believe because it sounds more moral and I will believe it until you show me evidence otherwise" game. First of all, creativity is not limited to the artistic community. That is not what I meant. Secondly (and we'll use painting as an example), go here and determine, for yourself, the ratio of represented men to represented women. And observe in recent history (within the last 100 years) how many female artists are in fact widely accepted as important, even postumously, if need be. Very few. Now I'm not saying that gender bias had nothing to do with that but Georgia O'Keefe, Helen Frankenthaler, Lee Krasner, and Frida Kahlo did it. But where are the others? And the only reason I'm even showing this is because you asked for numbers so there is no point in anyone turning around and saying "that's because they were oppressed." First of all, the word "data" is already plural. I'm not trying to be a pain but, in all sincerity, that will actually irritate me after a while. So, the fact that I said "tend" would suggest that in most cases (those cases being observations of various examples of intelligence) men would be dominant. I did mention the example, from my observations, of the female's superiority in terms of focus and multitasking and that is arguable a form of intelligence where women would be more dominant. In terms of the vagueness, I will say that I mean it to be a generalized view of intelligence that is dependant upon how I view it. I am not pointing to an implication. There is a general distaste for accentuating the differences between the genders, though it has been more acceptable in recent times to make claims of female dominance than the other way around. My claims are not entirely without support. It is observable through out history that men have have the most influence. You can tell me all you want that this is a matter of oppression but the fact remains that oppression cannot be quantified and therefore cannot be factored in. If someone actually had the intelligence to phrase this conflict differently and be bold enough to say something to the effect of "It is possible that women tend to be as intelligent as men," then I would be forced to agree. However, nobody says that at all and they do not do so because of social reasons and not because there is a preponderence of evidence to support intellectual equality without contest.

Jack Kerouac, in "On the Road," was accounting walking through Fresno when he saw an Armenian and at that moment, allegedly thought to himself, "Ah, Saroyan's town." Arshile Gorky was very important in the Abstract Expressionism movement.

So, I see then that you posted the article because it was on topic and not because it is something you believe to be true. Then tell me, assuming that the publication is bias, what there is to be gained from writing such an article in terms of stirring the nationalists? They are not offering a solution or a cause for agression but merely stating a potential and insurmountable scenario. If you are suggesting that they are over dramatizing for the sake of selling units or filling empty layout space, well that is something I cannot really contest.

I glanced at this thread as well as the one discussing the United States' interest in agression toward Iran which mentioned the stance it would take on Kharabagh. I may be missing something but the renouncing of the words "criminal separatist" and the potential of U.S. forcing Kharapagh over to the Azeris seem to be conflicted.

Men and women are different because they play different roles. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. I don't attribute success in the sciences as being proof that one gender is better than the other. That being said, I do believe men tend to be more intelligent and creative. Women are better at multitasking and are not as easily distracted. Men are less consistant (as someone else mentioned) but it is the instance of higher creativity and intelligence that really pushes things forward and anything less is just support for the individuals who possess those traits. Creativity is actually very important. There is a certain intelligence which, although deserving of reverence, is more geared toward doing what is instructed and is dependant on understanding and duplicating preexisting ideas. This is how I look at racial issues as well. Asians are intelligent but in a less creative and more mechanical way, making it more common for them to improve on concepts that already exist, but creating those concepts is often left to Caucasians, who are more creative in there intelligence. I do believe that men possess those qualities more often but they are countered (as someone mentioned) by equivalent negative traits. Both genders will be balanced in terms of function and impact and that means nobody is better. But it does mean that men tend to make the differences, whether positive or negative. Now, I don't know just how well this Harvard guy articulated himself but I get really fed up with people's adverse reactions to opinions about gender differences. Why is it so hard to believe that differences are not limited to anatomy? What law says such a thing? I will tell you the law: the social law of political correctness. There is no other authority. None. It is socially acceptable to praise women and attack men and anything else leads to people saying "This kind of bias makes me physically ill." Really? And the hypocrisy and blindness of which you wreak is potentially infuriating and stunningly embarassing.

test

Upcoming Jazz Show Recomendations for Los Angeles Spazio Bill Cunliffe -- Wednesday, Jan. 5 (very good and respected local pianist) Bill Watrous -- Friday, Jan. 7 (trombone player; very cool; played with Wes Montgomery) Ron Eschete -- Thusday, Jan. 13 (excellent jazz guitarist) Ernie Watts -- Friday, Jan. 14 (amazing sax player; I don't like the pianist but it'll still be worth it) Bob Sheppard -- Wednesday, Jan. 26 (phenomenal band; Sheppard is a respected studio musician and did the saxaphone solo on the Lost Highway soundtrack; the other musicians are absolutely phenomenal: Erskine is a drumming legend and Dave Carpenter is one of the best bass players in town)!!! Catalina Bar & Grill Dave Weckl -- Jan. 21 to Jan 23 (legendary Chick Corea drummer with an asskicking band) Vital Information -- Jan. 25 to Jan. 30 (a stack of legends rolled into one band; you'll hear some ripping guitar by another Corea musician and some insane drumming from a former Journey-man) McCoy Tyner!!! -- Feb. 9 to Feb 14 (that's right! it's the pianist from the John Coltrane quartet! this is a real treat) Chick Corea himself! -- Feb. 28 to Mar. 5 The Baked Potato Sandro Albert -- Tuesday, Dec. 28 (here you can see Dave Carpenter playing a six-string bass instead on an upright) Virgil Donati -- Wednesday, Dec. 29 (highly skilled and entertaining drummer with excellent bandmates; sweep picking and odd time galore) Triple Sec -- Sunday, Jan. 2 (what can I say? along w/ others you have Luis Conte on percussion, Walferedo Reyes on drums, and Eric Marienthal on sax) The Rythem Dogs -- Wednesday, Jan. 5 (Tom Brechtlein is on drums; played with everyone) La Ve Lee Pancho Sanchez -- Monday, Dec. 27 (one of the most famous conga players ever) Marco Mendoza -- Tuesday, Dec. 28 (does weird stuff like imitation latin percussion solos with his voice while he plays bass; Joey Heredia is an awesome drummer) Tuesday, Jan. 4 (Marvin Smitty Smith will be playing; you'd recognize him as the drummer from The Tonight Show) There's a lot of stuff in January. Look for these names: Alex Acuna, Chad Wackerman, Greg Bissonette, Scott Henderson, Sheila E, Kirk Covington Charlie O's Sal Marquez, a very strange trumpeter who played with Frank Zappa is playing tonight Lunaria David Hansen -- Wed. Dec. 29 (New Orleans style) The Jazz Bakery Tigran Nersissian will be there with a trio on Jan. 16; he's supposed to be a real good bassist Eh, that's good enough.

Songs & Flight Sign up for a newsletter for the most updated information.

Supplement...

Wow, that is some text. A "hello" followed by a few compliments would have been sufficient. I'll have to take time to work on a reply, especially since I will be trying to extract an ocean from a dry river bed.

I'm not really planning on staying. I just thought that was interesting. You didn't respond to my e-mail, you cheeky monkey.

Prevention and Remediation of Heart Disease

The show is tomorrow night.

For those of you in Los Angeles: Beat & Path is playing at the Roxy on Friday, February 27 at 10:15pm. They're a talented band with an Armenian drummer. Give them your support because they deserve it. You can hear some songs at: Beat & Path