In light of some past articles on diversity, SoylentNews: "How to Get Girls Into Coding" and SoylentNews: "Google to Release Diversity Data About its Workforce" This CNN article caught my attention.
Princess Free Zone offers empowering T-shirts with images such as dinosaurs, skateboards and soccer balls. "Kids should not have to be brave to wear the things they like," says founder Michele Yulo.
[...] "Girl clothes without the girly" is the mantra behind Girls Will Be, which includes longer shorts and T-shirts (no pink ones!) with images that seek to break gender stereotypes.
[...] The company buddingSTEM offers a line of girls' clothes celebrating girls' interests in science, engineering, technology and math.
Please, browse the photos. They are full of lovely little girls, minus what I call the "silly frilly" stuff. You might even click some links, and find something fitting for the young lady in your life!
Some might complain that it's a very small start - but the longest journey begins with a single step. Each of these startups seems to be doing pretty much what I've called for - giving the girls what THEY want, rather then telling them what they should want.
One of my favorite T-shirts, seen on girls young and mature, http://www.polyvore.com/cgi/img-thing?.out=jpg&size=l&tid=92703208
Related Stories
Google is planning to release statistics documenting the diversity of its workforce for the first time, amid escalating pressure on the technology industry to hire more minorities and women. The numbers are compiled as part of a report that major U.S. employers must file with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Employers, though, aren't required to make the information publicly available. Google Inc. had resisted previous calls for it to share the diversity data. David Drummond, an African-American executive who oversees Google's public policies, announced the about-face Wednesday during the company's annual shareholders' meeting at its headquarters in Mountain View. "Many companies in (Silicon Valley) have been reluctant to divulge that data, including Google, and, quite frankly, we are wrong about that," Drummond said. He said the information will be released next month.
A huge nationwide push is underway, funded by the nonprofit Code.org's corporate and billionaire donors, from Amazon and Google to Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, to introduce American schoolchildren to coding and to redefine it as a basic skill to be learned alongside the three R's.
Code.org's curriculum has been adopted by 20,000 teachers from kindergarten to 12th grade. But if coding is the new lingua franca, literacy rates for girls are dropping: Last year, girls made up 18.5 percent of A.P. computer science test-takers nationwide, a slight decrease from the year before. In three states, no girls took the test at all. An abysmal 0.4 percent of girls entering college intend to major in computer science [PDF]. And in 2013, women made up 14 percent of all computer science graduates down from 36 percent in 1984. The imbalance persists in the tech industry. Just this week, Google released data showing that women account for just 17 percent of its tech employees.
The problem is not only getting girls to computer class, but keeping them there.
See also girlswhocode.com.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:00AM
If a boy wears girls' clothes, he's crossdressing. If a girl wears boys' clothes, she isn't. Where's the diversity in your sexist society, you sexists?
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:18AM
There are plenty of women who crossdress.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:21AM
Lesbians pretending to be straight men? Do you include the strap-on as part of the outfit?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:22AM
Otherwise how can they get drunk and do frat-style gangrapes against (wo)men.
(Score: 2, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:53AM
How about these girls are dressing in functional clothing - not "boy's clothes"? What is male about geometric shapes? Or dinosaurs? Or math? The girls want clothing that fit, and reflects their interests. How does clothing that fits GIRLS become BOY'S CLOTHES?!?!?!
Girl's clothing does not fit boys, nor does boy's clothing fit girls. Especially after they enter puberty. Geez, Louise, didn't you study any anatomy?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:03AM
Bikinis, panties, briefs, and boxers fit asses just fine. When you shop for underwear, do you find it sold in the functional-underwear-for-everyone section, or do you find it sold in the segregated underwear-for-men and underwear-for-women sections?
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:33AM
I understand that you might be preoccupied with undergarments and lingerie - but those things aren't offered for sale on any of those sites. "Girl's clothing" - clothing that is cut and fit to developing female forms, but also fit for wear in public places such as school, the grocery store, or even the Harborview Girl Geek Club.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:41AM
So we have Girl Geek Clubs now that actively exclude boys? That's sexist discriminatory segregation. Why can't we have Geek Clubs For Everybody in your sexist society?
(Score: 3, Touché) by Joe Desertrat on Sunday August 30 2015, @06:20PM
So we have Girl Geek Clubs now that actively exclude boys? That's sexist discriminatory segregation. Why can't we have Geek Clubs For Everybody in your sexist society?
The first rule of Geek Club is that you don't talk about Geek Club.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by VLM on Sunday August 30 2015, @11:24AM
clothing that is cut and fit to developing female forms
Eh not really, this appears to be more for the 7 year olds. Based on the initial buzz I also assumed this was anti-prosti-tot but if you click the cnn link, that contains a separate link to a semi-related anti-prosti-tot story, title something like "too hot for tweens", which is what both of us were expecting. This isn't an anti-prosti-tot story at all.
If this were an anti-prosti-tot story it would be full of rage about thongs for six year old girls now being sold with gender neutral dinosaur themes instead of "what happens in vegas stays in vegas" themes. Or "Juicy" branded diapers, which is wrong in several levels. That would be a moderately interesting story and business, but its not THIS story.
To some extent they're missing the point, the problem isn't occasionally faulty artificial gendering for toddler clothes, its the marketing concept of artificial gendering itself. Four year old kids don't need separate (but equal ?) clothing sections in the store where items are arbitrarily assigned then marked up. The minecraft tee shirts need to be in the kids section, not a boys or girls section. Once they approach teen-ish range and development begins then yeah there are certain inherent physical differences in the clothing in certain areas, etc etc. Last time I was in an old navy store at the mall (admittedly this was probably in the 00s) I seem to recall they sold some gender neutral stuff, which was OK, so a plain XL red tee shirt was just a XL red tee shirt, not a specifically girls/boys XL red tee shirt.
Basically the TLDR is some stereotypical startup types want to buy "boys tee shirts" which market at a cheaper price because boys are supposed to destroy their clothes playing in the yard in the mud, mark them up to girl prices themselves, and keep the profit by selling them as "girl tee shirts". The public has been trained to expect girl clothes to be more expensive, vanity and all that. Kind of like womens haircuts ripoff, my wife's haircut doesn't seem to take all that much longer than my haircut but the cost is 2-3 times as much for her because she's a woman and women should pay more for the same thing than men.
(Score: 3, Touché) by TheRaven on Sunday August 30 2015, @12:43PM
Bikinis, panties, briefs, and boxers fit asses just fine
While true, you might at some point try looking at the front of a naked human, at which point you will discover why different underwear shapes are needed for different genders.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Sunday August 30 2015, @10:52PM
Hey, panties fit on guys just fine! ...Not that I would know, of course.
(I think the disparity between the material quality of panties and boxers/briefs to be the greatest discrimination.)
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:11AM
This submission feels like it is all about runaway trying to prove he's totally down with gender equality and the we should all take note that the damn dirty SJWs are forcing it down people's throats while he's just totally chill about the whole thing. Not frothy at all, just chill.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:17AM
Mothers make their daughters wear boys' clothes "with images such as dinosaurs, skateboards and soccer balls" to increase female penetration into "science, engineering, technology and math."
Sexist women do not want gender equality. Sexist women want revenge against men.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:23AM
Not doing too well with the ladies?
Do you need some freudian love too?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:43AM
If I had the chance
I'd ask a woman to dance
And I'd be dancing with myself
(Score: 2) by mojo chan on Monday August 31 2015, @09:15AM
Yeah, they are the ones being sexist, by failing to force their kids to wear Disney princess outfits.
Those kids don't seem particularly upset at being made to wear "boy's" clothes. Perhaps it's just you that feels comfortable with those gender stereotypes, while young girls actually dinosaurs and machines and not just what you think they should look like.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:44AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:42AM
What pop psych references are you talking about?
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Monday August 31 2015, @09:21PM
It [soylentnews.org] isn't [soylentnews.org] working [soylentnews.org].
1702845791×2
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:19AM
That is exactly what the terrorists want. We need to take our country back from the feminazis.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:23AM
Too late! Your country is a cuntry now. You've lost.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:05AM
Have we sunk this low? Can't we hold a sensible discussion without looking at the 'lovely little girls'? The summary explains what it is about without us to look having to look at pictures.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:19AM
There's no way I'm following a link to photos of lovely little girls.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by mtrycz on Sunday August 30 2015, @11:14AM
While I rated this funny (because it made me spit my coffee), I think it's actually pretty insightful about the degree of degeneration we've at. I clicked the link and yes, the photos are very acurately described by the OPs words: "lovely little girls". The main thing about the shots is that the girls seem to have fun being themselves (I liked the T-rex one particularly). It's obviously and ad campagin, and it's deliberately designed to be so, but still. I personally think that breaking the gender roles (expecially in young people; just think about it, all the little girls are princesses and all the little boys are warriors/soldiers) is a good thing.
The thing that when one reads "lovely little girls" the first thought is about child pornography says lenghts about the mental/psycological torsion we've collectively gone through. We can't even enjoy the beauty of persons, even young persons, without an everpresent subtle sexual tension.
I stand with OP: he's acurately described the content of the link. That's that.
In capitalist America, ads view YOU!
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @03:31PM
A big, fat shit in a toilet bowl. Man, it smells. A big, thick, hefty shit stinking up the place. And it leaves a shit-streak when you flush it, too.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Sunday August 30 2015, @04:08PM
I read Runaway's submission in the queue and thought, "Oh boy, he's gonna get ribbed for this." But clicking the links, his characterization is fine. The ribbing is more a reflection on those reading dubious stuff into it, and the times in which those people came of age.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by VortexCortex on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:37PM
I personally think that breaking the gender roles (expecially in young people; just think about it, all the little girls are princesses and all the little boys are warriors/soldiers) is a good thing.
Well, turn in your SJW card then because there are no little trans-girls on that page.
(Score: 2) by mtrycz on Sunday August 30 2015, @10:35PM
That doesn't even make sense. Can you rephrase that?
In capitalist America, ads view YOU!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:07AM
In the real world (which quite possibly excludes America), Dads make clothes too, and have done for thousands of years. Shop bought clothes are a recent invention - mostly dating from the 60's. Before that, they were had made to order at all levels of society, and in many countries/cultures still are.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:44PM
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:17AM
I find it funny that "giving the girls what THEY want, rather then telling them what they should want" means no pricess stuff, no pink. Really? That's bullshit. Pink and princess stuff does not exclude dinosaurs and cars you know. A girl can like them all. No credibility in this shit.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:21AM
Exactly! How do we know dinosaurs didn't have frilly pink feathers?
(Score: 2) by Kell on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:42AM
I would buy my nieces a cool "Princess Flamingosaurus" t-shirt in a heart-beat. They would love it to bits and destroy the house to get at it. Well... they destroy the house anyway, but at least this time it would be purposeful!
Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @09:31AM
I would love to give my niece a pink Pterodaustro t-shirt.
Just look at the images(with your favorite search engine), what a lovely flamingoness.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 30 2015, @09:33AM
I must have missed the part of the article stipulating that the girls must choose this or frilly stuff - for the rest of their lives, with no possibility of going back.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @10:02AM
My dinosaur is a princess! Princessaurus Rex!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @10:09AM
April shops at T-Rex, and so should you. [youtu.be]
(Score: 2) by kurenai.tsubasa on Sunday August 30 2015, @05:30PM
Princess Daisy? [imdb.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by albert on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:14PM
The princess stuff is usually lots of plastic/gauze mesh (cheap substitute for lace and silk) and lots of polyester or nylon. It'd be a major fire hazard if it weren't soaked in toxic flame retardants. This other stuff is cartoony (the shirts with dinosaurs) or purposely unfeminine (as opposed to unfeminine for practical reasons like durability). Yuck, yuck, and yuck. I guess it beats jeans with holes intentionally ripped in the butt.
What about nice fabric in solids, stripes, and plaid? Can't we have something kind of classy, respectable, and pretty but not garish? It could even be skimpy as long as that doesn't mean trashy holes and exposed bellies. It's be nice to have stuff untainted by corporate logos, political/religious messages, and licensed characters.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by sjwt on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:32AM
The funny thing is I see girls clothing with this kinda stuff on it all the time..
but hey, maybe I dont just close my eyes because of all the ''triggers''
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @10:24PM
i have a daughter and she likes "girly" shit and "boyish" shit. only feminists would be so sexist to assume that other members of their own venusian species would even give a shit
(Score: 3, Funny) by wonkey_monkey on Sunday August 30 2015, @10:01AM
Please, browse the photos. They are full of lovely little girls
Just try not to imagine that being said with a gravelly East European accent.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @10:04AM
Yes, yes, now tell me what the lovely little girls are full of.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Kell on Sunday August 30 2015, @10:05AM
Sugar and spice and everything nice. And the spice must flow.
Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday August 31 2015, @12:15AM
Just be sure to keep Jojo away from the Chemical X and we'll be good.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday August 30 2015, @04:12PM
I would mod you "Ick" and "Guffaw" at the same time, if I could.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Sunday August 30 2015, @11:28AM
I sent the link to my wife, as she's in shopping mode to get our kids back-to-school clothes. I love "Half of all T. Rexes were Girls."
I have been trying and trying to get my daughter more interested in STEM, taking her to Makers Faires, getting her tablets and RPis and trying to surround her with as many opportunities to have fun with technology as I can, but the deck is stacked against me with gender roles that pervade all media and, yes, available options for clothing. The message has always been, you don't have to dress like a "girl," but then you'll have to dress like a boy... No, a lot of girls want to dress like girls, but without the pat on the head, thank you very much. These clothes do that, I think.
Thanks, Runaway.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Sunday August 30 2015, @11:43AM
I'm with Phoenix.
My son likes pink, green and yellow. (Pink mainly because blue is Elsa's colour, so all the blue in the house is my daughter's. (Frozen; if you've escaped, be thankful))
My daughter likes blue and yellow and pink.
Clothes in shops are frilly (or barely covering things - string straps, short-short sleeves, tiny shorts, tull(!), and thin fabrics) for girls
And boring but at least functional for boys.
Now it seems Runaway's post might help me find clothes for my daughter, which might not tear when she climbs trees, and not have princesses on them.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Hairyfeet on Sunday August 30 2015, @12:33PM
"but the deck is stacked against me with gender roles that pervade all media"...sigh. It couldn't just be the fact that females run on different hormones and have differently wired brains based on their brain scans...nope its GOT to be "the media" that keeps them from wanting to act like males with little inverted penises.../facepalm/ This is why we liberals from the 70s do not get along with today's so called "progressive" movement, because its not about equal opportunity anymore, instead its about equal outcome. If we don't have enough of group X in job Y nobody even stops for a single second to ask "Maybe group X just doesn't find job Y appealing" nope its GOT to be some bogeyman that is keeping them down, hell I'm shocked they haven't had a fit about hockey being racist because there isn't enough black hockey players!
News Flash...girls and boys are different, their brains are wired differently, they run on different hormones and therefor they have different likes and dislikes and these even apply to...gasp! Choices of careers. There are plenty of jobs women are better than men at naturally, not because of "media bias" but simply because of the way they are built. For examples women have been found to be better at language skills and at reading people so they make both better translators and better hostage negotiators,, also due to their ability to take g-forces they also make excellent fighter pilots.
But this also means there are things that most women simply do not find interesting or simply don't care for and in all my years at the shop I can say technology and computers? Yeah they tend to not like them very much. Its not that they can't understand or use computers and other high tech devices, its just that they see them as simply a tool to get shit done and once the job is done? They really want nothing else to do with the thing, they want to just get the job done and move on. If I had to guess, just based on the many years of conversations I have had with women on the subject? Since women are much better at face to face communication they find technology lifeless and dull and really don't care to know anymore about it than "can it do what I want it to?" and if the answer is yes that is all they give a shit about.
So instead of dragging your daughter to places she probably finds about as fun as you find the DMV why not instead ask her "what things do YOU like? What things interest you?" and encourage and support her no matter whether its something YOU find interesting or not? If she wants to be a lumberjack fine, if she wants to be a stay at home mom great, as long as it is something she finds fulfilling and makes her happy that should be all that matters. Our goal should be to make sure they have the opportunity to be whatever it is they want to be without any barriers in their way, not to try to steer them in one direction or the other.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:46PM
First off, when I said "media" I used it in the general sense of something that conveys information. I meant it in the sense of the messages that girls are surrounded by, coming from whatever source. You took it in the narrowest sense of "MSNBC/CNN/Fox/Whatever," as in, a directed plot, something that must be corrected by affirmative action or something.
I thought the clothing Runaway posted was great because it gives girls different messages about how they can not follow traditional gender roles without being forced to be boys to do it. I am not content to wave my hands in the air, saying, "Girls just don't like math, science, and computers," and leave it at that. STEM makes you productive and powerful in this world and I don't want my daughter to not have social permission to access that because everything around her is telling her overtly and covertly that STEM is for boys only.
The article opens a perspective on STEM for girls, that perhaps girls don't like STEM as it is now because it has been built by boys, for boys. Perhaps, if we follow the example of this clothing line, we can open avenues to STEM that will appeal to girls without forcing them to approach it as do boys.
Second, I'd challenge the idea that "men and women" are built differently as the absolute determinant for roles men and women play in society. Do you want to assert that in many parts of the world women wear burkas because they have more estrogen than men? Do you think tribal men in the Amazon wear lip- and ear pucks because they have more testosterone? Do men in Iroquois society have some physical basis for the fact that their social structure is matriarchal? Probably not, right? A great deal of what we think men and women can do and prefer to do is quite governed by culture, not biology.
Besides, nobody is forcing anyone to buy these clothes for girls. Buy them if you like, don't if you don't.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Funny) by albert on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:41PM
I have the answer to this one.
Where might one find a good husband? You don't want too much competition. You want men who can support a family. Oh, hey, look at mechanical engineering and electrical engineering! Obviously, if the goal is to be a housewife, you need to be in engineering classes. You'll need to qualify for admission. Obviously you'll want to be at a good school. You'll need to do well enough so that you don't get kicked out before you find a nice husband.
So yes, STEM is for boys. It's lots of cute boys that are lonely. STEM is boys, boys, boys... and that makes it the best place for a girl. Hit the books!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @08:20PM
> Second, I'd challenge the idea that "men and women" are built differently as the absolute determinant for roles men and women play in society.
It is more than a little ironic that hairy's denial of the effects of social conditioning is the result of social conditioning affecting hairy.
(Score: 2) by kurenai.tsubasa on Sunday August 30 2015, @06:01PM
Hoo boy. Comment sins! (Don't take this too seriously. No comment is without sin, even this one! And Hairyfeet does address some practical matters.)
It couldn't just be the fact that females run on different hormones
Estrogen and testosterone affect the way that prepubescent children think. *ding*
and have differently wired brains based on their brain scans
I think we can take a sin away for this one, just this once. Yes, folks, the brain is a gendered organ.
hell I'm shocked they haven't had a fit about hockey being racist because there isn't enough black hockey players!
Hockey is racist. [huffingtonpost.ca] Apparently Hairyfeet isn't being anti-SJW enough *ding*
they run on different hormones and therefor they have different likes and dislikes
Hormones in prepubescent children control interests. *ding*
and these even apply to...gasp! Choices of careers.
Hormones control career choice. It couldn't possibly be that the lack of an effort such as in TFS has been influencing girls and boys by societal pressure alone. *ding*
There are plenty of jobs women are better than men at naturally, not because of "media bias" but simply because of the way they are built. For examples women have been found to be better at language skills and at reading people so they make both better translators and better hostage negotiators
Women, for whatever reason, are “better communicators” *ding*
also due to their ability to take g-forces they also make excellent fighter pilots
I mean, I'm all about strong women, but… citation needed? Hopefully one that controls for body mass and height? If this is true, all the more reason Star Citizen needs a female avatar already! Then I could zip around with G-safe disabled all day long and totally pwn everyone else! *ding*
Since women are much better at face to face communication they find technology lifeless and dull and really don't care to know anymore about it than "can it do what I want it to?" and if the answer is yes that is all they give a shit about.
Women are somehow better communicators. *ding*
Hmm… maybe I need a multiplier for this one. Moving on.
So instead of dragging your daughter to places she probably finds about as fun as you find the DMV why not instead ask her "what things do YOU like? What things interest you?" and encourage and support her no matter whether its something YOU find interesting or not?
Completely missing the point: women making things for girls that don't conform to gender stereotypes. *ding*
Comment sins total: 7.
Sentence: Re-Ned-ucation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:11PM
God damn you really need to work on your communication skills. I didn't get past the third line and I doubt many others did either. Should you have never been educated in writing for an audience, here is a bit of advice: no one will listen to childish bashing, no one likes a pedant, and finally in order to convince a hostile audience you must at least attempt to give them something they care about.
If you noticed I did not bother to comply with 1/3rd of my advice it is because people that can't write often lack the skill because they don't read either. Hopefully this will be more than just cathartic for me and put a seed of thought in defining your audience before you try to speak their language.
(Score: 5, Informative) by TheRaven on Sunday August 30 2015, @12:52PM
I love "Half of all T. Rexes were Girls."
Except that it's probably not true. A 50:50 gender ratio is pretty uncommon, especially in birds, which are the closest descendants of dinosaurs. In mammals, there's often a bias towards females because the growth rate of the population is limited by the number of fertile females (as long as you have the required minimum of males). For egg-laying animals, it's a bit more complex, as external gestation makes it possible for the female to have far more offspring, and the growth rate becomes dependant on the ability of the pack/tribe/family group to find food and defend against predators. In a scavenger species like the T. Rex, it's not at all clear which direction would provide a better evolutionary strategy. From what (little) we do know about the lifecycle of the species, I wouldn't be at all surprised if 60% or so of all of them were girls.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 4, Touché) by Phoenix666 on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:19PM
That's a good point, but I don't think all that will easily fit on a t-shirt :-)
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @12:54PM
I quit slashdot after 16+ years of daily reading because it got clogged with SJW gender BS, sad to see it infecting this place too.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday August 30 2015, @04:16PM
If you are human (and I assume that you are), then your entire world is infected with "gender issues." The closest you could probably get to something else is a Lamaist monastery in Bhutan. Good luck, and hope you are able to mumble in Pali.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @07:21PM
No. Claiming that everything is relevant to some cause indicates a champion of that cause and nothing to do with the cause itself just as racist groups think everything is about race and nationalist groups think everything is about immigration. Right now I am sitting alone in a lab staring at multiple screens, drinking tea from a nondescript mug and surrounded with cables, electronic miscellany, and scraps of paper. Not a thing about my current position save for the article comments I am reading on a lazy Saturday is "infected with gender issues". I do not worry about how sexist my tea-in-mug is. I don't care to know the gender of the person who made the cables. It is not relevant as to the sexist connotations of the scraps of paper having more blue lines than red.
It just doesn't matter.
And that is what brainspace looks like when you finally do give up being sexist, racist, classist, or any other -ist. Is a person ethical? Can they do the job? That's it. The end.
If you still can see everything being saturated with gender issues, you are part of the problem. You still judge people based on how they were born instead of their character and ability. Stop it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 31 2015, @11:34AM
Ethics, to me, includes not letting others build unreasonable barriers for women.
If you want to rail against us for caring about these things, I'm gonna have to fail you on ethics. Sorry.
(Score: 1) by LowSpeedHighDrag on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:11PM
Boys wear pink too. Either for breast cancer awareness or when dad does the laundry and that one red sock sneaks into a load of whites.
While I like the overall idea here, a lot (not all) of clothing really doesn't need to be gender specific. A basic T-shirt works just fine for girls or boys. How about a store that has a large 'neutral' clothing section with specific areas for more specialized stuff rather than the current "you must have (or lack) this chromosome to shop in this section"?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 31 2015, @05:43AM
> Boys wear pink too.
In fact, until recently pink was 'for' boys and blue was for girls. [smithsonianmag.com] And both genders worse dresses until age 5-6.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @01:38PM
Looks like there is a crazy AC obsessed with runaway, either butthurt and/or with hard-on I can't tell which. Disturbing either way.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:10PM
I went to Walmart shopping for school clothes for my daughter. Some of the young girls clothes looked more like stripper outfits. What fucked up mom would dress their kids in this shit? Oh, it must be the same ones that teach their 3 year old how to twerk, the ones that pump out kids to get more welfare.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 31 2015, @05:36AM
> the ones that pump out kids to get more welfare.
Welfare pays a couple of hundred bucks a month per kid. Barely enough to keep them fed. There is no profit in it. Except for political operatives using the idea of it to manipulate voters. Those guys get paid a lot of money to push it. I bet you didn't get paid a dime for your efforts. Useful idiot.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:17PM
I thought the Rehash topic were for articles about the software this site runs on?
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by CoolHand on Sunday August 30 2015, @03:46PM
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 30 2015, @02:57PM
Despite all the progress made over the years, there is still an unnecessarily strong arbitrary social perception that "x is for boys and y is for girls..."
Since we are talking about clothing, yes some shapes on average will fit one gender better than the other, and some styles will have more aesthetically pleasing results on one than the other.
But why exactly are, for example, dinosaurs "for boys" and ponies "for girls"? It's arbitrary. Along time ago someone made up these designations and enforced them with ass-kicking. It snowballed in to a cycle of abuse passed down through the generations. Anyone caught even thinking about crossing these arbitrary lines one way or the other was punished with an ass-kicking by those who had received such ass-kickings themselves.
At least it now is considered not politically correct to kick a girls ass for wearing practical cloths any more. But I would hate to imagine the ass-kicking storm that would arise if a similar site popped up advertising bright, colorful, frilly cloths for boys.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday August 30 2015, @04:22PM
You mean like these [google.com]? I agree, because most of the men responsible for the Renaissance and Western civilization that we now consider "civilized" wore clothes that most now would consider "feminine."
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 31 2015, @04:53AM
What about women without vagina? Aka MRKH.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2507167/The-girl-vagina-Teenager-19-sex-babies-rare-condition-left-reproductive-organs.html [dailymail.co.uk]