Misfeasance

Latino men voted Hillary 63% to 32% Latino women voted Hillary 69% to 25%

Black millenials voted Hillary 85% to 9% Latinos millenials voted Hillary 68% to 26%

Non-whites college graduates voted Hillary 72% to 22% All of these are from the same exit poll I used for my original post: http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls/national/president

It is hard to find a single white demographic that did not come up with a Trump majority (white college graduated women some up with a 51% for Hillary, a small margin indeed) and there is not a single non-white demographic that came up with a Trump majority or came anywhere near it. 

I encourage you to look through those exit poll results for yourself. CNN has  extensive and well-researched exit polls and the difference in the numbers is far too big to be explained away by a margin of error.

Statistically the strongest defining feature of the Trump supporter is whiteness. 

Does this mean the majority of white people actively hate people of color and voted for Trump because they wanted a racist in charge? No. That’s not how white supremacy works. 

What it does mean it that, as a result of white supremacy, a LOT of white people who consider themselves ‘not racist’, ignored Trump’s racism and voted for him anyway. A lot of white people did not care about people of color enough to not vote for Trump. 

1. There was an armed and trained police officer working security at the club. “If the other side had guns” doesn’t fly here because THE OTHER SIDE HAD GUNS.

2. There is NO excuse for civilians (or really, anyone not fighting in a war) to own automatic/semi-automatic rifles. That’s where we need gun control. Not a blanket ban on guns, but on civilians being able to carry weapons that can kill so many people in such a short amount of time.

3. The ONLY instance of non-gun mass killing all of you collectively could come up with was the Chinese mass stabbing, at which 29 civilians + 4 perpetrators died. There were 4 more perpetrators who survived. So, 8 people killed 29 people. That’s 3-4 victims per killer, as opposed to 1 person killing 50. 

How women prepare for first dates

Bonus: How men prepare for first dates:

Wow. WOW. Look at all these sheltered people and their internalized misogyny.

The point isn’t, “NOT ALL MEN ARE OUT TO GET YOU.”

The point is, “WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING A NICE GUY FROM A SERIAL KILLER.”

It’s not like they fucking wear nametags, okay? Moreover, the most awful people with the worst intentions often put on the nicest face or deliberately make themselves seem harmless and likeable, to lull potential victims into a false sense of security. (Read up on Ted Bundy sometime. It’s horrifying shit. Or read any thread on the “Let’s Not Meet” subreddit.)

In order to protect ourselves, we are forced to assume the worst of every man we meet, because statistically speaking, the biggest danger to women…IS MEN. Saying “not all men are out to get you, you’re just being paranoid” is like saying “not every car you ride in is going to crash, so buckling your seatbealt is stupid.”

When dealing with an unknown situation, in the absence of absolute proof of safety, exercising a little extra caution can be the difference between life and death. Shaming women for being what you may view as overly cautious is every bit as horrid as blaming them if something goes wrong later on.

And refusing to go to a secluded location with a complete stranger without letting someone know where you’re going, who you’re with, and how to find you is just common street sense, whether you’re on a date or just going out for business or social purposes.

If your life has been so sheltered (or your coping skills so incredible) that you see no need to distrust strangers or worry about the potential for violence, you should thank your lucky stars.

And you should also be aware that just because it hasn’t happened to you or anyone you know does not mean that it doesn’t happen.

Lemme say that louder for the people in the back.

Other fun turns of phrase in German include:

“Ich versteh’ nur Bahnhof” = “I only understand train station” for when you’re confused

“Hast du Tomaten auf den Augen?” = “Have you got tomatoes on your eyes?” for when someone’s not seeing the obvious

“Auf die Schippe nehmen” = “Take someone on a shovel”, basically means to take the piss out of someone

“Du gehst mir auf den Senkel.” = “You’re walking on my shoelace(s).”

“Du gehst mir auf den Keks.” = “You’re walking on my cookie.”

Here’s a quick handy reference list or anyone who isn’t sure:

Homosexuality does exist in almost all social species.

“Alpha males” are not a real phenomenon and in fact the most aggressive males tend to be the least reproductively successful.

“Survival of the fittest” simply means that the success of a species hinges on how well it “fits” its environment. It does not mean that stronger or smarter individuals are supposed to succeed. Those things can even be a detriment in nature by wasting too many resources.

“Race” is not a biological concept. Someone who looks different from you has the same human genes, just a different grab-bag of dominant traits.

Evolution is not a march towards higher complexity, more intelligence or even more adaptability. It’s just a fluctuation of characteristics dictated by environmental pressures and mutation. A slime mold isn’t “less evolved” than a hawk, just adapted for success under different parameters.

People didn’t evolve “from apes.” It’s more complicated than that. We are a category of ape, sharing a common ancestor with the other apes.

No human on Earth is “closer” to an evolutionary ancestor than any other. We all descended from the same one.

Neanderthals were also a “sibling” species of ours. We didn’t evolve from them.

Epigenetics does not have anything at all to do with genetic memories. It is a thing that affects characteristics like health risks, and this speculation floating around about how phobias could be related to some ancestral trauma is complete and utter nonsense.

It’s only a matter of time before such a claim is used as another pseudoscientific tool in the arsenal of people claiming that bloodlines have anything to do with the validity of one’s worship of European pantheons. “My ancestors were Swedish, and because of epigenetics I have genetic memories passed down from those ancestors, so therefore my connection with the gods is better than yours!”

saying the “male brain” works one way and the “female brain” works another way is ludicrous. for so many reasons, even beyond the obvious of imposing that tired old either/or mentality with regards to maleness and femaleness

occasionally you will read about how a study suggests that “men are naturally better at spacial reasoning” or “women are naturally better at cooperation”, but for one thing, given how early the brain wires itself and how easy it is to influence the wiring (like, disturbingly easy), and given the tremendous social expectations we face from pretty much the moment we leave the freaking womb, it’s impossible to study gender differences in a vacuum. 

like, do your findings prove that “women are better at reading faces”, or do they prove that, when you are part of a group that has been socialized since birth to be “nice”, to take care of other people, and to above all avoid making folks angry, you damn well have to learn how to read the room, and read it fast.