Hi, Math Geek White Knighters

I noticed that my previous post has attracted a lot of math geeks who like to play “white knight” to “damsels in distress”. So here are a few links that might open their eyes to the folly of their ways.

Enter White Knight – Rollo Tomasi

The Savior Schema – Rollo Tomasi

Chivalry vs. Altruism – Rollo Tomasi

White Knighting Explained – Heartiste

Chicks Dig Jerks: A Series – Heartiste

Good Girls ‘Do’ – Rollo Tomasi

The Feminine Reality – Rollo Tomasi

What do you think? Comments?

  1. 12inchsexmachine
    June 5, 2012 at 8:29 pm


    AD: What??

  2. acuskev
    June 5, 2012 at 8:31 pm

    Wtf my friend sent me this link and said it was to two girls one acuskev. WHERE’S MY PR0N???

    AD: You are becoming less entertaining..

    I could just block you.

  3. enlightened
    June 5, 2012 at 8:59 pm

    oh woah dude. these links are so eye-opening and enlightening that i think you’re absolutely right. you sure CHECKMATED! us there. Sorry, OP, we were just trying to be the alpha-male white knights to save the day for a very capable, successful, young lady.

    • P Ray
      June 5, 2012 at 11:20 pm

      A white knight that doesn’t get paid is kind of sad.
      But if he takes what he is owed by force, is kind of sad too.
      Either way, lessons are learned.

      She’s capable and successful … until both her and another lady with the same qualifications are vying for a position.
      Then it’s down to who looks better.
      Hey … positions for women means they hire a woman they want.
      No budget to take on the both of them, that’s fiscal/financial reality.

  4. Dreamer
    June 6, 2012 at 6:31 am

    I think the white knighters were also taken aback from the tone as well as the girl. I explained in the comment of the previous post, but your good message they their time is being wasted by a declining society was packaged in the same way a jock would say it as he take the kid’s lunch money mocking everything about him.

  5. June 6, 2012 at 1:45 pm

    Off topic. There is a question that keeps popping up these days: How to deal with persons who are not convinced with the clear evidence you present to them? Do you continue discussing them, especially if the discussion is online, or do you stop?
    My impression is to never open a discussion with anybody online from the beginning because every time you will encounter such persons. Better put all the evidence and let it speak for itself.
    What do you think?

    Arguing with ideologues, vested interests and morons is not fruitful as they are incapable of objectivity. I stick to saying what is obvious, objectively verifiable and counter/expose common objections to my viewpoint.

    Beyond that, I don’t care about what others have to say.

    • Sheep
      June 6, 2012 at 2:51 pm

      “i try my best to only state things that are objectively verifiable”
      “i can tell that these people are ‘aspergy virgins’ because of their facial expression, it is obvious that they all must be incapable of holding a conversation with other people”

      i fail to see any clear evidence that you’ve presented here. is there some sort of clear correlation between math ability and divorce rate? how about math ability and income (or lack thereof)? i think you’ll find in several follow-up studies on usamo participants/winners that they are actually having much better lives (i myself know many in the local mathematical community, and they are all living happy, healthy, balanced lives).

      the closest thing to an objective fact you’ve stated in this or your previous post is that you have a PhD in a STEM field (which is fairly respectable, i suppose). coming in a close second is that the usamo winners are aspergy virgins.

      at this point i’ve seen enough of your ignorance and lack of respect. why does an artist create artwork? why does an athlete try to succeed in the sport of his choice? the same reasons will answer the question, “why do we have a passion for math?”

      on a more practical note, mathematics (particularly number theory and such) does have real world applications, such as financial analysis on wall street, cryptography, computer science (mathematical logic being a fundamental point here) etc. without these types of people, you wouldn’t be able to find porn and post it here. in fact, i myself am considering these mathematically-based careers. but obviously these points are irrelevant because we can objectively state that anyone who’s going to compete at the highest level in math and go on to further the development of technology is an “aspergy virgin.”

      in every society i suppose there are going to be people who believe that society is poisonous and the root of many troubles. there will also be a group that takes this to an extreme (i suppose you could cite taoists and epicurians as an example) but does end up contributing valuable ideas and traditions to the next generations, even though they will never ultimately convince the bulk of the population to follow their ways. all you seem to have to contribute to humanity as a whole is hate, ignorance, and links to porn on the internet (made possible to you by the same computer scientists you denounced as people who will get “raped in divorce court”)

      have a nice life being an asshole to anyone who achieves anything respectable. goodbye.

      • P Ray
        June 6, 2012 at 7:28 pm

        Nope to your CS assertion.
        I know engineering and math graduates who can’t programme for nuts (one doing his Ph.D in Australia).
        MATLAB … is not used for writing widely used applications.
        Remember too, that Sergey Brin and Larry Page … didn’t create google ONLY by themselves. In other words, other people helped.
        If the world respected engineers and scientists so much, why aren’t they in charge, instead of lying PPE’s (Philosophy, Politics, Economics) graduates?

  6. Susilo Bangbong
    June 6, 2012 at 9:52 pm

    All Hail the mighty gadget makers!

    “We spend all day,
    With pen in hand,
    Solving math problems,
    That you can’t understand.

    We built a machine,
    To make lots of stuff,
    Like this shiny red dildo,
    To stick in your muff.

    Now we have surplus,
    Too much excess stock,
    Must increase Africa’s population,
    For more consumer’s to flock.

    Let’s make a medicine,
    That only treats disease manifestations,
    And send the bill to the public,
    Paid in full with massive taxation.

    Let’s make everyone work,
    A useless job,
    Because everyone should do something,
    Including pervert and slob!

    We are the engineers!
    Making it up as we go along.
    We don’t really know what we’re doing,
    Can you help us, Susilo Bangbong?”

  7. June 6, 2012 at 10:58 pm

    It’s not just that they are incapable of objectivity, there is a more important point: I can hardly find any one with a normal school education who recognizes that what they filled their mind since childhood might be false. It’s as if recognizing this will disturb their whole lives.

    The topics I usually deal with are very hard because they involve many languages that the ones on the other side do not understand. Showing the evidence in these languages, even if accompanied by a 90% equivalent English translation, seems to make not much of an impact.

    There are fundamental errors in modern history books. Fundametal in that they make whole conclusions false, and any conclusions based on these conclusions will be inevitably false. Did you know for example that fundamental concepts like “citizen of Rome”, “citizen of Sparta” or “citizen of Athens” are false and do not reflect the reality back then? In fact, the concept of “citizen” is also false, and whatever Greek or Latin word that is usually translated as “citizen” didn’t have the same meaning. But, whenever I argue about this fundamental error with the evidence (often in non English languages), no one tries to think that the modern narrative might be false.

    It seems that whatever you try to do here will have no impact on any one’s mind because these issues do not have a direct impact on their lives.

    • hans
      June 10, 2012 at 5:35 pm

      Your problem is that you actually believe the misnomer of “education”(lower/higher doesn´t matter, it´s the same).
      The current western “education” model is mainly based on the Prussian education (aka INDOCTRINATION) system.

      Actually useful(probably soon to be deleted) Wiki-Quote:
      “Seeking to replace the controlling functions of the local aristocracy, the Prussian court attempted to instill social obedience in the citizens through indoctrination. Every individual had to become convinced, in the core of his being, that the King was just, his decisions always right, and the need for obedience paramount.”

      It is basically impossible to dispel the doctrines of these kids, especially including the “grown-up” ones with PhD´s in textbook repeating.
      Mere facts and logic will just infuriate them as their egos ARE their knowledge. Your challenge of their “knowledge” is attacking their core being, thus making you the enemy.

      Be happy nobody has yet tried to harm you for your attempts to “evangelize” them to the truth.
      And stop doing it. You can´t save somebody who doesn´t want your help.

      • June 10, 2012 at 10:16 pm

        Education is filling the minds of kids with a certain consistent false narrative that any contradictory evidence will be rejected or ignored, as if their eyes have become desensitized.

        My final decision was to stop getting into any discussions ever, even if my part of the discussion consisted merely of showing photos of the evidence, because even these won’t have any effect.

  8. jhbowden
    June 7, 2012 at 6:43 pm

    A lot of young men in the STEM fields do not have well-rounded educations.

    If they read, let us say, books, for example, they might encounter Don Quixote, which inaugurates the modern period with a brutal mockery of white knighting. Or they might read Flaubert’s Madame Bovary, possibly the best novel ever written, where clueless Capn Save A Hoe never finds out about his wife cheating on him with sexilicious bad boys.

    The most relevant example here is Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels. The flying island of Laputa is run by math and science aspies, who have one eye that points only up at the stars, and another that points only inward back at the soul — they miss all of the detail in between. The wife of Laputa’s head of state keeps leaving the flying island to live down below with some thug that beats her; the nerds who inhabit the island are far too intelligent to understand why this is the case.

    • P Ray
      June 7, 2012 at 8:36 pm

      I dunno, a wife with one eye in front and one at the back, isn’t going to win any beauty pageants on planet Earth. They can KEEP her.
      Did the book have any illustrations of that?

      • jhbowden
        June 8, 2012 at 5:35 am

        PRay, you make a very astute observation. And the wife in question does leave for “an old deformed footman.”

        Yet Swift is one step ahead of us. He proceeds to explain that “the caprices of womankind are not limited by any climate or nation, and that they are much more uniform, than can be easily imagined.”

  9. TheTick
    June 7, 2012 at 8:14 pm

    To #8:

    My uncle is one of those lying PPE grads. One you’ve probably heard of. He tried for years to convince me to get a PhD in a scientific field. Despite massive financial success and access to every fleshly pleasure known to mankind, he still spent his life regretting that he was unable to apply his mind to the thrill of scientific discovery. While the real scientific minds (no, most PhDs in science are not serious scientists…) wake up every morning looking forward to another day of fun puzzle-solving (which also just so happens to be one of the only endeavors in which the human species has continued to make progress)…

    …he wakes up every morning wondering how he’ll cover his latest tracks from the Elizabeth Warrens of the world.

    Would you rather be the central cog in a pathetic little broken machine on this tiny little planet, or explore the galaxies beyond it? I don’t know about you, but to me the answer is obvious.

    • P Ray
      June 7, 2012 at 8:34 pm

      I’d actually say, be the central cog of your own machine.
      While it’s fantastic to explore the galaxies beyond …
      you’re still living among the PPE’s in meatspace,
      and the general assumption is “science/math is hard therefore it has no practical use”
      Actually that’s just a transparent ploy to drive down the wages of people with the hard science qualifications.
      Call it the revenge of the stupid. Since you’ve picked up something difficult, they will also make it a point to keep saying “But technical people cannot communicate and are out of touch with the human soul!”
      Which is to say that people with science/math qualifications can’t negotiate or talk at length (this is usually said by jealous/douchey people in management who themselves may have zero qualifications – MBAs can be bought WITHOUT having a prior degree).

  1. June 5, 2012 at 8:26 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: