I need to write about this in depth some time, but "diversity" and "inclusion" needs to be defined more broadly. I'm more of a libertarian (small "l") than a Progressive or Conservative, but neither diversity nor inclusion, at the moment, have room for differing political perspectives. It's selective.
If you're curious about the impact of climate change on extreme flooding, here's a good analysis. Climate change IS real. Flooding is NOT getting worse. Using this catastrophe to push for changes in energy policy is disingenuous. There are other ways to honestly fight for changes in our policies, but don't be an uninformed partisan or people are going to quit trusting you. https://t.co/Y71NV91KfC
I took an autonomous cab ride in Scottsdale, and the best thing about it was not having to talk to the driver. I did anyway, and it didn't disagree with a single one of my political views.
I was driving north out of San Fran last month, and it was still totally odd to see a 100% autonomous vehicle doing its thing on Market Street. It's going to take a bit for humans to get used to seeing something like that in rural America.
I did not vote for the asshole DJT, but so far I like 45% of what he's done, and 5% of the way he's doing it. At least someone is actually in charge, instead of signing whatever the interns are passing in front of him just a month ago. The same interns who cannot read the room.
I didn't watch all of the ads carefully, but I wasn't moved by any of them. I also don't think we need to keep giving men what I call the "episodic TV treatment," where they are unsophisticated idiots without a role in the world, always standing in the way of progress, and especially women's progress. Sure, some are, but it's to the point where you can't be proud of being masculine without someone thinking you're sexist or racist or in a conservative cult. Men need to learn how to be kind, confident men who aren't how they are portrayed, often, as incompetent backward idiots. If men were, largely, like the stereotypical men portrayed on sitcoms, I wouldn't want anything to do with them, either, but they are not. And I'm just tired of that portrayal.
I hate the Eagles and I'm tired of the Chiefs, so that combo made for a boring game b/c I find it hard to cheer for the Eagles, even though they have spectacular talent. I found the HT show to be vacuous. If you love Lamar and know the words, it would be awesome, but 10% of the population were ecstatic and the rest of us were. Uh? Lada Gaga was great.
I'm rethinking my citizenship. One of them blabbering about nothing and pardoning everyone suggested by the interns, and the other selling perfume and Xmas ornaments. Some other country make me an offer, please.
Coaches bailing a day after winning league titles. Teams pulling out of bowl because so many players have transferred. Players on playoff teams entering the portal. Playoff teams hosting portal visitors week of the game. Portal agents working the phones. Nothing to see here.
In her new article, "The Myth of Female Agency," @Louise_m_perry argues that “very few people are highly agentic.”
I would say that almost all people have the capacity to be highly agentic, but many are prevented from realizing their agency because they have an external locus of control, in part reinforced by cultural messages that diminish personal agency—such as referring to it as a myth.
She also states that not being highly agentic isn't a bad thing, which I disagree with. Extensive research has found a significant link between having an external locus of control—believing that life is shaped by forces beyond your control—and mental illness.
I think we should reject the views that perpetuate an external locus of control and encourage others to adopt an internal locus of control—the belief that we have agency over our lives.