Gays, lesbians, bisexuals, PART II

[The Wizard from Milan]

Originally Posted by Sminty_Smeagol

my male gay friend and I want to put on a drag show at a local club. It would amuse me to be hit on by gay men thinking I am a drag queen when ta da i am REALLY female.

Reminds me of the movie Victor Victoria

[inked]

Originally Posted by The Wizard from Milan

Indeed, he did not understand it. I surmise that the fact that he did not want to understand it, played a role in his not understanding it.


Exactly!


Yes, you are calculating them wrongly. And you don't even have the humility to look up on the internet the very basic rules of probabilistic calculus that you would get in the first two weeks of any introduction to probability course

Name yer sites, TWFM.

[The Wizard from Milan]

Originally Posted by inked

Name yer sites, TWFM.

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the binomial distribution. You have to interpret the explanation in the following way "success" is two have two LGBT principals in one district (a name that is coincidental, but fitting ) As p probability of success I used your more pessimistic assessment 1/10000. As n I used 10,000 districts. As k I used zero, because I computed the probability of not having even one success, and than used the complementation rule to get the probability of having at least one success.

For the complementation rule you can look here where they call it incusion-exclusion principle.

This is enough for you to do the calculations at home; to get really fluent you would probably need to buy a book in basic statistics.

But to get the statistical intuition besides the formulae you need neither the formulae, nor the book, just think of the following: if you focus on one specific district the proabability is small, but over a large number of districts the probability increases, because over a large number of districts even rare events are likely to happen at least once

EDIT: I found this interesting site that shows a lot of the things that I was talking about in my previous posts in a very accessible way (more accessible than the Wikipedia links). At that page, it also shows the famous "birthday" problem that contains the same intuition of the problem of the two LGBT principals (although maybe it is clear to me that that it is the same intuition, but it is not that immediate).
This site's explanation of the binomial is instead here

[inked]

TWFM,

Been away from here for about a month, so I just found your response. I will check it out.

Meanwhile, here's a little report from Canada about the attempt to silence opposition to homosexuality by abuse of the rather inchoate hatred act...

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06041305.html

What thinks ye?

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by inked

TWFM,

Been away from here for about a month, so I just found your response. I will check it out.

Meanwhile, here's a little report from Canada about the attempt to silence opposition to homosexuality by abuse of the rather inchoate hatred act...

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06041305.html

What thinks ye?

I've always been a fan of letting people say whatever they like. Better to know where the hatred is coming from than to try to censor it. Good decision to overturn.

[inked]

Good, BJ, then you will find this bit of harrassment rather unsettling, eh?

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06041902.html

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by inked

Good, BJ, then you will find this bit of harrassment rather unsettling, eh?

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06041902.html

It seems kind of strange that she would want to even remain a member of a union that had a policy she was so opposed to. But yes, if they allow people to divert dues in such a way, they have to allow it for everyone.

[inked]

Then you will just love this!

http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/n....aspx?cid=3724

We apparently no longer think universities should be liberal education institutions, but should push only one agenda... .


And, if you can't pay the piper......

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...e-3871a73e6aeb

Do you think this will be put to a vote?

[The Gaffer]

Hilarious. That librarian sounds like a right eedjit. Hope he gets the sack. How can we succeed in our stated aim of turning everyone into a gay communist muslim single parent asylum seeker with people like that around?

Second story: same thing happened with Gay Pride here in the UK. As a result, they went more commercial and mainstream and, as a result of that result, it became a bit lame and pants.

[GreyMouser]

Originally Posted by inked

And, if you can't pay the piper......

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...e-3871a73e6aeb

Do you think this will be put to a vote?

And this means what? That an organisation running a parade ran into some shakey dealings- are you saying this says something about gays?

Like the first executive director of the Christian Coalition running an extortion racket for casinos says something about Christians? Like the founder of the 700 Club lining his pockets in a diamond-smuggling ring with a genocidal thug like Charles Taylor tells us something about evangelists?

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by inked

Then you will just love this!

http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/n....aspx?cid=3724

We apparently no longer think universities should be liberal education institutions, but should push only one agenda... .

It's an investigation, not a decision. Universities can investigate/prosecute whatever they want. That old free speech thing. Get back to me when they rule on it.

[inked]

O, so accusing someone of a hate-speech and being disciplined for recommending books is OK on the face of it, BJ? Like I was to say you were being oppressive for recommending agnosticism? Then you got put on entmoot restriction because I said you frightened me? And then after smearing your name on the 'Moot, nobody noticed us when you were found not guilty?

OK, just checking.

[inked]

Originally Posted by GreyMouser

And this means what? That an organisation running a parade ran into some shakey dealings- are you saying this says something about gays?

Like the first executive director of the Christian Coalition running an extortion racket for casinos says something about Christians? Like the founder of the 700 Club lining his pockets in a diamond-smuggling ring with a genocidal thug like Charles Taylor tells us something about evangelists?

I don't know, GM, would you want your tax dollars to support those you list?

Or, if it was put to a vote and refused, would you allege oppression?

Or, is listening to the adage, "don't throw good money after bad" really a phobic remark of ANY sort and not just a rational observation?

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by inked

O, so accusing someone of a hate-speech and being disciplined for recommending books is OK on the face of it, BJ? Like I was to say you were being oppressive for recommending agnosticism? Then you got put on entmoot restriction because I said you frightened me? And then after smearing your name on the 'Moot, nobody noticed us when you were found not guilty?

OK, just checking.

Yep, you can accuse someone of anything you like. What would you prefer, a system where you could not express your opinion, even if it was somewhat irrational?

If a german language teacher suggested translating mein kampf as a class project it'd probably raise eyebrows, but there is nothing inherently wrong with the teacher suggesting it, or inherently wrong with people against it.

[Rían]

That librarian case gives me the willies. He couldn't even suggest books to read? He should counter-protest and say those people make him feel "unsafe".

To my mind, it's the familiar liberal idea of stupidity of the masses - apparently they think the students are too stupid to recognize bad books (if they're bad). Why not expose the students to all sorts of ideas? That seems more like what a university should do.

[The Gaffer]

Och

It's politics with a small p, obviously. Clearly there is a back story, probably involving petty personality clashes and people sitting in poorly ventilated offices like Tam O'Shanter's wife ("nursing her wrath to keep it warm"), which were are getting a selected slice of.

"Familiar liberal idea of stupidity of the masses". Hmmm. Not familiar with that one I must confess. I thought liberals were the ones who are in favour of civil rights, free speech, not believing every word of some religious text, etc. I must have been mistaken.

[inked]

Gaffer,

I understand Rian to be saying that the liberal view is that the masses (who don't share the same views as the liberals) need to be brought along to see the light. That is, the masses are apt to vote in ways and act in ways that are disparaged by the elite with the proper understanding of things. In this viewpoint, the librarian must be opposed because the students clearly do NOT have the wherewithal to distinguish between good ideas (liberal ones) and bad ideas (anybody else's). This does rather undercut the concept of education..............


Liberals are not for the concepts you propose to be associated with them unless those ideas concur with their agenda. Try crossing China's liberal policy with West and you get computers without access or restricted access. Now, if you are not a Maoist, this seems not liberal. But if you are a Maoist, just giving access to computers is very liberal. A relativistic position, yes, but liberal by Maoist standards.

Now, for the truly paradoxical concept: freedom to be truly human means living in accord with human design as it was intended to be, not as people have limited it in their own imagination of "the knowledge of good and evil".
To be truly liberal, be all you can be as the Creator made you to be; don't limit yourself to merely man-made conceptions - but you'd consider that conservative, I bet.

[The Gaffer]

I don't really want to get into the semantics, but

Originally Posted by inked

I understand Rian to be saying that the liberal view is that the masses (who don't share the same views as the liberals) need to be brought along to see the light. That is, the masses are apt to vote in ways and act in ways that are disparaged by the elite with the proper understanding of things. In this viewpoint, the librarian must be opposed because the students clearly do NOT have the wherewithal to distinguish between good ideas (liberal ones) and bad ideas (anybody else's). This does rather undercut the concept of education..............

As you say, critical faculties are to be developed by introducing new ideas. In what sense would reading about family values be introducing them to new ideas?

It seems as if a conservative lectures on right and wrong it's them stating their opinion, if a liberal does it it's them being illiberal. This is just one of the many the fundamental hypocrisies at the heart of this conservative argument.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

To my mind, it's the familiar liberal idea of stupidity of the masses - apparently they think the students are too stupid to recognize bad books (if they're bad). Why not expose the students to all sorts of ideas? That seems more like what a university should do.

Depending on how you define 'liberal' and 'stupidity', it's not a liberal idea.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

I don't really want to get into the semantics, but

As you say, critical faculties are to be developed by introducing new ideas. In what sense would reading about family values be introducing them to new ideas?

It seems as if a conservative lectures on right and wrong it's them stating their opinion, if a liberal does it it's them being illiberal. This is just one of the many the fundamental hypocrisies at the heart of this conservative argument.

Liberals are being illiberal? Imagine.