This Is What It’s Like To Be a Woman at a Bitcoin Meet-up

[Anonymous No.326107]

>better check yo privilege cryptofags

https://medium.com/ladybits-on-medium/864104ee0822

[Canaduhfag. No.326113]

>>326107
>Into the trash it goes.

[Anonymous No.326128]

It's not as if the guy she was talking to was wrong in the slightest.

Women love big nanny government to take care of everybody. Government is the ultimate alpha male. It's no surprise that the federal budget and spending exploded after women got the right to vote. So the idea of bitcoin going against the status quo is repulsive to most women because they cannot imagine going against the status quo or the established government.

Also, he's right because women never give a shit about new technology until it's absolutely socially acceptable and widespread. They refuse to give anything a chance until it's considered 'cool' or socially acceptable enough to talk about/use. See: video games.

[Anonymous No.326132]

Also:

>I think my experience at the meet-up is worth sharing because Bitcoin lies at the heart of both finance and tech, two industries that carry tremendous weight and which have traditionally struggled to attract women. Given the events of the other night, this is hardly surprising.

YEAH THIS IS TOTALLY WHY WOMEN AREN'T INTO TECH AND FINANCE.

LOL

How deluded is this cunt?

>We are naturally drawn towards finance and engineering and tech and stuffs and we would love to get involved, if not for those pesky men making hurtful comments!

Give me a fucking break

[Anonymous No.326144]

This is why all cryptotards should be killed. Just look at that retarded beta trying to seduce women in the most awkward and idiot way, the guy probably feels that his cryptos give him a penis extension.

It's similar to all other cryptotards who already see themselves as millionaires because their shitcoins will be worth millions someday in their fantasy world.

[Anonymous No.326149]

>>326107
>ladybits

[Anonymous No.326159]

I'm not sure why she got offended at some of his comments. It's not like they aren't true. Most men don't give a shit about bitcoins either, but most of the people that do care happen to be men. He was probably trying to compliment her for having unique interests in things like bitcoins. But of course since she wants to hate men she takes as an insult to her identity as a woman and writes some snarky blog about it.

Of course, the dude grabbing her waist and leg doesn't really help anything. That's a little weird.

[Anonymous No.326176]

>>326144
>This is why all cryptotards should be killed.

Bitcoiners actually have common sense and don't usually fall for this SJW shit. We responded to this particular clickbait very appropriately.

source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=431130.0

[Anonymous No.326216]

This sounds made up or maybe in an actually misogynist community
I've been to many bitcoin meetup none of which did any such activity go on.
What the writer described is fucked up but so much and something I've never seen I have trouble believing it's not actually entirely fabricated false information
Maybe it was right by the anime convention or something seriously most people involved in this shit aren't that beta

[Anonymous No.326348]

>>326107
>The other night my good friend and fellow cryptoenthusiast Ryan Shea suggested we head to a new Bitcoin meet-up neither of us had been to before.
So she's been to several and this is the first that's been like she describes.

>I’m not bringing up these comments because my feelings were hurt, and the last thing I need is sympathy. I’m also not concerned that one particular guy thinks women couldn’t possibly know about Bitcoin, or that another grabbed at me. But unfortunately this is representative of a larger trend.
>The current generation of hackathon organizers (largely led by the singular efforts of Dave Fontenot —hellllllyeah) is making a concerted effort to encourage the participation of women at their events, and while I’ve still gotten my share of off-color comments, the situation is gradually improving.
So it's representative of a declining tend, which is the opposite of what one would think this example would represent?

[Anonymous No.326557]

>>326348
She's a woman. I have never met a woman that didn't believe an emotional feeling was just as valid and important as a multi-premise logical argument. In their opinion, "That makes me angry," or, "You're being misogynistic," is a multi-premise logical argument.

The extremely depressing truth is that the vast majority of what women call thinking has nothing to do with any form of thought at all. What's worse, if you even hint at this fact, then you can expect to be called something similar to a rapist.

Best bet is to get super rich and don't marry anything hotter than a 7/10 looker. That's the way to escape dealing with most of this bullshit.

[Anonymous No.326565]

>>326557
What's cute is that you think your misogyny is somehow a multi-premise logical argument, rather than your emotional feelings. You woman.

[Anonymous No.326578]

>>326565
You need to talk to women more, son.

[Anonymous No.326603]

>>326578
I talk to mom every day, dad.

[Anonymous No.326687]

>>326603
P1. Women have sole ownership and control of the most intrinsically valuable thing in the universe to any straight man, the female reproductive system.
P2. Men will do everything imaginable just to have a chance of maybe getting access to this thing.
P3. All a woman has to do to, effectively, win or end an argument is enact the vagina veto by saying, "Well I don't like your opinion, therefore I'm right."
P4. Premise 3 requires no logic or thinking of any kind on her part.
P5. Not thinking takes far less energy than thinking.
C1. It is to a woman's biological advantage to not waste energy thinking and use the vagina veto at every possible opportunity.
Do you understand me at all yet?

[Anonymous No.326718]

>>326687

I understand you're a retarded virgin neckbeard talking non-sense. Grow up faggot.

[Anonymous No.326722]

>>326687
pfft ahahah
your mind is seriously warped and you need help

[Anonymous No.326723]

>>326718
Ad hominem, a woman's best friend, second being sex-shaming. Thanks for proving that you cannot into logic. Are you a grill by any chance?

[Anonymous No.326728]

>>326687
Your argument is flawed because P1-P3 only applies to dumbasses and desperate losers.

[Anonymous No.326731]

>>326687
i mean seriously do you just surf redpill forums and watch 90s sitcoms all day or do you actually interact with people

[Anonymous No.326737]

>>326728
>Your argument is flawed because P1-P3 only applies to dumbasses and desperate losers.

That would only be true is the woman was unnattractive. Obviously the strength of the veto is contingent upon this factor. Like I said, get rich and don't marry a model and this won't apply to you. Try again, beta.

[Anonymous No.326738]

>>326737
epic

[Anonymous No.326749]

>>326737
>That would only be true is the woman was unnattractive.

That would only be true if you're a desperate loser.

>admits to being a weak kneed beta but calls other people betas

Try again, beta.

[Anonymous No.326752]

>>326723

>Doesn't agree with my retarded virgin ways to see people, it must be a woman!

I'm a man you stupid fuck, I was just laughing at how pathetic and beta you are. Keep making people laugh with your virgin arguments.

[Anonymous No.326759]

>>326749
>That would only be true if you're a desperate loser.
Nope, not at all. Every man, except for the highest ranking alpha, has a threshold of hotness where they will accept the veto in hopes of appeasing a prospective mate. Of course not you, though, always remaining firm in arguments even with 10/10 women.
>>326752
>Keep making people laugh with your virgin arguments.
.
>Endless Ad Hominem
.
Look people, they aren't called logical fallacies because they are logical. Only the lowest moron thinks name-calling means anything.

[Anonymous No.326769]

>>326759

[Anonymous No.326772]

>>326737
lmao, why the fuck are you calling ME a beta, you dork? You're the one who apparently loses control after a certain "hotness" coefficient (lel). Not only that, but judging from your posts you must spend a lot of time axiomatizing your inability to deal with the opposite sex with these hilarious warped views of gender relations. Just go back to >>>/r9k/, /biz/ is for men not frustrated teenage boys.

[Anonymous No.326776]

>>326759
It's been my experience that there are generally two types of thinkers, and differences that are commonly divided by gender: there are rational thinkers and emotional (or feeling-based) thinkers. The distinction constitutes the "T" or "F" in the Myers Briggs type system, but it's also described in a variety of other behavioral and personality profiles. It's my belief (as I don't have sources right now) that the majority of Americans are emotional thinkers, and I believe it's pretty common knowledge that most women are too.

For an emotional thinker, one can establish the truth of a situation based on how you feel, rather than scrutinizing the available evidence and coming to a supported conclusion (or allowing evidence to sway your conclusion). If one's in this mode, to constantly be presented with contradictory evidence will do nothing to sway what is likely an irrational conclusion, and it can rapidly become annoying to be told you're wrong when you know you're right: after all, you can feel it deep down. The only thing that will sway your opinion is a change in your feelings, and feelings don't really respond to facts, but with communication, personal connections, and emotional appeals.

I further claim that the majority of people on Reddit are men, and that men tend to be rational thinkers. ESPECIALLY men who are in STEM (Science/Technology/Engineering/Math) fields, as many Redditors are.

[Anonymous No.326779]

>>326776
To an emotional thinker, it seems they find it a very prudent thing to say that any men (rational thinkers, really) coming into your space only be allowed to listen, as they're tired of them exploring ideas rationally rather than with emotional reasoning/communication/sympathizing. The particular complaints that "men play Devil's advocate" and especially the complaint that they dislike questions of "where are your facts" is especially telling, I believe, as this is the characteristic of someone who is trying to get to the truth of a problem and/or probe for weaknesses in your argument. This is often seen as an attack by someone who doesn't share a similar zeal for reconstructing arguments to better reflect truth. Again, from personal experience, this is often not welcome interaction for someone who wishes to maintain an emotional mode of thinking.

Note that I'm not explicitly saying that rational thinkers are inherently better people than emotional thinkers. I'm just trying to explain why you perceive (rightly so) that feminist/women spaces are hostile to being open forums for the free discussion of ideas. (But, as you can probably tell, I do consider myself a rational thinker and greatly prefer those types of interaction. I value Reddit when you can discuss ideas freely.)

[Anonymous No.326784]

>>326779
There may also be something deeper in the linked post, as the poster spends a lot of time describing negative interactions with men in which she (or he?) believes they are questioning them "for no reason" or playing Devil's Advocate "for the fun of it." The poster suggests that men "step back, breathe, think about whether or not their comment is necessary...[and] if it will be constructive at all..." This could partly be a reaction to the growing pains of any subreddit, especially a newly defaulted one, as it attracts stupider and stupider people the more popular it gets. If this were the case, though, it's interesting that the poster still only identified men as the culprits, and not stupider redditors of both genders. I think the situation I proposed is more likely.

[Anonymous No.326787]

>>326776
>>326779
>>326784
nobody cares

[Anonymous No.326788]

>>326772
>You're the one who apparently loses control after a certain "hotness" coefficient (lel).

I am sure that you would never be more likely to accept a non-argument as valid if the woman you were arguing with was close to your physical ideal. You must be one of those super alphas that accepts zero bullshit, even from supermodels.

>denial
>delusion
>pick two

[Anonymous No.326793]

>>326788
Male survival in 21st century America:

Do not get married.

Do not have children.

Get a vasectomy.

Do not tell your sexual partners you have had a vasectomy.

Do not cohabit with any woman you are in a relationship with.

Do not ever be alone with a child for any reason.

Do not date or have sex with any woman who has a child.

Do not provide regular financial support to any woman.

Do not attempt to protect or help female strangers. If you see someone beating up a woman, walk away. Do not attempt to help her. Do not call the police.

Do not speak to or touch a child you do not know. If you see a child drowning, walk away. If you see a child being kidnapped, walk away. Do not call the police.

Do not speak to the police for any reason ever.

Carry a cell phone or other device capable of audio and video recording at all times.

[Anonymous No.326797]

>>326776
>>326779
>>326784

Seems you and I are appearing to be the only people that are actually making any argument at all.

>>326787
>nobody cares
>nobody who "thinks" with their emotions, instead of using logic or reason, cares

/thread

[Anonymous No.326798]

>>326788
>I am sure that you would never be more likely to accept a non-argument as valid if the woman you were arguing with was close to your physical ideal.

Any man doesn't take any bullshit from any woman and that's something that women expect of you, not a single woman likes a push-over beta like you.

[Anonymous No.326801]

>>326788
Look buddy, I draw as a hobby. I have studied various female bodies more carefully than most guys ever do. They really aren't all that special. I won't deny that attractiveness can bias my behavior, but there's a limit to the amount of bullshit I'm willing to put up with from a single person, and the fastest way to become unattractive is to be a cunt. And if its between some bitch and my precious shekels, she can go fuck herself.

As far as "winning" arguments go, I try not to waste my time with retards to begin with, although ironically I'm still replying to you.

[Anonymous No.326803]

>>326793
Way to divert the entire argument into nothing but "haha neckbeard virgin" name-calling yet again.

What I originally proposed still holds, easily.

>>326557
>Best bet is to get super rich and don't marry anything hotter than a 7/10 looker. That's the way to escape dealing with most of this bullshit.

[Anonymous No.326816]

>>326803
I think too many women fear rape too much. I know it would be horrible, but at least you'd be alive. You can get better. I hate seeing guys chase women. Women should be chasing us. We're the ones making the money, and have the possessions. I don't chase, have never chased and never will. Yet, women still find me attractive. Imagine that, sex isn't the most important thing in the world. Guys of the world, you need to realize that. Maybe then women will wake up and figure out that we will not cater to irrational, and illogical behavior. I'm a 18 year old straight and atheist boy, and I don't respect woman that post nudes of themselves, I think they have no self respect and none of them have ever had a stable relationship. A couple months ago, my dad and I went to a car show in Norway, we walked past 5 beautiful girls in bikinis washing cars in about 0 degrees Celsius, and I said to my dad, ''look at those beautiful girls with no self respect, such a shame'', and I walked away. but on the flip side, I watch porn and I enjoy it -.-

[Anonymous No.326817]

>>326798
>Any man doesn't take any bullshit from any woman and that's something that women expect of you, not a single woman likes a push-over beta like you.
>all real men are totally immune to even the greatest physical charms
>all real men are top alpha males, including me
>my wife has never suddenly "gotten a headache" right before sex because I wouldn't let her win an argument with bullshit

Nope.

>>326801
>I have studied various female bodies more carefully than most guys ever do. They really aren't all that special.

Then all that means is you are measuring the power of the veto based on a different mode of attraction. Nothing different.

[Anonymous No.326822]

>>326816
Women used to be offered with dowry. The father would plead, "please get this freeloader out of my house before she turns into a spinster, I offer forty acres, and a mule."

[Anonymous No.326826]

>>326817
>Then all that means is you are measuring the power of the veto based on a different mode of attraction.
What, like personality? Well you got me there; I'm much more patient and open-minded with people who are earnest and nice rather than stubborn or aggressive. But that applies to anybody, not just hot girls. Although that does emphasize the importance of social skills when trying to persuade others. Being an arrogant, antisocial autist will not help you win any argument, even if the facts are on your side.

[Anonymous No.326865]

>>326107
Should have stayed in the fucking kitchen.

[Anonymous No.326874]

>>326752
>calling someone a virgin
>2014
Is...is this supposed to be an insult now?

That's like saying.
>"yeah? Well you're a fucking home owner!"
Literally anyone can go to their nearest ghetto and lose their virginity on a corner. The most ugly repulsive autist can get a desperate landwhale to sleep with him.

What a pleb. Just stop posting, kid.

[Anonymous No.326892]

IT WAS REAL IN MY MIND!!!

[Anonymous No.327137]

>>326826
>What, like personality?

Yes, premise 1-3 are contingent upon her perceived attractiveness, whatever you might see as beauty. Some guys like cheap whores covered in tattoos. Some guys fall for a woman's artistic skill in oil paintings. The logical framework of the veto doesn't change.