More Sexist Math


The fuzzy screen grab tells a story. The story it tells is one of woe, unhappiness and further illustrates the latent sexism that math embodies. As you can see, by mangling the numbers appropriately, thanks to the brilliant decisions of MI and FL, the national popular vote tally, WHICH HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON ANYTHING IN THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION OR THE GENERAL ELECTION, sets up a scenario where either Obama is up by 568k votes, or Hillary is up by as much as 164k. Math is hard, selective math is sexist.

There have been all manner of sexist math examples on the intertoobs the past several days. On the 25th, Jerome Armstrong of MyDD posted this little gem that includes the graph below.

Now, if you just look at this graph, it seems like Hillary, the red bar, is way ahead of Obama in SOMETHING. At this point it doesn’t matter what, just something. Unfortunately, when you look at the scale on the side, you see that there is actually less than 1000 units separating the two.

This is why graphs, as a function of math, are the sexy sexist. They have pretty colors and seem so simple on the face, until you see the gawd awful scale on the side and realize they signify very little.

There is going to be a lot more talk about math, and it’s inherent sexist properties in the coming days. There are people on all sides of the equation that will try to lure you away with seemingly simple scenarios that prove some presumptive presumers personal prophecy of politically potent proportions. It’s all just sexist math. Pay it no mind. Do not hook yourself to it’s lure. No spinner bait is that special.

Ultimately, it, all of it, is for one simple goal. Keeping Pat Buchanan employed. That’s what the lengthy Democratic nomination is all about, that’s the goal. Now as June approaches, goal realized, he can enjoy his vacation, only to come back and scream at us again in August.

Enjoy your Thursday.

Leave a Reply

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