"Who is this [gesticulates vaguely] For-tran."

Or, even simpler, it'd be like comparing a series of books that approach a topic various ways, but are individually light reading and easy to cross-reference - to a book that's 3 times the width of a phonebook & its glossary is spread through the entirety of the book.

I'm calling elitist on this one.

...My penis is so long it goes all the way from A to Z?

;D

I've actually got a video of a work-in-progress project! I do apologise for my awkward "ums" and "uhs" and stuttering though, I'm not yet that comfortable to do live streams and whatnot. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9IvBHaqZnI

Yeah, 3 week old video. It's still something that I'm working on even today. :P

Because I took five something minutes to just get the basics of Perl.

\n slipped through, newbie mistake. :P

use strict;
print "No.\n";

Y'know what's even more fun? Coding in a half-competent language that isn't a soup of syntax and symbols and isn't slow/ever changing.

Bogosort is best sort.

Just give it some time, it'll catch up, guys!

And on that topic: trying to shoehorn women into a particular job field purely because it's "male dominated" (and so what?) instead of hiring the best possible candidate of employees (who are typically male) is utter madness.

It's comparable to "here, we have our token black guy, look at how racially diverse we are!" hiring schemes that have been exposed to be a manufactured-by-corporations thing in the sense that corporations attempt to make themselves look better when really they're shooting for the bottom of the rung - but so long as we've got someone who's black, right? - instead of actually hiring decent, good employees - even if they are white "cis" males.

Political, and completely debatable.

I'm never going to go full-MRA (or whatever I'll be called for having a penis and questioning things as a "patriarchy") and I'll agree there is sexism and societal stereotypes of gender in professions where it has no rights to be - but this goes both ways (sexist stereotypes are also perpetuated by even those who believe that they're doing good by "being on the right side of history" as they try to find sexism in everything - when fabricated sexism, victimhood and bigotry is an often criticised facet of their narrative), and a "patriarchy" in the sense of what the loud minority of feminists paint it as are only half truths. Half truths as male-dominated jobs. Half truths as the 77 cent income average for women. Half truths about exploitation, sexual violence, and so on.

It really does frustrate me because of how vague, far-reaching and debatable of a topic it is. There are those that claim there's patriarchal sexism but honestly I feel that they're doing more harm than good - trying to find sexism in everything. Perhaps it's just Human condition to find and focus on the worst about ourselves instead of trying to band together and better themselves and everyone else.

tl;dr: no, I'm not crying "why can't we all just get along". I'm pointing out that sexism has more than just one side, that it's part self-fulfilling prophecy and that those who focus solely on sexism in the industries (as opposed to help avoid it outright) also perpetuate sexism. This includes any "male tears" mugs and "kill all men" jokes (sexism under the guise of reactionary humour which really doesn't benefit anyone).

I do apologise if this spawns (or indeed has already spawned) a complete tangent of a discussion. That's what happens when the source topic is flawed (by however much) I suppose. Gender politics. Oh dear. D:

"Don't fork me, no more."

It's okay, we're both sinners.