Are Women Good or Bad Entrepreneurs ?

Last year, i asked the question if Men were better entrepreneurs than woman, i tried to convince myself that gender has no relation …

But recent statistics made me change my views, now i’m convinced women are bad empire builders, they may be as good as men for small businesses but very few plan or dream of world domination for their niche products or services.

Here’s some stats:
According to the Wealth-X and UBS Billionaire Census 2014, there are 2,325 billionaires in the world, and only 12% of them are women. That means there’s 286 female billionaires.
Wait it gets worse, from these 286 women only 17% have self-made their fortunes, that’s 48 women out of the 2325 billionaires that can claim to have made their own fortunes.
In total around 66% of billionaires made their own fortunes … so we see a huge difference here!

But some points should be considered:
1. Majority of women are focused on motherhood, while men are testing or building their companies or ideas, thus women enter the game much later.
2. For Men, it is a game of domination, for women it’s about the well being, thus they rarely push their teams to go for domination and stack riches.
3. Tech sector is a big generator of billionaires, and there’s really few women in tech.

Charlie Hebdo , Truth, Facts, Islamic extremism, Conspiracy?

It’s a sad thing to see journalists die, but it’s even sadder to see cartoonist die!!
Journalist, especially those who choose to report in war torn regions, know the risk, and they take it, because they are the eyes and the ears of the world, and sometimes a shield against mass killing and exterminations, these Journalists are heroes, actually they are super heroes, because when people try to fly from conflict zones, these super heroes try to fly to these troubled zones.

Cartoonists on the other hand, are the goofy neighborhood kid that want to make everybody laugh, cartoonist did not choose to go into war zones, they did not choose the heroic but dangerous mission of reporting the truth. Instead, cartoonists try to approach the current issues with humor, to make you laugh and maybe reconsider your point of views.

I have read somewhere that the attack on Charlie Hebdo does not represent Islam. That’s ridiculous! It’s ridiculous because it makes no sense to associate a religion or race to an act, anyone who does the association is clearly a fool, that you should no waste your time discussing with …
But the real question is why do these extremist Islamic groups want to kill and are killing innocent people?
That’s a long answer, that probably every politician who is serious about foreign policy already knows.
These terrorist organizations have been killing people everywhere, their Muslim victims are hundred of times more than their western victims … “Hence the question, Is this Islam teaching?”, makes no sense ! Even when these terror groups are targeting western populations, there are often also Muslim amongst the victims, for example in the Charlie Hebdo massacre, from the 12 people killed by terrorist, 2 were Muslims.
On the other hand, the Islamic teaching, do talk alot about warfare, mainly due to the fact that Muslims had to take up swords to defend themselves at the beginning of Islam.
This being said, it is quite easy for manipulation experts to manipulate religious zealotry and turn it into extremism, especially due to the strong brotherhood feeling amongst Muslims (putting religion before tribe, race, country and sometimes family).
The Plan of action becomes simple, find a bunch of moderately religious young teens (young adults even better), push them to become religious zealots, the side effect is that this will increase their brotherhood through Islam sensation, then all you have to do is put them in contact with the suffering of their Muslim brothers throughout the world. For example, in the late 90’s photos and videos were widely circulating of Muslim women raped and killed, men and young boys  killed , and mass graves for Muslim population in Kosovo and Bosnia, all perpetrated by the Serb forces, helped extremists present it as the war of infidels against Islam.
The examples of tragedies taken advantage of by extremists, are numerous, from the massacres of Sabra and Shatilla camps (elderly, women and kids massacred – no men were in the camp) in Beirut by the Fallangite Christian forces, to the Israeli massacres in Gaza and Palestinian territories, to the Muslims suffering and persecution in Asia (China,Burma etc..). Add to this the embargo on Iraq the late years of Saddam Hussein that killed thousands of kids due to malnutrition,  the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan etc…

Add to this, a never ending struggle, tension and aggressivety in the Middle east since the creation of Israel, and a sense of oppression in the Muslim world where dictatorships muse conservatives from expressing their opinions or have a saying (see how democratically elected Egyptian president Morsi was toppled by an army general within weeks), and you’ll get a formula to push some extremists to become terrorists.

Sure not all extremists become terrorists, but some will do, and in their mind they are waging a holy war against those waging a war on Islam.

The second important factor is, finding the side manipulating the extremists? , and that can be very difficult to know, and most probably there are several players. Take for example the Afghan soviet war, the extremist were manipulated by the U.S.A to fight the Soviet, since then, many other international players started playing the terrorist card, financing specific groups to execute specific agendas.

It is a Chess game played globally between major players, and very few know what is really going on. Often the leaders behind the attacks are amongst  the first to present their condolences!!

Let’s go back to the Charlie Hebdo massacre: I would like to raise a few questions:
1- How come did the terrorist group know that the weekly meeting was being held?
2- How come the terrorist forget his id in the car, that they hijacked!!! when they take precautions to hide their identity by wearing masks and gloves, the id in the car looks only like a way to either selecting a scapegoat or a way to quickly point fingers so that the audience (with the attention span of a fish) don’t lose interest, without id and fingerprints investigation would have taken at least a week!

Either way, wars, politics and terrorism always choose innocent people to be their victims.

Charlie Hebdo team were defending something they held deer, they were defending the freedom of expression, and more precisely the freedom of making fun of religion and politicians alike. And it’s both these combined that were the bullets that killed these martyrs of Freedom.

The Last image cartoon by Chab, making fun of extremists’ promise to attack France, published few hours before the terrorist attack.

Tanya Valko anti Arab books – Arab wife – Arabska żona critics

The Arabs have been diabolized by the media for a long time, and in the last decade, after the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks, anything that was anti-Arab was promoted and seen as fighting for good.

In this spirit, a Polish writer Tanya Valko, took advantage of this need to know a culture that is popular, all while keeping the stereotypes readers would have had about this culture:

So Tanya wrote a series of books, her book Arabska zona, can be described mediocre at best, Tanya made the societies and people look ridiculously evil, by combining every stereotype & urban legend possible ….

In one of these books “Arabska żona”, the writer tells the story of a guy “Ahmed” who got married to a Polish girl.
throughout the story she start portraying Ahmed as the incarnation of evil and portraying the Libyan society as a morally deteriorated society where incest, treason, scams happen within closed doors.

For the Ahmed character the writer have bestowed him with these qualities:
– Drunk.
– Wife beater.
– Very Jealous.
– Incest : having a relation with his own sister (sister already aborted several of his kids).
– Extremist : participating in anti American riots and burning American flag.
– Letting his own wife be raped as a payment for a debt.
– Taking the kids by force from the mother.
– Selling his wife.

Here’s some other interesting points she tried to make in her books:
– Not giving Ahmed a male child would make his wife useless!
– Family taking the money that belonged to Ahmed without bothering to tell him – dishonest society?
– Family let Ahmed have relation with his own sister as nothing happened.
– Girls buy animal blood to spill on bed sheets after wedding, to prove they are virgins.
– A man would kill a women he’s in relation with only to keep it from public.
– Another Ahmed sister, a doctor, provided false death certificate about the wife – corrupt countries!

A world without Men!

emancipation

The other day, i was having a chit chat with a member of the opposite sex, when she said that men are almost of no use these days and a world without men is possible! This idea seams to be common amongst women these days.

Not taking in consideration that most company founders are men, and that they hire women without discrimination, but the other way is not always true.

In this post, i’ll try to analyze this theory “that a world of women without men is possible”, all while being as much objective as i can!

Before starting, i think we should thank the feminists of this decade, for successfully installing in the heads of women that men are useless, this idea is as much repulsive to the early feminists (who fought for real causes) as it is to men, a straight man would never think of the possibility of a world without women!

But to indulge the fantasy of the feminists and those imagining a world without men, i’ll analyze different cases leading to a world without men, based on my knowledge in science (genetics, evolution, etc …)

Obviously, my analysis will be reflecting my imagination of the situation, even if i’ll try to keep it as much objective as i can, there’s a possibility that it would favor an anti-feminist point of view!

---

 

Scenario 1: Men suddenly disappearing due to an illness that only target the male genome.  Meaning only females can live, every male child and adult will die.

case 1: If this event takes place anytime before 1978 (In vitro fertilization first success case), then Robert G. Edwards, the physiologist who developed the treatment, would have not been able to do so, and in this case the entire human population would have gone extinct withing 100-120 years (when the last girl dies), without men there’s no reproduction.

case 2: If this event takes place now, the female population left surviving will be able to use the IVF to fertilize female eggs with sperm from the sperm banks, but this will mean that the next generation will be 1% or less of the current female population (depending on sperm stored in banks), but the maximum it could be stored is 55 years (let’s say 100 year), so basically within 100 year from the moment men go extinct, women will no longer be able to have daughters and they will go extent few decades later, meaning in this scenario women will outlive men 200 years at most.

case 3: If this event takes place in the near future when cloning have been mastered,  please not at this time in 2015 we have successfully cloned many animals but, it often took a huge number of attempts and resources to do so (for Dolly the sheep: It took 434 attempts before an embryo was successful), and often cloned animals died few minutes to few days after being born, those that survived had a much shorter lifespan than original animal, and last, there were no even 1 successful human cloning till now, but let’s assume in the future we will master the cloning, and be able to clone humans, as well as prevent the fast death of clones. In this case the female population will drop dramatically to less than 0.1% within 1 generation, and the reason is that such a procedure have a very low success rate, it is very stressing, and require high level of trained personnel, making it accessible only to few. The generation after that will be probably less than 20% of the previous one, and afterwards it might be stabilized numbers wise, but not cloning wise, as cloning a clone might be much more difficult and less successful than cloning a human, but the loop will never end leading to more and more problems as we go farther from the original person, as cloning a clone of a clone will probably lead to many genetic mutations and physiological problems.

 

---

 

Scenario 2: Let’s say somehow, females are able to naturally reproduce without the need of a male, this is more a Science Fiction scenario, more than one based on scientific facts.

case1: If this takes place at the beginning of our species, meaning men never existed, only females existed, in this case some females will have to go hunt for food and some will have to keep the kids (all girls of course), this will lead to having females with a much tougher character, this will be mainly due to the fact that tribes with higher testosterone levels are more aggressive and risk takers and thus will be able to provide more food for their offspring and will eventually chase off any competing tribe. That means in a world without men, the women that have the most characteristics of men will be the ones who survive!!! Women will evolve to be more like men physically than women, and the natural selection will favor the strongest tribes every-time, thus creating a version of women with less social skills but more body power, basically creating Women that look and act like men. Why this never happened in our evolution, the answer is that men which have been subjected to the hormonal natural selection, decided to protect their women and kept them safe to take care of the young ones, the only selection factors women were subjected to are the fertility , sexuality and social skills selection, where men had more kids with women the perceived sexy, and women that were able to live peacefully with other women.

case2: If this takes place early through our history, far from the natural selection era, at the time of start of civilizations, example in 200BC or 1000 BC. Nothing much will happen, because the percentage of reproduction without male will be negligible compared to the standard way, except if for some reason, males suffer from something similar to the illness of scenario 1.
In this case, the history would be entirely different, without the testosterone induced domination behavior, big civilization will never be created, instead there will be a huge network of cities, living mostly peacfully amongst each other, there would be some skirmiches from time to time, but nothing mounting to the brutality of wars, technology science, and advancement wise the cities will advance at a much slower rate, first, because lower concentration of people means slower advancement, and second because men are more creative and much more men have very high intelligence Quotient (often associated with inventions)  than women (even when most IQ tests are constructed so that there are no overall score differences between females and males – allowing women to have as high score as men  – aka removing as much logic from the test as possible :P).
To put all this in perspective living in a 2015 only female world, would be like living in the 5th or 10th century, except there would have not been any minor wars for the last few hundreds years, and communication skills and language would have evolved to a level surpassing by far our current levels, intuition, six sense and borderline telepathy would have been common.

case3: If this takes place now or in the future: Also for a reason Men should no longer be able to exist, a quick and brutal regression will take place, men have been the bearers of technology flag for the last few decades, without men, cars, planes and electronics will fail without having enough people to repair them, how many female mechanic you know? what about female IT technicians, or female programmers or even female engineer ? These are the domains needed for technology and these are precisely the domains that have the least women. Why?, you might ask, that’s because these domains require the type of intelligence that many men excel in and that very few women do, this creates a pressure on girls wanting to work in these domains, and thus they avoid such domains to avoid feeling inferior. The fast drop in tech would later be halted, by making sure to have enough women that know these tech as possible, on the long run, current technology would be restored, tech advancement would be reignited but probably on a much slower rate than it is right now!

---

To end this article, a world without men is not possible unless it is science fiction, or maybe a model based on the amazonian women warriors, or even the bees and ants societies, where few males are kept for fertilization!

PS: Bees and Ants societies are hormonal slavery, where the queens secrete hormones to control the entire colony!!