|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 22, 2018 10:54:11 GMT
Feminism is ALL about equality and nothing else . . . Rape is about power I've pointed the following out a ton of times, but either (a) no one seems to pay any attention to it, or (b) no one agrees with it, yet if (b) is the case, no one attempts even the slightest defense of their view contra mine . . . at any rate, once again: Any statement of the form "x is about y," where x is something that even a handful of people think about, is going to be false as a generalization. Why? Because "aboutness" is reporting how people think in relation to x, the mental associations they make with respect to x, the meanings they assign to x, the motivations they have in mind for x, etc., and different people think about the same thing differently. There's nothing that a lot of people think about that they all think about the same as each other. |
|
|
|
Post by islandmur on Oct 22, 2018 12:07:34 GMT
Brett Kavanaugh, whom President Trump named to a seat on the US Supreme Court, was accused by three women of sexual assault, including an allegation of attempted rape. To take the seat on the Court, the US Senate had to confirm the appointment. How did the women senators vote, after hearing the allegations? Susan Collins (Republican) - voted to confirm Shelley Moore Capito (Republican) - voted to confirm Joni Ernst (Republican) - voted to confirm Deb Fischer (Republican) - voted to confirm Cindy Hyde-Smith (Republican) - voted to confirm Lisa Murkowski (Republican) - was going to vote no, but voted "present" instead as a courtesy to a fellow Republican who wanted to vote "yes" but had to attend his daughter's wedding that day The 17, or so, Democratic women voted against confirming. What I found interesting about the Kavanagh affair was not the accusations in themselves I do believe those were indeed timed to cause him to loose the seat, and I also believe they did happen but that's not what really shocked me, it was his demeanor during the depositions, Kavanagh did not comport himself as someone who would be a good supreme court judge it's his attitude during that processus that shocked me. |
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Oct 22, 2018 12:11:11 GMT
EλευθερίWe do not like in a rape culture or a culture that hates women. You're thinking of South Africa or the Middle East.
|
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Oct 22, 2018 12:13:33 GMT
Brett Kavanaugh, whom President Trump named to a seat on the US Supreme Court, was accused by three women of sexual assault, including an allegation of attempted rape. To take the seat on the Court, the US Senate had to confirm the appointment. How did the women senators vote, after hearing the allegations? Susan Collins (Republican) - voted to confirm Shelley Moore Capito (Republican) - voted to confirm Joni Ernst (Republican) - voted to confirm Deb Fischer (Republican) - voted to confirm Cindy Hyde-Smith (Republican) - voted to confirm Lisa Murkowski (Republican) - was going to vote no, but voted "present" instead as a courtesy to a fellow Republican who wanted to vote "yes" but had to attend his daughter's wedding that day The 17, or so, Democratic women voted against confirming. What I found interesting about the Kavanagh affair was not the accusations in themselves I do believe those were indeed timed to cause him to loose the seat, and I also believe they did happen but that's not what really shocked me, it was his demeanor during the depositions, Kavanagh did not comport himself as someone who would be a good supreme court judge it's his attitude during that processus that shocked me. His composure depends entirely upon your perception of his innocence. Were I in the position of having my name smeared across international media and my family were being threatened because of false allegations, then I would get angry as well. |
|
|
|
Post by islandmur on Oct 22, 2018 13:59:38 GMT
What I found interesting about the Kavanagh affair was not the accusations in themselves I do believe those were indeed timed to cause him to loose the seat, and I also believe they did happen but that's not what really shocked me, it was his demeanor during the depositions, Kavanagh did not comport himself as someone who would be a good supreme court judge it's his attitude during that processus that shocked me. His composure depends entirely upon your perception of his innocence. Were I in the position of having my name smeared across international media and my family were being threatened because of false allegations, then I would get angry as well. I agree in general I would also, but I'm not running for supreme court. So I expect more composure, while I was reading/viewing diverse portions I wasn't thinking about wheter he was guilty or not I was "can this guy handle the job?" "can he be unbiased, specially if it's a case that relates to his ordeal?"... |
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Oct 22, 2018 19:00:18 GMT
His composure depends entirely upon your perception of his innocence. Were I in the position of having my name smeared across international media and my family were being threatened because of false allegations, then I would get angry as well. I agree in general I would also, but I'm not running for supreme court. So I expect more composure, while I was reading/viewing diverse portions I wasn't thinking about wheter he was guilty or not I was "can this guy handle the job?" "can he be unbiased, specially if it's a case that relates to his ordeal?"... Why not? he's done it for 20 years previous to this. |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Oct 22, 2018 19:40:01 GMT
Perhaps you need to watch the Milo clip I posted before the Cousens one. I watched the first minute. Even worse than the Cousens video. Guess I don't have to take pedophile losers seriously. The male feminist is an abhorrent creature. Like I said: I don't have to take pedophile losers seriously. What did you feel she messed up about third wave feminism? Perhaps you needed to keep watching I watched two more minutes, with eyes partly closed, which made it bearable. Plenty of strawmen and lies. No need to watch more after the strawmen about "male privilege". |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Oct 22, 2018 20:19:07 GMT
Folks, please don't feed the troll. Who are you accusing of being a troll? |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Oct 22, 2018 20:23:50 GMT
Feminism is ALL about equality and nothing else . . . Rape is about power I've pointed the following out a ton of times, but either (a) no one seems to pay any attention to it, or (b) no one agrees with it, yet if (b) is the case, no one attempts even the slightest defense of their view contra mine . . . at any rate, once again: Any statement of the form "x is about y," where x is something that even a handful of people think about, is going to be false as a generalization. Why? Because "aboutness" is reporting how people think in relation to x, the mental associations they make with respect to x, the meanings they assign to x, the motivations they have in mind for x, etc., and different people think about the same thing differently. There's nothing that a lot of people think about that they all think about the same as each other. If I add IMHO can I be allowed to post it on here and have people consider the statements and the thought behind them? |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 22, 2018 21:04:52 GMT
I've pointed the following out a ton of times, but either (a) no one seems to pay any attention to it, or (b) no one agrees with it, yet if (b) is the case, no one attempts even the slightest defense of their view contra mine . . . at any rate, once again: Any statement of the form "x is about y," where x is something that even a handful of people think about, is going to be false as a generalization. Why? Because "aboutness" is reporting how people think in relation to x, the mental associations they make with respect to x, the meanings they assign to x, the motivations they have in mind for x, etc., and different people think about the same thing differently. There's nothing that a lot of people think about that they all think about the same as each other. If I add IMHO can I be allowed to post it on here and have people consider the statements and the thought behind them? I'm not saying you're not allowed to write whatever you want to write  I just want people to think about and realize (or alternatively offer an argument contra the notion) that different people think about the same thing in different ways; it's not like there's a widespread mono-mind or some such. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Oct 22, 2018 21:39:03 GMT
Feminism is ALL about equality and nothing else . . . Rape is about power I've pointed the following out a ton of times, but either (a) no one seems to pay any attention to it, or (b) no one agrees with it, yet if (b) is the case, no one attempts even the slightest defense of their view contra mine . . . at any rate, once again: Any statement of the form "x is about y," where x is something that even a handful of people think about, is going to be false as a generalization. Why? Because "aboutness" is reporting how people think in relation to x, the mental associations they make with respect to x, the meanings they assign to x, the motivations they have in mind for x, etc., and different people think about the same thing differently. There's nothing that a lot of people think about that they all think about the same as each other. I agree with you a little, not very much. For example the reasons 500 different people like a particular pasta sauce are not necessarily the same, you got that right. What you got wrong is that there are not 500 different reasons, more like four or five different reasons. Many might like the oregano. Many others might like the tomatoes. After the first few reasons there are not going to be many people with the same. Some might like it because it was the one their family always had or because a friend prefers it or because they like the artwork on the label and other rather individual reasons. I think it would be fair though to say that its oregano is the main reason people like it. Something like rape is most likely going to involve a failure to adjust socially. That "power" is the cause is probably not exactly right, but people who fail to adjust socially probably do have power issues more often. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Oct 22, 2018 21:42:41 GMT
If I add IMHO can I be allowed to post it on here and have people consider the statements and the thought behind them? I'm not saying you're not allowed to write whatever you want to write I just want people to think about and realize (or alternatively offer an argument contra the notion) that different people think about the same thing in different ways; it's not like there's a widespread mono-mind or some such. OK, I will play. Whilst people, of course think about the same thing in different ways, there is a thing called a 'general consensus'. (or if you are of the school that thinks this 'general' word is redundant or a tautology, then just 'consensus') |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 22, 2018 22:48:57 GMT
I'm not saying you're not allowed to write whatever you want to write I just want people to think about and realize (or alternatively offer an argument contra the notion) that different people think about the same thing in different ways; it's not like there's a widespread mono-mind or some such. OK, I will play. Whilst people, of course think about the same thing in different ways, there is a thing called a 'general consensus'. (or if you are of the school that thinks this 'general' word is redundant or a tautology, then just 'consensus') The problem is that aside from the fact that the relevant empirical research hasn't actually be done re "aboutness" for any terms (aboutness being different than definitions of course), if we were to do the empirical research we'd get data like this: Say that we query 1000 people re what rape is "about." 43 people might say it's about x 43 people might say it's about y 41 might say it's about z Etc. (And even that might be generous--similar answers might be far less common than ~4%). You're going to get a ton of different answers, and possibly you'll get at least as many answers as the number of people you query. Aside from that, (1) what people answer when they're queried about it might not be very reflective of how they actually think about it in various situations, (2) how people actually think about it is going to change in those different situations/contexts and over time. Almost no one actually thinks about anything in just one way, especially over long periods of time and in very different circumstances. So while you could say that the two answers that 43 people had in common are relative consensuses, that would be very misleading, because 96% of the queried population didn't actually give those answers. |
|
|
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Oct 22, 2018 22:50:31 GMT
EλευθερίWe do not like in a rape culture or a culture that hates women. You're thinking of South Africa or the Middle East. I don't know where you live. I live in the US, where sexual assault is common and a large percentage of the public, as well as many corporations and institutions such as the justice system, bend over backwards to find fault with victims of sexual assault & harassment rather than to punish perpetrators of sexual assault & harassment. There are varying degrees of discrimination. In the 1930s and 1940s, for example, discrimination against Jews was rife among many of the most influential institutions in the United States. Yale, and other Ivy League universities, restricted the numbers of Jewish students who were allowed admission and would not appoint Jews as full professors. Many elite law firms (so called "white-shoe firms") refused to hire Jews, many country clubs barred Jews from membership, and many homeowners associations had restrictive covenants that forbade any homes in the neighborhoods from being sold to Jews. Jews in the US were not being corralled into concentration camps and systematically murdered in these years, as they were in Nazi Germany, but it would wrong to argue that parts of American culture were not very antisemitic. Similarly, while both the overt and more subtle forms of misogyny and rape culture are much more blatant in countries like Saudi Arabia than in the US, that is not to say the American culture is free of misogyny and rape culture. |
|
|
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Oct 22, 2018 23:01:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Oct 22, 2018 23:07:47 GMT
OK, I will play. Whilst people, of course think about the same thing in different ways, there is a thing called a 'general consensus'. (or if you are of the school that thinks this 'general' word is redundant or a tautology, then just 'consensus') The problem is that aside from the fact that the relevant empirical research hasn't actually be done re "aboutness" for any terms (aboutness being different than definitions of course), if we were to do the empirical research we'd get data like this: Say that we query 1000 people re what rape is "about." 43 people might say it's about x 43 people might say it's about y 41 might say it's about z Etc. (And even that might be generous--similar answers might be far less common than ~4%). You're going to get a ton of different answers, and possibly you'll get at least as many answers as the number of people you query. Aside from that, (1) what people answer when they're queried about it might not be very reflective of how they actually think about it in various situations, (2) how people actually think about it is going to change in those different situations/contexts and over time. Almost no one actually thinks about anything in just one way, especially over long periods of time and in very different circumstances. So while you could say that the two answers that 43 people had in common are relative consensuses, that would be very misleading, because 96% of the queried population didn't actually give those answers. I agree that in polling, it is crucial what question is asked, however this does NOT negate the fact there is consensus on various issues in society. Quantifying it is the problem, however it can be detected in other ways. e.g protest marches as an outward sign in an extreme case butt many other issues have a consensus. |
|
|
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Oct 22, 2018 23:12:59 GMT
Brett Kavanaugh, whom President Trump named to a seat on the US Supreme Court, was accused by three women of sexual assault, including an allegation of attempted rape. To take the seat on the Court, the US Senate had to confirm the appointment. How did the women senators vote, after hearing the allegations? Susan Collins (Republican) - voted to confirm Shelley Moore Capito (Republican) - voted to confirm Joni Ernst (Republican) - voted to confirm Deb Fischer (Republican) - voted to confirm Cindy Hyde-Smith (Republican) - voted to confirm Lisa Murkowski (Republican) - was going to vote no, but voted "present" instead as a courtesy to a fellow Republican who wanted to vote "yes" but had to attend his daughter's wedding that day The 17, or so, Democratic women voted against confirming. What I found interesting about the Kavanagh affair was not the accusations in themselves I do believe those were indeed timed to cause him to loose the seat, and I also believe they did happen but that's not what really shocked me, it was his demeanor during the depositions, Kavanagh did not comport himself as someone who would be a good supreme court judge it's his attitude during that processus that shocked me. I don't think anyone disputes that the timing of the allegations being made to the public was intended to try to derail the appointment. Even the accusers themselves have said so. And it makes sense. These events are alleged to have occurred many years ago. The accusers never intended to make them public, and they have said that they tried not to think about them. But they were outraged to hear that someone who had done things so objectionable was now being put at the very top of the nation's justice system and being held up to be a paragon of virtue. If someone had done something horrible to you or a loved one of yours, wouldn't you speak up if you heard that they were now being made one of the top judges in the country? I agree that Kavanaugh displayed in his testimony a complete lack of the temperament that is a minimal requirement to serve as a judge. Moreover, there is ample evidence that he committed perjury during his confirmation hearings last month, as well as in his prior testimony before Congress. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 22, 2018 23:17:16 GMT
I've pointed the following out a ton of times, but either (a) no one seems to pay any attention to it, or (b) no one agrees with it, yet if (b) is the case, no one attempts even the slightest defense of their view contra mine . . . at any rate, once again: Any statement of the form "x is about y," where x is something that even a handful of people think about, is going to be false as a generalization. Why? Because "aboutness" is reporting how people think in relation to x, the mental associations they make with respect to x, the meanings they assign to x, the motivations they have in mind for x, etc., and different people think about the same thing differently. There's nothing that a lot of people think about that they all think about the same as each other. I agree with you a little, not very much. For example the reasons 500 different people like a particular pasta sauce are not necessarily the same, you got that right. What you got wrong is that there are not 500 different reasons, more like four or five different reasons. Many might like the oregano. Many others might like the tomatoes. After the first few reasons there are not going to be many people with the same. Some might like it because it was the one their family always had or because a friend prefers it or because they like the artwork on the label and other rather individual reasons. I think it would be fair though to say that its oregano is the main reason people like it. Something like rape is most likely going to involve a failure to adjust socially. That "power" is the cause is probably not exactly right, but people who fail to adjust socially probably do have power issues more often. For me to buy that something that a lot of people have conscious thoughts about has any widespread commonality with respect to that "aboutness"--again, where we're talking about something different than a definition, a la "rape is about power"--you'd have to actually show me empirical research that confirms widespread commonality. Heck, even when we're talking about definitions, it's common enough that we get as many suggestions as people who answer, even when people can simply look up the definition, and even when it's in a context like a message board where folks can simply look at others' answers. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Oct 23, 2018 0:00:25 GMT
Perhaps you need to watch the Milo clip I posted before the Cousens one. I watched the first minute. Even worse than the Cousens video. Guess I don't have to take pedophile losers seriously. The male feminist is an abhorrent creature. Like I said: I don't have to take pedophile losers seriously. What did you feel she messed up about third wave feminism? Perhaps you needed to keep watching I watched two more minutes, with eyes partly closed, which made it bearable. Plenty of strawmen and lies. No need to watch more after the strawmen about "male privilege". Like I said: You are a male feminist, but each to their own. She actually talked about the evil white patriarchy getting blamed for oppressing women by feminist fools. Yes, women have always been the target because the male patriarchy have been just so disgustingly evil to them. They love other men though and have always allowed them to shine, over and above women.  Ironic how another female could see the sense behind the turd wave feminist movement.
Do you want to get laid, is that why you are a phony?
|
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Oct 23, 2018 0:03:27 GMT
Eλευθερί We do not like in a rape culture or a culture that hates women. You're thinking of South Africa or the Middle East. I don't know where you live. I live in the US, where sexual assault is common and a large percentage of the public, as well as many corporations and institutions such as the justice system, bend over backwards to find fault with victims of sexual assault & harassment rather than to punish perpetrators of sexual assault & harassment. There are varying degrees of discrimination. In the 1930s and 1940s, for example, discrimination against Jews was rife among many of the most influential institutions in the United States. Yale, and other Ivy League universities, restricted the numbers of Jewish students who were allowed admission and would not appoint Jews as full professors. Many elite law firms (so called "white-shoe firms") refused to hire Jews, many country clubs barred Jews from membership, and many homeowners associations had restrictive covenants that forbade any homes in the neighborhoods from being sold to Jews. Jews in the US were not being corralled into concentration camps and systematically murdered in these years, as they were in Nazi Germany, but it would wrong to argue that parts of American culture were not very antisemitic. Similarly, while both the overt and more subtle forms of misogyny and rape culture are much more blatant in countries like Saudi Arabia than in the US, that is not to say the American culture is free of misogyny and rape culture. Thats all very well, but none of it is true. The investigation of an alleged offence requires questioning the alleged victim. Neither the system, nor society endorses or encourages rape. I live in the UK and our system is under scrutiny at the moment because the police have been found to have been withholding evidence from the defence because of pressure from the CPS to secure more prosecutions. This serves nobody and is because of feminist lies. |
|
