|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 23 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
The differences in innate ability of genders are well within the acceptable bounds for ability of either gender. The idea that either could be obsolete is absurd.
It seems to me like there is very little difference in innate abilities, but there is a much more significant difference in the life choices that men and women tend to make.
|
United States44205 Posts
On December 23 2013 07:50 ziggurat wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
The differences in innate ability of genders are well within the acceptable bounds for ability of either gender. The idea that either could be obsolete is absurd. It seems to me like there is very little difference in innate abilities, but there is a much more significant difference in the life choices that men and women tend to make.
Which is fine, as long as they're not being denied the ability to make choices due to sexism. If women want to choose to stay at home or whatever that's fine by me as long as they have other options available to them.
|
wtf is an innate ability
nyxisto the point is that kwark's crypto-christian belief in the androgyny of the soul is hilarious. That's all. As anyone who's ever been through puberty knows, the chemicals running through your brain change the way you think, and men and women have different mixes of chemicals. Qed I think
|
On December 23 2013 07:58 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2013 07:50 ziggurat wrote:On December 23 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
The differences in innate ability of genders are well within the acceptable bounds for ability of either gender. The idea that either could be obsolete is absurd. It seems to me like there is very little difference in innate abilities, but there is a much more significant difference in the life choices that men and women tend to make. Which is fine, as long as they're not being denied the ability to make choices due to sexism. If women want to choose to stay at home or whatever that's fine by me as long as they have other options available to them.
You wouldn't survive long in any feminist circles out here in west coast USA if you murmured approbation for stay at home parenting. It's a life choice only made because of the remnants of patriarchy (I'm quoting a feminist here widely praised for moderate views). In essence, only because of a culture of oppression towards women do women make this choice. It's not an option any enter into from freedom of choice.
In other news,
Obama repeals Obamacare
It seems Nancy Pelosi was wrong when she said "we have to pass" ObamaCare to "find out what's in it." No one may ever know because the White House keeps treating the Affordable Care Act's text as a mere suggestion subject to day-to-day revision. Its latest political retrofit is the most brazen: President Obama is partly suspending the individual mandate.
The White House argued at the Supreme Court that the insurance-purchase mandate was not only constitutional but essential to the law's success, while refusing Republican demands to delay or repeal it. But late on Thursday, with only four days to go before the December enrollment deadline, the Health and Human Services Department decreed that millions of Americans are suddenly exempt.
Individuals whose health plans were canceled will now automatically qualify for a "hardship exemption" from the mandate. If they can't or don't sign up for a new plan, they don't have to pay the tax. They can also get a special category of ObamaCare insurance designed for people under age 30.
So merry Christmas. If ObamaCare's benefit and income redistribution requirements made your old, cheaper, better health plan illegal, you now have the option of going without coverage without the government taking your money as punishment. You can also claim the tautological consolation of an ObamaCare hardship exemption due to ObamaCare itself. source
I'm ever so glad the executive branch of the United States government condescended to grant this exemption.
|
On December 23 2013 08:08 sam!zdat wrote:
wtf is an innate ability
nyxisto the point is that kwark's crypto-christian belief in the androgyny of the soul is hilarious. That's all. As anyone who's ever been through puberty knows, the chemicals running through your brain change the way you think, and men and women have different mixes of chemicals. Qed I think
Men and women are different. But then again, it seems pretty trite to say that everybody is different from everybody else. I'm sure you're not arguing that discrimination is ok ...? So what point are you trying to make here?
|
On December 23 2013 08:40 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2013 07:58 KwarK wrote:On December 23 2013 07:50 ziggurat wrote:On December 23 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
The differences in innate ability of genders are well within the acceptable bounds for ability of either gender. The idea that either could be obsolete is absurd. It seems to me like there is very little difference in innate abilities, but there is a much more significant difference in the life choices that men and women tend to make. Which is fine, as long as they're not being denied the ability to make choices due to sexism. If women want to choose to stay at home or whatever that's fine by me as long as they have other options available to them. You wouldn't survive long in any feminist circles out here in west coast USA if you murmured approbation for stay at home parenting. It's a life choice only made because of the remnants of patriarchy (I'm quoting a feminist here widely praised for moderate views). In essence, only because of a culture of oppression towards women do women make this choice. It's not an option any enter into from freedom of choice. In other news, Obama repeals ObamacareShow nested quote +It seems Nancy Pelosi was wrong when she said "we have to pass" ObamaCare to "find out what's in it." No one may ever know because the White House keeps treating the Affordable Care Act's text as a mere suggestion subject to day-to-day revision. Its latest political retrofit is the most brazen: President Obama is partly suspending the individual mandate.
The White House argued at the Supreme Court that the insurance-purchase mandate was not only constitutional but essential to the law's success, while refusing Republican demands to delay or repeal it. But late on Thursday, with only four days to go before the December enrollment deadline, the Health and Human Services Department decreed that millions of Americans are suddenly exempt.
Individuals whose health plans were canceled will now automatically qualify for a "hardship exemption" from the mandate. If they can't or don't sign up for a new plan, they don't have to pay the tax. They can also get a special category of ObamaCare insurance designed for people under age 30.
So merry Christmas. If ObamaCare's benefit and income redistribution requirements made your old, cheaper, better health plan illegal, you now have the option of going without coverage without the government taking your money as punishment. You can also claim the tautological consolation of an ObamaCare hardship exemption due to ObamaCare itself. sourceI'm ever so glad the executive branch of the United States government condescended to grant this exemption.
LOL. Indeed. For those of us who dislike Obama, the Obamacare trainwreck is the gift that keeps on giving.
|
United States44205 Posts
On December 23 2013 08:40 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2013 07:58 KwarK wrote:On December 23 2013 07:50 ziggurat wrote:On December 23 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
The differences in innate ability of genders are well within the acceptable bounds for ability of either gender. The idea that either could be obsolete is absurd. It seems to me like there is very little difference in innate abilities, but there is a much more significant difference in the life choices that men and women tend to make. Which is fine, as long as they're not being denied the ability to make choices due to sexism. If women want to choose to stay at home or whatever that's fine by me as long as they have other options available to them. You wouldn't survive long in any feminist circles out here in west coast USA if you murmured approbation for stay at home parenting. It's a life choice only made because of the remnants of patriarchy (I'm quoting a feminist here widely praised for moderate views). In essence, only because of a culture of oppression towards women do women make this choice. It's not an option any enter into from freedom of choice.
When "feminists" start telling women they must live their lives a certain way they end up with inverted commas. The point is that you don't go around telling people they must do X because of their gender.
|
United States44205 Posts
On December 23 2013 08:08 sam!zdat wrote:
wtf is an innate ability
nyxisto the point is that kwark's crypto-christian belief in the androgyny of the soul is hilarious. That's all. As anyone who's ever been through puberty knows, the chemicals running through your brain change the way you think, and men and women have different mixes of chemicals. Qed I think
I don't think even you know what the hell you're talking about at this point. All I was saying was that when you rank men and women at any given task (excluding dumb biological ones like how good at periods you are) the bell curves for men and women either mirror each other or overlap pretty closely. If you go by an obvious male favoured one like physical strength, yes men are on average stronger but the majority of women will still be above the bottom of the male curve. What this means is that if you were to say that women are obsolete because they're weaker then what you're also doing is saying the bottom 40% or so of men are obsolete because they're no stronger than the women. You'll see the same mirrored pretty much everywhere because the differences between genders are far less than the range of abilities displayed within each gender. No one gender can possibly be obsolete because even if you found an objective overriding criteria on which to judge one as superior you'd still end up rating the better gender as pretty obsolete.
|
On December 23 2013 08:43 ziggurat wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2013 08:08 sam!zdat wrote:
wtf is an innate ability
nyxisto the point is that kwark's crypto-christian belief in the androgyny of the soul is hilarious. That's all. As anyone who's ever been through puberty knows, the chemicals running through your brain change the way you think, and men and women have different mixes of chemicals. Qed I think Men and women are different. But then again, it seems pretty trite to say that everybody is different from everybody else. I'm sure you're not arguing that discrimination is ok ...? So what point are you trying to make here?
the point is that any politics based on absurd, dogmatic claims about anti-essentialism and the lack of differences between men and women is impotent, because grounded in a fantasy immediately recognizable as such to anyone who hasn't drunk the pomo koolaid. I don't have any programme other than pointing out obvious bullshit, which can only polarize discourse into people who accept obviously false postulates as a tactic vs those who refuse to do so and therefore become Enemies of Liberation (like yrs truly).
I mean, people can do whatever the fuck they want and perform their gender in any way that tickles their fancy, I couldn't care less. (Personally, I like loud, aggressive, intelligent women who like arguing more than shopping and I hold the patriarchy responsible for how hard they are to find) But don't say obviously false things, because I love my friends but I love truth more.
|
kwark your abilities thing is too reductionistic to be meaningful. People are not collections of stats, we are not dnd characters.
and we both think the other person is an idiot so you don't have to keep mentioning it
|
On December 23 2013 09:04 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2013 08:08 sam!zdat wrote:
wtf is an innate ability
nyxisto the point is that kwark's crypto-christian belief in the androgyny of the soul is hilarious. That's all. As anyone who's ever been through puberty knows, the chemicals running through your brain change the way you think, and men and women have different mixes of chemicals. Qed I think I don't think even you know what the hell you're talking about at this point. All I was saying was that when you rank men and women at any given task (excluding dumb biological ones like how good at periods you are) the bell curves for men and women either mirror each other or overlap pretty closely. If you go by an obvious male favoured one like physical strength, yes men are on average stronger but the majority of women will still be above the bottom of the male curve. What this means is that if you were to say that women are obsolete because they're weaker then what you're also doing is saying the bottom 40% or so of men are obsolete because they're no stronger than the women. You'll see the same mirrored pretty much everywhere because the differences between genders are far less than the range of abilities displayed within each gender. No one gender can possibly be obsolete because even if you found an objective overriding criteria on which to judge one as superior you'd still end up rating the better gender as pretty obsolete.
He is talking about tastes... not just capabilities. You are the one saying that woman should be allowed to do whatever they want right ?
|
United States44205 Posts
On December 23 2013 09:10 sam!zdat wrote:
kwark your abilities thing is too reductionistic to be meaningful. People are not collections of stats, we are not dnd characters.
and we both think the other person is an idiot so you don't have to keep mentioning it
Someone said a gender was going to be obsolete for some reason. I said that was dumb because the differences between the genders are smaller than the variance within the genders so no one gender can be declared obsolete because in doing so most of the other would also have to be categorised as obsolete. Somehow you failed to understand this very basic point and accused me on being a Christian DnD player.
|
you're just wrong, because you are thinking about these reductionistic aptitude test whatever and not about actual human beings with actual personalities and social embeddedness and emotions and etc etc
so yes, I stand by my claim that you are thinking about this entire problem like a christian dnd player.
|
United States44205 Posts
So the obsolescence of an entire gender wouldn't have anything to do with statistical aptitudes but instead be to do with an actual personality of an actual person?
I'm not sure you even understand what is being discussed here sam.
|
Gender is stats yo.
Even math majors are more romantic... 
|
On December 23 2013 09:34 Boblion wrote:Gender is stats yo. Even math majors are more romantic...
I am a math major and i can't confirm, we love our stats. Which makes us at least romantic about stats i guess
|
On December 23 2013 09:34 Boblion wrote:Gender is stats yo. Even math majors are more romantic...
Feminists often have quite luxurious personalities, not because of their bland philosophical postulates, but because their feminism is frequently a facade, behind which there stalks a longing for a natural self, which they attempt to provide via constructed ideological identity.
Can you not see the inherent romance? Feminists are damsels in distress, and they need a strong male to rescue them....from the doctrine of feminism.
Although I agree with sam; male feminists are kind of useless. Like many others, many of my most agreeable companions have espoused some form of feminism. Most male feminists however bore intellectual women; free-thinking women like counterparts, they dislike men being their own subdued echoes.
|
United States44205 Posts
Reality once again passing Moltke by.
|
On December 23 2013 10:03 KwarK wrote:
Reality once again passing Moltke by.
You will forgive me if I claim the advantage of realism vis-a-vis someone with over 20k posts on this forum.
|
On December 23 2013 10:03 KwarK wrote:
Reality once again passing Moltke by.
Is reality stats too ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
