Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
Holy crap! Progress.And a veggie-hater who is trying to be healthy would choose to eat veggies. And a person who hates flying that needed to get from point A to point B quickly would choose to fly. And a misogynist who wanted the best doctor would choose the best doctor even if they were female.My comparisons were valid and my initial answer was correct.This is why "I have blac
"Hating women" and "Hating veggies" are metaphysically different categories that can't be analogized in any meaningful way imo.
Maybe our Philosopher-at-Large checkraisdraw can chime in on this.
@checkraisdraw
Anyhoo, great discussion. I'm done for now
Cya!
how is this reconciled when many feminists worked for the system? Gloria Steinham proudly worked for the CIA.
The system promotes identity politics because it's an alternative to class politics. There are going to be genuine leftist feminists out there but unless you're in those spaces you're not going to hear about them.
"Hating women" and "Hating veggies" are metaphysically different categories that can't be analogized in any meaningful way imo.
Maybe our Philosopher-at-Large checkraisdraw can chime in on this.
@checkraisdraw
Anyhoo, great discussion. I'm done for now
Cya!
I’m not sure I agree that in principle you can’t make comparisons between hating veggies and hating women. The key is to make sure that the comparison holds true with respect to the property being compared. That they are different, even very different is to be expected with an analogy.
That being said I think the idea here is that you can hate women while still appointing them in your administration or to scotus. And that does indeed not form any contradiction and there’s no entailment of hating women that says that’s not possible.
However, I do think that if we think of things inductively, it at least would be more expected under the hypothesis that Trump hates women that he would not appoint them at all. So if my prior was agnostic and I saw Trump appoint women to important roles, that might tilt me towards the side of him not hating women.
On the other hand, I think Gregorian’s point is that there are other overriding reasons to think that Trump appointing women to certain roles isn’t enough of a reason to think he doesn’t hate women, and that there are alternative hypotheses that make sense of the data just as well. Such as he appointed those women because he thought there was a political expediency to doing so, or that they might accomplish anti-women policies better than their male counterparts, etc.
Going back a page or two re: the poster who suggested state paid sexual services. How soon you all forgot PointlessWords. At the same time he boasted about his education and money in this sub he had a thread in LVL about how he was 7k in make up playing 1/2 and 1/3 and in the end seemed to get out of the debt because his backer was arrested so he wasn't going to pay him.
I’m not sure I agree that in principle you can’t make comparisons between hating veggies and hating women.
Probably some fundamental differences between a food group and 50% of the population. I doubt the people who hate vegetables hate them as much as the people who hate women hate women.
Probably some fundamental differences between a food group and 50% of the population. I doubt the people who hate vegetables hate them as much as the people who hate women hate women.
I said that you can make the comparison. I didn’t say that it would work for all situations. Focusing on the things not being compared is like missing the point of an analogy entirely. You’re just supposed to focus on what’s being compared.
You’re kinda missing my point though..
The quote was a legitimate critique from a classic work of feminist theory, and the discourse I received in return was mockery, ad hominems, and even a “that doesn’t sound like me” from someone I considered more highly than others.
Disappointing at best
Just because you consider something to be a classic work doesn't mean it isn't deserving of mockery. That was one of most ridiculous things I've ever read.
If everyone disagrees with something you say, including even those you give higher esteem, you may want to consider that you could be wrong.
I’m not wrong, and, again, it’s quantifiable.
But is it actually true? Do men actually respect and revere other men more than women? It doesn't resonate with me either.
It doesn't with me either. Of course, my best friends in adulthood have mostly been women and the only time I'm around very many men is at the poker table, where I go despite having to mostly play with men.
Historical records, institutional data, government statistics, and peer-reviewed research all point to my thesis being empirically true, both historically and currently.
But you guys don’t want to address the scary facts in the room. The hard data that can’t be dismissed.
Meet the happiest demographic
Percentage of Adults Aged ≥20 Years Who Used Antidepressant Medications* in the Past 30 Days, by Sex and Marital Status — National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, United States, 2015–2018
Thank you for answering the question.
I personally believe that the answer is clearly "No."
I think a misogynist would trust their car or their computer to a female, but not their health and wealth.
I wouldn't think one would even trust their car or computer to a woman.
CN and I seem to have very different definitions of misogyny though.
I'm sure she thinks I'm misogynist just because I disagree with her generalizations about men being terrible.
It’s not really a matter of just my or your or Rococo’s opinions. It is, in fact, measurable.
It's actually interesting that people don't realize how much that's true. There's a reason men are the stars of history books. The roles and accomplishments of women are routinely ignored/disregarded. Men don't view women as even capable of contributing to things like that. It's sort of highlighted by the blind spot of not seeing something that obvious.
Look at how defensive men get when women even approach competing on the level of a man, or worse, beat them. Watch how quickly a story about a JV team being able to beat a women's soccer or basketball team shows up in the comment section of any women's sporting highlight. Just obvious examples.
Look at how Serena Williams is basically accused actually BEING a man because they can't deny how dominant she is. Though they will point out how a man ranked in the thousands could beat her at any opportunity.
The counter to this will be something about how women get uppity and claim they are on par with men so they have to be put in their place, but this happens unprompted in comment sections and conversations all the time - mostly without any such claim being made.
No, in large part, men do not respect women, and do revere other men. That's not an incorrect statement. It's just an uncomfortable one.
The happiest demographic exibit #2
Abstract
Objective: Depression constitutes a major health problem for older people, in this study defined as people 65 years of age and older. Previous studies have shown that mental health among older people who live with animals could be improved, but contrary results exist as well. Therefore, the objective of the present population study was to compare the self-rated depression symptoms of both female and male non-pet owners, cat owners, and dog owners.
Method: The participants in this cross-sectional population study included 12,093 people between the ages of 65 and 101. One thousand and eighty three participants owned cats and 814 participants owned dogs. Self-rated depression symptoms were measured using HADS-D, the scale of self-administered depression symptoms in HADS (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale).
Results: The main results showed higher mean values on the HADS-D for cat owners than for both dog and non-pet owners. The latter group rated their depression symptoms the lowest. When dividing the ratings into low- and high-depression symptoms, the logistic regression analysis showed that it was more likely that males who owned cats perceived lower depression symptoms than females who owned cats. No interactions were recognized between pet ownership and subjective general health status, loneliness, or marital status.
Conclusions: Our results provide a window into the differences in health factors between older females and males who own cats and dogs in rural areas. RESULTS from population studies like ours might increase the available knowledge base when using cats and dogs in clinical environments such as nursing homes.
I’m not even really annoyed about it. All of you have been conditioned to these biases and you do it subconsciously. It’s not about whether you are good guys or not; it’s whether you’re actually aware of the preferences you hold for other men over women of equal qualifications, both intellectually and emotionally.
Luciom, go back to your hole and find out why all your Italian composers put ten thousand vowels and double consonants on each eighth note in 9/8 meter. You’re not needed for this.
Historical records, institutional data, government statistics, and peer-reviewed research all point to my thesis being empirically true, both historically and currently.
But you guys don’t want to address the scary facts in the room. The hard data that can’t be dismissed.
We're addressing it right now. That's why we've commented. If empirical facts were actually posted in this thread then those could be discussed. I'm not too scared.
It's the phrase "full petard", not the individual word.
It's possible you didn't realize it, but I'm sure that was based on the phrase "full [word that rhymes with petard but starts with R]" from the movie Tropic Thunder.
He knows
