koti

I pretty much explained in my edit above - I do not wish to be refered to as „they” but iNow insists on it. The hypocrisy is both very aparent and very self explanatory.

I was just about to substitute You with me so we could have a more „fruitful” dialog on this with iNow but I’m glad you came in. Edit: Okay, this is where we differ, I do care if iNow refers to me as a „they” and I certainly do not wish to be refered to as „they” I am a „he”. It is Thursday today and if for some reason I loose my mind and by Sunday I decide everyone should refer to me as „your highness” while being sane at the moment of typing this, I would not want iNow to bare legal consequences of not refering to me as „your highness”

Sure, you can dodge all you want but it won't make all this any less ridiculous. Your stance should be the first example explaining what hypocrisy is in an encyclopedia.

Be careful, your'e not using MigL's chosen pronouns (he/him), you might be facing legal consequences.

"Three multimethod studies (total N = 348) probed the hypothesis that women's attraction to men would be influenced by male prosocial orientation" I wonder if N is the amount of people in the control group or the amount of kids the guy from Arete's story eventually had.

I bet the girl who was most disgusted with his behavior that night ended up having his kids.

I thought that's only Dimms area of expertise, who would have known.

I always pictured long necked white birds swimming in a lake of tea.

Who are you CharonY? We've been sharing pretty intimate dialogs over the years on this forum and it has been very apparent who I am because I GAVE IT ALL UP while you have been pretty much in the shadows. Are you married? do you have kids? What exactly do you do for a living? What are your pronouns?

I have to agree with Phi here. I’ve learned way more from your physics related posts than I did from Michio Kaku.

This is hard to disagree with. This plus his uncanny command of the English language which seems to be there for the sole reason of bulding likes/views/clicks is something that draws me away from him. His English is impressive though when put out of context. I live in the outside world of the 21st century in a middle class family and circle of friends and business interactions in Europe. You know, the place that is not the internet forums, the other place (it’s there I assure you)

Exactly. Thank you for agreeing with me. It's not the threatening of violence, it's projecting confidence and fearlessness with grains of humour, knowledge and intelligence which dissolves those situations. I've had numerous situations like this in my life and I've never had to resolve them through violence - the weak attack the weak. I thought you sarcastically replied "Quantum Field Theories" as a reply to CharonY's toxic elements and I found it hilarious. What QFT's are we talking about here Phi and I'm sory for the faux pas. Edit: Found it - Quoted For Truth. Facepalm at self.

This is where we differ, I have never had problems with asking for help when I needed it and when I knew there is a chance I could have received it. I'd also not call security in that situation, it seems that one man's toxicity is another man's bliss, I much rather have some broken bones and my 'masculine' conscience clear than resolve through security/cops. This attittude actually prevents and/or de-escalates any potential violence before it can happen and I'm willing to bet that JP would agree that this is exactly what he was trying to convey. Plus theres also the most likely scenario where my attitude leads to no violence and my wife telling me how much she loves me for deffending her and that she feels safe with me. Remember the times when it was ok for a woman to feel safe alongside a strong, dominant male? 🤣

Okay so I haven't read the book and you seem to have read it so I am not equipped enough to comment on this. I do remember a few years back though, you and me having a chat about that documentary "The Red Pill" and it seemed to me back then that we've been either watching two different films or we have a fundamentally different aparatus for digesting concepts and events which took place in that documentary so by crude interpolation I suspect we might be having a similar situation here. This is exactly what I'm refering to, frankly it is beyond me where you got the above because that's very much not what Jordan Peterson is saying in that video short.

It is clear now, thank you for clarifying.

It's not that. Some men tend to be much more stubborn and explicit in those kinds of situations than women and despite the wife standing up for herself the guy might not give up and keep on hitting on her. It does happen in the movies youre right but I got news for you - it does happen in real life too. So you would consult your wife and the guy how to resolve the situation in a calm discourse ? I wouldn't build my life around it as a fundamental aspect of myself but yes, if you keep on hitting on my wife at a party where she feels uncomfortable and I feel I have to stop it or we have to leave, I will tell you that I will break your jaw and if you keep up what youre doing I will do it. I've only had to resort to violence once in my life in those kinds of situations and I presume that if it wasn't for my stance on this, I would have to resort to violence much more often.

Peterson is making a statement, a claim, an observation, he’s not modelling a model. You on the other hand seem to be doing the very thing which you are accusing him of - taking an observation made by Peterson and implying that he’s making a model. Plus hes not claiming that male interactions are fundamentally a posturing where we asses the level of violence, we do it as only a part of our personality. Please elaborate on this, my English might be becoming a little rusty and I’m seeing you saying that if I was hitting on your wife/partner at a party you would call the cops?

Hi Phi and everyone else, its been a long time - around 3 years or so since I've posted anything longer than a few words. I've been busy with my family and business, not enough time to post a lot anymore, especially that the majority of topics have been mostly pollitical and less physics/science focused which was the original reason why I came here. I think what Jordan Peterson is claiming here is... let me give an example - if a man is hitting on your wife and he keeps on doing it despite civil discourse and does it again and again at a banquet or at a NYE party downtown, there comes a moment when you have to make a decision - you either take your wife and leave the place or stand up for yourself and tell the guy straight to his face to f off or you'll break his jaw. What Peterson is saying is that most men have a set of skills which enable them to detect which type of man they are dealing with during a normal, civilised, non hostile conversation - the leave the place guy or the break the jaw guy. I know that this might come as a serious shock to many here but women and men do differ in many physical and even psychological aspects and this is an example of such a difference. It might come as a further shock to many that this is not mysogyny, patriarchy heck - it's not even a bad thing.

Gravity not only looks like it's not a force but it also looks like its not a basic concept, it looks like it's an aproximation of something underlying. Interestingly, time seems to fill the same rough definition - time seems to be an aproximation and not a basic concept and it too seems to be a part of something underlying.

Powerful flashlight (10K+ lumen) Powerful blue/green laser (above 1W) Decent microscope with WiFi. Leatherman/Gerber multitool Tiny projector

Sounds like your safe space might have been breached and crossing fingers might not be enough. Enforcing real measures could be the only hope.

Youre right.

Where would you say I am deraling an already split thread on politics iNow? Would you say its more towards testical taze or political bias?