Jump to content

koti

Senior Members
  • Posts

    3161
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Everything posted by koti

  1. That would be me, I presume I won't be able to stay for much longer as this thread has ran its course for me even before it started.
  2. It does not require us to ignore biological sciences, it requires us to obey biological sciences.
  3. No it would not, people who have various medical conditions have my full sympathy and empathy and can be sure they will never get hurt by me. As for menopause its really a low blow and it just shows that if you have to use these kinds of arguments, what youre trying to argue is ridiculous. The people from the below youtube clip can go f themselves btw. Sure and that is your right. You can join the above in the YT clip for the fight. The difference bewteen you and me is that I don't want to legislate my subjective views by law and you do.
  4. I agree with him to a certain point. For example I won’t refer to a person who is biologically capable of baring children as a „he” despite if she demands it. I see it not as sign of disfespect of troglodyte like views but as a sign of my own sanity which I would very much like to keep. Empathy arguments do not work for me in this instance, if there is risk of suicide for that person then that is a job for pharmacology and a psychiatrist and not for me.
  5. Whats under discussion is something completely different and you know it very well. Whats under discussion, is Jordan Peterson's stance that one should not be forced by law to comply with refering to people per their prefered pronouns and his reasoning stems mainly from the fact that creating artificial language constructs will not work and is essencially silly. The fact that some people (C-16 in Canada) try to legislate it by law is not only silly but also disturbing. As much as I am not a huge fan of JP's persona I have to say that your twisting of his views is really something else.
  6. Well then look closely to what I am demanding above - do not ever refer to me as a ‚they’ as I find it offensive. My whole childhood I was forced to refer to state people (teachers at school for example) as „they” as a part of the charade the communist regime built for 45 years in Poland after the war. Refer to me per „he” because I am a man. Also, if you keep on refering to me as „they” I won’t press charges.
  7. Seriously?! You're kidding right?
  8. Sure. Please use "his" instead of "theirs" when refering to me in any future dialog, thank you. Don't you mean what did 'they' do that was so hypocritical?
  9. Yes, I hijacked iNow’s referral to MigL as my own. I hope that doesn’t bare the same consequences as refering to someone who can bare children as a she? I really wouldn’t want to go to some kind of a woke program to avoid jail, where I would need to attend this: https://youtu.be/UPLQNUVmq3o
  10. 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.
  11. 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”
  12. 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.
  13. Be careful, your'e not using MigL's chosen pronouns (he/him), you might be facing legal consequences.
  14. "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.
  15. I bet the girl who was most disgusted with his behavior that night ended up having his kids.
  16. I thought that's only Dimms area of expertise, who would have known.
  17. I always pictured long necked white birds swimming in a lake of tea.
  18. 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?
  19. I have to agree with Phi here. I’ve learned way more from your physics related posts than I did from Michio Kaku.
  20. 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)
  21. 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.
  22. 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? 🤣
  23. 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.
  24. It is clear now, thank you for clarifying.
  25. 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.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.