Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

You are disgusting!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    RE: You are disgusting!

    Irony is always funny.
    Senior Editor - Men\'s Human Rights Ontario
    Canadian News Director - AVFM
    Men\'s Human Rights Ontario - click the link

    Comment


    • #17
      RE: You are disgusting!

      I'm disgusting?
      *Sniffs armpit*
      Meh, maybe a little.
      But if I'm disgusting that, by comparison, makes you a vile, revolting pile of filth and feculence!
      The greatest threat to our planet and our future is the mistaken belief that someone else will save it.

      Comment


      • #18
        RE: You are disgusting!

        Originally posted by admin
        Burned a hole in my inbox today, lol

        From: Karina

        Message: Your views on women and feminism are disgusting. I am a woman and I am a rational thinker and I never let my emotions influence any of the decisions that I must make in my professional and personal life. In your piece detailing what feminism essentially was I was shocked at the claims made as I do not believe that your explanations of scientific experiments are valid assessments of data and you seem to have warped the purpose and findings of science to service your own selfish needs.
        His views on women are really not an issue at all; his views on feminism are pretty nasty, but that's largely due to feminism being far, far more nasty in the first place.

        I'm also a woman and a rational thinker, however, I can concede that I'm an emotional creature by default, and my intellect only gets to take charge when it's consciously aware that it's not doing anything. For example, I'm aware that I'm a little annoyed at this response that was given, and as such, though I'm deconstructing it in an effort to explain the situation better, there is also a twinge of malice and schadenfreude that gave me that little nudge to want to do so at all.

        If this email sender were truthful to her own self, she'd recognize that the mere act of sending a nasty note, aka a hostile worded email based purely on statements of emotion with no logical based evidence at all, is in fact a case of her emotions influencing her private life. If she weren't angry, she would not have sent the message. If she weren't angry, the message would have had detailed logical arguments to try to explain her position, rather than just stating that she supposedly has logical arguments without providing any. If she weren't emotional, this entire conversation wouldn't be happening =P

        Failure to understand what emotion is, does not equate to being immune to it; if anything, it means you're more susceptible to it's effects since your intellect can't override it without being consciously aware that the emotions are doing all the work.

        To even claim that one "never lets their emotions influence" pretty much anything, is a blatant lie, especially when you're in the middle of an emotional argument. It just means you don't recognize how little control of your life your emotions have.

        Regardless, I digress; to be "shocked" by arguments made is... well, emotional in nature. It doesn't mean it's bad, but it means that you are presented with three main options; look into the matter logically, now that your emotions have told you that this is something worth looking into, or put your fingers in your ears and go "LALALALALALAA I CANT HEAR YOU", or attack the person saying such without providing any real reason for doing so other than "I don't like what you're saying".

        The latter two were both invoked, and are both emotional responses; the former is logical, but based off of being tipped off by one's emotions. If one were not influenced by their emotions, one would not garner joy in anything, including research or learning new things. Without that twinge of emotion, nothing would be interesting, period. Each and every topic would be equally valid to any other, and we'd have no reason to prefer to discuss one over any other.

        Emotion isn't problematic in and of itself; it's problematic only when you don't recognize it for what it is, and let it run rampant.

        For example, "I do not believe that your explanations of scientific experiments are valid assessments of data" is an emotional argument; she does not believe such, but didn't do the logical thing which would be... you know... to actually check the numbers and verify if they were true or not.

        Instead, she relies on the emotional argument that she doesn't want to believe that the data is true, and the data she WANTS to believe is true therefore should be true because of that emotional response, not because it's actually true or not.

        To be blunt, I'm fairly neutral in this regard, as I don't want for things to go one way or the other; I'm not looking for evidence of men being oppressed, nor for women being oppressed, but what I've found is that the feminist movement relies roughly 90%+ on "warped the purpose and findings of science to service your own selfish needs.", while the men's human rights movement typically is closer to about maybe 20% warpage and the rest being simply deconstructing bad arguments made by feminists, and by the deconstruction of such, it shows that the reverse is true of what is claimed, not out of warping the purpose and findings of science, but actually by enforcing such with rigid logic.

        There are cases where even the MHRM will stray into making similar mistakes as feminism, because, well, you're dealing with humans who are emotional creatures at their core. The difference can be seen quite clearly, however, that the MHRM, in almost all cases, will cite a source, explain their reasoning, and provide a full and complete explanation for how they came to their conclusions, while the feminist movement will, in almost all cases, either make numbers up on the spot, or just cite an answer without giving even the slightest bit of reasoning for how they came to that conclusion.

        For example; feminism claims that 1 in 4 women will be raped; no evidence or explanation is given to explain this. A source is cited, but even using the most absurd and ridiculous assumptions, inflating numbers to roughly 100x what they logically should be, the closest I've seen this source be able to produce is about 1.6%, which is a far cry from 25%, even when using the most absurd methods of counting.

        The thing is, I can easily dissect the MHRM's arguments because they provide me the tools to do so, and show their reasoning. Generally it's fairly sound in it's arguments, though there are exceptions. Feminism doesn't even try; it relies almost solely upon yelling out absurdly inflated statistics to hook people with the emotional argument of "OMG look how high these numbers are, you must panic!", rather than "this trend of data shows this".

        Feminism is rooted almost solely in emotion, but they're not even aware of doing so even when they're doing it, such as the email provided shows.

        Everything the email sender provided was purely emotional in context, including the sending of the email in the first place, yet she stands firmly with the belief that she doesn't let her emotions affect anything she does, despite that, even the mere act of stating such is an emotional decision to try to defend herself, rather than one of clarification. The logical statement would be to state that her emotions led her to this being interesting enough to discuss further, and triggered the logical response of acting upon those emotions.

        To be blunt... she doesn't understand what emotions even are, and provided zero logic in her email at all; it was purely emotional without even realizing it.

        This is why I find myself generally siding with the MHRM over that of feminism; the MHRM is typically more truthful and accurate. Not always, but the vast majority of the time, while feminism is almost the exact mirror image of such.

        If only the email sender would recognize that she's her own worst enemy in this argument =P
        It doesn't matter if they're right; if they can't prove they're right, then they\'re wrong, no matter how right they may be.

        Comment


        • #19
          RE: You are disgusting!

          [attachment=585]
          Originally posted by admin
          Burned a hole in my inbox today, lol

          From: Karina

          Message: Your views on women and feminism are disgusting. I am a woman and I am a rational thinker and I never let my emotions influence any of the decisions that I must make in my professional and personal life. In your piece detailing what feminism essentially was I was shocked at the claims made as I do not believe that your explanations of scientific experiments are valid assessments of data and you seem to have warped the purpose and findings of science to service your own selfish needs.
          [attachment=585]
          Attached Files

          Comment


          • #20
            RE: You are disgusting!

            "..In your piece detailing what feminism essentially was I was shocked at the claims made as I do not believe that your explanations of scientific experiments are valid assessments of data and you seem to have warped the purpose and findings of science to service your own selfish needs and finally punctuation is a tool of the Patriarchy"

            Comment


            • #21
              RE: You are disgusting!

              Originally posted by onca747
              finally punctuation is a tool of the Patriarchy[/b]"
              the last words of onca747 before they suffocated them self by talking with out bref in for to long.

              yer I run into a lot of feminist hate in person (I do kind of attract it) and its all illogical garbage supported by there felling alone and if i mention that and say its relay fucking annoying then say ''oh haz I hurt you'er felz'':dodgy:
              or some other crap.
              I guess this is the price of valuing the truth
              Just some melancholy cat

              Comment


              • #22
                RE: You are disgusting!

                Originally posted by admin
                Burned a hole in my inbox today, lol

                From: Karina

                Message: Your views on women and feminism are disgusting. I am a woman and I am a rational thinker and I never let my emotions influence any of the decisions that I must make in my professional and personal life. In your piece detailing what feminism essentially was I was shocked at the claims made as I do not believe that your explanations of scientific experiments are valid assessments of data and you seem to have warped the purpose and findings of science to service your own selfish needs.
                Isn't that last part 100% of the feminist agenda? Blowing stats out of proportion while ignoring stats that affect men?

                Comment


                • #23
                  You're full of weapons grade bullshitium Karina. Karina, Karina, just to let you know there's no monsters under you bed, nor closet. No boogeyman, it's all in your little idiotic brain

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    well fuckity bollocks karina for someone who doesn't let your emotions dictate your decisions you give a lot of emotional and opinionated reactions and views without actually giving any real argument or discourse on the issue...'disgusting' is not an argument its an emotionally based opinion; unless you give some rational system of secular ethics that makes Paul's actions or ideas morally reprehensible it's just emotional adjective slinging
                    "There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious—makes you so sick at heart—that you can't take part. You can't even passively take part. And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all."
                    Mario Savio

                    "A single, seemingly powerless person who dares to cry out the word of truth
                    and to stand behind it with all his person and all his life, ready to pay a
                    high price, has, surprisingly, greater power, though formally disfranchised,
                    than do thousands of anonymous voters."
                    Vaclav Havel
                    'if you want to know who rules you, look at who you're not allowed to criticise' Voltaire

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      just reply with a definition of logic see if she gets the joke.
                      Originally posted by MatrixTransform
                      where were you before you put yourself last?
                      Originally posted by TheNarrator
                      Everywhere I travel, tiny life. Single-serving sugar, single-serving cream, single pat of butter. The microwave Cordon Bleu hobby kit. Shampoo-conditioner combos, sample-packaged mouthwash, tiny bars of soap. The people I meet on each flight? They're single-serving friends.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X