Total posts: 19,931
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
That's true actually, Lunatic directly harassed you during the campaign and they didn't act on it because you were okay with it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I also believe that conservative victims, in conservative schools and areas, report less than liberal ones do. Even with that setback, I believe I am correct and that the convictions (especially in this modern era of 2022-2024) will end up more on the conservative end of the spectrum.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
One problem for my side of the bet is that the headlines lately seem to only focus on female predators (to reduce the sexist bias against men regarding it) and they seem ambiguous about their political views.
I actually don't know how we'd police this bet because not all cases make headlines at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I will bet you money right now, literally any amount as I am that sure about this.
In the next 2 years, there will be more predatory teachers (we'd need to really dig through every case file that gets remotely public) that are right-wing conservatives than left-wing liberals.
We leave out right-wing Libertarians if you want, since if we include that I'll 100% win. 2 years today I'll pay you if I'm wrong but I'm not sure how to track it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Out of curiosity, why would it surprise you that Eminem has more of an N-pass than Donald Trump?
Do you know how Eminem grew up? He lived the ghetto life.
Created:
Posted in:
There's nothing more ironic, truly there couldn't be anything more ironic, than somebody defending Wylted and then playing butthurt over some mild rudeness. Wylted's as rude as they come, what high horse are you sitting on?
Like really, this is a fucking joke.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
We aren't having an exchange, we have me and ADOL spitting facts and you going 'oh dear how rude, you pointed out the truth to me I didn't read it but I will pretend I'm too offended and unable to read what you right past the point of offense'.
Why are you on a debate site? You could stick to facebook threads and maintain that posturing just fine.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Are you a headmaster or a tyrant of some sorts?
They both have a similar insecurity about being challenged and resort to 'you're too disrespectful' whenever they really they're shit out of ideas to counter their opposers with, intellectually (not all headmasters but definitely most are like that, all tyrants are though). xD
So it's a good guess, I'd say.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Trauma could be what causes a person who has lost an argument completely to need to resort to several trolling oneliners where they pretend reading incompetence and maturoty superiority to get under the skin of the other user.
Coal needs to learn to take an L and say sorry, he was wrong. That is what a mature adult does.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
Lmao, nobody on the website, even who supports you thinks your post was closer to responsible or adult-like than mine.
You are the immature troll here, not me. I just do not need to talk of the immaturity of your post to address the point made and debate it.
Stop talking like you speak for anybody but yourself, you have zero authority. Either debate me as an equal or stop @ing me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
Sorry, I struggled to read what you wrote, I will reply to you when you learn to write and debate as a grown, civilised adult.
Please respect my mental and emotional deficiency while I parade like I am a bigger person.
Created:
-->
@Amoranemix
If you call the Russian Regime as opposed to the Russian peoplecowardly, even though Putin was voted in (several times), but refuse to give Hungarians their regime the same distinction, you are not worth my time and energy. Enjoy debating the others who think you are worth the effort.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Forum Games crowd already have enough rule leniency serving their narcissism, there is no need for extra rule tweaking just to feed their ego.
Rules are for all subforums, equally. It is about time you slapped them with that reality.
Rules are for all subforums, equally. It is about time you slapped them with that reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
I don't even know what you're talking about.
We agree on that much. Does your brain comprehend that? Can you read that?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
Worry less about judging the character of a user, more about the contents of a thread. It's petty.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
compared to what?
Most people who say that prefer a country life, which is absolutely fine
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
>calling London a shithole nobody wants to move to
LOL
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
Instead of Progressive you should use the term Liberal as it is more specific to which part of the left-wing movement you're mocking (there are more Liberals that care heavily about full trans integration than Progressives, the latter tends to focus more on economic inequality and the less able and vulnerable).
The stance of the very pro-trans liberal is this:
The gender gap is real at the higher end of the economic spectrum where people negotiate salaries rather than fixed wages of any sort. Women are (or were) genuinely negotiated against harder by corporations, this is true for decades and while you can perhaps say they didn't negotiate as hard due to it being more masculine to risk and demand hard, it doesn't really matter because the gap is real and the fact is the negotiation should be a means to a reasonable end, not an unreasonable end in itself that's the anti-meritocratic way to determine who gets more money by playing hardball. Furthermore, back in older times (only 10 years ago even) women could find it harder to re-negotiate with a competitor to get a job at the same level (executive or some equivalent) simply truly due to sexism.
So what is a 'woman' in the context of gender pay gap? Those that present as women/female. In fact, it is not true that only biological women are counted, when someone puts F or M on their job application, the company generally runs with it especially now to avoid being transphobic. As for what the overall definition of 'woman' is (meaning what does one need to mimic in order to transition from man to woman) that is the part where Liberals do leave it up in the air to define.
The stance of the very progressive is this:
Same first paragraph
In the latter part, the Progressive is often more willing to point out flaws in the lexicality at hand and would wish there to be strict, clear-cut separation of a term for a biological female adult human and an adult human that presents feminine. The latter would be 'woman', not the former, explaining how a transition to womanhood can occur and Progressives are often more willing to define what's feminine and what's masculine.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
I am civilised, it's why I insult instead of beating somebody's brains out, you do the same just with passive-aggressive masking like you did right then and there by saying I'm being a child via saying the opposite.
Rather than virtue signal at how less you insult, stick to the logic here, I know you struggle with it. Be an adult, yeah? High and mighty holy coaly.
Since you are gonna just be a pushover and concede the debate by playing the 'insulted' card, I'll leave you with this:
As somebody who complains how soft and pathetic these new age Gen Z'ers and Y'ers have become, you sure do seem easily triggered and crybaby-like in an argument that you could just be the fucking 'bigger adult' you pretend to be in this and admit defeat, you were wrong about Wylted not directly encouraging doxxing. It's simple, just say 'shit, I was wrong' or keep saying 'waaaa waaa be an adult RM' I am an adult but even my teen self could run circles around you in this exchange, your approach is pathetic.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Welcome to society, you take part or get the fuck out of society.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
I have no interest in your incoherent rambling.
Coal, a few posts up.
Now he is lecturing me about the following:
This is not the way to speak to other people. On the internet or in life.
Awww, little coal is offended and has no rebuttal.
You claimed he "encouraged" doxxing, when Wylted encouraged no such activity.
Awwwww, is that how you talk to people online or irl when the person you're saying didn't encourage doxxing said this:
Everybody on this board who cares about children should be defending them to ADOL and engaging his arguments. I would also request anyone who is good at doing so, to work on doxxing him. This includes mods as well. Feel free to email me any information you find to [censored]. I will get ahold of police departments in his area to make sure he is being watched and does not have contact with children.
Is this one of those moments where you throw a further strop to make the other feel like they have no right to challenge your ego? I put in bold and underlined something to help your reading.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
It doesn't surprise me that somebody who goes out of their way to be as passive-aggressive and condescending as yourself can't take it when somebody directly condescends you.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Tyranny
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
You are supporting tyranny
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
@ILikePie5
You are pretty blind or dumb if you don't see how Wylted did encorage and paetiticpate in wilful defamation and doxxing. Add that to his history of continual abuse and taunting of other users and a ban is more than justified.
You have to appreciate the irony when the hardest free speech advocate (by his own claim) uses blackmail to silence and terrify other users, yet still some morons will defend his actions.
The reality is that Wylted actually sabotaged any chance of ADOL ever slipping up and revealing who they are IRL so that action could be taken. He reminded ADOL precisely why hiding behind TOR browser and being paranoid serve the user well.
So, not only has Wylted threatened and oppresses but the one thing he may have genuinely believed would do good, he has ensured never will come to fruition.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Tbh I am altering a ridiculously hyperfeminist (not egalitarian, hyperfeminist, there us a difference) nonsense concept thar was made mainsteam in 2021 that demonised male gaze manipulation which involves sexualised women in cinema (often depicted as either staring at the male protagonist or flaunting something sexy and looking towards the camera from a side angle consistently in scenes).
This idea drove the idea that female gaze is just subversive and rebellious against male gaze. It also oversimplified the male gaze entirely, not noticing what else male-oriented movies do.
I believe I am a genius so this thread is made out of that arrogance as well as curiosity at what people would reply. In my life, I have spent a lot of time analysing what female relatives and strangers even find dull af vs entertaining af vs myself and other men in my life and strangers.
I noticed that this so-called patriarchal male gaze is amusingly more open to have less attractive characters even in starring roles, tha female-gaze ones are (meaning females are actually perpetuating superficial sexual undertones way more in their media).
You will not find a female-geared series or movie that doesn't put massive effort into both casting, wardrobe and lighting, angles etc to make each and every scene appear very blended in.
This is also why Mean Girls has so much FEMALE eye candy... that movie was not geared to men at all, yet the least attractive character(s) on it are probably some of the men (matter of opinion, I saw it and thought this).
In malegaze media, you will find even a wonky faced Sylvester Stallone hailed as the almighty man's man Rambo. You will find plenty of unappealing females and males casted into movies and series for men because men do not want everything and everyone in scenes to not enable very standoutish visual characters. This is a huge reason why Fight Club is so clever because they went out of their way in scenes to always flaunt the sexy, macho, bright-fashioned, bright+spiky haired Brad Pitt and consistently juxtapose it to... less typically attractive portrayals of Edward Norton and Helen Carter.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
By that very same metric, God has also made the brains, bodies, and life events of each individual who have never committed a crime, who contribute large amounts of time and labor to their communities, and live content lives. Again, you would have to establish how inaction or non-interference establishes amorality
That is amorality...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
I didn't say God is evil, I said God doesn't give a shit and overall is right around the exact middle between evil and good.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
I'm not arguing a position here, so no, I don't.
cool
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
God knowingly made the brains, bodies and life events of each individual that commits the crimes against humanity that Double_R describes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
That's like asking how the definition of an adjective constitutes possessing the adjective if one repeatedly behaves in the way of the definition.
Created:
-->
@thett3
I am not sure how else to word my sensible reply to your futile flexing that many greedy rich bastards vote for the party that simps them. Nobody cares, everybody knows.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
No they wouldn't be, they both contradict reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
In the letter, he states: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."
Einstein, who was Jewish and who declined an offer to be the state of Israel's second president, also rejected the idea that the Jews are God's favoured people.
"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."
All that is the case, Einstein said that. He also slept with hookers regularly. We do not need to follow his every word, either the words have merit regardless of him being the one to say them or the thing he is saying is without decent value.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
Please explain how a morally benevolent god fits this reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
That's akin to saying that because the default position about Schrödinger's cat is that it is agnostically alive and dead equally, that therefore it is wise to be agnostic about it being feline or not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
So what rational reason do you use reject it?
Created:
-->
@thett3
Shame that the highest need the lowest to work for them, isn't it?
Greedy people are fine as long as their relationship with the poor is symbiotic.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
I disagree with you on that, this was not the point I was making.
They are more similar than different.
Created:
Trigger warning: This analysis presumes cisgenderism in human beings in the sense of brain structure regarding attraction.
There is a trick that many movie directors have mastered over time to make certain movies appeal far more to females and others to males. The trick is to do with fashion, angle, lighting, facial/bodily and expression choices in the actors.
Movies that are designed to attract females actually psychologically are more boring for males to watch because of scenes consistently having colours that blend well together and the actors wearing outfits that, again, fit too nicely together. You will often find that when watching a female-targeted movie or series you almost feel like every episode is too visually similar and/or that the way the actors move during the scenes is almost too 'smooth'. This is because the female brain is, for whatever reason, put off (whether they are aroused or not is irrelevant this is about interest and genuinely grabbing their attention.
What females find makes them unable to look away from something tends to be that it is just so smooth and hypnotic.
Males tend to want something rather different but not the opposite. If you analyse male-oriented movies and series, you will find that the ones that really hit big consist of bursts of fluidity followed by 'bam'. It doesn't have to be fighting and action, it can even be a romance movie/series that happens to somehow still pull in a significant male audience (Suits comes to mind). Furthermore, these male-oriented series and movies consist of strong, bold outfits on main characters with the side characters consistently blending into the background. The male brain seems to like this as it makes it easier for them to know 'oh so that's what I should be focusing on.' It actually is why male series tend to have less eye candy than female series, despite the stereotypes. If you watch a series geared towards women, it's extremely difficult to find characters that are ugly or offputting because they would cause imbalance in the general aesthetic, whereas in series geared towards males or gender-neutral appeal, there is generally a balance between attractive and offputting actors (it's politically incorrect to use the term actresses anymore, 'actor' is gender-neutral now).
The reasoning behind this is still unknown to neurologists but it is very consistent. The strangest aspect of this is that songs geared towards women tend to have strong imbalance where the chorus slaps hard but the verses are tender and inconsistent with the chorus' vibe. In contrast, songs geared towards males tend to have the similar vibe and tonality throughout (chorus similar to the verses etc) so it is not as simple as it being a brain difference in a consistent manner, what is apparent is this is specifically to do with sight. I wonder what the reasoning is.
Created:
Posted in:
Funding to public schools should be banned and reallocated to the parents of children.
The genuine reason this is suboptimal is because of bad parents.
Created:
-->
@ebuc
Cats are more intelligent than dogs in some ways, so I'm not sure where you got that.
The reason dogs learn better than most animals do is because the way the canine brain works socially is very similar to non-autistic minds.
Autism and feline behaviour are actually linked and it is the same way people think cats are not smart if they aren't super trainable that they mistake autistic people for not being very intelligent when they are.
The form of intelligence that intelligent cats have is much more autonomous than dogs. High IQ cats don't give a shit if the human thinks they're smart, they are smart out of sheer curiosity and innovation.
As for dogs and empathy center, they definitely have empathy. Domesticated dogs have even more empathy in their brains than humans do, I am certain of it.
What I am speaking about is not aggression on its own, it is pure lack of empathy, guilt and social-bonding in the brain. Leopards lack all three severely, making them unusually psychopathic for a mammal. Orcas are similar but it wouldbe hard to get hold of and brain scan orcas and certainly difficult to compare them to dolphins or whales.
Created:
Hahaha, let's see it happen. I can't wait for America's right wing to go 'oh fuck! All our economic powerhouse states are Democrat or swing states how did we ever think the needy Reds could cope on their own?
Created:
-->
@Amoranemix
Let me get this straight...
You think all Hungarians back Russia because their corrupt leader does. How can they democratically overthrow their leader? Have you ever voted for a candidate that made a call/decision you disagree with but you like some of their other policies?
Furthermore, what exactly is your definition of cowardice? Are all Russians cowards?
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
That suffera from two significant problems that psychopaths benefit from.
Firstly, hu.ans are so i credibly complex that the ampunt of people we know to strictly be psychopathic which we would need to compare to people that are similarly ruthless and aggressive but not psychopathic (other wild cats in my example) is so vast and unfeasible to attain.
The biggest problem is that because humans are so psychologically varied, even the things many psychopaths have in common that most people don't could be things that are linked more to the sociopathic scarring from their childhood and adolescence than their raw brain chemistry. It is also important to note that high functioning psychopaths are barely sociopathic at all and what makes their brains visibly psychopathic would be the ley but we cannot demand every CEO, politicians police chief, army General etc to take brain scans until we have the blueprint to definitively say that animal tests have led us to strictly determine psychopathic brain structure and activity from a scan.
Rats are very similar to humans and that is a problem. If you scan a rat's brain because of its ruthless tendencies, you cannot know if it is sociopathy or psychopathy or alternatively merely anger issues that is your independent variable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Tell us what you think the real minors are then? How low will you go?
Tell us. Smartass.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Leopards are by far the most psychopathic wild cat. It is not sociopathy, it is sheer psychopathy.
All wild cats have the 'predator instinct' and can potentially turn on one who feeds or regularly interacts with them but despite tigers being so much bigger and actually so ferocious, as well as lions and panthers, leopards take it to a whole new level in terms of frequency and severity of attacks.
There was a model who is really interested in helping wild animals, she knew about wild cats but not specifically about leopards. Due to this, she judged that since the leopard did not act aggressive to her, she could relax a little around it. This is true for almost all wild cats except for leopards. She turned her back on it for less than 30 seconds and this life-altering event has left her face disfigured, her life almost lost to blood loss, she is a drop in the ocean of leopard-kills-expert.
If scientists pinpoint exactly what is different in leopard brains vs tigers, lions etc, we may be able to literally scan brains of high ranking officials in any line of work and know them to be psychopathic, helping us know not to trust them.
This is controversial indeed but I ask you for a flaw in my theory.
Created: