This week in feminism...

[PhDhawk]

You didn't post a podcast.

[Deleted User 104]

You didn't post a podcast.

Now we're just playing obtuse.

[PhDhawk]

Listen to my video and then we can discuss. I'll come back 5 hours from now after you've had a chance to listen to it.

[DCHawk1]

There's no such thing as feminism.

[Deleted User 104]

There's no such thing as feminism.

?

[seahawk]

The woman is a drunk who rambles on about something and puts her drunkelogues on youtube. Why should any of us watch that?

[PhDhawk]

There's no such thing as feminism.

Sorry, can you post a 25 minute video to make your point instead?

[TDub]

Right. Your algorithm is whats fascinating.

Glad you find me interesting.

I applaud your attempts to think outside the box and seek alternative options, i think its a good thing to be skeptical and to not blindly believe what is told to yoi, particularly the government and the propaganda news machines.

However, you seem to have 0 ability to self reflect and see anything outside your specific point of view. You ability to alter, adjust, or discard your theories when presented with very legitimate knowledge that contradicts your thoughts. .

[Deleted User 104]

Right. Your algorithm is whats fascinating.

Glad you find me interesting.

I applaud your attempts to think outside the box and seek alternative options, i think its a good thing to be skeptical and to not blindly believe what is told to yoi, particularly the government and the propaganda news machines.

However, you seem to have 0 ability to self reflect and see anything outside your specific point of view. You ability to alter, adjust, or discard your theories when presented with very legitimate knowledge that contradicts your thoughts. .

To think outside the box, I would argue one would need to look at all available perspectives (that one is aware of). That's what I try to do, and then I come up with my theories or arguments based on what appears to be the facts or truth. I never said I'm perfect or that I know everything. I'm only arguing a few topics on here when it comes down to it. All in all, I'm always open to new ideas, just so long as they come from a sincere person (PhD for example, is not being sincere right now, so I wouldn't bother watching his videos).

[TDub]

Ok. I agree you need to look at all perspectives. What i am saying is that you DONT do that. But thats fine, im not going to argue about it anymore.

[PhDhawk]

Ok. I agree you need to look at all perspectives. What i am saying is that you DONT do that. But thats fine, im not going to argue about it anymore.

how can you argue, he posted a long video that no one can debunk?

[Deleted User 104]

Ok. I agree you need to look at all perspectives. What i am saying is that you DONT do that. But thats fine, im not going to argue about it anymore.

I disagree -- I try my best. I think the real problem is that some people on here are bothered by some of my conclusions. But instead of saying why they believe I'm wrong, I just get snarky replies most of the time. But what they probably don't know is that when you resort to name calling, it is an admission that one has nothing to say.

[TDub]

Most of the snarky name calling came after you refused to acknowledge any of the lengthy, science based, reaponses and legitimate discussion points made by those replies in the 9/11 thread. After that people decided you were a troll as noone who was serious could be so obtuse (to use your word). I defended you to some degree on that thread until it became obvious you werent trying to have a real discussion about the topic.

[Deleted User 104]

Most of the snarky name calling came after you refused to acknowledge any of the lengthy, science based, reaponses and legitimate discussion points made by those replies in the 9/11 thread. After that people decided you were a troll as noone who was serious could be so obtuse (to use your word). I defended you to some degree on that thread until it became obvious you werent trying to have a real discussion about the topic.

I just disagree with some of their conclusions. They might be experts in their field, but even experts are wrong. I mean, look at the FDA -- you know how screwed up they are, right? I think you get my point.

[TDub]

So why are the youtube "experts" more reliable than their experts?

[Deleted User 104]

So why are the youtube "experts" more reliable than their experts?

Honestly, most of the time I don't post videos because the person is an expert or not. Most of the time, it's just because I happen to think most of what they are saying is valid. If you're trying to argue there's a lot of nuts on Youtube, I don't disagree at all. Again, this all comes back to trying to be intellectually honest to the best of ones ability. I think reliability should be judged on if someone has a history to trying to be sincere.

[TDub]

I thinm it should partially be judged by whether or not they are educated and knowledgable on the topic or if they are randomly spewing nonsense out of their asses.

[Deleted User 104]

Well of course, but someone can be educated and still be completely ignorant of how things really are, right? I know you at least agree with me on that.

I think most of the disagreement in the 911 thread was that people were using government-backed articles as if they are the authority. A lot of people in our society will just accept these articles from the government, which is disturbing.

[seahawk]

I take real exception to the fact that you want posters here to listen to this woman's alcohol fueled ramblings as if she were some kind of guru for my gender.

Perhaps it explains your tolerance for Prince Andrew fucking teenagers--they must be alcoholics or at least under the influence and therefore bad girls who deserve it.

[DCHawk1]

There's no such thing as feminism.

?

Feminism doesn't exist any longer.