• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Seven dead in drive by California shootings

Checkmite said:
No
Click to expand...

Good. Then women shouldn't be the sole arbiters whether a man can be heterosexual (or fond of women) and misogynist, even if we go by lived experience instead of logical analysis of the actual statements and factual knowledge of human behavior.

Checkmite said:
; but what does it matter to anyone else how validated your observation/lived experience is if you never offer it or relate it?
Click to expand...

Why does anyone's lived experience matter at all in this question?

Checkmite said:
You claim to have encountered "many" heterosexual misogynists, and yet rather than offer that experience as a counter to a poster who has claimed that there can't be many misogynists because men are "genetically" predisposed to like women, you instead use it to take me to task for the wording I used when expressing skepticism of the aforementioned claim - evidently now because my post, which suggested women might be better positioned to make the observations is the one that "invalidates your experience", as opposed to the post that expressly contradicts that experience.
Click to expand...

What? :)

Listen, this is getting ridiculous. If you don't see the very unscientific and weird approach you were suggesting to take when commenting on Axiom_Blade post, I have nothing else to add. I already explained what my point was. I first thought yours was an offhand comment made without much thought, but you leaped to defend it, so I guess you really meant it.

Checkmite said:
Perhaps you're right; perhaps it's more to do with my personal philosophy that those who are hurt by a thing constitute the most powerful voice against it.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I feel this is all too off-topic and I just don't care enough to drag this further.

Thanks for your responses.
 
TeapotCavalry said:
If you don't see the very unscientific and weird approach you were suggesting to take when commenting on Axiom_Blade post, I have nothing else to add.
Click to expand...

It seems to me like a semantic distraction. I think it's pretty clear that the sole purpose of the whole passage, of which you have taken issue with a segment, was to express skepticism of the claim that there are unlikely to be "many" misogynists for reasons of genetics.
 
Axiom_Blade said:
Fortunately, the US doesn't live in a vacuum. We can look at other countries' success with banning guns. Those countries have much fewer homicides. People are not being killed as much: not by gun, not by pipe bomb.

There is also another important factor which often goes overlooked in gun debates: suicide. If you have a gun in the house, the odds that you will kill yourself go up. In fact, this study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology found:
Click to expand...

Problem being different societies. And in addition seeing as spree killing seems to be the focus here, we are dealing with a very distinct subset of people.

Are you honestly saying you don't believe disturbed individuals and criminals will adapt? Just look up the myriad of weapons (including firearms) that get made in prisons. Do you not find it logical, with more raw supplies, and less observation, these people could make better things on the outside.

But all that is beside the point. Think of it this way. If you wanted to kill a large amount of people and you had no gun, do you not think you could come up with an alternate effective method? If not you are a very inventive person, if so you have just proven a criminal or psychopath could do the same.
 
colander said:
The owner of the PUAHate forum made a deliberate choice to impose virtually no moderation on the worst sub-forums of his site, because "free speech".
Click to expand...

There it is, that free speech again! When will people learn?! How many more have to die???
 
Axiom_Blade said:
There it is, that free speech again! When will people learn?! How many more have to die???
Click to expand...

Moderating posts on an Internet forum doesn't actually violate anyone's right to freedom of speech, though. So there's that.
 
colander said:
Moderating posts on an Internet forum doesn't actually violate anyone's right to freedom of speech, though. So there's that.
Click to expand...

Well, it's not a First Amendment, government violation of free speech.
 
Last edited:
Axiom_Blade said:
Yes, it does. It's just not a First Amendment, government violation of free speech.
Click to expand...

It is a violation of free speech in exactly the same sense that being ordered to get off my neighbor's lawn when he catches me standing there, yelling to passers-by about the evil and pernicious Jew would be a violation of my free speech.
 
Last edited:
colander said:
Moderating posts on an Internet forum doesn't actually violate anyone's right to freedom of speech, though. So there's that.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess if you believe in free speech it does.
 
qayak said:
colander said:
Moderating posts on an Internet forum doesn't actually violate anyone's right to freedom of speech, though. So there's that.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess if you believe in free speech it does.
Click to expand...


I'm a fervent believer in the right to free speech.

I don't believe that I have the right to say anything I want anywhere I want.

Can you parse the difference? If I'm standing in your living room cursing and insulting your family and friends do you believe you don't have the right to make me leave?

An Internet forum isn't an open public space. It is owned and maintained by real people, just like your home is.

If someone wants to exercise their free speech rights on the net and they can't find a forum that wants to listen to them (pretty unlikely considering the plethora of alternatives) they can start their own, make their own rules, and attract their own group. Just like everyone else.

That seems pretty free to me.
 
Doghouse Reilly said:
No, and I find it odd that you think I was saying that.
Click to expand...
You're certainly on fixating those first five years and his family background to deny he had an "typical American upbringing." Did we miss him being regularly shipped back to Eton/Oxbridge for his schooling, or was actually living in the United States for 17 years simply not enough to "count"?
 
Last edited:
Information Analyst said:
You're certainly on fixating those first five years and his family background to deny he had an "typical American upbringing." Did we miss him being regularly shipped back to Eton/Oxbridge for his schooling, or was actually living in the United States for 17 years simply not enough to "count"?
Click to expand...

I'm not fixating on anything.

Obviously we disagree on the definition of "typical upbringing".

First of all, in my own personal experience, the first 5 years of my life were extremely formative, and I have an abundance of memories from that time. If I had moved to Britain at the age of 5, it would have been very unlikely that I'd have felt subsequently to have had a "typical British upbringing", being raised in Britain by American parents.

Second of all, I don't see how you can consider a child to have a typical American upbringing when neither of his parents are American, with one being British, another Chinese, and another a Moroccan reality tv star. Where does the "typical American upbringing" come into play in the context of his home life?

That's all. I wasn't saying that being British had anything to do with his descent into madness, I was simply disagreeing with the assertion that he'd had a typical American upbringing.

If you disagree, I don't really understand why, as the first five years of life are likely to be extremely formative, and parents are one of the most important influences, if not the most important, in one's upbringing, and his parents were not American, but it's not a big deal...But if anything, YOU seem fixated on wanting to insist that he had a typical American upbringing.

In light of the factors I described, my opinion is that going to American schools and having American friends doesn't equate to having a typical American upbringing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom