Youtube comments of (@nightmareTomek).
-
192
-
183
-
111
-
104
-
88
-
63
-
56
-
53
-
49
-
48
-
46
-
43
-
41
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
32
-
30
-
29
-
27
-
26
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
22
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
@cube22111 She annoys me as hell, I'm not gonna watch that full interview. I think she has a very skewed viewpoint. She sees all men as rapists, and then disregards the whole data of unhappy women who hit the walll, still haven't found a relationship and no longer can. We have the data! And the studies. Women dating options peak at 20 and tank at 40, men dating options is the exact opposite, they peak at 40. It would be fine if she said she doesn't want this and that personally, but when she blames society for trying to teach her these facts, because these impair her freedom... When she's 40, she's gonna blame society again and say, men are all perverts because they want a young, fertile woman.
Not only that, when women get pregnant before 30, they have way less risks of everything, and I would guess (though I'm not a woman) that they're not keen on having a c-section.
I bet that she's going into clubs to drink, sexy dressed, maybe with makeup, and then is surprised that the drunks are approaching her, and from there she deducts that all men are like that. It's not like she gets approached on the street at daylight.
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
Alright.. I did. Impressive. But. There are a lot of buts.
First of all these are all just single videos of single individuals. They hide their secrets, hide themselves from the public. Not many scientists get a chance to investigate. The guy drilling his head? He drills always on the temple. Maybe it really is chi and he's superhuman. But it's likely possible he implanted a piece of metal into that place. People in this world go through great lengths to fool others.
The chi healer, heals yet doesn't want anyone else to be a healer with his technique. Strange. Though I'm not denying the possibility that the electricity inside the body can be controlled by the individual. It would be pretty interesting, if it turns out to be true, proven by science in a few decades. But, it's again as likely that he found a way to trick us. Super thin, invisible wire connected to some battery, controlled by his feet. A 10 minutes video isn't enough to decide, which of it is true.
And the levitation... same thing. Impressive, but far too unsatisfactory analyzed. They again don't levitate very high, they are still connected to the ground by sticks... Maybe it's not spiritual, but some new technology?
So it comes down to belief. You can believe what you see in a few videos. Or not. I won't choose a side. I will neither believe straight away nor deny the possibilities. All I know is that I watched a video. And frankly speaking, I think everybody should be like this. Instead of choosing a side and then insulting the other one.
And the angelic summoning? That really sounds too far fetched, even if you do believe in chi.
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
Same for me, only that the women I encountered weren't particularly nuts, but selfish. They're twisting the truth, subtly insult, shame, manipulate, purposefully withhold validation, anything to get some small advantage over something, be it only a social situation. There's always something they want for free, they're never content with what they get, and it's just annoying to talk to them.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6:00 is that a joke??? xD If I were 6 feet with a 6inch friend, I'd be my own damn fault if life were hard.
Women can't accept that, they can't take responsibility for their actions.
They fail judging characters. They refuse to listen to men. And when things don't work out, who do they blame? Men.
Oh and the reason we are gatekeeping suffering? Because people are competing for who's the bigger victim. If I say "I have it hard, too", I'm borderline getting called a misogynist for not agreeing that it's the hardest for beautiful women. It's their own damn fault they're destroying our sympathy.
Show me one high value man like this who's depressed. Besides, despite the bullsh_t women say sometimes, that they want a good and caring man, ALL studies and statistics in the world show that women chase successful men, men with money and status. And men know this full well, as a man you know eyou're not getting loved for who you are ANYWAY, but for your money that you're SUPPOSED to give to women. That's probably another reason why these high value men never commit. They want a wife and a relationship and someone to love. But they rarely feel like being loved for who they are instead for what they have. Then it makes more sense to just have pleasure.
Tired to listen to this dumb society.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@dietmarnieder9834 Weißt du eigentlich, was passiert, wenn man sie kritisiert? Man verliert ihre Freundschaft. Probier es mal aus, wenn du so viele hast, eine weniger ist nicht schlimm. Nimm dir eine gängige Kritik, aber keine harmlose, eine die vor den Kopf stößt und wahr ist, sag es einer, erklär, dass du völlig damit übereinstimmst, und schau wie lange eure Freundschaft noch andauert. Oder hast du schon gelernt es nicht zu tun? Das ist halt so ein Problem, die richtige Meinung wird von ihnen belohnt, die falsche bestraft, während wir uns damit rühmen wie viele wir abbekommen.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Bei "zwei Menschen korrigieren sich" haste mich verloren. Das sehe ich nicht. Nur einer muss sich korrigieren, und zwar am laufenden Band, an sich arbeiten und arbeiten und dann noch mehr arbeiten, weil ihm die Gesellschaft einredet, dass er nur mit einer Frau an seiner Seite glücklich sein kann. Der bzw die andere hingegen ist viel mehr mit Nörgeln beschäftigt, als mit sich verbessern.
Alles Schwachsinn. Ich bin da schon vor 2 Jahrzehnten ausgestiegen, noch bevor es populär war. Ich arbeite an mir, weil ich dazu Lust habe, und nicht um jemandem zu gefallen, aber entsprechend sind mir die Dinge wichtig, die auf dem Datingmarkt nicht interessant sind. Für mein Leben ist es aber super.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@jonahbyrne8286 That's the thing, they built the story so they can address it all the time. While we are in a sensitive time ourselves. Might be political agenda trying to be subtle about it, instead of forcing it down our throats like other shows.
After all, we don't have just a patriarchal world, we have also no merciful exceptions, all men, and the protagonist is a woman which does something that women never do, only men: go for revenge. Then she cuts down hundreds of men. Don't you think this is a bit much?
I wanted to dive into fantasy there, not be reminded of our political problems at every turn.
Also if she's not a Mary Sue, how did she melt down that metal which the master couldn't, without him noticing? She's just not "that much of" a Mary Sue, like for example Rey Skywalker.
I'm not impressed by the story yet. Maybe a few more episodes will do, maybe not.
3
-
3
-
@bluexy121 No, as usual people like you interpret my words stupidly into pure garbage.
I said, she swimming in ice cold water made no sense. The patriarchy makes sense, but it's too much, it's annoying. It's everywhere, they didn't focus just on one oppression of the main character, but multiple ones. It's like the writers wanted to remind us that they think our current society is an evil patriarchy as well (which it is not, btw).
But, fine. Apparently there's more to the story when you continue. But there's another issue:
I researched a bit, although not for days. Found an article saying that japanese women have been oppressed since 600ac and the buddhism religion made women look evil. Women were even forbidden to learn, and some woman learned from spying on her brothers being taught, and then wrote some awesome book (wonder why the men didn't destroy that book). The author of that article was a history graduate, and more importantly, a woman.
Another source however, more like a masters thesis, wrote my a man, wrote that women were valued up to 1300ac, they had education and were deep in arts, it also mentioned that awesome book, which was written in 1100ac.
You see the issue? One gender is lying. And since it's similar to our current societal situation, I'm guessing the women want to paint men as waaaaaay worse than we really are.
And that's getting reflected in the Blue Eye Samurai, because one writer is a woman and the other probably a simp. It's not just about that the patriarchy exists, it's how it's presented as well.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Ist auch egal das ganze. Bei mir ist das so, ich verstehe nicht, warum man Lotto spielen soll und einfach irgendwelche anlabern für ein Date. Egal wie ich es drehe, es kommt mir oberflächlich gewählt vor. Man macht es halt oft, Quantität über Qualität, bis man mal Glück hat. Aber wenn ich warte, bis ich jemanden ein bisschen kenne, bis dahin ist sie dann ja schon gelangweilt und denkt, ich wäre eingeschüchtert, und außerdem stehen 30 andere bei ihr schon Schlange, die lautstark um Aufmerksamkeit kämpfen.
Ich komme aber auch generell nicht mit den Eigenarten des anderen Geschlechts klar. In der Regel sehe ich Beziehungen als etwas, das die gute Laune erstickt. Das ist ok so, ich hab viele andere coole Dinge, um die man sich kümmern kann. Bin einfach raus.
3
-
3
-
3
-
I don't think everything that's being said here is correct, or simply put, behaviors are called narcissistic despite them actually being different pathological issues instead, or even just simple manipulation that you fell for and are angry about.
I've seen narcissists be jealous of others or state that others don't deserve things, but most narcissists haven't acted on that. Also a narcissist has no reason to destroy your happiness in a new relationship (unless maybe if you make it super easy), because in their mind you're dating an idiot anyway, someone who's inferior to the narcissist. I would also say narcissists are a bit sociopathic, they don't value happiness the same way normal people do, as well as they care way more about themselves compared to their exes to bother about their relationship (unless of course they get something out of you, like get you to cheat, but that's your fault then).
3
-
3
-
19:30 "soeciety works way better if men and women can work it out". Can they, though? Or is that a myth?
I have real trouble finding even one single woman who's willing to work out problems. As long as they aren't madly in love with you, they either run from problems, or ghost you when there's something to discuss, or are angry and retaliate emotionally, there's always something. Unfortunately not all of them were on the pill, some have never taken it.
21:10 "how are we supposed to evolve if we can't talk about the issues". See, men try to talk about the issues, and women just blame men. She cherrypicked a few examples where men have given up and are angry to be blamed, and she blamed them. THAT'S why we can't talk about it. And we don't evolve, we are at best stagnant.
Ouff... very interesting what she said about the pill. But the red pill seems to be correct.
3
-
3
-
3
-
I think you're forgetting "DUMB". I'm binge-watching him today, a few videos have good messages, but most are just dumb, and way too long for their dumbness.
Just let me point you to what he said at 8:30, so you can really envision the stupidity of that what you're praising here.
"Eventually your red pill days will be characterized by relationships with women. Everything is completely different and yet nothing has changed. ... Women will be part of our lives in one way or another. In a way the red pill allows to have relationships with women in a way that makes sense for the particular individuals involved. Women are not the enemy."
And then envision divorce r4pe. How men can lose everything, job, house, children, to a woman who became a bit unhappy and is full of spite towards her ex husband because in her eyes he's at fault she has to divorce.
And Orion is saying a bunch of nothing, or that no matter our knowledge nothing will change and what is happening is going to be ignored. How is that not stupid?
No, actually women's behavior is abnormally destructive and needs to be addressed and fixed, the way you'd try to correct a bad behavior of a child. Divorce r4pes need to stop, PERIOD. Many other things need to stop as well. The red pill points this out, there's no stupid enlightment in this, it's knowledge that can either be used or ignored, and he talks about it like it can only be ignored. And that's from someone with a psychology profession. Aboslutely idiotic!
Think it through.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@zachbuschman3105 It's fine if it's integral, but doesn't mean it has to be real. I think there should be a distinct separation between tools in the theory which we use for example to calculate, and results of the theory that are real. I suspect we have blurred the line too much, things that were originally just calculation tools have been pepped up with mysticism and we believe this is how the world really is. Superposition, entanglement, probability waves, wave particle duality.
Just as an example, for the wave particle duality I lately figured that it's the quantum mechanics math which reduces the wave to a single particle which then allows this single particle to travel through multiple slits in the double slit experiment, until measured of course. But it's not something that really happens, it can only travel through one, this is just a calculation tool. In reality a wave is always comprised of multiple particles. Yet the wave function predicts where the particle lands and the result is correct and reality.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
There's a dating advice book called "Why men love b...". I guess most red pilled hate it, but in reality the title is ABSOLUTELY misleading. The female author interviewed a lot of men before writing it. And 20 years ago she already wrote how women keep score. He works his job for 8h, he gets one point. She walks the dog, one point, does the homework with kids, another point, pays someone to repair something in the house, 3rd point, drives the kids somewhere, 4th point, and buys something to decorate the house, 5th point. At the end of the day in her mind she has done 5x as much work, and the author stated that this mindset causes relationships to break.
In the beginning of my last relationship I told my girlfriend that I usually recommend this book to most women because they have no clue. At the end of it I recommended it to her, which offended her of course. And then we split up.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@youtubeyoutube936 This vacuum society not just simps after Andrew Tate, but after channels like this one as well. Don't they? Intead of down-voting them into oblivion like they kinda deserve.
They talked about how the pill negatively affects women and their behavior, but stopped right there and never explored further how it makes women actually behave. In the red-pill community this is being done. But this channel lives like most under the societal rule that criticizing women is forbidden; as you said, anything against women, even constructive criticism, is sexist and misogynistic. So they went complaining about red-pill and Tate and his followers instead (only watched 50% so far, I'm not sure I'm gonna watch it all), meaning they were complaining about men.
They call themselves triggernometry, but they look like 2 simps to me, nodding along to whatever their interviewer says. And the viewers nod along to the video. Someone said they are asking the best questions, but I don't see it.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@yellafella2718 If you ask like that. :) Sure.
Well. This is very subjective and really just a minor criticism. But it feels to me like these science videos talk more in a way that sounds exiting than to explain as close to the truth as possible. Probably to entertain even those, who would have otherwise lost their focus, to get as many views and watch time on YT as possible. It's not like they're telling us lies or that I don't appreciate their and the scientists effort, it just that they're making the science sound more pop. It's still interesting, although I feel like my ears need to filter out the stuff that's meant to sound exciting.
Wiki: "Popular science is an interpretation of science intended for a general audience."
For example an anecdote: a friend of mine who has recently finished his physics studies, explained to me just a few weeks ago, that we have no means whatsoever to detect intergalactic black holes. So if there were any of these randomly floating trough space, they would part of dark matter. I've been waiting for explanations like these since forever, but on YT they either assume it to be "too much" for the average listener, or "dark matter" as sounding way more exciting and mysterious.
The second thing is their phrasing, they formulate everything as if they knew for certain, as if they had seen the Higgs Boson or already unmistakeably figured out the Big Bang. Which makes it hard to deduct how much evidence they actually have, what other possible explanations there are and how probable these are. About the Big Bang I really want to know how sure they are and what makes them so sure. And... 500 years ago humanity KNEW that the earth was flat. You know. :P It's again just a minor criticism, but it's irritating me slightly. I guess what I want is just more details packed into it.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
"In the 1800s, Ignaz Semmelweis, a Hungarian physician, advocated for handwashing to reduce the spread of childbed fever, a deadly disease in maternity wards. His efforts faced strong resistance from the medical community, leading to his loss of his job and subsequent commitment to a mental asylum where he died."
This is baiscally the same with Sabine now. People haven't learned and are as unwilling to admit mistakes as they were then. I haven't heard them bring forth a good argument yet either, just personal attacks. Professor Dave for example, how he lowered his argumental quality down to a flat earthers level to dunk on Sabine. "Bad English in this latter, must be FAKE!" 🤦♀
I also don't like physicists attitude, many phrase things like we can't be mistaken with out theories about dark matter, the birth of the universe or the singularities in a black hole. Clearly the data shows otherwise. There wouldn't be alternative theories like MOND or Timescapes, if dark energy would be established like a fact.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Nexii801 Then what do you think on my take? I got that one by being sick of the mystified and misleading language some physicists use. Like when they omit telling you that they're measuring light with a polarizer, which changes the light. Or when they said light sends information back in time in that quantum eraser delayed choice experiment a few years back. Who knows what else isn't science but fantasy? I came out with my own understanding.
First of all we also see an interference-like pattern from just one slit, a different yt physicist has shown it. So that means a particle going through both slits is kinda nonsense. Then the single fired particles only change direction and you only get the interference patterns after a wave of particles, just like they demonstrate it with water, which is also a wave of water molecules.
And that's where I think the wavelike behavior comes from, not from a single particle. I think it's just quantum mechanics math that for calculation purposes reduces a wave to a single particle and creates something abstract but nonexistent, the same way infinities and singularities and even square roots do, which create an additional result that can be outside of reality.
Then how does water create circular waves and an interference pattern behind the slits, even if it's just one slit? The only explanation that seems logical is that the molekules bounce off the edges of the slit and disperge their energy among other molecules in the wave. Which is why the wider the slit the less visible the pattern is.
So light is a wave of particles, but particles aren't waves. That doesn't mean it exludes particles from having wave like properties. Like electrons kinda bend the electric and magnetic fields around them while traveling, but they're (probably) still particles. They've done the double slit experiment with electrons as well and they make an interference pattern.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@taotek5220 Schön, schön. Ich kenne Frauen und von denen sind 75% Schuhesammler und kein Problem mit haben es zuzugeben. Kenne Männer, die gern ein Eigenheim hätten, aber die Frauen, die ich kenne, formulieren es eher so als wäre ein Eigenheim eine Notwendigkeit. Kenne Männer, die wollen ein Eigenheim FÜR ihre Frau. Meiner Beobachtung nach sagen die Frauen auch oft den Männern, sie sollen weniger sammeln, die Männer realizieren, wie blöd ihre Sammlungen sind und geben nach, schon wieder FÜR ihre Frauen. Das umgekehrte kommt auch vor, ja, ist aber unverhältnismäßig selten.
Frauen haben doch gute soziale Fähigkeiten, sagt man. Richtig? Meine Frage: wer sagt denn, dass die primär dazu da sind mit anderen Menschen auszukommen? Wieso sind sie nicht primär fürs Überleben, wie sonst alles andere am Menschen auch? Wie würde sich das denn äußern, zB. in einer Welt von vor 3000 Jahren?
Antwort: Resourcenmaximierung. Man nutzt die sozialen Fähigkeiten, um mehr Resourcen zu haben und eine größere Chance zu überleben. Warum sonst haben Menschen mit angeblich so guten sozialen Fähigkeiten auch so viel Zickenterror untereinander? Wie passt denn sowas zusammen?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Ye, she's also buddha and jesus and batman. 🤦🤦♂🤦♀
Sure, she did a good job recovering from previously throwing her life away.
But the way people respond to youtube videos...
After a life-story video: "I feel inspired, encouraged, but also challenged."
After a flat earth video: "I feel inspired, encouraged, but also challenged."
After a funny cats video: "I feel inspired, encouraged, but also challenged."
After some p0rn: "I feel inspired, encouraged, but also challenged."
I think people have posted more words here than their cumulative amount of brain cells.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Die Maske ist noch das, was am besten das Verbreiten des Virus schützt. Aber einige Maskenregeln sind völlig absurd. Dass Kinder den ganzen Tag in derselben Klasse Maske tragen, wie soll das denn helfen?!?!?!??? Und in der Pause, draußen, umarmen sie dann ihre Klassenkameraden.
Meiner Meinung nach sollte:
- die Maskenpflicht überall da entfallen, wo Menschen sehr lange aufeinander hocken: in Schulen, auf der Arbeit, im Restaurant und ICE. Das Virus verbreitet sich eh, trotz Maske. Die Maske sollte da weiter getragen werden, wo man sich kurz aufhält, aber viele Leute trifft, wie in der U-Bahn, im Einkaufszentrum, im Museum und beim Pizza abholen. Ich weiß, einige sind sogar dagegen, aber es ist wenigstens ein vernünftiger Kompromiss.
- Arbeitgeber sollten ihren Arbeitern eine Möglichkeit regelmäßiger Pausen einräumen, im Falle das eine Maske getragen werden muss.
- Maskenpflicht sollte für alle unter 14 komplett entfallen. Ohne Kompromisse. Auf den Kindern sollte nicht die Verantwortung lasten ihre psychische Gesundheit und ihre Bildung zugunsten der ältesten Menschen aufzugeben. Nur weil unsere Menschlichkeit nicht einsehen möchten, dass jeder irgendwann sterben muss.
- die Kn95 Maske schränkt die Atmung viel zu stark ein. Die sollte mit sofortiger Wirkung entfallen bei einer harmloseren Variante wie Omikron. Im Sommer bei fallenden Fallzahlen sollte auch die FF2P Maske entfallen und wiederverwendbare Masken erlaubt werden. Damit wir auch mal weniger Müll erzeugen.
- statt auf einmal alles aufzuheben kann die Maskenpflicht erstmal auf diese Weise verringert werden und dann können wir 1-2 Monate gucken, wie es läuft, und entsprechend reagieren. Vermutlich kann sie dann weiter aufgehoben werden, aber alles auf einmal aufzuheben sehe ich nicht als sinnvoll an. Natürlich so schnell wie die Politik agiert, werden aus 1-2 Monate schnell mal 1-2 Jahre..... diese Aufhebung hätte schließlich schon vor Monaten stattfinden sollen. Von daher vielleicht doch alles auf einmal.
Glaube aber, dass bis zu dem Detail kein Politiker denkt.
Ich sehe aber auch immer wieder Leute, die draußen eine Maske tragen. Die sind selbst schuld...
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@opossom1968 Well, difficult to say I've met people like this when an entire gender gives off this vibe to me. It's more of a gradient of how strongly pronounced that mindset is. They still go to work, but as soon as they don't get something for free or someone else has enough money to buy something they want, they find it unfair, or they collect every opportunity of welfare that they can get, or they say that they deserve something even if it's againt the rules, or they simply leech off of a guy with the promise to go to work one day, like my mother. And when they can do nothing of these things, they are simply extremely stressed out.
Honestly, this would be acceptable if they'd be more thankful and modest about it, after all nature made men to be providers and women to be provided for. But then they rarely apologize for taking something extra, more commonly they frame it like they deserve to take someone else's stuff. They never say, I'm not harming anyone, but say instead, I deserve to do it even though it's against the rules. Exactly like you say, they're always owed something. And the way people speak affects how they think. Also they ramp it up to the extreme, no matter how much they get they are still dissatisfied and want more. It's a rampart princess complex, or a narcissism epidemic, there have been books about this like 20 years ago. I also think it's an anti-social behavior that hurts society and it's the reason why it's the topic of so much discussion.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
"Don't be a low value man", well that's some advice...
Honestly, from what I see how women throw away good relationships with high value men as well, I doubt that even winning the DNA lottery is going to help that much. I think the rabbit hole is even deeper than that, I suspect that at some point it was advantageous for the species if siblings had different fathers, because of how DNA replication works. It's more error prone during incest, when the ones mating have the same DNA, the errors that are already there will be passed down, plus new errors from replication, for a total of 2x as much errors as reproduction between non-siblings. If the villages were on the smaller side, I imagine this could become a problem.
Can't wait for the studies to confirm this, in 50 years...
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jonsnowight9510 Well, to be fair I think he meant it like he would still help others, just that noone benefits from his happiness more than him. Still, I don't like his overall message in this video. What he says 20 seconds later, that he knows girls that would drop everything if he asked for help, does he really think it's because of his confidence? That's so obviously bs, it hurts.
I mean, you can see it everywhere, the confident macho in the top 40%, when he asks help from his female friends, they WILL get angry at him. The top 10% shy guy? They gonna gladly help him, praise him for his confident asking for help, and maybe teach him one or two things about women.
This is just all bs. These eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeendless talks about confidence, all. Just. Bs.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
That delayed choice quantum eraser, some physicists, including Sabine, have cleared this up. There's no going back in time at all, it's just a mystified language to make it sound exciting, but it's misleading and in reality something else is at play.
I came to think that this mystified language is everywhere, and finally photons aren't even waves, a wave is made of several photons. They can't show a single photon exhibiting wave like properties, it can't be done. They also can't show a single photon going through both slits, I bet this is just quantum mechanics math that reduces a wave to only a particle, just like square roots give you an additional result that's sometimes outside of reality, and everyone just believes it at face value.
When water forms an interference pattern after the two slits, they also don't go "a water molecule goes through both slits and is a wave". No, the water molecule just changes direction upon going through the slits, that's all. And it looks more and more to me like light is doing exactly the same.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@soleil7259 These are sweet, but empty words. I'll give you an example.
It's said that communication is needed for a good relationship. So does this advice tell you, why or how communication breaks down, which causes the downfall of relationships? No, it doesn't. Why not? Because if it did, someone would be offended, and that someone threatens people with being hurt to avoid hearing he or her is the problem, also known as victim mentality.
And my next question is, which gender loves doing the silent treatment, when angry? What do you think that does? It breaks the communcation. But does that advice that communication is needed ever tell you not to use the silent treatment? No, it doesn't.
That's why your words are so empty, although technically what you say is correct, use say it just for the purpose to shift our perception of who's to blame from women onto men. If that doesn't work, the next step that women often do is calling others misogynist, and if that doesn't work either, next step would be tears and crying.
Same thing with responsibility, you're trying to blame men although in reality men usually take most, if not all of the responsibility (and blame) for the problems in the relationship, even those caused by women. I can give you an example here, too. What does society often say, if he cheats? It's because he's an a-hole. If she cheats? Because he didn't give her what she needed. He gets blamed both times (thus he has the responsibility put on him to make her happy).
This is societal manipulation, women are good at that. Unless women stop seeing things from an emotional, judgemental and narcissistic perspective (or we go back to patriarchy), things in society won't improve. You want equality? Then start being actually objective and fair (and studies show that in stressful situations (and you could call hearing criticism as a stressful situations) women's fairness goes out the window; also studies show that children from single mother households have disadvantages in life, like greater chance to fail at school, do drugs, suicide and be criminal. But the studies can't yet explain that it's actually the emotional unfairness of women from stressful situations that causes it, but just wait a few decades and there probably will be something showing you that I was right all along). Own your feelings, or fk your feelings, one or the other, or these unfair judgements will just cause disdain.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
lol. Didn't he simply make a mistake? And that being the reason nobody is getting it? Because between 0 and 1 there are fractions [1/2, 1/4, 1/8...] and not whole numbers [2, 4, 8], so the distances wouldn't be between (0,8) -> (1,9), but (0,1/8) -> (1, 9/8). And from there it's gibberish. You cannot invent math by simply inventing random stuff. Math has many, many rules!!! Only things, which pass the tests of these rules will be accepted into math.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Pichkalu Pappita Yeah, yeah, I know about these patterns. My point is, that you NEED to make God omnipotent IN ORDER to disprove his existence. That's another pattern humans have: to arrange things in a certain way to benefit their understanding or argument. I'm an atheist, but I never understood God to be so very omnipotent. Very powerful and able to create stuff is quite enough. Supreme in relation to us is enough, since we came up with the definition of God, no need to be all supreme.
That also doesn't make the speed of light God, because the speed of light cannot "create stuff". In my opinion God's speed is irrelevant, if he can create the Big Bang, it doesn't really matter whether he can reach the speed of light or not for him to be allowed to be called God. All powerful would also mean, that he can make things happen instantly, right? And what would happen to your definition, if he could do anything but would need a preparation time? Would he stop being God? Sounds absurd to me. And you are not free to decide over this.
Thus I guess I am an agnostic. I think we can safely say, with a high certainty, that God doesn't exist. But not with absolute certainty. As already said, the Rationality Rules guy said himself, that it doesn't cover all definitions of God. As long as you can't disprove them all, you cannot disprove God. What would a believer of God respond to this "irrefutable" debunk of God's existence? With "ok, then God isn't omnipowerful, just powerful enough to create the Big Bang. I still believe in him". Probably. They will search for loop holes as long as necessary, and so there will always be a way to define him in a way he can't be disproven. And even unrelated to that always a slim chance that God exists but is outside of our understanding, and doesn't bend to the argumentation chain "a God must be omnipotent and with this simple trick I can disprove the existence of omnipotent beings".
You can choose whichever definition of God you like most, but you cannot decide over the definitions of other people.
1
-
Pichkalu Pappita lol. You are a moron. You want to push through your view of debunking God, forcefully. Reading your comment past the first 3 lines is a CHORE. You also seem to have failed at every opportunity to understand my argument, even failed to pay enough respect to actually READ IT properly. And then you say such bullshit like "if you studied some scientific", yeah go fuck yourself, too. Have you studied something? Anything? Why are you unable of compiling your wall of text into an organized presentation, instead of leaving it such a mess? I have studied mathematics, if you insist on knowing.
The "gigantic math machine" you speak of like it were overly complex magic, doesn't simply deny God. What denies God is the way his video twists formulations around and skillfully hides the fact, that he cherrypicked a definition which fits his argument. Then again, to give him some credit, as I already said for the 3rd time (third time!!!), he said himself, that it "doesn't disprove all definitions of God". Holy crap, learn to read properly!
Definitions of Gods are also opinions. You can't shame an opinion you don't like out of a conversation, like a feminist. Have you been raised by a single mother who doesn't know how to make a proper argument which doesn't rely on demeaning your opponent? Do you even know what deterministic means? If not, then why the fuck are you using it like an insult? It's not an insult. Look it up. And then tell me again how you came up with the idiotic assumption that I am deterministic.
And then it goes on. What is your first sentence even supposed to mean? Because you don't agree that there could be a "powerful enough" God, for you speed of light becomes God? You can see God and speed of light however you want. But don't you have the capability to see that people have different opinions, different interpretations and different definitions of God? Are you incapable to comprehend that your definition isn't absolute? How you define it for yourself is irrelevant, if you wanna "disprove" someone else's definition. You can't just say "I define Elephants as being yellow, and since there are none, it's proof that Elephants don't exist". That's one lazy way display your own opinion as the truth, and quite frankly… also the definition of God complex. But I'm starting to doubt that you can even understand this paragraph.
If the first line of your next comment is remotely as pointless and unorganized as your last comment, you can be sure that I won't read more than 5 words without blocking you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Ramurod I don't think there is. As wrong as it sounds to you, and as socially inacceptable it is to say this, I think this is normal for women, it's their nature. If they think they deserve a top 20% man and don't have him, they just don't care. They're in love with the relationship, not with the man they have the relationship with. Decent women will split up before sleeping with someone new, but even they don't care, they drop the old relationship like a dirty kitchen sponge.
That's why women treat men in their relationships like incompetent children, that's why some women are capable to show immense empathy for the weaker, like children, while at the same time being the absolute worst and full of apathy towards the stronger, despite the stronger not having done anything wrong. And women in stressful situations lose their sense of fairness, it gets completely thrown out the window if the situation is stressful enough. Women compete with men in jobs and they have to hurry for their eggs, they are more helpless when walking through the night and are more risk-averse than men, which overall makes them some amount more stressed than men.
If he were a high value men, they would never do this.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@CeceliPS3 I haven't read the whole conversation, but I agree with you.
"Best to always be stoic, indifferent, detached, calm, etc. No one but you should have power over you." sounds like a meaningless phrase. She has power through how society sees women as more important (I mean, there are studies on this!), or laws being skewed towards women. If you get put into that situation, you can be stoic all you want, you can not care about it but you gonna be seen as the bad guy anyway. They shouldn't have power over you, but they collectively judge you.
And how about if she accuses you of harassment?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@turinturambar347 xD xD xD Whaaaaat? Babies pick up on hormones of the mothers? Where did you hear that kind of bull? xD They're lying to you. As I said, if they're lying about muscles and strength, why wouldn't they lie about something more important and harder to disprove? We believed that bull for probably thousands of years, only now studies get released showing what bull that actually is.
And chemicals, what chemicals? The brain changes during pregnancy, not some chemicals. That however does not equal a level up in nurturing, we don't even know if it's related at all.
I read just 2 lines of your comment and already I don't know if I should continue... I mean, if I want my brain to char some cells, I could just watch Simpsons the whole day.
...
Okay, on to how we evolved for millions of years... First of all, does nurturing only mean feeding? If not, then being able to feed doesn't equal being skillful in nurturing. As I said, we have studies, and my observations always matched with the studies before they released, but I kinda was an exception while everybody else had the very different mainstream viewpoint. I also think that for millions of years fathers were educating the children while moms were just sitting back, and that's where their skill to be nurturing and bonding with their children comes from. But that's mostly swept under the rug.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@todorstojanov3100 I don't think a new model is needed. Quantum mechanics is fine for now. The problem is our understanding of it, which, as I said, has been misled through mystified sci-fi language. Like the delayed choice quantum eraser sending information back in time. Or entanglement sending information with speeds faster than light. None of this is real, in reality entanglement doesn't send any information anywhere, it's just updated on your sheet of paper. And omitting facts, like I said, not telling the measurement is done with a polarizer. The measurement isn't a problem at all, the solution is even kinda boring. Which is that they're not measuring the light at all, they are changing it, polarizing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
6:16 Solche Aussagen nerven mich. "Ungeimpfte hoffen auf die Solidarität der Geimpften". Das ist falsch und nicht als Frage formuliert. Wenn man Angst vor Corona hat, sollte man sich impfen lassen, fertig. Ich hab mich nicht impfen lassen, weil ich ganz genau wusste, dass ich Corona ohne Komplikationen überstehe. Ich ernähre mich vernünftig, ich rauche nicht, ich trinke kaum, treibe wenigstens etwas Sport und hab ein super Imunsystem.
Vor 2 Wochen hab ich Corona bekommen, vor einer Woche bin ich gesund geworden, so wie vorhergesagt. Ich war froh, dass der PCR-Test positiv ausgefallen ist. Morgen ist Quarantäne zu Ende. Jetzt hab ich ein stärkeres Imunsystem und bin noch weniger auf die Impfung angewiesen, als zuvor. Und ich hab etwas Ruhe vor der doofen Politik.
Und die Regierung will mich in einem halben Jahr trotzdem impfen. Pfff.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mw-th9ov aren't the numbers she showed enough? If they're statistically irrelevant, then they're irrelevant. What's more to say?
I've read some studies myself where their conclusion is completely off to what their own numbers say, but they simply needed to conclude something that was socially acceptable. The IMO biggest German neuro scientist frequently analyses studies together with his team, although not in the majority, but still in many of those studies he finds flaws upon flaws upon bad conduct. Veritasium once made a video about how science magazines have to publish sensational findings instead of the boring but truthful ones. This isn't a meme, it's reality.
And people who try to discredit Sabine, like Professor Dave, I've never heard such dumb arguments out of his mouth. Sure, it's easy for him to pick on flat earthers, but when tackling complex issues he suddenly starts employing flat earth style arguments himself, so that I not only have to call him a mo _ _ _, but also a fraud.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
School isn't made for gifted children, never was. It won't give them the challenge they need to actually sit down and do the work. It gets worse, many schools where I grew up want the best ratio of graduates, so they are waiting for the dumbest kids to catch up.
And when working from home, a gifted person that isn't used to work for long times, has to figure out this riddle how to concentrate on the work. In school you can't just get up in the middle of class and leave, but at home there's nothing stopping you when things get boring. I struggle with this, too. One problem I face is that I can procrastinate forever and then do everything at the very last minute - which makes my effectiveness skyrocket. But I can also miss deadlines and I have this huge time window before where I just sit and try to start the work. O_o
I think, parents put too much responsibility on their children, when they find out they're gifted. Suddenly the child HAS to build the mansion. But you don't. They want you to fill the inadequaties of those around you that weren't so gifted. The sooner the child realizes that he should decide on his own what his goals are, the better. And when he realizes that you should always set the goals in a way that you have a decent amount of work - not give yourself overly ambitious goals that require working forever just because you're gifted and supposed to stand out.
1
-
@vorpal22 Sorry to say that, but is this even true that many gifted people have ADHD? Might be more common to have it when having high intelligence, but to say that most gifted people have it is quite a stretch. It wouldn't surprise me if humanities arrogance causes people with ADHD to rate themselves as gifted.
And the other way around, that while having a lack of motivation, blame it on some sickness...
Smart people, seems to me, can overcome psychological disorders. They control their minds and decide "what do I need attention for, what does it give me for my life?", and that thinking immunizes them for example against an attention deficit disorder.
He worked hard, and he has a lot of motivation. He deserves the outcome. I have a severe lack of motivation myself, but it truly is just laziness. I can't even use my intelligence for others, it's really just for myself to feel better about my accumulated knowledge. And for my art. But if I'd blame my parents for my work ethic (and don't get me wrong, my mother is a true b_tch and I have broken up contact, and my father is dead), it would only solidify the notion that I can't learn a new work ethic. Not something I want, really.
I heard one psychologist say that the first step to get out of a depression is to stop calling it a depression. I don't wanna just judge you, but on my part, it is really just laziness.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I think it's not physics, but sci-fi. Travel along invisible strands of time?
I have a much, much simpler explanation, or theory, which goes like this: physicists are misleading us with mystified language. Photons are particles, not waves, what makes a wave is a bunch of particles. How do I reason?
First of all we also see an interference-like pattern from just one slit. So that means a particle going through both slits is kinda nonsense. Then the single fired particles only change direction and you only get the interference patterns after a wave of particles, just like they demonstrate it with water, which is also a wave of water molecules.
And that's where I think the wavelike behavior comes from, not from a single particle, but a bunch. Noone has tried to measure a single water molecule either, or shot single water molecules through slits, yet there's also an interference pattern. I think it's just quantum mechanics math that for calculation purposes reduces a wave to a single particle and creates something abstract but nonexistent, the same way infinities and singularities and even square roots do, which create an additional result that can be outside of reality.
Then how does water create circular waves and an interference pattern behind the slits, even if it's just one slit? The only explanation that seems logical is that the molekules bounce off the edges of the slit and disperge their energy among other molecules in the wave. Which is why the wider the slit the less visible the pattern is.
1
-
1
-
@MTWAResearch 1. then show me. I haven't seen it, only heard people claim it. What I see is single particles building the interference pattern one dot at a time, not a single particle making the whole pattern. Whenever they claim they to do what you say, they end up showing what I say, they claim they show an interference pattern with a single photon but then they don't shoot a single photon at all, but multiple. That's my whole problem with this mystified language, for decades they didn't tell us they're measuring light with a polarizer. A polarizer primarily changes the ligth, the measurement is rather like a side effect. They omitted important facts. Or the delayed choice quantum erasor double slit, 5 years ago physicists were saying light sends information back through time.
This is a sci-fi understanding of physics, not reality. A mystified fantasy language that is misleading the public and makes physics look like something uncomprehensible and unobtainable. More and more people start noticing and criticizing the way we talk about it.
Quantum superposition is just a math tool, in reality the particle isn't in multiple places at once at all, but we're facing the problem that we don't know it's exact position, so we create a probability map and calculate with it, this is what makes our results make sense. Same goes for entanglement, how many physicists claim it shoots information at speeds faster than light? Only once in a while a physicist comes along and takes out the bs, there's no information actually traveling anywhere.
I even suspect that the wave function collapse is something that occurs on paper, you have a long function with many terms, but as soon as you measure the particle many of the terms equal to zeor and the length of the function expression collapses to just a few terms. Wouldn't that be interesting if I turn out to be correct on this one?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lisasimpson600 Klar, ich seh mir deine Stichwörter an. Aber glaub mir, wenn die nur Scheiße labern, erkenne ich das schon im 1. Satz. Denn du klingst wie ne Verschwörungstheoretikerin, und die sind leider meist irre und verharrt in ihrer Denkweise.
"Dort hat man nach dem Krieg die fähigsten 300 Wissenschaftler der Welt zusammengeholt, um zu beratschlagen, wie man das Deutsche Volk weiterhin klein halten kann, es sollte nie wieder zu seiner ursprünglichen Stärke finden, und UK hat da fleißig mitgespielt. "
Und das macht auch Sinn. Die hatten Angst, und kein Hass. Du würdest dasselbe tun. Das heißt nicht, dass sie ihre Pläne durchgesetzt haben, geschweige denn Erfolg damit hatten. Im Endeffekt ist nämlich NICHT jeder Deutsche ein Nazi. Und die US wollte sicher nicht den Frieden, den sie geschaffen haben, damit stören, indem sie sich jeden Deutschen zum Feind machen, nicht während sie mit den anderen Ländern, inkl. Russland, im Konkurrenzkampf stehen, wer den "besten Frieden" schafft.
Das macht absolut keinen Sinn und das siehst du nicht. Du bist festgefahren.
Und warum sind die dann gegen Deutschland und Russland in den Krieg getreten, deiner Meinung nach? Und haben sich später mit Russland verbunden? Warum haben die Alliierten sonst so oft Seite an Seite gekämpft, trotz ihrer Differenzen? Und wie äußert sich das, dass Deutschland die Melkkuh von USA ist? Auf diese Fragen hast du sicher nichtmal kohärente Antworten.
Und warum gehst du ausschließlich nur auf diesen Punkt ein und hast das über die Menschlichkeit völlig ignoriert?
Und nein, deine blöden Annahmen ich würde alles im TV glauben, stimmen nicht im geringsten. Du ziehst dir irgend einen Mist aus dem Hintern, um deine Meinung durchzusetzen, denn das ist ja einfach. In Realität sage ICH den Leuten, sie sollen den Blödsinn im TV nicht glauben. Ich denke hingegen, du glaubst irgendwelchen erstbesten Trotteln und Verschwörern auf Youtube, und meiner Erfahrung nach sind solche Leute nicht zu retten.
Und ich glaube deshalb, ich setze dich jetzt auf ignore.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Yusheesan I have a very good idea why they divorce, because when relationships start I can predict their durations very accurately, and let's be real here, you can't do that, not in a million years.
You just look like one of these women that blames men for everything, and that throws temper tantrums when we point out one of your bad behaviors, or a general bad female behavior. Blaming men is your strategy to divert from your funny reasons to end it, and generally when women don't want to look bad. Men can see through this, though. They only don't confront you with it like I do because they don't want to deal with your childish emotional explosions that women misuse to their advantage at every occasion (or maybe they are simping to get pussy), which unfortunately makes it worse by reinforcing your bad behavior.
But I am, like an increasing number of men and a few women as well, witnessing these absurd reasons, usually pretty lame excuses that most women come up with. Again and again and again. Regularly. Deny it all you want, be the delusional one, denying and crying is prime female strategy to bury facts they don't like. They're surfacing though. We know what we're dealing with.
The majority of women aren't even honest about why they leave because it's in your nature to avoid confrontation. That's why you can only blame in the first place. How many stupid gals came along and claimed that their last boyfriend was an abuser? It's dishonest, dirty and selfish.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theresefrancis9283 A woman will ALWAYS see her reasons as justified. Always.
Doesn't mean they are. There's a reason the red pill community is growing so fast, men everywhere are realizing how much you're bullsh_tting us. How you're lying to make yourself look better, at our cost. And how dumb your excuses can get.
"Women will usually stick it out until they are burnt out"
"without mentioning that cheating, p*rn addiction, and blowing money are the top reasons for the wife to leave"
Translation: "It's men's fault, it's men's fault, it's men's faaaaaault!!!"
It's so consistent actually that I have my own theory why you're lying so much, it simply helped women survive for tens of thousands of years and be accepted by communities, something they desperately needed. They are trying to elevate themselves, to make themselves look better (even clothing and make-up is for this purpose), and (yes, from my observation again) women can get very, VERY angry if you hinder this effort, they can even get furious at constructive criticism just for making them look worse. Proving women wrong is hard even today, but back then it was a million times harder. And we also need to deal with the emotional explosion after saying something against women ("you're a misogynist"), so that's another reason women don't get scolded when they should.
For most men it wouldn't even be a problem if you talk yourself up, but what the problem is that you are hurting us while doing it, without even realizing it.
There was even a survey about this, which interviewed men and found out that even in happy relationships their wifes hurt the husbands feelings on a daily basis and won't even understand it when it's explained to her.
Thus, "women will stick it out" is just pure bullsh_t. They will only try to stick it out when they get a high value man, when she's a 6/10 and he's a 9/10 and it's evident to any man that he doesn't want a relationship at all. That's when women try to stick it out, as many, many men have noticed by now, and what I've observed even before the existence of the internet. If she's a 6/10 and he however is a 7/10, she will get all the attention for her pussy and that's where I see most women drop their relationships on a whim, while men try to stick it out like the simps they are. Always leaves them heartbroken and it just amazes me how they could be so blind, since I predicted her behavior, and I predicted exactly the moment she stops being true to her word.
Obviously you won't believe me as I'm not believing you, but I actually can predict the duration of a lot of relationships years in advance. I never said they change overnight, what's actually happening is that the chemistry between the partners gradually changes, in the woman way faster than the man.
As long as someone understands that women lie for their survival, the whole thing unravels itself and becomes comprehensible. And women cease to be a mystery. There really isn't much to it, women are simply liars.
What else?
Oh yeah.
"cheating, p*rn addiction, and blowing money"
You talk about extreme cases as if they were the norm. Those aren't actually the norm, just your fears, on which you are acting. Arguing with women is nearly always like this, and it can get very tiresome.
Women actually decide on 80% consumer buying decisions. So she's the one blowing money, usually his money. Despite that women divorce when they make more money than their husband. If he makes 100k a year he's most likely to end up divorced. If he makes 400k a year, he's most likely to end up divorced and then remarry. If he makes 600k a year he's most likely to stay married. And the average dude makes 75k a year.
AND from what I observe, women have the opportunities to cheat, not men. The men with options instead tell women he doesn't want a relationship, literally so he can fk around. But usually the women don't believe him, they think they can "change" him, but are left heartbroken when it doesn't work out as in her delusion.
And on a funny sidenote, I found a channel lately reading break-up stories from reddit or somewhere, mens' stories and womens' stories at around 1:1 ratio, however in all stories it's always her who cheated, I haven't heard even one with the man cheating. Well, the channel could be biased obviously, but isn't it interesting anyway that I haven't even heard one?
Got any more stupid accusations against men? I doubt you even got to the end...
1
-
@Yusheesan That's just my observation. And before you think it's sudden, like the other gal, I didn't say it's sudden, it's a gradual change of chemistry. The reason of break up just comes out suddenly, doesn't mean she hasn't mentally and quietly prepared for it for some longer time.
Thing is that more and more men gather the same or very similar observations as me. But we can't really make studies that make women look bad, or otherwise there's gonna be a huge outcry of you poor, poor victims.
As I said, I believe there's a biological reason why women lie, it's to be accepted by others, and communities, and it helped them survive for thousands of years.
1
-
1
-
@kirielbranson4843 Okay, well, true. But still sounds extraordinarily difficult, I mean you need support financially and to carry out the study and to get it pubilshed. For that the study needs a certain appeal and I don't think something that can paint women in a negative light will get much of that. Even if it's not meant to hurt but to improve society, criticism will always make people feel bad. There will be outcries and lots of heads shaking. And sadly I'm not in this field, I'd love to be, but I'm not. Wouldn't even know where to start. I've been interested in psychology since I was 15, thinking, observing, puzzling it together, and I still am, but just for myself. And I don't have any university certificates.
I guess a few things could be found out with surveys and publish them over youtube in a format like the It's Complicated channel. Could work. Could really work and blow up similarly like a few other channels did. Hm.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@saladsalad4190 Well, if women want to constantly benefit from hypergamous socio-economic status, they must remain in the marriage. Right? If women's rights are worse than mens', they will most likely be improved through homogamy as well. I had girls tell me even here with more or less equal rights, that without a boyfriend or a men at her side they're treated differently, a little rude, when they're in the city. Similar things with men actually, how many times did I hear the argument, that "you're only a man if you have a wife at your side". The women would want to keep their marriage, and put some effort into it for it to work. From a logical point of view, and with logic I mean my logic..
However this is not the case. Statistics show, that mostly women are the initiators of a divorce, and the divorce rate steadily going up and being I think >60% in America and >50% in Europe. So it's not the status they're after. A few decades ago gold-diggers also had to keep their marriage alive to benefit. So if this hypergamy is neither for status nor for money, then what? Must be looks and genes and sex. That's what the red pill community is observing. Dunno, are there any studies on in which areas and how strong women's hypergamy is?
Of course this is still simplified compared to reality. We don't really have a debate, do we? We agree with each other, so we just say things and nod.
Well the problem with this hypergamy is still how it effects relationships, since 80% of women chase 20% of men, but society expects us to live in monogamy, we end up having a huge discontent on both sides.
1
-
1
-
@saladsalad4190 Thx for the advise, and you're right. Though don't worry, I'm not stupid. I have noticed these correlations way before I knew that they were called borderline personality disorder or even narcissistic personality disorder. I can't draw the line between all these identifiers, but my instincts scream a warning in my face when I notice them, I notice them quickly and I listen to my instincts. And they did with my last girlfriend 2 years before she told me that she was into me. I thought I could maybe help her with her self-confidence and instable emotions since I was the only one able to see through, however she turned out to be way too stubborn for that, as if she needed to have low self-confidence to have an excuse for bad behavior and neediness. Well, also I'm not a doctor.
I also have no drive to participate in any form of dating. I didn't have any before I knew about the red pill community and all this other crap. I disliked the way men swarm a girl and drop everything they're doing to focus on seeking their attention like their life depended on it, and then these girls have like 20 applicants (similar to job applicants). The result is that these girls need to make quick and shallow decisions, they unlearn the ability to read a man's character (this you supported basically by saying, that women 40+ seek more personality - and guess what, at 40 they have less applicants standing in line) and they unlearn to put any effort into the relationship they seek so much. And effort is again correlated with constant love. A study of speeddating has shown that women's willingness to start a relationship with the candidates doubles when it's them who need to approach and make the first steps, not men. If you invest in something, you are less willing to lose it, so you keep investing - if you invest in a partner, you love him more as a result. When the partner stops investing, you can accurately predict that in a year or two he/she will also stop loving you.
These topics also fall into the red pill category, but they're not discussed (yet). It's also an indication that men helped create this problem we see nowadays. However for the way I'm connecting the dots I don't have any evidence. But it looks to me that once the puzzle is completed far enough, suddenly all the indicators support your system, and all new research like the personality disorders fit right in with no trouble. Superficial opinions however don't, and many of such opinions we have been indoctrinated for a century.
That's why I wonder, whether women's height is a piece of the puzzle.
I live in Germany btw. Started studying math, but on a technical university, which means that it's way easier. It ended up being too easy and I dropped out. Ya know, educational system has huuuuuuge problems as, well, right? Where do you live?
1
-
@saladsalad4190 I also, again, agree with most what you said. I haven't watched the videos yet (I think btw you could also post a link), will do that afterwards. Hm, but I think I don't like the guy from the 2nd video, I watched something already, I guess. But well, we'll see.
The discrepancy that you describe, smaller women looking for especially tall men, I think can be explained by evolutionary or social arguments. I already have theories. Assuming that this isn't a rare phenomenon, or some coincidence that you observed it several times. One theory (or should I rather say, it's a guess) is that height represents strength in men as well as in women, and the smaller thus weaker women need an especially strong protector. Some studies have proven that women with longer legs also live longer, and some quite important scientists say, it's because in the past they could better run away from evil animals. My second idea is that the smaller women are indeed less confident due to seeing taller women on average getting more attention by men, because men are sensible to these traits representing health and long life, like the long-legs-thing. The women then are trying to marry up to artificially raise their own sexual market value, so they get themselves some high standards (red pill often says, these women are over-estimating their SMV). The men they find, however, don't want much more than sex from an insecure average or below average looking woman, which in turn lowers their self-esteem even more. In the end they need much longer than the tall girls to find out that they should be looking for a quality character. This aligns with what I always thought about these insecure women, it always felt like they'd dump you for someone better looking just because of their insecurities, something a self-confident woman would not. I've seen it happen a few times as well. Maybe that's even the cause (or a distortion) for the observed correlation, that looks matter more in casual hookups.
The true problem however arrives, when these women give up on banging alphas and settle for the beta. The 80/20 rule might not apply for the amount of relationships on earth, but still may in the head of the women. When she settles for the beta and keeps being delusional about her SMV, she will constantly think she married down and deserves an alpha, nagging on her husband why he isn't an alpha, blaming him. Some of these insecure women are also desperate to have a relationship, they are in love with having a relationship and not in love with the man, but they prefer to have a miserable one than none. And thus these women will make the relationship miserable. Some less than others, obviously. When you ever hear a woman say in bed, that she won't do something because it's below her, then it's because of these reasons. And some red pill people have made chad accounts on the net and told the girls that they will stop texting if she doesn't do something naughty (like sending a naked pic), they refused at first with this reasoning, "it's below her", but for the conversation with the chad not to end she finally did it. So this means, "it's below me" is actually an insult and shaming strategy (one of many) of these women because of their insecurities. And men can sense these, and it gnaws on the relationship until it's comparable to vomit. When it ends the men will go MGTOW or red pill or whatever eases their minds. Another explanation, why you don't see any chads in these communities, and thus why some blue pills think of them as a bunch of sissies.
Some women aren't like this, true. They can openly admit someone elses attractiveness and not be affected much by it, they know about competition as you said, and so on. Some women however deny it with false excuses to make their current partner happy. But if per chance this chad starts talking to her, she'll blush and tell you afterwards that it's not her fault that she fell in love with him. Their current (or old) partner sometimes gets angry and jealous, for good reason! I've watched all these different scenarios happen. Dunno, these insecure gals might have NPD or BPD, or whatever, maybe in a weak form.
I wonder if our basic male instinct kicks in there to save that woman from a life of unhappiness, to help her out and provide the stable relationship she wants, because he wants it too. But these women are traps. As you said, it's a huge mess.
We're going slightly in circles, aren't we? But it's fine, for me at least, I find it interesting.
1
-
@saladsalad4190 The first video told that well, we want the happily ever after without putting in the effort now. It's very nice, thank you for the suggestion. The 2nd video, 80/20 rule. Well, I'm not sure, he is raising good points and has good argumentation, but also it's only his opinion, he didn't think deeper in some areas, and the first comments below somewhat support this. Also the 80/20 rule… The 80 is a joke based on a mathematical concept, the 20 has been statistically shown by online dating sites. 80% of men are "below average" looking, say the studies. The women are after the 20% or even less, part of the 20% is average looking after all. And they don't want something below her, does she? They don't want weaker guys, they don't want smaller guys, they usually don't want guys with less income (but this seems less important nowadays), they absolutely don't want guys with lower IQ.... etc. People put the blame on the 80/20 rule probably too much, but it doesn't mean it's false.
Sure, women might be intimidated by the top looking guys. But this video right here said, women want to feel small. Maybe it's being intimidated is the thing that makes them wet in the first place. More than half of the women will accept her real SMV and then settle for a 5, 6 or 7, sure. It's less troublesome to fight your way through all this competition, and you need to do it with makeup most of the time. And the 5s, 6s and 7s have reasonable personalities. Maybe these women fall in love for their 5s, 6s and 7s. But maybe they will make a huge drama because of their insecurities. Like many people say.
1
-
@saladsalad4190 Thank you for your encouragement. Well my plans are to study game development online for bachelor and then go for math master again.
Well, the 80/20 rule. Hm... I guess one would have to analyze the Europeans (or Asians?) during the last 5 centuries. Americans were expanding during this time, so they were scattered and had to deal with slavery and wars. I can imagine that didn't leave much options for the women to choose from. Europe had wars as well, but I guess a little more stable structure? And before that weak men were filtered out through wars and diseases, however for wars also the strong were picked and it depended much on strategy. There's a lot to consider, and I guess I don't know enough history. But the church helped to label women's virginity as holy, women fucking around as sluts/whores and divorces were unthinkable. Also men were free to punch their wives when they misbehaved. Funny enough it's what women are missing now. To keep her "chaos under control". Yet women were picky, and people also made bastards. I guess they were always somewhat picky, but they had limited options, only the men in her village.
50-100 years ago all this changed drastically. With violence in families being labeled as bad there might now be not enough means to educate girls; it's not like they're learning these things in school. Or themselves, like boys. Boys punch each other and then become best friends. With sexual protections and freedom and later with internet and dating apps women's instinct to find the best man went into overdrive, while they depended on a protector even less. I think these things happened too quickly, all like in a 100 years. But nature needs thousands and thousands of years of evolution. Just wait until 9019 and we will have resolved this problem. So I guess this is an evolutionary as well as social problem, these two simply drifted away from each other. I don't think we will be ever able to put a number on it, like 60/40. But this women's drive to search the best man also adapts to the circumstances. The circumstances changed drastically, so 60/40 also changed.
For the HIV, I don't think one should say, that nature invented it for the humans. It's a virus. A form of life. Every form of life has a chance, but we're in an arena, we need to fight for it. And some forms of life are also resources for other forms of life. You wouldn't say either, that nature invented lions to wipe out antelopes. In addition to that the human body is fragile, but nature keeps us evolving and getting better. We just won't turn into terminator over night, it's a damn slow process governed by random genetic mutations.
Hm. I'm wondering, these damaged girls with their bad attitude towards sex. If they have trouble finding intimacy, is this causing them in their search to cling to it even more? Like desperately diving into an relationship and pushing it to the next stage, like wanting the boyfriends to immediately move in with them. My ex was and still is like that, and it always was a red flag for me which I also saw before deciding to risk it. I guess, to be on the safe side, I should avoid such girls, and I did for quite a long time. But will I still? Maybe it could turn out interesting to play doctor once again. Now I'm much better prepared after all. Though my priority will be to see some progress before moving to a "next stage" of the relationship. And undamaged girls are getting rare after all, every man wants them, there's again just competition, which can damage the girls.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@franblue7492 Ich kann SEHR WOHL pauschalisieren. Schon allein, dass ich mit JEDER dasselbe Gespräch habe und JEDE von euch behauptet ihr wäret alle anders, JEDE mit denselben Argumenten. Mit der Dame da oben, anwa12345, hatte ich auch schon GENAU DASSELBE Gespräch, und mit jeder anderen auch. Ihr gehört sehr wohl alle in einen Topf.
Je mehr man mit euch diskutiert, desto deutlicher wird es, in wie vielen anderen Punkten man euch ebenso in einen Topf werfen kann. Und darüber werdet ihr sauer, weil ihr von uns verlangt, dass wir euch jeden Unsinn abkaufen. Aber dann die Studien vorlegen kannst du nicht und wirst das auch nie können, es waren nur wieder einmal leere Worte.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Komisch, dass Frauen all die Dinge nicht mögen, die sie selbst bei Männern machen. Gibt ne Studie, die interviewte "glücklich" verheiratete Männer und sagte aus, dass Frauen den Männern im Durchschnitt einmal pro Tag die Gefühle verletzen, es nicht merken und sogar es nicht verstehen wollen, wenn man es ihnen erklärt.
Und ich habe festgestellt, dass Frauen sogar die kleinste Kritik als furchtbar negativ sehen, ergo darf man ihnen nichts mehr sagen, noch nicht einmal, wenn sie den größten .... macht. Ich habe eine 15-jährige Freundschaft mit einer Frau dadurch verloren, dass ich ihr erzählt habe, dass eine andere Frau gesagt hat, dass Frauen sich vom Verhalten der Männern eine Scheibe abschneiden könnten.
Ich geb dem Video einen Daumen runter, weil es, wie alle anderen Frauen es auch tun, all diese Dinge schönredet und unter den Teppich kehrt. Diese ganzen Lügereien sind mir zu blöd.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@trentostgaard With the spaceship I implied that they would send signals or have a giant clock mounted on their side, didn't think it required extra mention. You described an object appearing slower due to it moving away. Not what I meant, but fine, then how about an object moving towards you, does time speed up?? But they are saying that an object traveling perpendicular to you also shows time dilation, because for you the light bouncing up and down in the ship seems to travel a bigger distance than it looks to someone on the ship, who'd be the stationary observer for that light. So to cancel this out, time must tick slower. One question already would be whether they actually are slower or just appear slower, do they come back to you showing you a clock then that is behind your clock when you were originally synced up? If they were just looking slower, time would have to catch up somewhere, like they'd have to appear faster than you when they hit the breaks, which sounds nonsensical since the spaceship would have to shrink to make the distance the light has to travel up and down smaller. If they are actually slower and perpendicularly passing earth, then earths movement should appear faster to them, because if it's not, time would somewhere need to catch up again. By the way if they are slowed due to speed and then also appear slower due to moving away, these are 2 effects stacking onto each other. So in other words, when you sit on earth and see the spaceship at a distance at relativistic speeds, yet you see their giant clock ticking not slower but faster, you should be deducting that it's rather you who is moving. And that there's an absolute zero where time moves the fastest. The vertical lines in these cone diagrams.
At this point usually people don't address my question, but just respond with the textbook answer that's incomplete, and then proceed to tell me that I'm supposed to relativity in some special way.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ReflectionRF Yes, I can, if I don't expect people to read a novel. If you need an example, you could ask nicely for one instead of being a d and telling me what I'm supposed to do according to your crappy opinion. But fine, I'll give you one, just let me watch that video for 5 minutes...
Erm, well ok, 2 minutes was enough to stumble upon the first nonsense.
1:04:30 - host asks him specifically a question that is from his books. So I assume he gives the same answer that he wrote in the books. He says that babies have the skill to read body language and when we grow older we lose it because we use words. Then he says that imposters hate being around children because children see through them.
This is such random bullsh_t pulled out his ass there, unbelievable. Even more unbelievable how you people fall for this. And yet even more unbelievable is that he wrote that in a book and is making money off of it. There are NO studies WHATSOEVER to support his claims, frankly because it's bullsh_t. When you google "babies" and "bodylanguage", the things that are popping up are tips how to read the babies bodylanguage as a parent, suggesting the exact opposite being the case from what Mr. Greene said, namely that grown-ups in fact can read body language at least from their children. One study says that babies don't sleep well when the mother, while breast-feeding, doesn't pay attention to her baby, but her phone instead. If mothers talk to or caress the babies, they sleep better, often the mothers calming voice is enough, even if she reads an adult book to the child (since it doesn't understand a thing anyway, it's just her voice that's important). This does suggest that babies don't understand the calmness of the mother being on her iphone.
It's not how the brain works anyway. The brain learns through experience, and if the knowledge gets deeprooted into the brain it doesn't unlearn it as easy either. Babies aren't born with the knowledge of body language, they have to watch people first, parents, caretakers, other babies, etc.. When that's learned and proves to be used on a daily basis, the person never forgets. Another the thing with learning is that it's coupled to a persons attentiveness and thus IQ. The more attentive you are, the more you see and learn. And that's why smart people are indeed very good at reading body language, gifted people can be insanely finetuned in this, and people who start paying attention consciously get a boost in learning, too. Not only can they read body language better, but also manipulate and control their own, if they for example want to hide their condition. They notice variations in someone's behavior that the normal folk just doesn't notice, not to mention the dumb ones.
And what's that about the impostor? I have no idea, it really sounds like random crap. Is he talking about someone that dressed up like someone else, or what? If so, then I guarantee you that any adult will spot this 1000x faster than a baby. If you can actually mimic a behavior that the baby is used to seeing, you can actually sooth and fool it way easier and blend in easier. So an "impostor", whatever that may be, usually worries less about children.
Throughout the video Mr. Greenes explainings were highly imprecise if not completely made up. Is this enough for you?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@vsmith6109 So you have a family, involving kids? How old are those? And a divorce behind you? Did you feel like a burden in that marriage as well? Are you actually a burden or do you only feel like one? Is your boyfriend responsible of fostering those feelings, or did your head do it on it's own? Why are you waiting to get dumped instead of leaving? How would your family react if you did one or the other, would there be a different reaction? And if you're trying to get others to dump you, why are you only now getting annoyed not getting your needs met? Why did you choose him in the first place? Or rather both of them, and how did that marriage end? How does it make you feel that he's still not dumping you? You know, there's a million videos on the net about wifes putting divorce papers on the table and being shocked when the husband agrees, they expect him to fight. But if they disrespect him and he doesn't leave, they lose respect for him leading to more disrespect. Again my question, what steps are you taking to get dumped, is it coincidentally disrespect? Poking the bomb while avoiding conflict?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Fruehlingshaar Das Sorgerecht vielleicht, heißt nicht, dass auch ein Wechselmodell umgesetzt wird, sondern das Kind wohnt bei der Mutter. Dass das Wechselmodell besser ist, zeigen erst moderne Studien und in der Gesetzgebung kommt dies nur langsam an, obwohl die EU schon vor 10 Jahren angeordnet hat, dass das Wechselmodell in die Legislative eingebaut werden soll. Und was ist, wenn man dann lauter alte, traditionell denkende Leute vor sich hat? Die werden dich für verrückt halten, wenn du ihnen erklärst, dass dein Kind 2 Wohnungen haben soll.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@aimee9478 Your advise sounds of course reasonable. And in real life I am behaving quite reasonable.
But against the internet? I've tried it and it didn't work. People are angry and can hide behind it's anonymity. If you don't share their opinion to begin with, posting a "varying opinion" is like stepping in a toxic waste puddle. They aren't angry on this channel, but if I wouldn't have been confrontational, nobody would have read the comment. So I have just two choices: say nothing or be confrontational.
Honestly, in some other places some people are so dumb they can't be reasoned with. Ever argued with a flat earther? You know the quote "don't argue with a pig, he drags you down and beats you with experience"? Or the quote (as good as I can translate it) "opponents will assume they refute us by repeating their arguments and ignoring ours". The way that I found works is establishing at the very beginning that their argument is based on stupidity. If I can explain their stupidity, then it probably has more to do with the truth than me being an a-hole. And really, if people feel bad and step back and change something about themselves, is it really such a bad thing that I made them feel bad?
Besides, I insulted broadly a mass of people here, noone individually. Even Einstein said people are stupid and his quote is probably the most used the quote in history.
If I see people being reasonable, I will treat them reasonably. But did anyone here say "ok, maybe it is a bit much praise, but Africa is still an amazing person"?
She is. And it is. Just don't overlook someone else deserving praise because you used it all up on her.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bruhattherate You're a stupid hater. She's not solely for the money, clearly you haven't watched her videos at all and you don't have the slightest clue what message she's conveying, yet you try to ruin her image, and people thumb up your stupid message and applaud it. That makes actually you the hypocrite.
She also didn't admit she's a hypocrite, that's something you didn't read correctly and made up. I could exactly say the same about you, like you accuse her of solely wanting money, you wrote that sh_t to get approval of other people here, this is the same thing. You are the hypocrite right there.
Actually she admitted she has a male look (not a hypocrite), and about the female behavior she criticizes she often admits of doing the same bad things. That's not a sign of a hypocrite, but of someone who's trying to improve his character.
This whole channel looks to me like a hate-channel. Frankly I've seen only one video, but this video misrepresents the truth and uses it as a pretext to sh_t on someone.
That's what you're approving of.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kamkamkam_ I think you made that explanation up all on yourself, because I've never heard that at all and it doesn't make sense to me either. And when you say stuff like "we know this", you're making use of a very, VERY common strategy of telling your opinion like it were an established fact, essentially lying. Let's be honest, 99% of people on the internet use this strategy, they present their opinionated guesses always as if these were scientific facts, which they nearly never are. Who is "we" and where exactly is the proof? "We" as I know it doesn't even consider the existence of the wisdom of crowds.
This wisdom usually doesn't work when the group is biased. Lets take the latest video of Veritasium as an example: the population has been taught a simplified model of electricity at school, thus making them biased. On top of that the social pressure causes people to stick to what they've been taught. On the other hand, if you had asked a probabilistic question like "how far away is the sun" a thousand years ago, I believe the wisdom of crowds would have utterly failed, too.
And I think the wisdom of crowds can apply to non-probabilistic questions as well. Your explanation sounds insufficient, so I have to ask again: why not? I think people can have a feeling for the right answer out of their experience watching everyday things. And they've forgotten what they've been taught about the rope problem at school, so that's why they're no longer biased, and this makes them picking this answer... was it C? Very interesting. Maybe they're indeed wrong just like the crowds would have been wrong 1000 years ago about the distance of the sun. Then again Veritasium is putting out a lot of videos lately with "you never understood this correctly" and "you always understood that wrong", this makes me very sceptic. For his first video of electricity he received the well deserved backlash, he did a bad job explaining and didn't show any testing, like in the 2nd. For the video with the rope he simply didn't receive backlash. So I'm wondering... should he have?
1
-
1
-
@meta02 Or maybe you are just wrong? I keep forgetting to test this, life's getting in the way, although I have an idea how to do it. Thanks for the reminder.
I think Dereks test is insufficient, good science needs to be repeated anyway, and Dereks also has been trying to convince people of his unverified opinion a few times after he made this particular video. And there have been endless cases where teachers did mistakes, too, they were convinced of their answer being correct, while in reality it wasn't. My skepticism is well placed here.
Everything else I already explained, which you seem to have just "forgotten" to read or forgotten while reading. You seem to not be a worthwile conversation partner, you kind of talk like a stupid d (typical YT experience, right?). I'll repeat once more, what I said, but if you keep being a d, I won't read any more of your comments, but put you on ignore.
I believe the rope weight pulls on itself, and Derek has negleted that. The rope however is overall too heavy for the effect to be seen by our eyes, because the guys don't want the rope to fly upwards into the propeller (or how's that called?). This remains to be checked.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@saywhatnow57 Eeeeeeerm. You saying everybody wins in the lottery and they don't realize it? Sounds to me like those with long marriages are just out of touch - meaning you are far from the first giving me this impression. A reason is that many men have been putting it this way until the studies from the dating sites released and a lot of them realized they didn't actually win the lottery, but were tricked in believing so.
And apart from finding a sane woman, which is an accomplishment in itself, there's the whole other issue that in my observation women treat those men better that they think are high value. In other words, a big gap between her and your value is gonna make her be nore respectful and loving. And since men date down, are happy to be blessed by having any pussy at all, I found many to be oblivious to this gap, as in tricked to believe themselves lucky (and a girl with just good decency will have it easier to convince men of her being the prize). Woman dated up high and knows this, then she certainly doesn't want him to know that he dated down a lot. I'd actually have to see whether this is the case with your relationship, and in case it is, all you've said would be for naught, it would just come down to simple hypergamy mechanics.
Can you even follow what I'm saying?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Gifted people will always have trouble finding someone that challenges them, and conversations from normal or dumb people will simply bore them. If that are the people in his vicinity, he's unlucky. But I doubt this has anything to do with his mothers conditioning.
I have a similar problem, I'm bored by quite many people, especially those who drink and smoke tend to not think about stuff more than once. I know I'm smarter than them, I still try to respect them up to a certain point if they respect me back and acknowledge my strenghts. I mean, dumb people can have different strengths, they might be resiliant, they might be good in sports, they might be strong or fast or have good reactions. I will acknowledge it if they have good traits, I'd like them to acknowledge my intelligence instead of how society usually reacts, by being offended.
I'm interested to talk to that dude. xD Could result in a good discussion and I'm craving these, too. Sometimes I also ask weird questions to encourage discussions, but often it doesn't work.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Hey I'm an anti-vaxxer! Look:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170075/
"Linear regression analysis of unweighted mean IMRs showed a high statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates, with r = 0.992 (p = 0.0009). "
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26021988/
"For child death reports, 79.4% received >1 vaccine on the same day"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42QuXLucH3Q
Well, I'm not really an anti-vaxxer, I'm only concerned about vaccines, but I'm not saying to throw all that science out the window, like you will immediately assume anyway. I think people should slow down with the amount of doses, not every vaccine on the market is actually necessary. I think not even a tenth. And especially not for babies.
Doesn't matter though, because you guys are MORONS. You assume that you know way better what I am than me. Also when trying to have a discussion about these concerns, vaxxers immediately start a wave of insults. Just like flerfers actually. Yeah, I've given up to have a conversation and I'm just here to say that you vaxxers are as stupid as flerfers, that's all. And all you vaxxers can do is make jokes about dying children.
She: "I am so afraid to get measles! It's a SSSSSSERIOUS disease. The media has told me it can cause deafness! If I go out and my Measles vaccine doesn't work, I blame the guy I got Measles from! And the whole anti-vaxxer movement. I don't take responsibility whatsoever because I'm a WOMAN! It's a privilege issue! I'm privileged! I'm not the one who has to adapt, like not go outside if there's an outbreak. Other people have to adapt!!!! I will cry until I get my way!!! Everyone should get their freedom impaired by the state for my safety!"
He: "Bar the doors, hahaha. (There are more important things than to flip out over every little danger.)"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@andresvillasenor See, you compliment me, and then you proceed to make more assumptions about me, that are incorrect.
Like 90% of people are doing this, instead of asking "do you avoid love to avoid pain?", you just go straight ahead and answer it for me: "avoiding pain comes with avoiding love, period".
Changes your compliment immediately into just some hot air.
Same with "the reason you fail to emphasize with the depressed". You actually don't know anything about my empathy. I would stay here and talk with you for a month and share all my knowledge if it would help you. But I expect you and other people to simply not listen, that's society nowadays, they see something working and when a person describes how they made it work, they refuse to listen with all their might (unless it's work related, but for anything else, especially mental, psychological or behavioral, they don't listen), as if I were to expose them that only as victims they get any attention.
I'm criticizing the use of language here. When you blatantly say "you fail to emphasize", you're either trying to isolate yourself against potential help, or you're using way too imprecise words to describe things. Language is a tool and it looks like you're using a hammer to saw through a tree. Same with your initial comment, which used nice phrases to describe life in the most inefficient manner. Language that sounds good and belongs into a novel, but is way too imprecise for a real situation and it suggests to me that you actually don't understand what you're talking about. I dislike this impreciseness, I try to be as precise as possible since I think it's the only way to correctly address a problem and solve it, including problems of the mind (I repeatedly solve mine this way). And I also see a connection between mentally ill and those who are using language in such a dreamy way. The video is the same and attracts those who report to have mental illness or addictions.
I'm wondering if those actually prefer to stay that way, since, as said, they refuse to listen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@todorstojanov3100 You don't get the pattern by shooting a single particle or molecule. What you get is just a single dot, one impact. For the topic it doesn't matter what the photon does after hitting the screen or whatever there is at the end. Whenever they say they fire just one particle and there's an interference pattern, they actually fire multiple particles, maybe it's just one at a time, but the interference pattern doesn't appear from a single dot. This is the confusing, mystified language I'm talking about. Just like when they omitted telling us for several decades that they're measuring light with a polarizer. A polarizer primarily changes light, measurement is only like a side effect. But they are treating it like photons were tiny dwards that hide under their hat when you come closer to take a good look. This mystified language is misleading, it's not even how the experiment was conducted originally. A bunch of particles, or a wave of particles are needed to see an interference pattern. Thus I also said that an individual particle doesn't go through both slits, not that the whole wave can't. The wave being reduced to contain only one particle I believe is a math trick in quantum mechanics that make calculations possible, but doesn't appear in reality. Just like square roots give you an additional result that sometimes is outside of reality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Kanzu999 Because we don't have a brain, we ARE our brain. All these processes combined make us, our conscience. It's not some ghostly soul, but a whole bunch of firing neurons. The way you phrase your sentences is like saying, a radio cannot play music, because it's the parts inside who play. It's more of a symbiosis, and less of "well that neuron decided that I eat some ice cream, I don't have any free will".
Also we are in control of or are able to influence certain processes inside us. If we tell ourself, that we are strong, we actually become stronger and faster without seeing any difference. If keep telling ourself that we are sick, we become sick. That's something a computer cannot do.
1
-
Kanzu999 When I said "we are our brain" and you said "We do not control what our brain does", then you already misunderstood me. Our brain controls what our brain does and since we = our brain, it means we control what we do/our brain does, and vice versa. That's how I see it. German's top brain and psychology researcher said this, and I think it's very clever. Obviously it is also simplified statement, it's the processes which makes up consciousness and so on and so forth. We could overcomplicate things all day long, but I'm not into it, you will have to do it alone. And... "Our brain chooses for us" doesn't work with this concept.
What would you say, does our brain have free will?
Also, speculating what would be different when we would go back in time, while disallowing any atom to move differently, is kind of pointless, don't you think?
1
-
1
-
Kanzu999 You repeat yourself for the 3rd time now. Also while repeating you to write a whole lot of text.
First, if we restart time from some state in the past.. isn't there some quantum processes that still occur randomly? Like radioactive decay, quantum jumps and other stuff? If not and it's really deterministic (or if we so decide for our discussion), then there is really no point at all in discussing time travel.
Secondly, even though some state in time makes things mostly deterministic and our "free-will-decisions" have already been decided trillions of years ago, I don't agree that this nullifies our free will. I just see it differently. No point explaining, though, because..
Lastly: you've shown me now that you don't listen at all, since I said several times now that talking about time travel makes no sense, if nothing changes anyway, and you keep talking about it. And with my last comment I said that you leave no room for a discussion, which made you repeat everything all over again. Maybe you only like listening to yourself. But clearly you don't listen to me. So there's no point for me staying here.
So. Feel free to repeat yourself for the 4th time, before I'll.. erm... deterministically ignore you. :-P
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
JP sure is smart, but has lost his marbles by now. Too much hardship in his life probably. Seriously, WW3? And people are cyborgs because you can send their pictures around the world now?
And he's talking like judgement day is around the corner. xD Just google top 10 failed doomsday predictions.... I think the Jehovas witnesses stopped predicting judgement day 50 years ago because it gave them a bad name since it never came true. xD
Too many talk in this apocalyptic manner, just when I look at my yt recommendations, everythings breaking, the internet is breaking, the dating is breaking, society and population growth is breaking, gaming is breaking, film industry is breaking and a lot of content creators and channels are breaking as well. Too little talk about global warming though...
JP essentially wants men to man up harder, work harder and compete harder. Essentially judging them by what they do for society. Ironically, like robots.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Was nimmst du dir zu Herzen, dass Statistiken zeigen wie du denkst? Wie lang in der Beziehung musst du sein, um einem Mann zu erlauben deine Miete zu zahlen? Was denkst du über ihn, wenn er es nicht tut? Wie würdest du ihn behandeln, wenn er fragt, ob du ihm mal aushelfen kannst und ihm die Miete zahlst? Wenn du verheiratet bist, würdest du deine Schminke selbst kaufen? Und deine Schuhe? Und die Hausdeko, von der du denkst dein Haus braucht sie?
Wäre auch alles in Ordnung, wenn die Frauen dankbar dafür wären. Und nicht rumschnauzen und drohen zu wem anders zu gehen, wenn der jetzige nicht mehr gibt. Frauen verlieben sich ja auch nicht in Geld, sondern finden einen Mann mit Geld charmanter, gutaussehender und selbstbewusster. Da gibts auch schon Studien zu, wo dieselben Männer nur verschieden angezogen waren oder vor verschiedenen Autos standen.
1
-
@anwa6169 Und wenn dich mal ein charmanter Mann, der danach aussehen würde, als würdest du mit ihm nie wieder wenig Geld am Monatsende haben, nach einem Date fragen würde? Wie würdest du reagieren?
Nach meiner Beobachtung würde nur ein einziger Typ Frau diesem Mann entsagen, und zwar die, die 100%ig wissen, dass sie Aussehenstechnisch außerhalb seiner Liga sind.
Du kannst gerne behaupten anders zu sein und wenn es wirklich stimmt, ist es wunderbar. Aber Leute behaupten es zu oft und es sind zu oft leere Behauptungen. Ich höre nicht mehr drauf, ich will sehen wie es anders ist und ich sehe es nicht. Und es wird ja auch oft gesagt, dass man bei Frauen schauen muss, was sie tun, nicht was sie sagen. Wir kennen uns eh nicht und es hängt nichts davon ab, ob ich dir glaube, oder nicht.
Zu Punkt 4: in den Studien wurde es mit denselben Personen getestet, um das, von dem du da faselst, auszuschließen. Der Mann steht vor nem reichen Auto, kriegt er die Menge an Dates. Derselbe Mann steht vor nem armen Auto, am Anfang ist er noch motiviert und fragt, aber sehr schnell ist ihm klar, wie sehr das arme Auto hinter ihm seine Erfolgschance eindämmt. Er wird keines Blickes gewürdigt, dann gibt es einen Feedbackloop und hat schnell schon kein Bock nach Dates zu fragen, denn er weiß schon das Ergebnis im voraus. Das ist, was ihr Frauen dann hinterher Selbstbewusstsein nennt, komplett ignorant gegenüber eurem eigenen Einfluss darauf. Weil es euch nicht kümmert, wie es wirklich funktioniert.
Das hat nichts mit pösen Pösewichten zu tun, sondern damit, dass ihr alles tut, um nicht die Seiten von euch, die moralisch-gesellschaftlich als schlecht eingestuft werden, zugeben zu müssen, weil Jahrtausende lang euer Überleben davon abhing ein gutes Bild abzugeben. Dieses pöse Pösewichte Zeug ist ein Anzeichen dafür, dass ihr beleidigt seid, wenn wir der Wahrheit näher kommen.
1
-
@anwa6169 Hm. Ich habe langsam eine Vorstellung davon, warum du sagst, was du sagst, und so lebst. Wäre meine nächste Frage, wie alt du bist, und deine Kinder. Du hast gesagt, du hast schon Tieflagen durchlebt, also bist du zu dem Denken erst gekommen. Klingt, als hättest du dich abgefunden und versuchst das positive aus dem Leben zu ziehen. Ganz anders wäre es, wenn du dasselbe mit 20 sagen würdest, wenn du noch in dem Bereich bist wo jede Frau von sich denkt sie ist eine 10 von 10.
Männer behaupten auch gerne, dass sie treu sind, egal was kommt, egal wie entmutigend es zuhause zugeht. Aber die sind alle nicht in den top 20%.
1
-
@anwa6169 Weißt du, dass es eine Umfrage gab vor Jahren (in den USA), die "glücklich" verheiratete Männer befragte? Raus kam, dass die Ehefrauen den Männern die Gefühle im Schnitt einmal täglich verletzen. Wenn den Frauen das erklärt wurde, haben sie es nicht verstanden.
Das ist schön und gut, dass jetzt... einige... Frauen verstehen, wo der Lebenskomfort her kommt. Aber das ist längst nicht alles. Die meisten haben es immer noch nicht unter Kontrolle ihre Emotionen nicht wie Wurfmesser einzusetzen, und werden es auch nie haben. Du hast gesagt, dass du selbst aus Dingen gelernt hast, wo dein Leben durch eine Tieflage gegangen war. Wie bist du da mit diesem Punkt umgegangen? Wenn es typisch für Frauen ist sich erst mit 50 mit dem Leben, so wie es ist, abzufinden, das hilft den Männern auch nicht sonderlich. Und ich kenne, glaube ich, mehr Frauen, die mir vorhalten würden, in wie vielen Sprachen sie Quatschen können, als sich dafür zu bedanken, dass jemand den Erdrutsch wegschaufelt.
Ich hab langsam eine Vorstellung davon, warum du sagst, was du sagst. Du sagst viel, was moralisch sehr vernünftig klingt, aber dennoch bist du in einer Scheidung. Na, wie kommt denn das. Und wenn du versuchst eine Studie mit Unsinn auszuhebeln, kann ich das sehr wohl als Unsinn betiteln, ob du nun beleidigt bist oder nicht. Vielleicht ist es eh an der Zeit beleidigt zu sein, denn es sickert langsam durch, dass bei dir nicht alles so rosig ist, wie du es beschreibst, im Grunde fehlt nicht mehr viel, um zu zeigen, dass du doch ähnlich denkst, wie die anderen. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Hat sich ja gelohnt mich vom Gegenteil zu überzeugen... 🤦♂
Auch das Thema, wie unattraktiv Videospiele für Frauen sind und wie die Ansicht doch ein bisschen Oberflächlich ist, geht in den USA gerade rum. Ich spiele Videospiele. Warum sollte ich das aufgeben? Weil es erwartet wird, dass ich ein Arbeitsesel bin, auch wenn es nur als Müllmann ist? Ich könnte mehr arbeiten, wenn mir eine Frau mit der Persönlichkeit wie in Animes in den Schoß fällt, Job zu finden ist doch nun wirklich nicht schwer. Aber so was gibts nicht in der Realität. Ich spiele lieber und arbeite weniger, um weniger Aufmerksamkeit auf mich zu ziehen.
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Weißt du, dass es eine Umfrage gab vor Jahren in den USA, die glücklich verheiratete Männer befragte? Raus kam, dass die Ehefrauen den Männern die Gefühle im Schnitt einmal täglich verletzen. Wenn den Frauen das erklärt wurde, haben sie es nicht verstanden.
Das ist schön und gut, dass jetzt... einige... Frauen verstehen, wo der Lebenskomfort her kommt. Aber das ist längst nicht alles. Die meisten haben es immer noch nicht unter Kontrolle ihre Emotionen nicht wie Wurfmesser einzusetzen, und werden es auch nie haben. Du hast gesagt, dass du selbst aus Dingen gelernt hast, wo dein Leben durch eine Tieflage gegangen war. Wie bist du da mit diesem Punkt umgegangen? Wenn es typisch für Frauen ist sich erst mit 50 mit dem Leben, so wie es ist, abzufinden, das hilft den Männern auch nicht sonderlich. Und ich kenne, glaube ich, mehr Frauen, die mir vorhalten würden, in wie vielen Sprachen sie Quatschen können, als sich dafür zu bedanken, dass jemand den Erdrutsch wegschaufelt.
Ich hab langsam eine Vorstellung davon, warum du sagst, was du sagst. Du sagst viel, was moralisch sehr vernünftig klingt, aber dennoch bist du in einer Scheidung. Na, wie kommt denn das. Und wenn du versuchst eine Studie mit Unsinn auszuhebeln, kann ich das sehr wohl als Unsinn betiteln, ob du nun beleidigt bist oder nicht. Vielleicht ist es eh an der Zeit beleidigt zu sein, denn es sickert langsam durch, dass bei dir nicht alles so rosig ist, wie du es beschreibst, im Grunde fehlt nicht mehr viel, um zu zeigen, dass du doch ähnlich denkst, wie die anderen. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Hat sich ja gelohnt mich vom Gegenteil zu überzeugen...
Auch das Thema, wie unattraktiv Videospiele für Frauen sind und wie die Ansicht doch ein bisschen Oberflächlich ist, geht in den USA gerade rum. Ich spiele Videospiele. Warum sollte ich das aufgeben? Weil es erwartet wird, dass ich ein Arbeitsesel bin, auch wenn es nur als Müllmann ist? Ich könnte mehr arbeiten, wenn mir eine Frau mit der Persönlichkeit wie in Animes in den Schoß fällt, Job zu finden ist doch nun wirklich nicht schwer. Aber so was gibts nicht in der Realität. Ich spiele lieber und arbeite weniger, um weniger Aufmerksamkeit auf mich zu ziehen.
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Das ist schön und gut, dass jetzt... einige... Frauen verstehen, wo der Lebenskomfort her kommt. Aber das ist längst nicht alles. Die meisten haben es immer noch nicht unter Kontrolle ihre Emotionen nicht wie Wurfmesser einzusetzen, und werden es auch nie haben. Du hast gesagt, dass du selbst aus Dingen gelernt hast, wo dein Leben durch eine Tieflage gegangen war. Wie bist du da mit diesem Punkt umgegangen? Wenn es typisch für Frauen ist sich erst mit 50 mit dem Leben, so wie es ist, abzufinden, das hilft den Männern auch nicht sonderlich. Und ich kenne, glaube ich, mehr Frauen, die mir vorhalten würden, in wie vielen Sprachen sie Quatschen können, als sich dafür zu bedanken, dass jemand den Erdrutsch wegschaufelt.
Ich hab langsam eine Vorstellung davon, warum du sagst, was du sagst. Du sagst viel, was moralisch sehr vernünftig klingt, aber dennoch bist du in einer Scheidung. Na, wie kommt denn das. Und wenn du versuchst eine Studie mit Unsinn auszuhebeln, kann ich das sehr wohl als Unsinn betiteln, ob du nun beleidigt bist oder nicht. Vielleicht ist es eh an der Zeit beleidigt zu sein, denn es sickert langsam durch, dass bei dir nicht alles so rosig ist, wie du es beschreibst, im Grunde fehlt nicht mehr viel, um zu zeigen, dass du doch ähnlich denkst, wie die anderen. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Hat sich ja gelohnt mich vom Gegenteil zu überzeugen...
Auch das Thema, wie unattraktiv Videospiele für Frauen sind und wie die Ansicht doch ein bisschen Oberflächlich ist, geht in den USA gerade rum. Ich spiele Videospiele. Warum sollte ich das aufgeben? Weil es erwartet wird, dass ich ein Arbeitsesel bin, auch wenn es nur als Müllmann ist? Ich könnte mehr arbeiten, wenn mir eine Frau mit der Persönlichkeit wie in Animes in den Schoß fällt, Job zu finden ist doch nun wirklich nicht schwer. Aber so was gibts nicht in der Realität. Ich spiele lieber und arbeite weniger, um weniger Aufmerksamkeit auf mich zu ziehen.
1
-
@anwa6169 Du sagst aber noch viel nach dem Verabschieden.
Also Spiele spielen ist Zeitverschwndung. Übrigens gibt es Spiele, die die kognitiven Fähigkeiten verbessern, und die man im sozialen miteinander spielt. Aber auf der Couch kuscheln und vermutlich sonst nix tun ist keine Zeitverschwendung. TV übrigens senkt den Iq. Und dann wird man geschämt dafür, dass man nicht rund um die Uhr macht, was sie will. Halbe halbe Kompromisse sind wohl nicht drin, was? Und aufs Bett kuscheln und Sport machen hat sie nach der Heirat auch kein Bock mehr.
Tja, ich hab nicht von dem Gespräch profitiert. Ich hab alles schon mal so gehört. Sogar von einer Scheidung wo der Partner, der ebenfalls männlich war, auf sein Leben verzichten wollte. Das letzte mal wars ein Thema bei mir, als ich eine Partnerin hatte. Als erstes drohte sie mir damit, und als ich ihr gezeigt habe, dass ich damit genauso gut drohen kann, hat sie das Thema für immer sein gelassen. Ich bin wirklich hellauf begeistert, wie oft dieses Thema benutzt wird.
Also dann, ein schönes Leben wünsche ich, und hiermit auf Wiedersehen.
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Ist schon wieder ein persönlicher Angriff in Planung? Wir wissen doch schon, dass Frauen alles schlecht machen, was Männer tun, was nicht für Frauen ist. Wenn Männer nicht mögen zu kuscheln, haben sie ein kaltes Herz, wenn Männer Spaß im Bett wollen, vergegenständlichen sie ihren Partner, und wenn Männer Hobbys haben, dann sind sie faul. Genauso wie wenn er fremd geht, ist er schuld, und wenn sie fremd geht, ist auch er schuld.
Also ich bin 38. Dann lass mal hören, was du drauf hast.
Genauso der Kommentar von der anderen Frau, dass hier nur Männerfrust wäre. Weil Männer verstehen, was los ist, hier wird nur mit emotionalen Angriffen gearbeitet, und das war auch einer. Wenn man dahinterkommt, ja da kommt etwas Frust hinzu. Aber sie meint ja eigentlich, dass es schlecht ist, dass wir dahinter kommen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Du gehst davon aus zu wissen, wovon ich ausgehe. Leider, wie immer, völlig falsch. Aber mal angenommen, du lägst richtig, warum genau gibt man Männern immer an allem die Schuld? Warum heißt es, wenn er fremd geht, ist er schuld, und wenn sie fremd geht, ist auch er schuld? Warum können Feministen so lange ihre Abneigung am anderen Geschlecht ausdrücken, ohne dass ihnen jemand sagt, dass es mal genug ist?
Ich bin hier, um die Menschen mit den den Dingen zu konfrontieren, die anders laufen, als gesagt wird, mit den Dingen, die sie machen, von denen sie die Auswirkungen nicht verstehen, und mit der ganzen Doppelmoral. Im Grunde, um sie zum Denken zu bewegen. Zugegeben nicht immer auf die sanfte Tour, ich weiß schon, dass ich den Leuten auf die Füße trete, aber die sanfte Tour funktioniert auch oft einfach nicht. Hut ab vor dir, denn du bist eine der ersten, die nicht schon nach der ersten Konfrontation verschwindet. Trotzdem gibts Raum zur Verbesserung, ich meine, wer die Kommentare zunächst nur verwendet um zu erzählen, wie er es besser macht als alle anderen, sagt in der Regel nicht die ganze Wahrheit. Und dummerweise, von dem was ich beobachte, ob du es magst oder nicht, stimmt das wieder überein mit deiner Natur. Kann dir sogar erklären, wie, aber ob du es mögen wirst?
Ich gebe, teils deswegen, erst Dinge preis, wenn ich gefragt werde. Du kannst mich gerne alles fragen. Aber dann wiederum, wenn ich einen persönlichen Angriff rieche, sage ich es auch. Bist ja nicht die erste, mit der ich mich unterhalte, und viele leider sind sehr angriffsbereit und ziehen das Gespräch sehr schnell ins emotionale, auch wenn sie nur ganz allgemeine Kritik hören. Man kann oft kaum über was anderes als das Wetter sprechen, ohne dass sie es persönlich nehmen.
Sowie das mit dem kuscheln und Videospielen. Männerhobbies werden der Beschämung ausgesetzt und naja, ihr merkt es einfach nicht. Da bringt auch kein sanftes erklären, ich meine, wir haben Studien, die zeigen, dass sanftes erklären nichts bringt.
Mir fehlt es wohl tatsächlich an männlichen Vorbildern. Aber die werden ja auch eher unterdrückt von der Gesellschaft, ist ja alles toxisch heutzutage. Ein Vorbild war erbärmlich, liebenswürdig, aber viel mehr noch ein Simp bis zur letzten Haarstähne, ein Arbeitstier mit kleinem Hirn. Den hättest du gemocht, glaube ich. Ich hab mit ihm keinen Kontakt mehr. Einen äußerst guten Privatlehrer hatte ich, er sagte eher Dinge, die einem das Weltbild erweitern. Joa. Das wars, schätze ich.
Und das zu der Werteverwirrung, ja, die haben wir, aber auch schon wieder nicht so, wie du denkst.
1
-
@anwa6169 Jaja, alle wollen sich nicht der Realität stellen und behaupten, sie seien einzigartig. Kannst gerne vorm Spiegel erklären, wie es nicht passt, meine Beobachtung aber zeigt, dass es sehr wohl passt und euer ständiges Abstreiten einfach nicht stimmt.
Und ich habe schon gesagt, dass ich 38 bin.
Es ist auch keine Unterstellung Simps zu mögen, an seinem Character ist nämlich auch anderes dran, ich habe auch erwähnt, dass er liebenswürdig ist, unterstelle ich dir also fälschlicherweise, dass du ausschließlich liebenswürdige magst? Das ist die Art, wie du die Sprache verdrehst, um mich zu überzeugen, dass ich dich nie verstehen kann. So ein Blödsinn. Er hat im Grunde einen guten Charakter, aber er ist so naiv und aufdringlich, dass es nervt. Ich meinte auch nicht, dass du ihn als Partner mögen würdest, sondern als Person. Habe ich mögen gesagt, oder habe ich verlieben gesagt? Oder ist das für dich dasselbe?
Das meinte ich, es wird ins emotionale gezogen und alles sofort persönlich genommen. Ein Mann hätte gefragt, "warum denkst du, ich würde ihn mögen?" und wäre nicht nur von einer Partnerschaft ausgegangen. Du aber, so wie andere Frauen auch, hast die negativste Eigenschaft an ihm herausgepickt und mir unterstellt, dass ich dir was unterstelle. Und jetzt überleg mal, man will das ganze obendrein noch sanft erklärt haben, damit eine Veränderung möglichst viele Jahrtausende in die Zukunft verschoben wird. Das geht nicht, keiner sagt dir die ganze Meinung, sie geben sie dir nur in klitzekleinen Häppchen, weil du sonst emotional werden würdest. Das ist die Welt, in der wir leben.
Ich glaube, das ist alles Schau, um die negativen Seiten zu verschleiern und sich nicht verändern zu müssen, denn das ist ja anstrengend. "Ich habe keine negativen Seiten, es versteht mich einfach nur keiner". Mhm, klar. Und ja, warum sie das so machen, ist aus biologischer Sicht sogar logisch und erklärbar.
1
-
@anwa6169 Die diplomatische Umgangsform kommt automatisch bei euch, sobald ihr mit irgendwem die Beziehung verbessern wollt. Solange ihr denkt, dass ihr sagen könnt, was ihr wollt, wird das nichts mit Diplomatie.
Und es geht nicht darum, dass Machos nicht kuscheln möchten, sondern darum, dass alles, was Männer tun und was nicht für Frauen ist, sofort von Frauen schlecht gemacht wird. Das hab ich jetzt schon einige Male erklärt, nicht wahr? Trotz all der moralisch guten Dinge, die du Anfangs aufgezählt hast, hast du es immer noch nicht verstanden. Und so ist das halt immer, wenn man euch versucht was aus unserer Sicht zu erklären, hier hast du die harte Wahrheit. Gibt ja sogar ne Studie, die das zeigt.
Ich hab nichts gegen Kuscheln. Aber wenn das dann so aussieht mit Dingen, die ich will, nein Danke. Und zum Thema Stress, nach einer Weile in einer Beziehung haben einige durchgehend "Stress" (auch im Urlaub) und dann ist die Sache mit Körperkontakt komplett vom Tisch, auch wenn er möchte. Dann helfen echt nur noch Katzen.
1
-
@anwa6169 Die diplomatische Umgangsform kommt automatisch bei euch, sobald ihr mit irgendwem die Beziehung verbessern wollt. Solange ihr denkt, dass ihr sagen könnt, was ihr wollt, wird das nichts mit Diplomatie.
Und es geht nicht darum, dass Machos nicht kuscheln möchten, sondern darum, dass alles, was wir tun und was nicht euch dienlich ist, sofort von euch schlecht gemacht wird. Das hab ich jetzt schon einige Male erklärt, nicht wahr? Trotz all der moralisch guten Dinge, die du Anfangs aufgezählt hast, hast du es immer noch nicht verstanden. Und so ist das halt immer, wenn man euch versucht was aus unserer Sicht zu erklären, hier hast du die harte Wahrheit. Gibt ja sogar ne Studie, die das zeigt.
Ich hab nichts gegen Kuscheln. Aber wenn das dann so aussieht mit meinen Dingen, nein, danke. Und zum Thema Stress, nach einer Weile in einer Beziehung haben einige durchgehend.. Stress. (auch im Urlaub) Dann ist die Sache mit Körperkontakt komplett vom Tisch, auch wenn er möchte. Warum dann nicht sofort Katzen!
1
-
@anwa6169 Die diplomatische Umgangsform kommt automatisch bei euch, sobald ihr mit irgendwem die Beziehung verbessern wollt oder müsst, dazu zählt auch jemanden einzulullen. Solange ihr denkt, dass ihr sagen könnt, was ihr wollt, wird das nichts mit Diplomatie.
Und es geht nicht darum, dass Machos nicht kuscheln möchten, sondern darum, dass alles, was Männer tun und was nicht für euch ist, sofort von euch schlecht gemacht wird. Will man nicht kuscheln, ist man unfähig zur Intimität. Spielt man Videospiele, ist man unfähig zu arbeiten. Das Kuscheln ist nicht von Bedeutung, sondern dass auf uns rumgehackt wird. Das hab ich jetzt schon einige Male erklärt, nicht wahr? Trotz all der moralisch guten Dinge, die du Anfangs aufgezählt hast, hast du es immer noch nicht verstanden. Und damit fällst du in die Schublade, hier hast du die harte Wahrheit. Wenn man euch versucht was aus unserer Sicht zu erklären, ist es, als würde man mit Aliens reden. Gibt ja sogar ne Studie, die das zeigt.
Und das kommt von euch, nicht von uns. Und hinterher wird noch behauptet, ihr hättet mehr Empathie. Tssss...
Ich hab nichts gegen Kuscheln. Aber wenn das dann so ist mit meinen Dingen, sag ich gleich zu dem ganzen Beziehungskram nein, danke. Und zum Thema Stress, nach einer Weile in einer Beziehung haben einige durchgehend Stress, auch im Urlaub) und dann ist die Sache mit Körperkontakt komplett vom Tisch, auch wenn er möchte.
Mit Katzen verhaltet ihr euch nicht so. Dann nimmt doch lieber die.
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Und es geht nicht darum, dass Machos nicht kuscheln möchten, sondern darum, dass alles, was Männer tun und was nicht für euch ist, sofort schlecht gemacht wird. Will man nicht kuscheln, ist man unfähig zur Intimität. Spielt man Videospiele, ist man unfähig zu arbeiten. Tut man nicht, was sie will, ist man kein richtiger Mann. Dass es Kuscheln ist, ist nicht von Bedeutung, sondern dass auf uns rumgehackt wird. Ich habe es nun jetzt schon einige Male erklärt, nicht wahr? Trotz all der moralisch guten Dinge, die du Anfangs aufgezählt hast, hast du es immer noch nicht verstanden. Und damit fällst du in die Schublade, hier hast du die harte Wahrheit. Wenn man euch versucht was aus unserer Sicht zu erklären, ist es, als würde man mit Aliens reden. Gibt ja sogar ne Studie, die das zeigt.
Und das kommt von euch, nicht von uns. Und hinterher wird noch behauptet, ihr hättet mehr Empathie. Tssss...
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Und wenn du jetzt denkst, hier sitzt ein weinender 16-jähriger, der bei jedem Tastenanschlag schluchzt, muss ich dich nochmal enttäuschen. Es sind Fakten, die wir schon seit längerem akzeptiert haben. Die Sonne ist gelb, das Gras ist grün, die Frauen sind halt so. Schau, was andere Leute hier schreiben, und überleg, warum. Aber auch obwohl es Fakten sind, können sie nerven und zuviel werden. Jedenfalls bringt die blöde Antwort "wer hat dich denn verletzt", die oft benutzt wird, nichts. Es war keine einzigartige, es IST die breite Masse und man kann kaum was gegen machen.
1
-
@anwa6169 Ich seh, wie Männer als solches beschimpft werden, ständig und unberechtigterweise, einfach schon sobald sie nicht kriegt, was sie will. Zum Beispiel, wenn wir nicht Kuscheln wollen. Ihr projiziert. Google mal, was das bedeutet.
Das ist ja der Punkt, die ganze Strategie basiert auf Beschämung. Wenn du genau drüber nachdenkst, würde es auch garnicht gehen, dass wir so sind. Wir werden nicht für jede dumme Entscheidung aus der Sch.. geholt. Wir werden nicht von allen Seiten geschützt sogar vor Dingen wie Kritik. Aber wenn du zu dem Schluss kämst, könntest du uns nicht als unreif beschimpfen, richtig? Das wäre aber ein ganz schöner Nachteil, hm?
Das mit dem ihr, da musst du halt mal mit Google reden.
Und dass du uns nicht schlechtmachen willst, aber gesagt hast du ja trotzdem, dass von und ja auch viele Kinder sind, oder das wir keine Videospiele spielen sollten, sonst weiß nicht mehr. Und wir hatten nur ein paar Tage Gespräch, bei dem du fast nichts persönliches über mich weißt. Wieviel hört denn der, der mit dir zusammen lebt? Wie viele Frauen sagen, dass Männer nur an das eine denken? Oder das Frauen mehr Empathie haben? Uns wird immer vorgehalten, dass Frauen reifer sind, bessere Entscheidungen treffen, friedlicher sind, das bessere Elternteil sind, Liste ist endlos. Und dann geht man ne Beziehung ein und merkt, dass das alles nur gesagt wird mit dem Ziel, dass wir uns schlechter fühlen. Denn die Statistiken zeigen ein KOMPLETT anderes Bild, eines, dass ihr einfach nicht wahrhaben wollt. Es gibt ne Studie darüber, und es gibt andere Frauen, die es als emotionale Misshandlung betitelt haben. Das ganze fundiert auf einer Strategie von Beschämung.
JPeterson sagte, das muss so sein und ist auch richtig so, denn ohne Beschämung würden wir überhaupt nicht arbeiten gehen.
Wenn du so überzeugt davon bist, dass einige Männer Kinder sind, dann erklär doch mal genauer, warum. Was machen sie? Ich hoffe, es ist nicht wegen Videospielen... Oder dass sie miteinander Witze reißen.
Keiner spielt uns aus. Ihr wehrt euch vehement gegen Kritik. Das ist wirklich los.
1
-
@anwa6169 Ich seh, wie Männer als Kinder beschimpft werden, ständig und zu oft unberechtigterweise, einfach schon sobald sie nicht kriegt, was sie will. Zum Beispiel, wenn wir nicht Kuscheln wollen. Ihr projiziert. Google mal, was das bedeutet.
Wenn du wissen willst, wie das für uns ist, dann stell dir im Kaufhaus vor, wie dein Kind das teuerste als Geschenk will, und wenn du nein sagst, sagt es dir, dass du zu unreif bist, um eine Mutter zu sein. Wirft dir vor, dass du es zu früh bekommen hast. Ja, dann teile und herrsche mal, viel Spaß.
1
-
@anwa6169 Ich seh, wie wir nicht Kinder sind, aber trotzdem als solche angesehen werden, ständig und zu oft unberechtigterweise, einfach schon sobald sie nicht kriegt, was sie will. Zum Beispiel, wenn wir nicht Kuscheln wollen. Ihr projiziert. Google mal, was das bedeutet.
Wenn du wissen willst, wie das für uns ist, dann stell dir vor, wie im Kaufhaus dein Kind das teuerste als Geschenk will, und wenn du nein sagst, sagt es dir, dass du zu unreif bist, um eine Mutter zu sein. Wirft dir vor, dass du zu früh schwanger geworden bist. Ja, dann teile und herrsche mal, viel Spaß. Und nutze deine Kraft mit der Sanftheit, die du von einem Mann erwarten würdest.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Das mit dem ihr, da musst du halt mal mit Google reden.
Also du möchtest uns nicht schlechtmachen, aber gesagt hast du ja trotzdem, dass von und ja auch viele Kinder sind, oder das Videospiele schonal ganz schlecht seien. Und was war nochmal an dem Mann verkehrt, der nicht kuscheln wollte? Irgendwas mit der Intimität... Und wir hatten nur ein paar Tage Gespräch, bei dem du fast nichts persönliches über mich weißt. Wieviel hört denn der, der mit dir zusammen lebt? Was sagen denn andere Frauen alles über Männer? Dass sie reifer sind, bessere Entscheidungen treffen, friedlicher sind, das bessere Elternteil sind, Liste ist endlos, zusammengefasst dass sie die Engel sind und wir die Neandertaler. Und wie werden die Geschlechter in den Medien dargestellt? Homer Simpson? Peter Griffin? Friends ist ja auch nicht so viel besser. Und dann geht man ne Beziehung ein und merkt, das stimmt alles garnicht. Es wird nur gesagt, damit wir uns schlecht fühlen. Die Statistiken zeigen ein KOMPLETT anderes Bild, eines, dass ihr aber nicht wahrhaben wollt. Es gibt ne Studie darüber, und es gibt andere Frauen, die es als emotionale ... betitelt haben.
JPeterson sagte, das muss so sein und ist auch richtig so, denn ohne Beschämung würden wir überhaupt nicht arbeiten gehen.
Wenn du so überzeugt davon bist, dass einige Männer unreif sind, dann erklär doch mal genauer, warum. Was machen sie? Ich hoffe, es ist nicht wegen Videospielen... Oder dass sie miteinander Witze reißen.
Keiner spielt uns aus. Ihr wehrt euch vehement gegen Kritik. Das ist wirklich los.
1
-
@anwa6169 Wenn du wissen willst, wie das für uns ist, dann stell dir vor, wie im Kaufhaus dein Kind das teuerste als Geschenk will, und wenn du nein sagst, sagt es dir, dass du zu unreif bist, um eine Mutter zu sein. Wirft dir vor, dass du zu früh schwanger geworden bist. Wenn du es tadelst, kommt das Kaufhauspersonal zu dir und sagt, dass es hier verboten ist die kleineren zu schickanieren. Ja, dann teile und herrsche mal, viel Glück. Und nutze deine Kraft mit der Sanftheit, die du von einem Mann erwarten würdest.
1
-
@anwa6169 Tja... Das ist eben so auf privaten Plattformen mit der freien Meinungsäußerung. Mir sind auch ein paar Kommentare abhanden gekommen und ich hab welche von dir gelesen, die jetzt nicht mehr angezeigt werden. Im Prinzip schreibe ich die oft in einer Notiz-app, kopiere die rüber, warte paar Minuten und schaue, ob sie noch da sind. Manchmal muss man sie aufteilen in kleinere.
Zum Beispiel die mit "Männer sind alle vergew-irgendwas" sind jetzt weg. Dazu wollte ich ja sagen, erstens, das wird schon so gesagt, es ist nix neues es von dir zu hören. Zweitens ist meine verallgemeinerte Formulierung aufgrund der Plattform, was ich schon mindestens zwei mal gesagt habe, und als Kritik gemeint, während deine wohl eher als Beleidigung gemeint ist.
Und warum jetzt löschen? Damit andere es nicht sehen und kein schlechtes Bild bekommen? Ich hätte sie ja schon gelesen gehabt.
Und dass emotionale Unreife bei beiden Geschlechtern zu finden ist, ist im Prinzip auch in einen Topf werfen, nur auf eine andere Art. Es stimmt technisch gesehen, es gibt auf beiden Seiten Exemplare. Aber die Formulierung wird extra auf eine Weise benutzt, um zu verschleiern, dass es das eine Geschlecht mehr trifft, als das andere. Und im Hinblick auf den Ausdruck da oben, dass alle Männer ver-irgendwas sind, stell dir folgendes vor. Wenn es jetzt nun das andere Geschlecht gewesen wäre, das emotionale Unreife ausweist, wie wäre die Gesellschaft damit umgegangen? Genau. Sie hätten es rausposaunt und es als Vorwurf verpackt uns an den Kopf geworfen, so wie.. immer. Jetzt überleg nochmal, wer in Wirklichkeit mehr emotionale Unreife an den Tag legt...
Nur weil wir unsere Emotionen selten zeigen, heißt das nicht, dass wir keine haben. Es kann genauso gut bedeuten, dass wir einfach gezwungen sind sie besser unter Kontrolle zu halten als ihr.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Das mit den Kommentaren ist halt so, das hab ich ja 2 mal gesagt. Warum ich ihr so oft benutze, bzw benutzen muss. Ich schreib oft erst in einer Notiz app und kopiere es dann rüber, und den Text aufteilen ist auch oft vonnöten. Man kann auch nicht erklären was los ist, denn die AI ist dafür sensibilisiert worden..
Dafür haben Leute ja jetzt ein Wort erfunden, enshittification, für was die Plattformen machen. Lol.
Das mit Männer sind alle verge-irgendwas mag jetzt nicht mehr angezeigt werden, aber gesehen hab ich es trotzdem. Dazu wollte ich ja sagen, erstens, das wird schon so benutzt gegen uns, es ist nix neues es von dir zu hören. Zweitens meine verallgemeinerte Formulierung ist auf Basis von Argumenten und eine Kritik zur Verbesserung, während deine Formulierung wohl eher als Beleidigung gemeint war.
Und warum jetzt löschen? Damit andere es nicht sehen und kein schlechtes Bild bekommen? Ich hätte sie ja schon gelesen gehabt.
Und dass emotionale Unreife bei beiden Geschlechtern zu finden ist, ist im Prinzip auch in einen Topf werfen, nur auf eine andere Art. Es stimmt technisch gesehen, es gibt auf beiden Seiten Exemplare. Aber die Formulierung wird extra auf eine Weise benutzt, um zu verschleiern, dass es das eine Geschlecht mehr trifft, als das andere. Und im Hinblick auf den Ausdruck da oben, dass alle Männer ver-irgendwas sind, stell dir folgendes vor. Wenn es jetzt nun das andere Geschlecht gewesen wäre, das emotionale Unreife ausweist, wie wäre die Gesellschaft damit umgegangen? Genau. Sie hätten es rausposaunt und es als Vorwurf verpackt uns an den Kopf geworfen, so wie.. immer. Jetzt überleg nochmal, wer in Wirklichkeit mehr emotionale Unreife an den Tag legt...
Nur weil wir unsere Emotionen selten zeigen, heißt das nicht, dass wir keine haben. Es kann genauso gut bedeuten, dass wir einfach gezwungen sind sie besser unter Kontrolle zu halten als ihr.
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Tja, wo hast du dich rumgetrieben in jungen Jahren? Ich kenne Frauen, die haben sich betrunken und dann fremde Kerle zu sich in die Wohnung eingeladen, wo sie ganz alleine waren, und nachher nannten sie es V. Sie brachten sich in eine Situation, in der sie sich nichtmal mehr trauten nein zu sagen, obwohl das vielleicht ihre Rettung gewesen wäre. Und das, wenn man sich mal umhört, ist nicht mal was ungewöhnliches. Männer können oft nicht begreifen, wie ihr euch, sozusagen gerne, in diese Zwickmühlen bringt. Naja, aber ihr seid ja stark und unabhängig.
Und das mit dem in einen Topf werfen ist immer noch nicht vergleichbar. Ich kann sagen, dass Frauen Schuhe sammeln, und statt zu antworten "ja, das tun tatsächlich viele, aber ich eher weniger" sind die meisten sofort beleidigt. Bei Schuhen nicht so sehr, da es ein etabliertes Clichée ist, aber bei vielen ähnlichen, ganz normalen Dingen schon. Warum reagiert ihr so? Weil wenn ich anfange mit.. meiner Erfahrung nach, Frauen.. dann weißt du schon, dass es kein gutes Bild auf dich wirft und willst meine Erfahrungen sofort als belanglos hinstellen, und am besten verhindern, dass ich es sage oder noch mehr sage.
Sage ich es trotzdem, dann pickt ihr euch das allernegativste, was euch über uns einfällt, heraus und schlägt damit zurück. Da kann ich dich sehr wohl in einen Topf werfen, du reagierst so, wie alle anderen. Du magst es zwar anders ausgedrückt haben, mit dem was wäre wenn ich sage, aber vom Sinn her sagtest du Schlussendlich dasselbe. Einen Mann hab ich noch nie so reagieren sehen. Hab ich gesagt, dass alle von euch Diebe sind, die einen in der Scheidung ausrauben? Nein, oder? Und das andere Männer euch gegen V verteidigen UND bei den Scheidungen für euch den besseren Deal rausholen kommt ebenfalls nicht zu Wort.
Und dann sagst du hinterher noch so blöd, dass es mich ja nicht beleidigen sollte. Du warst aber beleidigt.
Das sind halt eure Methoden, um euch als Engel auszugeben und uns als Bösewichte hinzustellen. Kannst dir ja vorstellen, dass es nervt. Kannst du dir auch vorstellen, dass es zum Problem wird, wenn wir euch nichts mehr sagen können? Da seid ihr dann in einem Topf, ob ihr wollt oder nicht, wenn wir lernen, es geht mit einer nicht, denken wir, es geht mit der anderen auch nicht, und obendrein geht es dann mit der anderen wirklich nicht.
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Tja, wo hast du dich rumgetrieben in jungen Jahren? Ich kenne welche, die haben sich betrunken und dann fremde Kerle zu sich in die Wohnung eingeladen, wo sie ganz alleine waren, und nachher nannten sie es V. Sie brachten sich in eine Situation, in der sie sich nichtmal mehr trauten nein zu sagen, obwohl das vielleicht ihre Rettung gewesen wäre. Und das, wenn man sich mal umhört, ist nicht mal was ungewöhnliches. Die ganze Männerschublade kann oft nicht begreifen, wie ihr euch, sozusagen gerne, in diese Zwickmühlen bringt. Das ist so zahlreich, dass ich auch nicht mehr weiß, ob ich Mitgefühl zeigen soll, oder dich für... Naja, aber ihr seid ja stark und unabhängig.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Und das mit dem in einen Topf werfen ist immer noch nicht vergleichbar. Ich kann sowas sagen, wie dass Frauen Schuhe sammeln, und statt zu antworten, ja, das tun tatsächlich viele, aber ich eher weniger... sind die meisten sofort beleidigt. Bei Schuhen nicht so sehr, da es ein etabliertes Clichée ist, aber bei vielen ähnlichen, ganz normalen Dingen schon. Warum reagiert ihr so? Weil wenn ich anfange mit.. meiner Erfahrung nach, Frauen.. dann weißt du schon über deine eigenen negativen Seiten bescheid und willst meine Erfahrungen schnellstens als belanglos hinstellen, und am besten verhindern, dass ich es überhaupt sage oder noch mehr sage.
Sage ich es trotzdem, dann pickt ihr euch das allernegativste, was euch über uns einfällt, heraus und schlägt damit zurück. Da kann ich dich sehr wohl in einen Topf werfen, du reagierst so, wie alle anderen. Du magst es zwar anders ausgedrückt haben, mit dem was wäre wenn ich sage, aber schlussendlich kam derselbe Satz. Einen Mann hab ich noch nie so reagieren sehen. Hab ich gesagt, dass alle von euch Diebe sind, die einen in der Trennung ausnehmen? Nein, oder? Und das andere Männer euch gegen V und bei Scheidungen mehr verteidigen, als ihn, kommt natürlich ebenfalls nicht zu Wort.
Und dann sagst du hinterher noch so bl_d, dass es mich ja nicht beleidigen sollte. Und selbst?
Das sind halt eure Methoden, um euch als Engel auszugeben und uns als Bösewichte hinzustellen. Kannst dir ja vorstellen, dass es nervt. Kannst du dir auch vorstellen, dass es zum Problem wird, wenn wir euch nichts mehr sagen können? Da seid ihr dann in einem Topf, ob ihr wollt oder nicht, wenn wir lernen, es geht mit einer nicht, denken wir, es geht mit der anderen auch nicht, und obendrein geht es dann mit der anderen wirklich nicht.
1
-
@anwa6169 Und das mit dem in einen Topf werfen ist immer noch nicht vergleichbar. Ich kann sowas sagen, wie dass Frauen Schuhe sammeln, und statt zu antworten, dass das tatsächlich viele tun, aber du eher weniger... sind die meisten sofort beleidigt. Bei Schuhen jetzt nicht, weil es ein etabliertes Clichée ist, aber bei vielen ähnlichen, ganz normalen Dingen. Warum reagiert ihr so? Weil wenn ich anfange mit.. meiner Erfahrung nach, Frauen.. dann weißt du schon über deine eigenen negativen Seiten bescheid und willst meine Erfahrungen schnellstens als belanglos hinstellen, und am besten verhindern, dass ich es überhaupt sage oder noch mehr sage.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Sage ich es trotzdem, dann pickt ihr euch das allernegativste, was euch über uns einfällt, heraus und schlägt damit zurück. Da kann ich dich sehr wohl in einen Topf werfen, du reagierst so, wie alle anderen. Du magst es zwar anders ausgedrückt haben, mit dem was wäre wenn ich sage, aber schlussendlich kam derselbe Satz. Einen Mann hab ich noch nie so reagieren sehen. Hab ich gesagt, dass alle von euch Diebe sind, die einen in der Trennung ausnehmen? Nein, oder? Und das andere Männer euch gegen V und bei Scheidungen mehr verteidigen, als ihn, kommt natürlich ebenfalls nicht zu Wort.
Und dann sagst du hinterher noch so bl_d, dass es mich ja nicht beleidigen sollte. Und selbst?
Das sind halt eure Methoden, um euch als Engel auszugeben und uns als Bösewichte hinzustellen. Kannst dir ja vorstellen, dass es nervt. Kannst du dir auch vorstellen, dass es zum Problem wird, wenn wir euch nichts mehr sagen können? Da seid ihr dann in einem Topf, ob ihr wollt oder nicht, wenn wir lernen, es geht mit einer nicht, denken wir, es geht mit der anderen auch nicht, und obendrein geht es dann mit der anderen wirklich nicht.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Genau. Der Vater hat sich vor seiner Frau an dich rangemacht, vor seinem Kind am besten auch wollte er gleich zur Sache gehen. Und das hast du vor 30 Jahren nicht gemerkt, aber jetzt. Mhm. Und weil er abwesend geguckt hat, hätte er dich fast ver. Klar. Hörst du dir eigentlich mal selbst zu? Und dann wird erwartet, dass man euch ernst nimmt. Auch vor Gericht ohne Beweise, sondern nach Gefühlen. Mhm. Du hättest es auch anders formulieren können, dass es glaubhafter klingt, wie es andere auch machen. Es einfach nicht erwähnen, dass er es vor seiner Frau getan hat. Oder einfach gleich behaupten, dass er es getan hat. Schon hättest du weitaus mehr als nur eine Gefolgschaft nickender Leute, die das Beschimpfen des anderen Geschlechts mit Freuden für dich übernehmen.
Milliarden solcher Behauptungen fliegen durch die Luft. Wenn man genauer nachfragt, kommt man oft der Täuschung auf die Spur, aber wer macht das schon? Wenn du das über den Vater behauptest, wie viel Wahrheit steckt dann in dem über die Gleichaltrigen, auf der Party? Hast ja auch soviele liebensvolle getroffen, hindert dich aber nicht dran trotzdem ein generell schlechtes Bild abzuwerfen. Und wenn man es in Frage stellt? Dann ist es Hass und die AI lässt es auch ungern durch.
Bescheuert ist das. Deshalb kritisiere ich so viel.
Couchsurfing ist, was ich meine, dass ihr euch in diese Zwickmühlen begebt, freiwillig. Meiner Tochter bleibt das auf jedem Fall verboten, außer vielleicht wenn sie Karate lernt. Und dennoch ist dir nichts passiert.
1
-
@anwa6169 Genau. Der Vater hat sich vor seiner Frau an dich rangemacht, vor seinem Kind am besten auch wollte er gleich zur Sache gehen. Und das hast du vor 30 Jahren nicht gemerkt, aber jetzt. Mhm. Und weil er abwesend geguckt hat, hätte er dich fast ver. Klar. Und dann wird erwartet, dass man euch ernst nimmt und euch immer glaubt, auch vor Gericht. Du hättest es auch anders formulieren können, dass es glaubhafter klingt, wie es andere auch machen. Es einfach nicht erwähnen, dass er es vor seiner Frau getan hat. Oder einfach gleich behaupten, dass er es getan hat. Schon hättest du weitaus mehr als nur eine Gefolgschaft nickender Leute, die das Beschimpfen von uns mit Freuden für dich übernehmen. Milliarden solcher Behauptungen fliegen durch die Luft. Wenn man genauer nachfragt, kommt man oft der Täuschung auf die Spur, aber wer macht das schon? Das mag die Gesellschaft nicht und AI auch nicht. Wenn du das über den Vater behauptest, wie viel Wahrheit steckt dann in deinen anderen Begegnungen??? Hast ja auch soviele liebensvolle getroffen, hindert dich aber nicht dran trotzdem ein generell schlechtes Bild abzuwerfen.
Bescheuert ist das. Deshalb kritisiere ich so viel.
Couchsurfing ist, was ich meine, dass ihr euch in diese Zwickmühlen begebt, freiwillig. Und war ja bei weitem nicht die einzige. Meiner Tochter bleibt das auf jedem Fall verboten, außer vielleicht wenn sie Karate lernt. Und dennoch ist dir nichts passiert. Hm.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Du magst ein etwas positiveres Bild abgeben mit deinem dass du viele liebe Männer getroffen hast, vermutlich erhoffst du dir dich damit von anderen abzuheben. Aber im großen und ganzen ist es immer noch ein ganz schön negatives Bild und damit fällst du genau in die Schublade, so wie ich es von Anfang an gesagt habe, und meine ihrs stimmen einfach mit dir überein. Dass ihr nicht aus dem Haus gehen könnt, ohne angesprochen zu werden. Es gibt vereinzelte Frauen, bei denen klingt es wirklich positiv, nicht nur so scheinheilig positiv. Wir wissen mittlerweile, dass ein einfaches Hallo schon als Belästigung angesehen wird, wenn der Mann nicht attraktiv genug ist. Das ist schon bekannt. Einerseits seid ihr so voller Ängste, dass ihr jedes Husten als eine V darstellt, andererseits bringt es euch aber nicht dazu sicherer durch das Leben zu gehen, irgendwie musste jemand dich doch aus dem Bett schmeißen. Ich hab das sehr wohl rausgehört, wie leicht du es ihnen gemacht hast. Ob dir was passiert hast dem puren Zufall überlassen. Das meinte ich mit den Zwickmühlen. Aber trotzdem ist dir nichts passiert, hm? Komisch. Überall siehst du Gefahren, aber das hatte dich damals nicht gehindert in diese reinzurennen. Das ist scheinheilig, bzw hypokritisch. Du kannst vermutlich auch nicht erkennen, wo echte Gefahren sind, also pauschalisierst du auf alle, sogar auf den Vater, der abwesend guckt, und versuchst hinterher es etwas zurück zu drehen, da dir schlussendlich bewusst wird, dass du doch nicht damit argumentieren kannst, dass dir was passiert ist. Übrigens, welche Frau hätte das mit dem Vater schon so unlogisch ausgedrückt wie du, statt es auszulassen, dass seine Frau dabei war. Oder eben gleich behaupten er hätte dich...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anwa6169 Ich hab seit längerem kein Bock mehr auf dieses Gespräch. Einerseits kann man hier nicht normal schreiben, was ich nun vermutlich 5x gesagt habe und du es immer noch nicht gerafft hast und stattdessen erwartest, dass ich deine übertriebenen Ängste raffe. Du denkst nur an dich, womit du ja leider schon wieder in eine Schublade fällst. Alle, die sich darüber ärgern in eine Schublade gesteckt zu werden, ärgern sich deswegen, weil sie eben da rein gehören. Andererseits, alles, was ich hier rausfinde, ist, dass ich damit richtig lag, was ich anfangs sagte. Das ist nix neues für mich. Je mehr man nachhakt und sie reden lässt, desto mehr fällt die Inkonsistenz auf, es ist immer dasselbe. Und dann wollt ihr ernst genommen werden. Kennst du den Spruch, einer Frau muss man nicht widersprechen, sie wird es selber tun? Ja, dann ist meine Reaktion nicht das Gelbe vom Ei. Genau. Darum bleib ich lieber allein. Versuchs bei nem anderen, gibt genug Simps, die dir den Unsinn abkaufen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gabrieleseydel1210 Ja, da müssen wir genau drauf achten, was da passiert und wie wir das ausdrücken in einer Diskussion.
Ich weiß nicht, wie oft die Impf-Nebenwirkungen auftreten, aber es scheint bei mir im Umkreis recht regelmäßig zu sein, dass ältere Leute für 1-2 Tage nach der Impfung ausfallen. Wenn nun im Altenheim die Impfwelle kommt und alle erstmal krank sind für 2 Tage... Ja, das würde ich schon als Ausnahmezustand bezeichnen. Wenn dadurch aber weniger Spätfolgen oder schwere Corona-Verläufe stattfinden, war der Ausnahmezustand vermutlich das notwendige übel. Das sagt das RKI und ich denke, das stimmt größtenteils.
Wie hoch die Quote ist bei Jugendlichen für Impf-Nebenwirkungen weiß ich momentan auch nicht. Die Quote für schwere Corona-Verläufe ist jedenfalls sehr klein, und das, finde ich, spricht gegen eine Impfung. Und da wurden eben schon Zahlen gefälscht und Falschaussagen veröffentlicht, um die Jugendlichen zur Impfung zu bewegen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mostlysunny582 I think you're a 60iq person. Maybe you took issue that I said, spewing out bullsh_t online is a problem for advancing our knowledge. You're not really addressing my argument, you're trying to beat it down as if you're desperate to win. Like with "nonsensical", you don't take the time to understand it, then halfway through your comment you halfway retract your statement. That was really dumb.
Both our examples actually happen in real life. The important question is at which rate. And "it is very plausible" from your perspective is not a valid way to completely dismiss the other.
Especially at the end, when you say "then turn around to make an argument based on correlation and causation" shows how stupid your whole comment is. Where the fk did you see correlation and causation in my example? What's really nonsensical is the way you're attacking my example (btw, it was just an example, lol). Use your brain more, and your mouth less.
Also, don't respond. You just get ignored, I won't read any more bullcrap.
1
-
@Linnetd Nope, wrong. You're not phrasing your things with enough precision, your comment is a facts-with-opinions-yoghurt.
If they haven't experienced sex work yet for themselves, they are IN EVERY CASE seeking it out because others tell them how they see it.
If they continue with their sex work, it's mostly because they feel bad about doing it, and that makes it damaging. People who believe they're sick get sick.
There are tons of feminist women shouting "my body my choice" and happily going into online sex work, convinced for decades that it has no effect. Only after 1-2 decades, when they hit the wall, they realize society doesn't like sluts, and they regret what they've done.
It's still unclear whether sex work in itself is actually harmful or not, it's just loud opinions crying from all sides, some only cry so much because they think women deserve even more respect and status than they already have. It's how society judges sex work that puts people at a disadvantage.
I however have researched a bit, and there are some very reasonable opinions that defend sex work, people who have interviewed sex workers AND the police about this topic. People who weren't just running around ignorantly vomiting their opinions into social media, like you just did.
And industries are often be exploitative, that's nothing new, like the music industry for example. Yet some (artists) decide to accept the downsides for what they want to achieve (get known, gain popularity, fulfill their creativity, earn money, even if it's just a fraction of what the industry earns from their work).
Then there's online sex work, can you tell me how exactly only fans is exploitative? Because it's not, they sign a contract and within it's limits they can do what they want. Any danger they put themselves in is completely on their own.
Which brings me to that I believe women are completely willing to endanger themselves for chads and tyrones. I've heard from friends that they invited drunk strangers into their house, and of course later said they've been raped, while probably they've been just too uncomfortable to tell him "no". We are already constantly making society safer for women, but women frequently choose to break this safety for a short thrill. If you do this and then feel afraid and uncomfortable, the blame falls on you, not on the rest of society which you expect to fix your problem for you.
1
-
@Linnetd No, people who seek out sex work have no experience with it, so they can't seek it out because it's destructive, they can only because other people told them how they think it is.
If they're depressed and already in a weakened mental state and go into sex work, they can't really defend their image or status when society puts them down, probably they think they deserve being put down.
That's probably why you said it is destructive for the majority of people, but not for all of them. Because the healthy ones can defend themselves, which makes sex work in itself not harmful. What's actually harmful for the sex workers is how society reacts to it.
And the industry has nothing to do with it, if you can use platforms like only f, where you are the one responsible for everything. Women love to blame everyone else except themselves, but when on sites like this there is nobody else to be blamed.
It's probably the same effect with sex work like the ones from the study with the scar. The one where they painted a scar on womens faces and removed it at the last second without their knowledge, and those women who just thought they are scarred reported to be heavily discriminated against. Same in sex work, if they feel discriminated against, it will harm them, doesn't mean they are actually harmed from the outside.
1
-
1
-
@mostlysunny582 Okay, I'll entertain that brainless idiocy of a comment. But just once. Afterwards consider yourself ignored.
"They do it for the easy money or they don't have any other skill to work" does not nullify that they still have mental problems, and usually because they have no other skill they develop mental problems, which can be before they go into sex work. Sex work can bring those problems to light, but that doesn't mean it creates them.
"It is very plausible that their choice in sex work over the years caused them to have mental health issues which leads to drug use."
It is plausible, but that isn't what you people are saying. You are saying that this is not just plausible but a definitive fact, which it really is not. What I said was another explanation for what's happening, an example for how it could be differently.
You're incorrectly reproducing what people have been saying, just in an attempt to refute me. It does not refute me, it makes your comment dumb.
"I can also use the "Correlation does not mean causation" argument against your claim as well. How laughable for you to say "Correlation does not mean causation" then turn around to make an argument based on correlation and causation."
This was pretty much the dumbest part. Nothing about my example was about correlation or causation, I think you might not even know what correlation and causation means. What I said was just another possible, unexplored example for an explanation. An example. That's why I started my 2nd sentence with "for example" and later said "we have no way of knowing". This is the opposite of correlation or causation. Please visit wiki to learn a few definitions, so I don't have to deal with people who don't know how to correctly use language.
Also, I have the feeling that I have to repeat myself for my words to get through to a person like you, so I'll say this again. Consider yourself ignored. Go talk to someone that has only 3 brain cells and is on your level.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
52:55 another bs opinion that gets us nowhere. He's saying a few good things, but inbetween he's inconspicuously putting the blame on men, as if women were infallible. However in reality women are responsible for a lot of damage as well, they are hurting others emotionally and not only aren't these women realizing it, they often also outrage when you critique them. Many men who "need to heal" get their wounds from this in the first place, but so do women. NOBODY EVER ADDRESSES THIS.
The world cannot just heal if we're being ignorant about half of the problem. Sweet words won't change anything.
A survey has shown that wifes in "happy marriages" hurt their loved husbands feelings on a daily basis without noticing. Those women don't understand the problem when you explain it to them either, unless men use the exact words "you hurt my feelings" (which aren't words they often use). And these are only the happy families, how about all the unhappy or broken ones, where women can get extremely spiteful? You need more examples? I have probably like a thousand.
If we keep up the notion that women are all special and all angels and men are to blame for everything, the world's not gonna heal, ever.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1