|
Ytlaya posted:I get the impression Laci Greene is generally well intentioned but not particularly bright. She strikes me as more of a Joe Rogan sort of figure than someone who has (or is likely to gain) any actual commitment towards the more bigoted ideology of the alt-right (I think someone else made this comparison). She seems like the sort of person who will agree with just about anything provided you state it in a friendly tone and doesn't enjoy having strong disagreements with people. I wouldn't write her off as dim. I'd call it ignorance. While admittedly I've only watched a few, my understanding is that her sex-ed vids and advocacy are well informed. Frankly I think what's she most bonding with the Man-o-sphere on are the 'radical' elements of the far left who take take protest either too far (relative to the offense) or to absurd places. Being harassed online, doxxed, etc. I'm sure didn't help and now she's being fed a steady stream of this poo poo. I apologize for being a Laci Green apologist. I'm not sure what happened.
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 10:33 |
|
|
fallenturtle posted:I wouldn't write her off as dim. I'd call it ignorance. While admittedly I've only watched a few, my understanding is that her sex-ed vids and advocacy are well informed. Someone described her as a people pleaser who's trying to make friends with both SJWs and the Alt-Right. Unfortunately she doesn't seem to get, or doesn't want to admit, that one of those groups is well-meaning if not always well-executed and the other is borderline to outright a hate group.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
Pittsburgh Lambic posted:i'm hesitant to give any definition for a word that a majority of this thread uses to justify hatred of people they don't agree with You don't have to provide any definition. Just tell us the minimum amount of evidence you need to know if someone is racist according to you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 02:21
|
|
|
Y'all fuckers don't need to jump on every poster. Though LFM could stand to be less glib in his original post, y'all didn't need to jump in on the special needs thing. Chill. Direct your anger at dumb youtube men (and I suppose women now  )Lightning Lord posted:From what I understand, IQ tests are only useful when they're part of the spectrum of educational tools, not when used as the sole determining factor of intelligence like Molyneux wants, and when low scores are seen as a failing of the education system and something to be improved rather than ammunition against a particular group of people. This. What is the standard measure for IQ? Well usually it's pattern identification, knowledge of grammar and vocabulary and so on. How do you test that? How do you know your tests are accurate? If a person sucks in math, but can deconstruct the messages of James Joyce does that mean they have low/average IQ? The entire test is usually used as a sort of "this is the ballpark of how smart people are, sorta". It's honestly barely even useful there because the "average IQ" needs to constantly be re-adjusted as information becomes more easily available to people thanks to the internet and improvements to the education system.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
fallenturtle posted:She's also been getting poo poo because of this whole sex is male/female thing yet when she explains it more fully (in that Ruben interview) she basically says sex is primary male and female but that there is a spectrum and stuff in between. I think she needs to work on her terminology because its biting her in the rear end. For example in that same explanation on sex she said its binary but on a spectrum, which is obviously an oxymoron. Academically, the idea was that sex and gender were separate things (though obviously there is often a good deal of correlation between them). In some of the lefty circles I run in, I have seen (I think) the idea that talking about sex and gender as separate things serves as a way to exclude trans people, and even mentioning "biological sex" is basically just giving ammunition to TERFs and Christianist Culture Warriors.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
Yeah. The argument is that TERFs argue that a Patriarchy society doesn't oppress women because of the social constructs of Gender, but because of biological sex and what's between their legs. Therefor, Trans women do still have male privilege because they have male genitals and ave no right to call themselves women or feminists. I don't think I ever saw that int he TERF wild though. THen again I don't tread in TERF waters beyond this thread and people I follow on Twitter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:Who writes rationalwiki? Divabot and friends? Read around that site a bit. What's the pointo of it? Its like a significantly shittier version of Wikipedia with way worse sourcing and citations, all too obvious slants in their articles and some really bad and often contradictory info.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
I think TERFs also believe that trans people are a way for men to infiltrate and destroy feminism
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Read around that site a bit. I don't actually know. I think it might be a goon project? Or associated with a goon... but I might have it mixed up with another site. I linked because it looked like a good article on the subject at hand.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Read around that site a bit. I think it exists to counter Conservapedia.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:I think it exists to counter Conservapedia. But wasn't Conservapedia created to counter Wikipedia?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:I think it exists to counter Conservapedia. I'm pretty sure Rationalwiki pre-dates Conservapedia. I think it's mostly a bunch of rationalists that happen not to be complete douchebags.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
I just checked and Conservapedia was started November 21, 2006 and RationalWiki 2.0 was created as an open editing wiki on May 22, 2007. SAclopedia is older than both, being started in 2004
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:I'm pretty sure Rationalwiki pre-dates Conservapedia. I think it's mostly a bunch of rationalists that happen not to be complete douchebags. It was created directly to debunk conservapedia. It's mostly comedic but occasionally has some good articles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
Zenithe posted:It was created directly to debunk conservapedia. It's mostly comedic but occasionally has some good articles. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:From what I understand, IQ tests are only useful when they're part of the spectrum of educational tools, not when used as the sole determining factor of intelligence like Molyneux wants, and when low scores are seen as a failing of the education system and something to be improved rather than ammunition against a particular group of people. I administer psychometric testing for a living, and this is basically accurate. I give a lot of IQ tests because they're required by the government to get SSI for an Intellectual Disability, but it's never the only test and we also do an interview to try to figure out anything that might make said IQ test less than accurate. IQ is a useful tool, but it's not the god of all understanding of human intelligence.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 05:49
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:I don't actually know. I think it might be a goon project? Or associated with a goon... but I might have it mixed up with another site. Goon divabot is associated with Rationalwiki, and has lamented both the current connotation of the name, and the difficulty of getting high quality articles from the general public.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
Jethro posted:The right basically believes they are the same and that your gender (which is the same as your sex) is totally defined by your X/Y chromosomes (as indicated by your external genitalia sometime before birth). This is a semantical tangent, but sex, as I understand it, is identified through a combination of chromosomes, reproductive body bits, and hormones. When you have a mismatched combination you are intersex. From its usage I think intersex refers exclusively to when this mismatch is caused naturally. That is a mismatch that happened because of taking hormones or through surgery would not be intersex. Is there a term for that? The closest I could find was transsexed, but that means post-op and thus wouldn't cover people who have only undergone hormone therapy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
So when Pewdiepie made that dumb Holocaust "joke" a few weeks ago, I honestly thought it was a lame, misguided attempt at humor, but didn't think he actually held any racial prejudices like Sargon, ChrisRayGun, et al. But now he's apparently defending some right-wing, Polish politician who said that women have naturally lower IQs than men. Guess he has more in common with Jontron than I thought. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 10:44
|
|
|
It often starts like that. "[anti-semitic joke], haha Jews right?" "Dude, that's not okay." Then depending on their capacity for self reflection either. "I'm sorry, I didn't realize I overstepped so much." or "Well screw you, I'm going to listen to this guy who says it is okay. Oh cool, he has lots of other opinions too." It used to be a slower process but I guess in our internet connected global village superhighway it can happen in accelerated time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 10:58
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Read around that site a bit. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Sargon_of_Akkad http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hans-Hermann_Hoppe http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian They are good for internet culture stuff. That's what I use them for anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 11:02
|
|
|
When Rationalwiki is good, it's super good. But when it's bad, ho boy. Hope you like barely contained Islamophobia,STEMlord smugery and terrible dead memes
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 11:38
|
|
|
Rationalwiki does not believe in the eternal science of Marxism, they will never truly be rational.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 12:09
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:So when Pewdiepie made that dumb Holocaust "joke" a few weeks ago, I honestly thought it was a lame, misguided attempt at humor, but didn't think he actually held any racial prejudices like Sargon, ChrisRayGun, et al. But now he's apparently defending some right-wing, Polish politician who said that women have naturally lower IQs than men. Guess he has more in common with Jontron than I thought.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 12:26
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/notch/status/887125928924647425 the fact that a billion couldn't provide him happiness due to the empty nature of his soul makes me feel fuzzy inside
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 12:40
|
|
|
Zikan posted:https://twitter.com/notch/status/887125928924647425 It's deeply comforting that money does indeed corrupt people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 12:46
|
|
|
Somfin posted:It's deeply comforting that money does indeed corrupt people. I believe it would not corrupt me and I'm willing to put myself at risk to find out. Please donate to my patreon to help in this scientific endeavor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
Somfin posted:It's deeply comforting that money does indeed corrupt people. Or at the very least doesn't inherently solve all your personal problems
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 14:29
|
|
|
Rich people and twitter is proving to be an unexpectedly interesting combination. Trying to imagine in 100 years when they look back at the lives of early 2000s billionaires and go through Notch's tweets. They being the last ten thousand humans living on the floating artificial island. Carecat fucked around with this message at 14:35 on Jul 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
SSNeoman posted:This. The response back is the G (generalized intelligence) argument. Basically, being smart at one thing is being smart at all things as far as potential goes. I think it's BS, and apparently there's a good bit of science that's been written since The Bell Curve came out saying that G is not as well credited of an idea as was thought at the time. But apparently 20 year old social science is what we should base everything on forever. quote:The entire test is usually used as a sort of "this is the ballpark of how smart people are, sorta". It's honestly barely even useful there because the "average IQ" needs to constantly be re-adjusted as information becomes more easily available to people thanks to the internet and improvements to the education system. Somewhat. The issue as always is that people are now starting to use it to grade countries. As in, these countries are low IQ, or these racial populations are lower IQ. And if you also say that IQ is 80% genetic (which is something else they assert), you've just made an argument for the genetic inferiority of these people. It's hyper disgusting, but get some level of traction since science is objective in many people's eyes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
It's more like being smart at one thing often gives you tools to bootstrap other skills. If you know how to play the piano, you'll generally be quicker to pick up a trumpet than someone who hasn't played any instrument before. You already have some idea of the music theory underlying the instrument, and just need the mechanical skills and muscle memory. Even the mechanical skills will be easier to acquire, given your dexterity from playing piano. So in reality, it's less like there's some fixed 'G' underlying human capacity for learning, and more like there's a snowball of 'G' that makes acquiring new knowledge easier and quicker for every piece of knowledge you already know. To Illustrate this, let's consider that pianist again. Assume they spent their entire life in NYC. Take that musical genius and stick him in the Amazon and see where his intelligence gets him. Probably be dead really quick right? Yet there are uncontacted tribes that have lived in similar conditions for generations. Are they geniuses and the pianist dumb? No, not really... considering I'm doubting the tribesmen would know what a drat piano is much less how to play it. And why is hat? Because intelligence has a huge component of 'being adapted to your environment', and unsurprisingly, the IQ test is slanted toward scoring higher those persons 'adapted to urbanized/suburbanites western culture'
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:It often starts like that. Happily it also works the other way, I went from milquetoast unthinking liberal to radicalized communist in the space of a couple of years thanks to UKMT.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:So when Pewdiepie made that dumb Holocaust "joke" a few weeks ago, I honestly thought it was a lame, misguided attempt at humor, but didn't think he actually held any racial prejudices like Sargon, ChrisRayGun, et al. But now he's apparently defending some right-wing, Polish politician who said that women have naturally lower IQs than men. Guess he has more in common with Jontron than I thought. This is why you don't tolerate "jokes" like this. No amount of bullshit "Oh but nothing should be off limits in comedy!" can excuse it. Carlin did not make Jew killing jokes. Pryor did not make Jew killing jokes. Mel Brooks did not make Jew killing jokes. We don't joke about certain things, even the "shock" comedians generally agree on this, but you get some idiots who go "No, comedy is sacred!" not realizing that words have power.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rap4B0gMaOQ a story from personal experience posted:you should divorce him and screw the painter down the street who hasn't had a job in 15 years, survives off government grants, but knows how to make a mean latte and an orgasm stefan, nicest guy posted:my question is: why was there no friend zone before the welfare state --- there's no friend zone in Shakespeare "deep biological truths posted:a woman who was biologically designed to acquire resources for her offspring --- basically men were evolved to gather resources to access the eggs of the highest quality around what posted:it doesn't really matter because she can just go marry the state eggs posted:[...] eggs [...] crime weed fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Jul 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
What is Romeo and Juliet if not the story of the montagues and capulets attempting to create the concept of the friend zone in order to stop teen suicide?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 16:13
|
|
|
Eggs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Somewhat. The issue as always is that people are now starting to use it to grade countries. As in, these countries are low IQ, or these racial populations are lower IQ. And if you also say that IQ is 80% genetic (which is something else they assert), you've just made an argument for the genetic inferiority of these people. It's hyper disgusting, but get some level of traction since science is objective in many people's eyes. The problem comes when you start looking at it through a lens of HBD or whatever they're calling scientific racism now, or when James Watson asserts that 'West Africans are less intelligent' as just a thing that is rather than (if true) an effect caused by something. Interestingly, when a recent study in the UK showed that white males from low income families were the worst overall academic performers, the genetic arguments all evaporated into thin air. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 16:34
|
|
|
*posts hour and a half long video proclaiming the genetic inferiority of the white male. Puffs on bubble pipe, sips glass of apple juice labeled 'WHISKEY'* If I had any talent at all I think it would be fun to run with the inverse of Sargon's gimmick. Loudly proclaim to be a centrist and classical liberal but only cite Marxist sources, champion third world Maoism, and only support super obscure local socialist party candidates and Jill Stein.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
Great Metal Jesus posted:
I would love to see this done in the most cringiest, close-to-copyright-infringement way as possible. Like 'Hammurabi of Babylon'. Fakedit: Also, it makes me happy that Anita gets to chill in the Google search results with the other ancient leaders in the 'also searched for', while the youtube guy gets relegated to 'Did you mean Carl?'  Christ Carl looks like a miserable greasy tool in that image. Smile more you big lug!
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 10:33 |
|
|
JVNO posted:Christ Carl looks like a miserable greasy tool in that image. Smile more you big lug! That's why I said the only time I've ever seen him look normal was that picture of him with the other YouTubers hanging out. He's still a terrible human being, but at least he looks chill there instead of whatever the gently caress he is otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 17:15
|
|
