Lovechop posted:

wasn't his original username like, @firedfortruth or something? guy is basically just jerking off to himself at this point

nickmeister posted:

little munchkin posted:

probably not news to many people in here, but Anthony Fantano is getting outed as an alt-right guy at the moment. should be a spicy hot "I was only being racist/sexist as a funny joke" rebuttal video coming out soon
"

BigRed0427 posted:

https://twitter.com/UnburntWitch/status/916120576825090048

Welcome to the poo poo show ladies and gentlemen.

Reading all this bullshit makes me wanna break something.

Pembroke Fuse posted:

I knew a lot of computer engineers who were "self made" dipshits, but didn't see them sliding into Nazism so quickly. Not sure about the S and M portions of STEM though. Scientists usually have some kind of understanding of social dependency (standing on the soldier of giants, etc) and Medicine requires at least a tiny amount of empathy.

Groovelord Neato posted:

https://twitter.com/coherentstates/status/917517177078546433

boner confessor posted:

no thats joss whedon in the pic, and as for the twitter person i have no idea who that is except they're a big idiot and probably permamad about women on the internet

quote:

In late 2014, “GamerGate”, an ideological and cultural conflict within the gaming community, made 4chan inhospitable. I migrated to 8chan and started to take interest in the events surrounding GamerGate.

AttitudeAdjuster posted:

Is there a comprehensive rebuttal to the alt right/race realist IQ stuff? I’ve read enough over the years to know it’s bollocks but it’s be satisfying to read or watch someone tearing it to shreds.

Every time Stefan Molyneux blithely talks about the flow of people from a “high IQ” country to a “low IQ” country I have to go for an angry walk.

boner confessor posted:

i do, there's more stupid people out there than there are calculatingly dishonest people

business hammocks posted:

Do you have a link? Most TERFs argue in bad faith because they know that their positions are epistemologically indefensible, but Contra knows epistemology.

Glazier posted:

Looking more and more like Contra got played

https://twitter.com/RealDorianDawes/status/926152918939643910

Glazier posted:

The best part is when people call him out for it by showing how the only retweets are transphobes, he uses Stefan Molyneux's catchphrase.

ClancyEverafter posted:

So how should journalism about science that is being debated between scientists cover that science? Or should it not?

What are the specific critiques of the article, the things it got wrong, or the things it didn't cover that it should have?

Glazier posted:

Even though many came out after the article was published and said he interviewed them.

ClancyEverafter posted:

That's an incredibly bad faith assumption to make.

I don't see how people who spend their day-to-day careers, choosing to work with the trans community, are instantly outed as transphobes because their view of the science is different than yours, and I think it's pretty lovely of you to do that.

ClancyEverafter posted:

Alright, post some links and we've got something to work with.

quote:

-In a German study (2014) which interviewed 13 international experts in the area of gender identity, 11 of these 13 stated that the approach and methods of the CAMH C&Y are unethical. The 2 who stated it was ethical was [redacted] and Dr. Ken Zucker.

-[A former client, now an adult trans person] recall being unclear and confused about the process, the use of questionnaires, IQ tests and being told by Dr. Zucker that 'I was too smart to be trans.' They felt that they were asked many invasive and unnecessary questions, yet felt intimidated to express their concerns. They also described that the staff often misgendered them and that they were not told about community and medical resources available.

-...Two predominant themes emerged as areas of concern: the GIC appears to operate as a fairly insular entity, and the GIC is out of step with current clinical and operational practices.

-There appears to be a mismatch between literature research findings (including those from GIC itself), and clinical practice and approach. The wealth of factual knowledge tends to get lost in translation to practice. The approach to clinical practice appears to be filtered by a bias that assumes that most children presenting with gender variant behaviours require clinical intervention. This does not reflect the findings of the clinic's own research.

-We cannot state that the clinic does not practice reparative approaches (if not outright therapies) with respect to influencing gender identity development.

ClancyEverafter posted:

This is great stuff and I will look into it, but seriously, how closely did you read the article? The "hairy little vermin" claim is given a lot of attention, and in the end, even the person who made the claim agreed that it couldn't have happened at the clinic.

edit:

The fact that even this claim is still be tossed out is one more thing that points to what I bitched about earlier, about how if you can't even agree on a baseline level of "this happened" vs. "this did not happen" that even the person who originally made the claim now disagrees with you on, then how the gently caress do we even have discussions that approach the rational.

ClancyEverafter posted:

It does demonstrate the shoddiness of the document that was used to shut down the clinic though.

boner confessor posted:

not posting is an option, you know. just throwing that out there

ClancyEverafter posted:

When was that? Because that would be some unabashed TERFy poo poo.

quote:

Since the open letter is all he’s got, Singal then attempts to rebut the objections put forward by it. The letter, for example, states that Tuvel dead-named a trans woman, using her pre-transition name in the article. Singal argues that the woman in question was Caitlyn Jenner, who has used her pre-transition name often in public, “It’s nonsensical to claim that once a very famous trans person has exhibited comfort using their old name and talking about their pre-transition life, any reference to that name or life is still verboten,” Singal insists.

Unfortunately for Singal, a persuasive counter-argument was made by Tuvel, author of the article in question. In a response to the criticism she writes: “I regret the deadnaming of Caitlyn Jenner in the article, which means that I referred to her birth name instead of her chosen name. Even though she does this herself in her book, I understand that it is not for outsiders to do and that such a practice can perpetuate harm against transgender individuals, and I apologize.”

SteelMentor posted:

Suggested Creators: Weev "Gluten made me a manlet" McShitcock.

Some great company there.

OwlFancier posted:

What the hell is a postmodern neomarxist?

Cos I think mostly just 150 year old marxism is good enough for me a lot of the time.

JVNO posted:

Much of his work is centered around personality research (‘the big five’) and its correlation with various other traits like spirituality and political alignment. It’s medium impact stuff, but nothing particularly groundbreaking or awful. Personality research is still a bit of a crap shoot honestly.

As for specifically what classes he teaches? Well, I go to a competing university in southern Ontario- not the same university. So I honestly have no clue.

Mr Interweb posted:

I asked him something similar, and he said that forcing someone to not say something (i.e. you can't say the n-word to a Black person) is different than if a trans person forced him to say something like "zhe" and only that pronoun.

TheQuietWilds posted:

Jordan Peterson bums me out more than any public intellectual I can think of, because there's some really good stuff in his lectures (especially his early ones when he was still just the 'Maps of Meaning' guy), and then he just poisons the well with some insane tangent a mile outside his academic expertise. Top tier grad programs should just show a video of him ranting about economics or linguistics and be like "and this kids, is why you should stay in your goddamn lane and just talk about things you know about."

Monglo posted:

The existence of a person who trolls on the internet, but doesn't hold the views he's portraying doesn't seem that impossible to me. Is having a non-black/white worldview that difficult for you?

Yardbomb posted:

Mr Interweb posted:

How come there's very few youtube videos (and hell, even articles) out there debunking Jordan Peterson? He's been in the shitlord spotlight for a while now, but there's hardly anything on him from the Left.