Friday, 26 April 2019
Manuel H: Ron, "We have only so many rights and freedoms as the environment in which we live enable us to have." And that's why some people are born with A-Z rights while others aren't, just like the natural rights of animal species vary across species (the right to life / not to be eaten, as example), and from non-human species in relation to humanoids. The only rights inherent to us are the biological traits we are born with. Can we see them as rights? I think we can, but not as universal. Example: someone born with two arms and two legs has the natural right to use them in his or her benefit, but we cannot decree that humans as a whole have the universal right to two arms and two legs (some people are factually born without two of each).
Rights are a social construct agreed upon communities, and that's why they need to be written down. If rights were natural we wouldn't need charts and bills specifying them. Some communities are better than others in the rights they foresee for their participants, fortunately for some, unfortunately for others, and although said rights aren't inherent but received through the manner of agreement / declarations / laws, they are inherited (this distinction matters), for as long as the agreements or declarations are not revoked. If we are born in part A of the world (Europe), we inherited from our community a set of given rights that we will hopefully, in turn, make sure they're passed on to the next generation.
Manuel H: This is interesting. I can see the point he makes -- bringing religion back could serve as an antidote for the process -- but didn't find it compelling, seeing that religious organisations are one of the main allies in the chain he described, constantly interpreting alternative ideologies as legitimate and welcome. And this isn't just true of leftist ideologies. Finland is actually a good example. They'd qualify as the functional allies / useful idiots Bezmenov describes.
Manuel H: Ron, we can use our (inbuilt) genetically wired morals and make sure they aren't corrupted. Watching the behaviour of any toddler before she or he are exposed to their parents' gibberish is sufficient to show us there isn't a stronger base for morality than that one. It isn't a perfect system but it takes us further than any other. That system is attached to our genes and is what makes any 0-4 year-old react lovingly to love, smile when well treated, feeling sad or fearful when ill-treated, and so forth. Problems arrive later when grown-ups start messing about with their intuitions.
Manuel H: Ron, neither the 10 commandments are a source for moral behaviour nor people (of any sort) need Kant's ethical scheme to behave morally. More importantly, suggesting that "for the majority of simple population the best source for morals is A", whereas "for educated people is B", is nonsensical and suggests moral confusion ...
Manuel H: I'm sorry, Ron, but your confusion isn't washed away by your arrogance. Arrogance is a close friend to ignorance, as to why you're displaying both.
Manuel H: I know you're done here. That's evident.
Leftism is a disease, in many ways comparable to religion, and it's positively irrelevant debating which is worse. That would be the same as discussing whether Ebola is worse than the Spanish flu. They're different but will both destroy you.
Matt, 3 and 1/2 years away from entering the 40's, I can tell you there's little to worry about it, believe you me, especially if you were a woman (which you're not), and I'm not just talking carnal and sexually.
The problems begin when we're 50, generally speaking, the time we start deteriorating beyond repair, mentally and physically. Whatever it is you've been, you'll become a shadow of it the more you go beyond the 50' mark.
Potatoes, french fries and the French people (in general): It's just wrong being one.
Well done, although it won't repair the damage caused by the actions of these predators. Too bad we can't revoke Bill Clinton's presidency too. Clinton wasn't as bad as Cosby but comparable to Polanski. That is to say 69% predator, 24% abuser and 7% rapist. 7% seeing the right circumstances.
Cosby is a rapist. There's no doubt about that.
Consider the syllogism: If 50% of Europeans understand, speak and use English reasonably, Finland isn't European.
Although Jesusism and Christianism aren't objectively as bad as Mohammetism, in every religious creature, Christian and Muslim alike, there's an intellectual and morally handicapped person in need of either therapy or medicine. Regrettably, said medicine is yet to be developed, and therapy is a form of art mostly performed by the ignorant.
Her legs are much sexier than the pile she's standing next to ...
This isn't true socialism. (Not enough graves and mass murder going about.)
"Ego", "relative poverty", "the basic wages of those who grew the cocoa", and even "the victims of war in Syria" ... comments relating to a chocolate dish. Grow up, idiots.
Yes, if I were a muppet I'd say: Science is important but let's not overestimate it. Peoples' feelings first and foremost. Of course, with a good chakra alignment and decent doses of yin and yang, especially if we do yoga and go on wild journeys to "become one with the tree". Also, be water.
Describing gender as a social construct / role isn't subversive to Croatia's Catholicism. Rather an affront to common sense and to science. Gender is a biological construct, not a social nor religious playground. This of course isn't something leftists grasp but that's why they're stupid, dangerous and destructive. As such, well done to the Croatians protesting this treaty (even if they're doing it for less than rightful reasons).
Sex and gender are the same thing, differing from sexuality / sexual orientation. There are two and only two genders: male and female, both biologically wired. With that said, we can of course have 2 males or 2 females in a relationship, seeing their sexual orientations. That sexual orientation doesn't however change the fact they're either male or female.
While we're at it, any one's sexual orientation is also biologically wired. It isn't a trait people choose.
The progressive destruction of public education, using children to build up political agendas. If you can't see how wrong this is, seek treatment for your own good.
How perverse interfering with the natural development of children and using them to boost their agendas.
Yigal Dozier, that definition follows up the gender theory principles refined within feminist and LGBT studies, part of contemporary "social (so-called) sciences" and interdisciplinary studies. When disciplines are divided between hard (natural) sciences and soft (social) sciences you know the latter comprising gender theory from which that definition rose has no foundation in empirical science. It is in other words gibberish, thus conflating gender with roles or with social attributes and with how females and males are generally perceived in any given culture or society, and the roles (right or wrongly) attributed to them according to their gender (a problematic which has obvious relation with churchery). Also conflating it with sexual orientation. It's a mess mixing terms with the purpose of reinventing definitions which with regards to their meanings aren't to be mixed, let alone taught disguised as sciences.
The World Health Organization not that long ago (in the 90's) incorporated (for example) homosexuality on their list of mental disorders. But just because it was there it didn't mean that it carried any truth. Actually the WHO still includes (today) the diagnosis of ego-dystonic homosexuality, a type of mental disorder, also referred to as sexual orientation disturbance (SOD). You don't need me to tell you how nonsense that is as defining it as a mental disorder implies that it can be messed about / treated, when sexual orientation isn't a matter of preference and heterosexuals, homosexuals and bisexuals alike cannot change and do not choose their sexual orientation, nor can said sexual orientation be changed for them. Why? Because it's biologically wired. It is innate. It's the same for gender. Why do transgenders need to undergo hormone treatments and facial or other types of surgery? Why would that be necessary if gender were a fluid spectrum or "continuum" (as that definition calls it) that people could simply navigate across? Their biological circuits are in the way and those circuits have determined for them even before they were born what their gender is. All else is fantasy.
Refreshingly, pockets of sanity remain:
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/gender-theory-banned-in-nsw-classrooms/news-story/eeb40f3264394798ebe67260fa2f5782
Let me know if you can't open the article and I'll print-screen and send it to you.
“It is only when patriotism is replaced by the belligerent and alien ideology of nationalism that a nation-state becomes dangerous to itself and to others. Patriotism is a love of home and a willingness to defend it, while nationalism—from that of the French Revolution to even more deadly 20th century versions—is parasitic, cynically using national symbols in the service of war and the abuse of its own citizens.”
That is Orwell's distinction of patriotism from nationalism, giving the former a defensive nature and the latter an expansionist tendency. Patriotism would (does) comprise attitudes such as those of military and cultural defence. Nationalism, on the other hand, aims to consolidate power and prestige, not necessarily for the nationalist but for the nation or the unit in which the individual sinks his individuality into, if that makes sense. In sum, representing some of Orwell's thoughts: The patriot identifies himself with X and by impulse takes care to protect it. The nationalist may also begin by identifying himself with X, but soon incurs in the vision of a world where the success of a cause (his) is directly related to the failure or the ruin of others. The patriot will hardly recognise himself as such. The nationalist will misappropriate the term patriot.
«Jeux Sans Frontières», remember? That was an excellent European televisioned cultural spectacle, not a circus where someone wins only because they're a bearded drag called Conchita, or, someone suffers from heart failure (the Portuguese dude who won). This isn't to be mean.
Their music was truly tasteless.
This is a proper Euro show. Never followed suit since.
If leftists and religious zealots (alike) could distinguish fact from fiction, I wouldn't mind them too much ...
'A rare look at the young rebels'.
The romanticising of hate and violence constantly brought to you by the liberal media. (As with Palestine.) It's worth mentioning that the ELN — Ejército de Liberación Nacionale, in Spanish — is a communist compound of Marxist-inspired ideology and liberation (Christian) theology. As you know, hard-core leftism and religious creed walk hand in hand ...
Matt, the terms “hate” and “speech” weren't mingled by those who wish to repel vicious speech, seeing there isn't such thing as “hate speech”, just as there isn't “joyful speech”, nor “cheerful speech”. Its real and only purpose is to freeze dissent. Which form? Thought.
On mingling “dissension” with “hate”, in simple terms: 'I'm too limited to overcome my intellectual dissonance and counter your thinking (thought), so I'll just call you racist (thus attributing you hateful motives). In this way, more than silencing you, I am objectively having you doubting yourself and interfering with your ability to freely think. Just as important: The distinction between those with much to gain from the repealing of thought and the horde conflating “dissension” with “hate” (mostly leftists) is especially relevant in Europe, as there is only one ground that allows liberals to flourish: free and secular democracies, when no democracy can survive the attempt to abolish, scout, keep tabs on, and punish thought. In other words, liberals are digging their own grave ... Europe will learn it the hard way.
Reversed racism: "You're not making black robots? Then you're a racist!", one of the many joys in looneyland.
If the surface is like this, we can only imagine the mess under these people's skulls.
Aye, good thing you feel proud that you're a black African woman, although I wouldn't be capable of relating to such feelings, clueless as to why would someone feel pride for the colour of his / her skin. Were you a white boy shouting "Europe my Europe, proud of being white" and you'd be branded Nazi. Let me know which way you wanna go with this ...
How many legs does a dog have if you call his tail a leg? Four. Saying that a tail is a leg doesn't make it a leg. (Lincoln)
As soon as language came about, and with it more sophisticated layers of consciousness (or vice-versa), only members of a self-centred species could come up with detailed concepts of other-worldliness (supernatural), not for the reason that they're gifted with imagination (or they would use it for more productive things), but to accommodate childish fears and insecurities, specifically, the fear of death, and the idea that there has to be something other than death awaiting them after they die, or that the cessation of life and its associated processes, for some reason, doesn't apply to them. In this time and age, it takes a special kind of narcissistic, capricious unintelligent prick so focused on personal entitlement to approve or even consider notions such as the afterlife ...
Excellent insight all the way through. With regard to the New Zealand Herald article stating that nothing predicts suicide better than random guessing (seeing depressive moods VS the normal populace who isn't depressed; the variation is only slightly higher for the former), with the data supporting the claim, that doesn't speak for the relation between said depression and wanting to die. Wanting to die is different to committing suicide, and that distinction matters. It is a bit (in reverse) like the myth, to some extent truthful, that cats have 7 lives and often survive 4 and 5 or 6 floors-high falls. Some do, with organ / internal injuries for life, but most don't. The problem is that the majority who doesn't survive doesn't make it to the vet and is thus unaccounted for. The legion (so to speak) within the pool of depressed people who have a wish for death but doesn't commit suicide is (I imagine) very high.
Also, the sociobiological perspective is somewhat eye-opening. Many people who commit suicide probably do think, believe, or feel, that the lives of A, B or C will improve if they take their own. If those are mere excuses or search for self-reassurance, only they could (individually) answer for.
Dread T Hawk, Bourdain (Dec. 2017) wrote about the topic, describing the impact Argento and subsequently the MeToo movement had in his life. She didn't of course kill him, or anything of the like, but there's probably a connection. That means his dynamics with his then girlfriend is one of the many elements contributing to his decision of committing suicide.
Soon, if not late, the lack of any useful meaning for the word racist will also be considered racist. By that time, the leftists obsessed with racism and obsessed with victimisation will blame it on you, for not throwing accusations of racism in due time. Through linguistic proximity, I can celebrate the “Cinco de Mayo”, and I also feel -- because I'm so morally good -- that there aren't enough Kosovar, Indians, Ethiopian, Belgians, Cape Verdean and Hindus represented in “Dunkirk”.
Torture is inhumane. The death penalty "no matter what method used" isn't. To execute some people is not just necessary but morally sane. If only the folk writing these pieces showed the same concern for the victims and the victims' families over the pain caused to them by the people rightly accused of the crimes they've committed ...
Don't eat as much. Eat healthier. Do some exercise. Your body doesn't produce fat. It's ingested.
What more advice is there to be given?
“Illusion of invulnerability, collectivism, belief in inherent morality (infantile self-righteousness), direct pressure on dissenters, self-censorship and illusion of unanimity.”
In sum, what makes groups by definition dangerous and group identity a form of pathology, irrespective of the values appointed by the group or the attributes singled out to rally an identity / identities. As follows:
Groups claim to care deeply for value(s), morally (goals) or otherwise, and, unless we're speaking of sociopaths, groups will want to adopt good values, or values perceived as such. Once adopted, 'good' in the form of we and ours, not as good or 'bad' in the form of they and theirs.
i) properties (features): properties are by definition neutral (e.g., gender, height, sexual orientation, weight, skin-colour, the number of fingers in your left hand).
ii) moral values (goals): values are not neutral (e.g., reconciliation, hostility, sorrow, compassion, guilt, peace, retribution, resentment).
On i), 'To Value' and 'Values': What we value is called 'values'. Interchangeably, 'values' is what we value. In a moral sense, what we value and doesn't exist in a physical form. It isn't a complicated term.
Groups can only be formed around properties (features), but groups can only value what is tangible, measurable, observable, or else any attempt to drive one around the X, Y or Z values succumbs. Go out there and try to find, attach yourself to, or form a group that values truth, honesty and dignity? You cannot, as those things are recognisable but are not quantifiable. Now go out there and try finding a group that values the colour of your skin (whatever that may be), the country you were born in (whatever that may be), your sexual orientation (whatever that may be), the religious group your parents appointed your belonging to (whatever that may be), your gender (female or male), and, you get the point ...
Wanna grow up? Leave the group. “As soon as you get a bunch of people together, no matter how truthful they are as individuals, instantly the crowd is not a truthful thing.”
Of all the preeminent dates associated with fictitious events celebrated and hijacked by Christianity from pagan festivals and traditions, despite irregular as it changes every year, Easter is probably the easiest to decode. While I'm not too familiarised with the eggs and the chocolate rabbits rituals, Easter hasn't obviously anything to do with resurrection.
Why? Because there is no such thing as resurrecting. But you already knew this, I hope.
So what is it about? Simple as it may sound, Easter is the comparative of the positive East. Positive — East. Comparative — Easter, or more East. Superlative — Eastest, or the most East. In a sentence: Where are you right now relatively to the rabbit? I am Easter (more East) of the rabbit. How Easter? Well, I am not the Eastest.
For the Left / for leftists bad and inhuman behaviour causing suffering to others has always some far-stretched explanation and is eclipsed by an ideal of how things ought to be, not how they indeed are. "If only our society had done this, or that, or were like this, or like that, that poor soul wouldn't have raped the woman nor killed a man." This is how the brain of a leftist operates, but that's why no-one can trust them in any useful sense of the term. Simple as.
Grasping spirits over trousers and belly buttons. Let me correct you despite your evident talent: It would be mean if Nancy or 'the' tailor were here to read it.
This reminds me of 2 'childhood' wishes, in commas as for one (of the two) I wasn't a child anymore: i) having an electrical wheelchair, which for a kid is the equivalent of a spaceship and ii) needing glasses. It wasn't long ago that I considered buying the type of glasses that have lenses without graduation. I know that glasses aren't an accessory or a toy, but medical equipment for people who actually need them (more than half of the adult population). Strangely, this wish doesn't relate to aesthetics, although I find glasses on an attractive female in themselves (glasses) attractive, or, pretty. But generally speaking, glasses or no-glasses doesn't aesthetically make a difference, as far as I see. What I really want(ed) is experiencing the need for glasses ...
What is it like seeing things blurred?
Glasses users aren't blind. They can see. But see what? How far? How well?
Glasses are like a cape, (em)powering or improving a sense, just by putting something on your face.
It's extraordinary, although — I imagine — not as extraordinary as driving a wheelchair ...
Keep shouting and don't become anaesthetised, if not on the pedophilia and the sexual abuse scandals involving my church around the world. Then, use caution and deny everything, as lying for a living and giving cover to pedophiles makes me look respectful, especially when I'm wearing my special hat. — Jorge Mario Bergoglio, or so-called “Pope Francis”
Anyone who needs a safe space from other people’s opinions should be in therapy.
So, they can't get their own lives straight, but spend their days trying to change the world and the lives of others?
Makes sense ...
Michael Coughlan, it isn't a coincidence that the major scientific advancements addressing (and that will address) pollution come from capitalist nations, as those are generally speaking the ones who favour scientific entrepreneurship. As for the latter (pillage), you live in a capitalist society, so you know very well that pillage or social convulsion aren't priority problems, unlike other areas of the world that are allergic to capitalism and therefore characterised by social disorder, generalised poverty, despair and, as a result (among other things), pillage.
Rallies, search for chaos, gratuitous destruction, interfering with the lives of others, shouting clichés or raising a billboard aren't synonym to making a lasting impact, but actions from people clueless about what it is they should do with their lives. Those are the majority of activists nowadays. This isn't to say there aren't (and, more importantly, there weren't) important activist movements and leaders.
“Nome sane?” — which looks almost Latin.
No, they aren't the same (Christianity and Islam). They worship the same Abrahamic so-called “God” but are entirely different. Jesus of Nazareth was a delusional (probably, well-intended) individual who saw himself as something he obvious wasn't, a harmless and friendly man but nonetheless delusional, and mentally sick. Muhammad was a pedophile, a rapist and a conqueror / warlord.
He needn't have worried to apologise, as the risk of displeasing some of his support base might compromise his goals (mobs of leftist-ignorant-zombies and of course young British Muslims). Also, why apologise when he in fact has sympathy for the anti-Semitic narrative? The muppet might as well be open about it.
All across the Middle East, with the exception of Israel and very few other areas, theocratic scum motivated by genocidal fantasies and feelings of superiority can continually burn American flags and spit anti-Atlantic, anti-Western, and anti-Israel fanaticism from dawn to dusk, that many Americans and Europeans will carry on seeing their own countries as tyrant, and their own governments and institutions as the threat. Seeing this pattern, have you any doubts as to who is bound for defeat in this affair?
I am not Jewish, although I've read 'The Diary of a Young Girl' (I was 'forced to', in school), but that doesn't make me Jewish any more than having watched 'Braveheart' make's me Scottish. However, why would you assume that only the Jewish have sympathy for the Israeli cause? Please do enlighten me. I'll wait here.
Ah, you're retarded. Alright, no more needs adding.
Rights are a social construct agreed upon communities, and that's why they need to be written down. If rights were natural we wouldn't need charts and bills specifying them. Some communities are better than others in the rights they foresee for their participants, fortunately for some, unfortunately for others, and although said rights aren't inherent but received through the manner of agreement / declarations / laws, they are inherited (this distinction matters), for as long as the agreements or declarations are not revoked. If we are born in part A of the world (Europe), we inherited from our community a set of given rights that we will hopefully, in turn, make sure they're passed on to the next generation.
Manuel H: This is interesting. I can see the point he makes -- bringing religion back could serve as an antidote for the process -- but didn't find it compelling, seeing that religious organisations are one of the main allies in the chain he described, constantly interpreting alternative ideologies as legitimate and welcome. And this isn't just true of leftist ideologies. Finland is actually a good example. They'd qualify as the functional allies / useful idiots Bezmenov describes.
Manuel H: Ron, we can use our (inbuilt) genetically wired morals and make sure they aren't corrupted. Watching the behaviour of any toddler before she or he are exposed to their parents' gibberish is sufficient to show us there isn't a stronger base for morality than that one. It isn't a perfect system but it takes us further than any other. That system is attached to our genes and is what makes any 0-4 year-old react lovingly to love, smile when well treated, feeling sad or fearful when ill-treated, and so forth. Problems arrive later when grown-ups start messing about with their intuitions.
Manuel H: Ron, neither the 10 commandments are a source for moral behaviour nor people (of any sort) need Kant's ethical scheme to behave morally. More importantly, suggesting that "for the majority of simple population the best source for morals is A", whereas "for educated people is B", is nonsensical and suggests moral confusion ...
Manuel H: I'm sorry, Ron, but your confusion isn't washed away by your arrogance. Arrogance is a close friend to ignorance, as to why you're displaying both.
Manuel H: I know you're done here. That's evident.
________________________________________
Leftism is a disease, in many ways comparable to religion, and it's positively irrelevant debating which is worse. That would be the same as discussing whether Ebola is worse than the Spanish flu. They're different but will both destroy you.
Matt, 3 and 1/2 years away from entering the 40's, I can tell you there's little to worry about it, believe you me, especially if you were a woman (which you're not), and I'm not just talking carnal and sexually.
The problems begin when we're 50, generally speaking, the time we start deteriorating beyond repair, mentally and physically. Whatever it is you've been, you'll become a shadow of it the more you go beyond the 50' mark.
Potatoes, french fries and the French people (in general): It's just wrong being one.
Well done, although it won't repair the damage caused by the actions of these predators. Too bad we can't revoke Bill Clinton's presidency too. Clinton wasn't as bad as Cosby but comparable to Polanski. That is to say 69% predator, 24% abuser and 7% rapist. 7% seeing the right circumstances.
Cosby is a rapist. There's no doubt about that.
Consider the syllogism: If 50% of Europeans understand, speak and use English reasonably, Finland isn't European.
Although Jesusism and Christianism aren't objectively as bad as Mohammetism, in every religious creature, Christian and Muslim alike, there's an intellectual and morally handicapped person in need of either therapy or medicine. Regrettably, said medicine is yet to be developed, and therapy is a form of art mostly performed by the ignorant.
Her legs are much sexier than the pile she's standing next to ...
This isn't true socialism. (Not enough graves and mass murder going about.)
"Ego", "relative poverty", "the basic wages of those who grew the cocoa", and even "the victims of war in Syria" ... comments relating to a chocolate dish. Grow up, idiots.
Yes, if I were a muppet I'd say: Science is important but let's not overestimate it. Peoples' feelings first and foremost. Of course, with a good chakra alignment and decent doses of yin and yang, especially if we do yoga and go on wild journeys to "become one with the tree". Also, be water.
Describing gender as a social construct / role isn't subversive to Croatia's Catholicism. Rather an affront to common sense and to science. Gender is a biological construct, not a social nor religious playground. This of course isn't something leftists grasp but that's why they're stupid, dangerous and destructive. As such, well done to the Croatians protesting this treaty (even if they're doing it for less than rightful reasons).
Sex and gender are the same thing, differing from sexuality / sexual orientation. There are two and only two genders: male and female, both biologically wired. With that said, we can of course have 2 males or 2 females in a relationship, seeing their sexual orientations. That sexual orientation doesn't however change the fact they're either male or female.
While we're at it, any one's sexual orientation is also biologically wired. It isn't a trait people choose.
It is normal, in many Swedish preschools, for teachers to avoid referring to their students’ gender — instead of “boys and girls,” they say “friends,” or call children by name. Play is organized to prevent children from sorting themselves by gender. A gender-neutral pronoun, “hen,” was introduced in 2012 and was swiftly absorbed into mainstream Swedish culture, something that, linguists say, has never happened in another country.
The progressive destruction of public education, using children to build up political agendas. If you can't see how wrong this is, seek treatment for your own good.
How perverse interfering with the natural development of children and using them to boost their agendas.
Gender, typically described in terms of masculinity and femininity, is a social construction that varies across different cultures and over time. (6) There are a number of cultures, for example, in which greater gender diversity exists and sex and gender are not always neatly divided along binary lines such as male and female or homosexual and heterosexual. The Berdache in North America, the fa’afafine (Samoan for “the way of a woman”) in the Pacific, and the kathoey in Thailand are all examples of different gender categories that differ from the traditional Western division of people into males and females. Further, among certain North American native communities, gender is seen more in terms of a continuum than categories, with special acknowledgement of “two-spirited” people who encompass both masculine and feminine qualities and characteristics. It is apparent, then, that different cultures have taken different approaches to creating gender distinctions, with more or less recognition of fluidity and complexity of gender.
Yigal Dozier, that definition follows up the gender theory principles refined within feminist and LGBT studies, part of contemporary "social (so-called) sciences" and interdisciplinary studies. When disciplines are divided between hard (natural) sciences and soft (social) sciences you know the latter comprising gender theory from which that definition rose has no foundation in empirical science. It is in other words gibberish, thus conflating gender with roles or with social attributes and with how females and males are generally perceived in any given culture or society, and the roles (right or wrongly) attributed to them according to their gender (a problematic which has obvious relation with churchery). Also conflating it with sexual orientation. It's a mess mixing terms with the purpose of reinventing definitions which with regards to their meanings aren't to be mixed, let alone taught disguised as sciences.
The World Health Organization not that long ago (in the 90's) incorporated (for example) homosexuality on their list of mental disorders. But just because it was there it didn't mean that it carried any truth. Actually the WHO still includes (today) the diagnosis of ego-dystonic homosexuality, a type of mental disorder, also referred to as sexual orientation disturbance (SOD). You don't need me to tell you how nonsense that is as defining it as a mental disorder implies that it can be messed about / treated, when sexual orientation isn't a matter of preference and heterosexuals, homosexuals and bisexuals alike cannot change and do not choose their sexual orientation, nor can said sexual orientation be changed for them. Why? Because it's biologically wired. It is innate. It's the same for gender. Why do transgenders need to undergo hormone treatments and facial or other types of surgery? Why would that be necessary if gender were a fluid spectrum or "continuum" (as that definition calls it) that people could simply navigate across? Their biological circuits are in the way and those circuits have determined for them even before they were born what their gender is. All else is fantasy.
Refreshingly, pockets of sanity remain:
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/gender-theory-banned-in-nsw-classrooms/news-story/eeb40f3264394798ebe67260fa2f5782
Let me know if you can't open the article and I'll print-screen and send it to you.
Labels: Commentary
ByMMatApril 26, 2019
Style is the perfection of a point of view — the most gifted snooker player / sportsman of all time.
Sunday, 10 March 2019
ByMMatMarch 10, 2019
Saturday, 16 February 2019
The Younger Dryas impact hypothesis, and the theory of the extinction of historical advanced human civilisations.
Labels: Randall Carlson
ByMMatFebruary 16, 2019
Tuesday, 8 January 2019
'HelpIamClaustrophobic', it's commendable that you voice your opinion. However, it's about time people understood (and accepted) that WG's goal isn't balance. Their goal is introducing broken and/or OP premium tanks that enough people will pay for, and to introduce bad and UP free-to-play tanks that enough people will pay to skip in the X to Y tech trees. Simultaneously, changes to tanks normally entail armour buffs that keep premium ammo flowing. And there's hardly anything relevant anymore. What you have now doesn't need fixing. It's what they aim for.
CorSed, the people that matter don't follow this forum, and aren't interested in what the EU player-base has to say. Likewise, EU representatives are irrelevant in the bigger scheme of things, not to mention about 75% of them are close to clueless. All it takes is a read of their occasional interventions in the forum ...
Arthur, all it takes is 1 or 2 broken tanks to render 11 or 12 uncompetitive, if not unplayable. Defender and LT-432 are good examples. IS-3A is completely overpowered, but it isn't broken. Still, in your list, half of what you consider balanced is either underpowered (AMX 105, Kanonenjagdpanzer) or overpowered. Balanced and competitive would be / is something like the AMX M449. Very good = Lorraine, Progetto, Centurion AX. Overpowered = WZ-120 or IS-3A. Broken = LT-432, Defender. On these lines ... Somua, another example of a very good and competitive tank, but not OP nor broken. Bottomline is, they know exactly what is and what isn't acceptable, and their introduction of tanks such as the LT, Defender, IS-3A, or the sale of E25 isn't innocent. What we have now is indeed what they want.
Yes, and it's fine having different perspectives on certain tanks, while I don't disagree with much of what you're saying, but even if I did that wouldn't be a problem as long as people comment in good spirit (as you do). I consider broken everything relating to armour-profile, connecting (in comparison) to every other tank, while overpowered is a sum of 3 or 4 characteristics that may or not include an armour-profile. Take the Rheinmetall Skorpion G: It has a superb gun, very good mobility, more importantly than mobility it has a turret, and it also has very decent camo. More than balanced it's undoubtedly better than anything the tech tree has to offer. But is it broken? Not really. Players who make mistakes are immediately punished, and that's how it ought to be. The WZ, on the other hand, has a broken armour-profile making it immune to many tier VII and even tier VIII guns, frontally. It isn't a better tank than the Skorpion but it's a broken entry to the game. This distinction matters ... While completely overpowered (as example), I wouldn't describe the IS-3A as broken, seeing any tier VIII with 220 or plus pen can in many circumstances outplay it, or at least fight back. Overpowered, surely, because of the gun, but not broken (armour). The Defender on the other hand (as you say) is completely broken. Type 5 (another example) is beyond broken, when this one is a complete freak seeing the HE gun it carries, on top of its armour-profile. But they know all of this. There's even a Q&A video where one developer says 'players don't like a balanced game', or something on those lines (the bob was thinking of the Russian server, probably, the only one they try to please) ...
Labels: Commentary, January 2019, WG Forum EU - Comments and Threads
ByMMatJanuary 08, 2019
Tuesday, 27 November 2018
Bayern München 5 - 1 SL Benfica (Allianz Arena)
Pois é Laudrup ... para efeitos de exibição nada do que aconteceu em Munique foi surpreendente. Já o resultado foi pior do que o previsto, mesmo tratando-se do Benfica, quando a goleada até poderia ter sido mais severa (ainda bem que não foi). Para agravar a expectativa de um confronto desequilibrado pelo futebol quase-insignificante / totalmente medíocre que este Benfica pratica, o Bayern conta por empates e derrotas metade dos jogos que fez na Bundesliga, contexto que faz (e fará) os seus jogadores actuar na Liga dos Campeões mais descontraídos e inspirados, vista a oportunidade para esquecer(em) por momentos a competição doméstica. Niko Kovač resumiu o jogo de forma perfeita, em declarações à televisão do seu país: "Este era o jogo e o resultado que precisávamos, o Benfica veio na altura ideal, agora temos de nos concentrar na recepção ao Mainz que será incrivelmente mais difícil. (Satisfeito?) Muito satisfeito. Fomos dominadores, o Benfica não existiu, estamos a 45% do nosso potencial." Na mesma toada, Arjen Robben: "Não fizemos um jogo perfeito mas os nossos adeptos mereciam uma festa bonita. Uma palavra para o Benfica que trabalhou muito para não sofrer mais. Temos de ser solidários, mas hoje fomos Bayern." Amigos, estais recordados quando há pouco tempo no Benfica (adeptos e não só) se usaram em anos consecutivos de duas finais Europeias perdidas para desconsiderar / manchar / denegrir o trabalho absolutamente fenomenal duma equipa técnica comandada por um treinador genial que mais do que voltar a fazer do Benfica um grande tornou-o dominador? Pois claro, agora têm o que merecem, que é exactamente igual ao que tinham antes (e depois) de Jorge Jesus: um rotundo nada. Lamentavelmente, sem qualquer intenção de achincalhar (mais) uma prestação desta equipa, também é preciso recordar que após os tempos longínquos de Vigo, de Paulo Bento, de Toni ou de qualquer uma das várias deslocações do FCP de / do bom Jesualdo ao terreno do Arsenal, só mesmo o actual Benfica nos mostra uma equipa portuguesa fazer tão pouco e perder por tantos, o mesmo que já se vira esmagado em Dortmund (4-0) em 2016/17. Esperemos que na quinta-feira Marcel Keizer se revele capaz no Azerbeijão de anular o desprestígio construído pelo Benfica que mais uma vez abalou o futebol português.
O Sporting já está a caminho de Baku. (Redigido na caixa de comentário do Lateral Esquerdo.)
ByMMatNovember 27, 2018
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
