TTDIM: Things that don't irk me

[thisphantomfortress]

4 minutes ago, Tesla said:

Trend of trans hate?

Seems to me the trend is the opposite.

And no, gender is not a social construct. 

Not even gunna bother arguing the second point because we won't get anywhere.

Maybe I'm just a SJW and get triggered when I notice it but I have seen a lot of "there are only two genders" and "you can't use my bathrooms" type shit lately. Plus the whole coalition attack of the safe schools stuff has probably made it more prominent. I've made it pretty clear before I'm socially liberal and personally couldn't give a shit what anyone does. If they can afford men's/women's clothes and the appropriate harmones/surgery all power to them.

[Tesla]

2 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

Not even gunna bother arguing the second point because we won't get anywhere.

Maybe I'm just a SJW and get triggered when I notice it but I have seen a lot of "there are only two genders" and "you can't use my bathrooms" type shit lately. Plus the whole coalition attack of the safe schools stuff has probably made it more prominent. I've made it pretty clear before I'm socially liberal and personally couldn't give a shit what anyone does. If they can afford men's/women's clothes and the appropriate harmones/surgery all power to them.

Well I do have the answer to my question now (that apparently gender is a social construct, even though I don't think I agree. i guess the expression of one's gender is a social construct, but the gender itself isn't).

FWIW, all these SJW promoted PC issues have some hypocracies to them which I generally ignore, I suppose the reason this one bothers me is what I added to my previous post via edit is because you have some quite questionable things happening as a result of it (people being able to choose which gender bathroom they use, and children being able to decide to have permanent life altering surgeries or even if it's not surgery shit like taking different hormones etc is pretty serious as well)

[bt50]

7 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

Not even gunna bother arguing the second point because we won't get anywhere.

Maybe I'm just a SJW and get triggered when I notice it but I have seen a lot of "there are only two genders" and "you can't use my bathrooms" type shit lately. Plus the whole coalition attack of the safe schools stuff has probably made it more prominent. I've made it pretty clear before I'm socially liberal and personally couldn't give a shit what anyone does. If they can afford men's/women's clothes and the appropriate harmones/surgery all power to them.

Theres a difference between being accepting of trans and pandering to their insecurities tho.

I couldnt care less what people do/are, but id stop at halting normality to please the pc police, let alone spending government funds on trans toilets etc

[thisphantomfortress]

1 minute ago, Tesla said:

Well I do have the answer to my question now (that apparently gender is a social construct, even though I don't think I agree. i guess the expression of one's gender is a social construct, but the gender itself isn't).

FWIW, all these SJW promoted PC issues have some hypocracies to them which I generally ignore, I suppose the reason this one bothers me is what I added to my previous post via edit is because you have some quite questionable things happening as a result of it (people being able to choose which gender bathroom they use, and children being able to decide to have permanent life altering surgeries or even if it's not surgery shit like taking different hormones etc is pretty serious as well)

To the point you made about mental illness before, so far as I am aware, I think that for a child to have the hormones/surgery they need to be diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Now how strictly they assess this I do not know but I guess I can be considered if not a "mental illness" a mental abnormality for lack of a better term 

[n i k o]

This guy I used to know through work would say being homosexual, lesbian or transgender are all mental illnesses and should be committed as its against the natural order of reproduction. 

Edited June 8, 2016 by n i k o

[thisphantomfortress]

20 minutes ago, n i k o said:

This guy I used to know through work would say being homosexual, lesbian or transgender are all mental illnesses and should be committed as its against the natural order of reproduction. 

That's just plane wrong though, I'm glad you "used" to know him. Human sexuality is fluid and on a spectrum people can fuck who they like. 

[NewConvert]

2 hours ago, Tesla said:

Some quality comments there.

But, let's be serious for a sec, people can do whatever the fuck they want as far as I'm concerned, but I honestly don't understand why this transgender stuff isn't considered a mental illness given other things that society would consider a mental illness. Again, as long as they're not hurting anyone I really dont care if people want to dress up and act like a different gender, I'm just saying like many of these PC issues there is some serious hypocrisy going on. Eg if I, Tesla, a human male, decided I was a dog and walked around on all fours barking I'd be considered mentally ill and probably locked up. But If I decided I'm a female and walked around dressed as a female I am completely sane and can continue on my merry way with the support of the PC crowd as a hero of the oppressed masses. Am I missing something here?

I don't know enough about psychology/psychiatry to make any sort of useful comment but I do have prejudices which I won't bore anyone with. Way back in the 60s/70s psychologists begun rethinking what mental illness is and to cut a long story short the standard definition was most of the public don't behave that way. This gave Stalin, Mao and just about any tyrant the ability to jail someone because not believing that the sun shone out of their arses then it was an obvious sign of mental illness. Earlier periods you were considered a witch - see the Salem witch hunts under Governor Cotton.

No Tesla these days you would not be locked up. I live near some low cost housing for people who once upon time were put in loony bins and they tell terrible stories. It is quite disconcerting talking to Mr G. because he does have the mind of a child between 5 and 12 although he is now 68. Joan Kirner wanted to close all the mental health institutions because she thought they were cruel and people with mental health issues should not be locked up. Jeff Kennet wanted to close the mental health institutions to give tax cuts. If the left and right agree don't be alarmed be terrified. They only lock up people if they have committed a violent crime. And this is where the real crime by the state occurs - some of these individuals are seriously ill but they get locked up with the real violent criminals instead of being placed in an institution. I believe that The Austin hospital does have the only facility where people with mental health issues that have been charged with capital crimes are kept. Almost all others are let loose in the streets ready to abuse the next unsuspecting victim. Two years ago Michelle - "a local identity" - died in the street and basically just about everyone had been abused by her and one of the local shop keepers got attacked with a butchers knife. The police would come take her to the local wait for her symptoms to pass and let her go.

As for biology, well that is in a state of flux. About 12 years ago there was a research paper indicating that at least 700 species had homosexual and bisexual behaviour. This does not fit in the survival of the species/passing on the genes theory of evolution. Since then more species have been added.

One thing I am curious about your opinion is why do you claim it to be a PC issue. I grew up in an era where poofter bashing was so common and ingrained into society that it is hard for people to imagine. Last year I worked up the courage to apologise to one of my high school classmates about what was quite disgraceful behaviour on my behalf. So I find it difficult to accept that people can dismiss it as PC.

[GreenSeater]

FWIW I've very much in favour of anyone being able to do whatever they want as long as they aren't hurting anyone. Gender dysphoria is a real mental illness, but one that people can easily live with by choosing to act like/dress like whichever gender they feel most comfortable with. As for the biology of it all, there are two sexes. Some people have birth defects which cause them to be born intersex, but that is very rare. Homosexuality is a different issue altogether, but that is natural and has been observed in almost every species of animal on Earth. I personally think rather than transgender toilets or whatever there should just be one room for urinals and one room for cubicles and anyone with the capacity to use each toilet should be allowed to do so. I'm certainly not transphobic or homophobic or anything like that, I just posted it as I thought it was pretty funny how worked up people got over a meme on a page about garlic bread...

[HeartFc]

"Trans rights" is like talking about "hummingbird rights", no one gives a fuck about them enough to hate them. They make up about -0.349 percent of the world population and if I think they're weird or odd thats not hate, if I don't want my daughter going to the toilet with a middle aged bloke in a dress, thats not hate. I honestly don't get the hysteria of stating biological facts.  

While the west are deciding if is racist that straight guy doesnt wanna drop a load in Bruce Jenner, islamist are plotting the downfall of european culture and tradition, so far they're doing a pretty decent fucking job. 

Leftism is the true mental illness.

 

 

[malloy]

2 hours ago, n i k o said:

This guy I used to know through work would say being homosexual, lesbian or transgender are all mental illnesses and should be committed as its against the natural order of reproduction. 

A twist on this homosexuality is against nature etc etc is nature itself will always try to achieve an equilibrium of everything so that when that equilibrium is tipped in one direction nature will of itself adjust to bring it back. It is arguable that the human population has exceeded optimal level to live sustainably on Earth to which it could be argued that homosexuality (based on the premise that it is something you are born with), is natures way of pushing back via people who are more likely not to reproduce.

Didnt quite get across how I wanted it to sound. But im sure you understand the gist.

[Grimey]

1 hour ago, HeartFc said:

While the west are deciding if is racist that straight guy doesnt wanna drop a load in Bruce Jenner

nearly fell off my chair, bravo

[Jimmy]

I've done a gender studies subject at uni before. Some things I'll point out:

1. There's a general censuses that sex is something that you're born with. It's a scientific classification based upon genitalia; whereas gender is a social construct and is influenced by society, conventions, social scripts etc. You can fit in different places along the gender spectrum. This is more how you feel.

2. Sex change operations and hormonal therapy are extremely hard things to get (I'd argue way too hard) and potential patients are put through a very rigorous assessment process that has medical, psychological and legal hoops that need to be jumped through. Which is pretty rough on the poor kids who often know what they are on the inside, but have to be poked and proded at for years before they're given permission to undergo a procedure.

3. The rate of these people "changing their mind" is extremely low. But the kids are put on hormone blockers until they reach an appropriate age where they can make a final informed decision.

Edited June 8, 2016 by Jimmy

[strider]

homosexuality was considered an illness (according to the DSM) up until 1973. the 70s was the gayest time on earth bar the macedonian alexander the great's rule.   

sex changes are fucking stupid. much cheaper to scates it

the world celebrates pussi-fication and de-masculinity. the higher ups are threatened by the little people having the god hormone, testosterone. 

there was a study that... "measured the testosterone levels of 31 male MBA students who had been involved in starting new businesses with 79 male MBA students who had never been involved in starting new businesses. They found that the students with entrepreneurial experience had higher testosterone levels. In addition, there was a relationship between testosterone levels and the odds of having entrepreneurial experience after they separated out the effects of the subjects’ age, race, undergraduate degree, risk taking propensity, and the time of day that the testosterone levels were measured."

It is all a part of a much bigger and grander plan. Population control is real. Have spoken to many HNW investors on this issue back when I worked in Pharma PR. There are cures for cancer... not in the 1st world (i.e. IV VIT C). There is no money to be made from people who are healthy and happy or dead. So they make people fat, sad and diseased. Why cure cancers when people can fork out thousands for chemo... only to (for the most part) have the cancer return at a later date? The earliest case of AIDS was in the late 50s/early 60s. BRB people were not getting having anal until the 50s. Let's make people unhappy with their OWN gender, let's make people unhappy with the opposite gender (feminism uprising [shit, it has caused guys to fucking hate girls now]) and we can control the population and train humans how to think via mass media. It is 1984 realised... but much scarier and more profound than you can imagine. People are being pumped full of fear to consume consume consume. Have the best car, have the biggest dick, abuse your body to look good, starve yourself, eat terrible fucking food because it is cheap and easy, get breast implants because boys might like you, buy acne cream cos girls won't fuck you. Did you know water-powered cars have existed for years? One inventor was even killed after meeting with investors. They are suppressing our free energy.

Fuck the corporations, fuck the governments and fuck the few nameless, faceless and soulless vermin puppeteering the world as we know it.

The funny thing is, we all know it to be true. Deep down each one of us knows something in the air is foul and does not make complete sense. But the human race lives and dies on its knees. 

ttdim: being awake 

ttim: not being able to do anything and knowing so

[Tesla]

2 hours ago, strider said:

there was a study that... "measured the testosterone levels of 31 male MBA students who had been involved in starting new businesses with 79 male MBA students who had never been involved in starting new businesses. They found that the students with entrepreneurial experience had higher testosterone levels. In addition, there was a relationship between testosterone levels and the odds of having entrepreneurial experience after they separated out the effects of the subjects’ age, race, undergraduate degree, risk taking propensity, and the time of day that the testosterone levels were measured."

Well I was gonna say this is probably because higher testosterone levels leads to greater risk taking, but then I see the effects of greater risk taking ability is supposedly separated out (how?).

[GreenSeater]

10 minutes ago, Tesla said:

Well I was gonna say this is probably because higher testosterone levels leads to greater risk taking, but then I see the effects of greater risk taking ability is supposedly separated out (how?).

Increased testosterone levels have enormous benefits in males. Everything from increased strength and body composition to increased confidence and better emotional health. Of course men with higher levels of testosterone are going to be more likely to succeed in whichever field they choose.

[Jestr]

33 minutes ago, GreenSeater said:

Increased testosterone levels have enormous benefits in males. Everything from increased strength and body composition to increased confidence and better emotional health. Of course men with higher levels of testosterone are going to be more likely to succeed in whichever field they choose.

That's why when I became bold I just blamed it on too much testosterone. 

My head became 1 giant solar panel for a sex machine.

[cadete]

I take my standard Thursday off and WTF did I just read?

A conversation where Transgender PPL were seriously compared to PPL who they think they are RL dogs?  Homosexuality apparently being a part of evolution not wanting certain PPL to procreate? 

Also can we not discuss Testosterone levels on here? I mean seriously let's have some sort of dignity as a Male Dominated Forum... What is going happen next Thursday in my absence?

Is someone going to start a "Seduction Community" Sub Forum where PPL post pictures of everyday woman and then grade the looks of these girls that would never look twice at them as "Sixes" because apparently their ears are too big. 

[n i k o]

1 hour ago, cadete said:

Is someone going to start a "Seduction Community" Sub Forum where PPL post pictures of everyday woman and then grade the looks of these girls that would never look twice at them as "Sixes" because apparently their ears are too big. 

Seems like something strider might head up 

[bt50]

2 minutes ago, n i k o said:

Seems like something strider might head up 

He's too busy exposing the Illuminati conspiracy.
Maybe next year.

[n i k o]

Just now, bt50 said:

He's too busy exposing the Illuminati conspiracy.
Maybe next year.

Its already been exposed hasn't it?

[bt50]

2 minutes ago, n i k o said:

Its already been exposed hasn't it?

Not until its on the front page of the Hun. Pity those soccer grubs keep stealing the headlines.

Remember : The end is really just the beginning of another end.

Edited June 10, 2016 by bt50

[Embee]

25 minutes ago, bt50 said:

Not until its on the front page of the Hun. Pity those soccer grubs keep stealing the headlines.

Remember : The end is really just the beginning of another end.

[Tesla]

On 09/06/2016 at 8:25 AM, GreenSeater said:

Increased testosterone levels have enormous benefits in males. Everything from increased strength and body composition to increased confidence and better emotional health. Of course men with higher levels of testosterone are going to be more likely to succeed in whichever field they choose.

So if greater testosterone = greater success, then the gender pay gap is justified?  

 

Edited June 10, 2016 by Tesla

[cadete]

On 6/9/2016 at 8:25 AM, GreenSeater said:

Increased testosterone levels have enormous benefits in males. Everything from increased strength and body composition to increased confidence and better emotional health. Of course men with higher levels of testosterone are going to be more likely to succeed in whichever field they choose.

5 minutes ago, Tesla said:

So if greater testosterone = greater success, then the gender pay gap is justified?  

 

Can u guys please discuss Testosterone in the relevant thread:

 

[Tesla]

3 minutes ago, cadete said:

Can u guys please discuss Testosterone in the relevant thread:

 

I don't see why we can't have a scientific discussion in this thread.

Plus mr left wing basically just gave a legitimate reason (that isn't sexism) as to why men are paid more so I'm interested to hear his answer  

[GreenSeater]

22 minutes ago, Tesla said:

So if greater testosterone = greater success, then the gender pay gap is justified?  

 

Never said greater testosterone = greater success in all people. It does however have a correlation with greater success amongst males in certain fields. Females have a different hormonal makeup to men so therefore testosterone has different effects on women. Certainly wasn't intending to be sexist, I hope that's not how it was seen by people eg @cadete, I was simply saying those are the effects of testosterone on men.

17 minutes ago, cadete said:

Can u guys please discuss Testosterone in the relevant thread:

 

Also if you met me it would become very clear very quickly that I am certainly not a "gym rat"

Edited June 10, 2016 by GreenSeater

[Tesla]

6 minutes ago, GreenSeater said:

Never said greater testosterone = greater success in all people. It does however have a correlation with greater success amongst males. Females have a different hormonal makeup to men so therefore testosterone has different effects on women. Certainly wasn't intending to be sexist, I hope that's not how it was seen by people eg @cadete, I was simply saying those are the effects of testosterone on men.

Testosterone has the same effect in all humans, though obviously the more manly body composition and strength stuff you probably don't want to see in a woman.

At the very least it is well established scientifically that testosterone is the risk taking hormone, and it could be argued that reason men are more successful in certain areas is because of greater risk taking (eg business, finance, etc.)

Edited June 10, 2016 by Tesla

[thisphantomfortress]

So from this thread I have leant; if I don't take testostorone I will become a dog. If I do take it I will become a gym rat and  my head will explode.

[cadete]

3 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

So from this thread I have leant; if I don't take testostorone I will become a dog. If I do take it I will become a gym rat and  my head will explode.

I have learnt that it would be a solid investment for us to literally pull our money together in order to pay Tes to hit up some Smith Street Bars and present his views on life to the girls he comes across...

[GreenSeater]

8 minutes ago, Tesla said:

Testosterone has the same effect in all humans, though obviously the more manly body composition and strength stuff you probably don't want to see in a woman.

At the very least it is well established scientifically that testosterone is the risk taking hormone, and it could be argued that reason men are more successful in certain areas is because of greater risk taking (eg business, finance, etc.)

The main purpose of testosterone in women is to provide the basic structure of oestrogen production as oestrogen is actually made from testosterone. It also has an effect on sex drive in females. There have also been studies that have found non-linear correlation between women who have higher circulating testosterone levels and lower levels of risk aversion, however the levels of circulating testosterone in the average healthy young woman is extremely minute when compared to males, so there is doubt around whether there is any level of causation. It is actually believed that other, non-sexual adrenal hormones have a much greater effect on risk-taking in both males and females than testosterone.

[Tesla]

15 minutes ago, GreenSeater said:

The main purpose of testosterone in women is to provide the basic structure of oestrogen production as oestrogen is actually made from testosterone. It also has an effect on sex drive in females. There have also been studies that have found non-linear correlation between women who have higher circulating testosterone levels and lower levels of risk aversion, however the levels of circulating testosterone in the average healthy young woman is extremely minute when compared to males, so there is doubt around whether there is any level of causation. It is actually believed that other, non-sexual adrenal hormones have a much greater effect on risk-taking in both males and females than testosterone.

Biology major?

http://www.pnas.org/content/106/36/15268.abstract

Thoughts?

Edited June 10, 2016 by Tesla

[cadete]

1 minute ago, Tesla said:

Biology major?

http://www.pnas.org/content/106/36/15268.abstract

Thoughts?

Is that a link to an Absthetics One Percenter Video? 

Edited June 10, 2016 by cadete

[Tesla]

6 minutes ago, cadete said:

Is that a link to an Absthetics One Percenter Video? 

Let it go man, barely anyone knew who he was back then (I dont think even I had ever heard of him until you first started mentioning him), let alone now.

Edited June 10, 2016 by Tesla

[GreenSeater]

24 minutes ago, Tesla said:

Biology major?

http://www.pnas.org/content/106/36/15268.abstract

Thoughts?

Yep, and yeah that study and a couple of others were the ones I was referencing. There's definitely some eveidence out there, but not enough to say either way definitively. Correlation doesn't equal causation.

[cadete]

29 minutes ago, Tesla said:

Let it go man, barely anyone knew who he was back then (I dont think even I had ever heard of him until you first started mentioning him), let alone now.

Mate you are posting about how men like yourself are genetically superior to women because of Testosterone... its fucken lame as fuck and TBH just shows how very few women your own age that you interact with socially for to say such shit. 

It's also actually insulting to me to read such stuff TBH because I see it as an insult to the women who I am close too in my life and how they prove such a theory to be so fucken stupid.

Edited June 10, 2016 by cadete

[Tesla]

15 minutes ago, cadete said:

Mate you are posting about how men like yourself are genetically superior to women because of Testosterone... its fucken lame as fuck and TBH just shows how very few women your own age you interact with socially for to say such shit. 

It's also actually insulting to me to read such stuff TBH because I see it as an insult to the women who I am close too in my life and how they prove such a theory to be so fucken stupid.

I didn't say men are superior, I said they take greater risks, and in general that can lead to career choices that result in higher income. That doesn't make them superior, but risk is rewarded by the market as people are naturally risk adverse, hence the greater income. And the key part of what I've just said is 'in general', it doesn't mean any one individual woman can't take a risk or have a higher income, but if we look at an aggregate of all women vs all men (as people do when they bring up the gender pay gap issue), there would be a noticeable effect which I believe explains a lot of the gender pay gap..

Fact is there are genetic differences between men and women, as there are genetic differences between different races (proven by science), in both cases it doesn't mean one is necessarily superior to the other, but it does mean they are different (regardless of wether the PC leftard can't accept this), and it can lead to different outcomes over the aggregate. On the micro, or individual, level it's unlikely to be noticeable or significant but on the aggregate it is.

Edited June 10, 2016 by Tesla

[cadete]

6 minutes ago, Tesla said:

I didn't say men are superior, I said they take greater risks, and on average that can lead to career choices that result in higher income. That doesn't make them superior, but risk is rewarded by the market as people are naturally risk adverse, hence the greater income. And the key part of what I've just said is 'on average', it doesn't mean any one individual woman can't take a risk or have a higher income, but if we look at an aggregate of all women vs all men (as people do when they bring up the gender pay gap issue), there would be a noticeable effect which I believe explains a lot of the gender pay gap.

Whatever...

I cant be bothered arguing about this anymore but I am pretty sure this gap which has existed prior to Christ in the Western World has a little more to do with Gender Roles in World History (See Feudalism for one) than the modern day effects of Testosterone in regards to taking risks. 

Edited June 10, 2016 by cadete

[Tesla]

Just now, cadete said:

Whatever...

I cant be bothered arguing about this anymore but I am pretty sure this gap which has existed prior to Christ in the Western World as a little more to do with Gender Roles in World History (See Feudalism for one) than the modern day effects of Testosterone in regards to taking risks. 

For sure in the past there was an element of sexism, and in parts of modern society that still exists, no one can deny that. But in parts of modern society there is a lot of positive discrimination going on as well which probably balances out the sexism that still exists. I honestly know of a number of women who I really question whether they would have gotten the good jobs that they have if they were a male with the same CV. Though that seems to be at the early stages of one's career, if there is a bias against females in these fields it would be at the higher levels (and it wouldn't surprise me if there is a bias against women at those levels).

[cadete]

1 minute ago, Tesla said:

For sure in the past there was an element of sexism, and in parts of modern society that still exists, no one can deny that. But in parts of modern society there is a lot of positive discrimination going on as well which probably balances out the sexism that still exists. I honestly know of a number of women who I really question whether they would have gotten the good jobs that they have if they were a male with the same CV. Though that seems to be at the early stages of one's career, if there is a bias against females in these fields it would be at the higher levels (and it wouldn't surprise me if there is a bias against women at those levels).

I ams sure you are right about their now being positive discrimination...

But you are forgetting those employees who still see that the fact Women may wish to get Pregnant as a negative towards employing them for certain positions.

[Tesla]

25 minutes ago, cadete said:

I ams sure you are right about their now being positive discrimination...

But you are forgetting those employees who still see that the fact Women may wish to get Pregnant as a negative towards employing them for certain positions.

Well let's be honest, from the employer's perceptive it is a negative. Having an employee gone for a while is obviously not ideal. Perhaps not the end of the world, but certainly an inconvenience at the least. Finding and organising a replacement cost time and money. So it's only logical that if a man and women have the exact same CVs and are of an age where they're likely to have a child in the next couple of years, the man is chosen. I'm not saying it's right, but I can understand it from the employer's perspective. Though I think it's pretty short sighted if you choose an inferior male candidate over a woman because you think they'll get pregnant, but that's the employer's loss at the end of the day. It does seem the trend these days is for women to work almost right up to when they give birth and then go back to work like 2 weeks later so it's probably not as big a deal as it was once.

Edited June 10, 2016 by Tesla