• Santorum Says, "If Women Are In Combat, Men May Try To Protect Them"
    230 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Numidium;34638434]Well, there's criticism of pretty much everything. You could turn this around to infinity, I know that the main page being larger than the criticism page doesn't mean anything.[/QUOTE] It's a science that ignores the whole evaluation and testing process, so yeah Zeke is right, it's pseudo science.
[QUOTE=newbs;34637429]I'm in no way a sexist, but-[/QUOTE]I'm not racist, but black people are [B][I]OBVIOUSLY[/I][/B] predisposed towards committing crime. It's a bit of a standing thing around here that if you have to preface a statement with "I'm not <prejudice>, but..." then whatever ever follows is exactly that, <prejudice>.
[QUOTE=Turnips5;34638446]what the shit? you DISAGREED that we WEREN'T enslaved to evolutionary priorities, or at least INSINUATED that you STRONGLY DISAGREED or FOUND HIS POST SO RIDICULOUS that you COULDN'T REPLY TO IT I mean... I don't know. Am I going nuts? Is there some total breakdown of communication occurring? Because to me, that looks like you're doing what I said in capitals above. There might have been a huge misunderstanding here.[/QUOTE] I found his post, that to me implied we were free of biological predisposition, hard to reply to. Yeah. I disagreed that we weren't enslaved. Yeah. That doesn't mean I think that we are enslaved to it. As I said, just because I disagree with that extreme suggestion does not mean I support the extreme opposite. I explained before that I think that it definitely plays a role in our actions, with which you agreed on. I'm disagreeing with the notion that we're completely free of them, which to me, not being enslaved to them implied.
[QUOTE=Numidium;34638523]Yeah. I disagreed that we weren't enslaved. Yeah. That doesn't mean I think that we are enslaved to it.[/QUOTE] I suggest you forget evolutionary psychology and take a crash course in boolean logic
I said I didn't know how to respond to him because I honestly didn't, and I did not want to start this exact argument. It probably came across as me saying he's dumb, and the comment about meeting humans was snarky, yeah, but what I was trying to get across is that if you know how people behave you can't claim they're completely free of natural instincts and biologically backed behaviour. [editline]10th February 2012[/editline] You can't look at this as 0 and 1, there is a pretty huge grey zone that you ignore for some reason. [editline]10th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Turnips5;34638550]I suggest you forget evolutionary psychology and take a crash course in boolean logic[/QUOTE] This is a spectrum issue, you can't take my opinion and pretend it's a switch that has to either be completely on one extreme or completely on the other. [editline]10th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Turnips5;34638550]I suggest you forget evolutionary psychology and take a crash course in boolean logic[/QUOTE] When I say that everything you do is wrong, and someone disagrees, it doesn't mean he thinks everything you do is right. This should be pretty obvious. Boolean logic doesn't apply to something as complex as an opinion.
Alright, I'm sorry for using that hyperbole then. And if you could, please stop calling me a "Him", it's kind of annoying since my user-name indicates otherwise.
You're not gonna tell me you look at everything as a complete black and white issue, are you? [editline]10th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=QueenSasha24;34638641]Alright, I'm sorry for using that hyperbole then. And if you could, please stop calling me a "Him", it's kind of annoying since my user-name indicates otherwise.[/QUOTE] You could stop descending to rating every post you disagree with dumbs and actually posting a fucking point before I talk about you by your name. Don't demand respect from me while you tell me I'm stupid.
If a man and woman were injured in combat, it's more likely that another man will attempt to save the woman first, regardless of how serious the wounded man's injuries might be. No, it cannot be proven that this will happen every time, but the likeliness of it happening is more than I would gamble. Way to go, Facepunch, disagreeing for the sake that someone on the right said it.
[QUOTE=Numidium;34638648]You're not gonna tell me you look at everything as a complete black and white issue, are you? [editline]10th February 2012[/editline] You could stop descending to rating every post you disagree with dumbs and actually posting a fucking point before I talk about you by your name. Don't demand respect from me while you tell me I'm stupid.[/QUOTE] Excuse me? I merely asked you call me She instead of He, christ, calm down. I didn't rate every post of yours dumb, and I've been posting my point for the past page and a half.
[QUOTE=Numidium;34638648]You're not gonna tell me you look at everything as a complete black and white issue, are you? [editline]10th February 2012[/editline] You could stop descending to rating every post you disagree with dumbs and actually posting a fucking point before I talk about you by your name. Don't demand respect from me while you tell me I'm stupid.[/QUOTE] Wow, you were sounding almost [I]rational[/I] there, and then you went and insulted her. when did she tell you you were stupid, and when did she demand respect?
[QUOTE=Hostel;34638692]If a man and woman were injured in combat, it's more likely that another man will attempt to save the woman first, regardless of how serious the wounded man's injuries might be. Way to go, Facepunch, disagreeing for the sake that someone on the right said it.[/QUOTE] We're not disagreeing because someone on the right said it, we're disagreeing because those statements aren't back up by any fact.
[QUOTE=Hostel;34638692]If a man and woman were injured in combat, it's more likely that another man will attempt to save the woman first, regardless of how serious the wounded man's injuries might be. Way to go, Facepunch, disagreeing for the sake that someone on the right said it.[/QUOTE] Tell me why. Give me 5 good reasons why a man would automatically go for the woman instead of the man first.
[QUOTE=hoodoo456;34638715]Tell me why. Give me 5 good reasons why a man would automatically go for the woman instead of the man first.[/QUOTE] Must resist making joke about tits...
[QUOTE=Zeke129;34637994]This HAS to be a satire post I refuse to believe otherwise, because it's great satire (if not, just want to let you know that evopsych is basically pseudoscience)[/QUOTE] 1. Lies to self about the sincerity of his opponents views based off of "absurdity". 2. Sources wikipedia to establish credibility. You are just a gem of a poster, aren't you? :)
[QUOTE=newbs;34638780]1. Lies to self about the sincerity of his opponents views based off of "absurdity". 2. Sources wikipedia to establish credibility. You are just a gem of a poster, aren't you? :)[/QUOTE] If you actually took the time to read the posts the claim was to check the sources of the pages, not wikipedia itself.
-snip-
[QUOTE=newbs;34638780]1. Lies to self about the sincerity of his opponents views based off of "absurdity". 2. Sources wikipedia to establish credibility. You are just a gem of a poster, aren't you? :)[/QUOTE] Wikipedia is still more credible than evo psych though hurr hurr hurr,
[QUOTE=hoodoo456;34638715]Tell me why. Give me 5 good reasons why a man would automatically go for the woman instead of the man first.[/QUOTE] Men instinctively want to protect women, the child bearers, from harm. Even since nomadic times, men have always left women and children inside the village for safety. From bearing witness and experiencing it myself, men have a natural inclination to protect women.
[QUOTE=QueenSasha24;34638819]If you actually took the time to read the posts the claim was to check the sources of the pages, not wikipedia itself.[/QUOTE] If it isn't from an academic article or peer-reviewed I refuse to acknowledge it in a formal debate. Life is just a lot cleaner that way.
[QUOTE=hoodoo456;34638701]Wow, you were sounding almost [I]rational[/I] there, and then you went and insulted her. when did she tell you you were stupid, and when did she demand respect?[/QUOTE] You're the guy who's only turned up a few posts ago that suddenly had the capacity to us text instead of rating to convey his point, and I haven't really seen any of it yet except "Hey guys, everyone that disagrees with me is stupid, ima rate em dumb and not engage in a debate!". And she demands that I care about the way I refer to her when she's been doing the same thing. Please, at least try to apply the golden rule a little tiny bit? And before the smartasses among you tell me how dumb I am for caring about ratings, yeah, I care about a guy that has nothing better to do than rate every one of my posts dumb without contributing anything to the discussion, I feel it's pretty low and says a lot more about hoodoo than there is on the surface. Also, could you all please stop claiming that I said some things I DID NOT SAY and stop treating my opinion as a 0/1 switch? Boolean logic, if you want me to use your smart term, does not apply to this. Opinions are not a math equation.
[QUOTE=Hostel;34638858]Men instinctively want to protect women, the child bearers, from harm. Even since nomadic times, men have always left women and children inside the village for safety. From bearing witness and experiencing it myself, men have a natural inclination to protect women.[/QUOTE] Well I certainly don't feel this instinctive need to go out and specifically save women so am I no longer classifiable as a human?
[QUOTE=Hostel;34638858]Men instinctively want to protect women, the child bearers, from harm. Even since nomadic times, men have always left women and children inside the village for safety. From bearing witness and experiencing it myself, men have a natural inclination to protect women.[/QUOTE] Ok, now give me 4 more.
[QUOTE=newbs;34638859]If it isn't from an academic article or peer-reviewed I refuse to acknowledge it in a formal debate. Life is just a lot cleaner that way.[/QUOTE] Wikipedia uses other sources, it pretty much takes information from peer reviewed sources and puts them on wikipedia.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;34638902]Well I certainly don't feel this instinctive need to go out and specifically save women so am I no longer classifiable as a human?[/QUOTE] Yep, you're no longer human.
[QUOTE=newbs;34638780]1. Lies to self about the sincerity of his opponents views based off of "absurdity". 2. Sources wikipedia to establish credibility. You are just a gem of a poster, aren't you? :)[/QUOTE] Wikipedia is a perfectly valid source if you think of it as a community-driven information aggregator (because that's what it is)
And the scary thing is that Americans want this guy to be President. He won all three states back on Tuesday.
[QUOTE=hoodoo456;34638924]Ok, now give me 4 more.[/QUOTE] Sorry that I only made one reason, making five would just be reaching for nothing and make my point more illegitimate than it actually is. I wouldn't demand five reasons from you, one good one would suit me.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;34638902]Well I certainly don't feel this instinctive need to go out and specifically save women so am I no longer classifiable as a human?[/QUOTE] Yep, since you don't treat women like fragile dolls that are COMPLETELY NEEDED to continue our (already overpopulated) species, you're not human. /sarcasm obviously
[QUOTE=Numidium;34638886]You're the guy who's only turned up a few posts ago that suddenly had the capacity to us text instead of rating to convey his point, and I haven't really seen any of it yet except "Hey guys, everyone that disagrees with me is stupid, ima rate em dumb and not engage in a debate!". And she demands that I care about the way I refer to her when she's been doing the same thing. Please, at least try to apply the golden rule a little tiny bit? And before the smartasses among you tell me how dumb I am for caring about ratings, yeah, I care about a guy that has nothing better to do than rate every one of my posts dumb without contributing anything to the discussion, I feel it's pretty low and says a lot more about hoodoo than there is on the surface. Also, could you all please stop claiming that I said some things I DID NOT SAY and stop treating my opinion as a 0/1 switch? Boolean logic, if you want me to use your smart term, does not apply to this. Opinions are not a math equation.[/QUOTE] Holy shit, are you for real? I've engaged in debate, and Queensasha simply asked you to call her a girl instead of a boy. Is it possible for you to be any more irrational?
[QUOTE=Hostel;34638939]Yep, you're no longer human.[/QUOTE] Does this make me above human then? I've always wanted to be some kind of post human!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.