The 2017 Election Thread

[jasonu]

Did anyone chuck a dildo or maybe a box of connies at her at the Waitangi Murray Day parade?

[Crasherfromwayback]

Did anyone chuck a dildo or maybe a box of connies at her at the Waitangi Murray Day parade?

Nah. Prob as she doesn't talk shit like Old Dickface.

[carbonhed]

Nah. Prob as she doesn't talk shit like Old Dickface.

Really? It's fingernails down a blackboard virtue signalling for me plus teeth and lipstick... still I guess there's enough pencil dicked, pussy whipped eunuchs begging for a pity fuck to keep the boat afloat for now.

[Graystone]

So it's the latter option then - Ad Hominems....

But at least you agree that my beliefs are supported by Evidence...

So who is the Sexist? The person who has evidence for their beliefs or the person who doesn't....

The sexist is the one who holds sexist beliefs, this should not be a difficult concept to understand.

And don't go confusing my knowledge of the difference between supporting evidence and conclusive evidence to assume I have none at all for my beliefs.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Really? It's fingernails down a blackboard virtue signalling for me plus teeth and lipstick... still I guess there's enough pencil dicked, pussy whipped eunuchs begging for a pity fuck to keep the boat afloat for now.

Lol. As I said to Woodman, feel free to show us a pic of your Mrs. Me, I'm more than happy with mine, and I didn't vote for her for her looks.

[ellipsis]

...this gets better every day...more, 'intellectuals' joining the fray......dweeb-warriors unite

[TheDemonLord]

The sexist is the one who holds sexist beliefs, this should not be a difficult concept to understand.

Yeah, you missed the point there...

Is it sexist to believe Men (on average) are stronger than Women?
Or
Is it sexist to believe that they are not?

And don't go confusing my knowledge of the difference between supporting evidence and conclusive evidence to assume I have none at all for my beliefs.

Well, I'm all ears/eyes.

You speak a lot about evidence, but it is conspicuous by its absence.

[TheDemonLord]

...this gets better every day...more, 'intellectuals' joining the fray......dweeb-warriors unite

Feeling a bit inadequate are we?

[Graystone]

Yeah, you missed the point there...

Is it sexist to believe Men (on average) are stronger than Women?
Or
Is it sexist to believe that they are not?



Well, I'm all ears/eyes.

You speak a lot about evidence, but it is conspicuous by its absence.

It has been conclusively shown they are, so it is not sexist to believe they are. It certainly isn't sexist to beleive they aren't though.

Nah, you're clearly not up to it.

[TheDemonLord]

It has been conclusively shown they are, so it is not sexist to believe they are. It certainly isn't sexist to beleive they aren't though.

Isn't it though? if one believes something untrue about a specific Gender - sounds a bit like Sexism to me...

Nah, you're clearly not up to it.

So you got nothing then... Thought so.

[Graystone]

Isn't it though? if one believes something untrue about a specific Gender - sounds a bit like Sexism to me...



So you got nothing then... Thought so.

Then you should read up on what sexism is "Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination" are some pretty key words there.

[TheDemonLord]

Then you should read up on what sexism is "Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination" are some pretty key words there.

You mean Prejudice as in believing something that is untrue about a group?

Cause the evidence for Men being stronger than women is about the same as the evidence for Men having greater variability on the IQ scale.

Yet one you believe, the other you don't - and I'm saying that you don't believe the other for Sexist reasons - only it's Sexism against Men.

[Graystone]

You mean Prejudice as in believing something that is untrue about a group?

Cause the evidence for Men being stronger than women is about the same as the evidence for Men having greater variability on the IQ scale.

Yet one you believe, the other you don't - and I'm saying that you don't believe the other for Sexist reasons - only it's Sexism against Men.

No, again I simply mean the meaning of the word, not some other thing you wish to strawman.

it really isn't, not even close.

[TheDemonLord]

No, again I simply mean the meaning of the word, not some other thing you wish to strawman.

Oh I know where you are trying to box me into - but there is no strawman here - you've screeched sexism like a shrill harpy, because I've dared to say something that at worst has data backing it as a possibly valid conclusion (which you've neither refuted or posted anything to countermand its validity - merely just saying it's not true). At best it's a proven conclusion.

And now I'm saying that maybe the reason you fight with so much vitriol (and lack of evidence) against it, is that it is you who are the Sexist - who can't accept that maybe the reason more Men than Women get to the top is due to a Biological advantage.

Afterall - to quote Sargon's law - when someone makes a character judgment about you, the same is true for themselves.

it really isn't, not even close.

Well, firstly how would you know? You've declined to post up any evidence to the contrary...

But more to the point:

For both - we've got multiple independent studies, across cultures and with large sample sizes
For both - we've got objective real world empirical data that backs up the studies
For both - we've got a sound theoretical model to explain the differences
and for the bonus round:
For both - we've got sexist zealots who try and say it's not true because 'muh sexism' and 'muh societal bias'

[Graystone]

Oh I know where you are trying to box me into - but there is no strawman here - you've screeched sexism like a shrill harpy, because I've dared to say something that at worst has data backing it as a possibly valid conclusion (which you've neither refuted or posted anything to countermand its validity - merely just saying it's not true). At best it's a proven conclusion.

And now I'm saying that maybe the reason you fight with so much vitriol (and lack of evidence) against it, is that it is you who are the Sexist - who can't accept that maybe the reason more Men than Women get to the top is due to a Biological advantage.

Afterall - to quote Sargon's law - when someone makes a character judgment about you, the same is true for themselves.



Well, firstly how would you know? You've declined to post up any evidence to the contrary...

But more to the point:

For both - we've got multiple independent studies, across cultures and with large sample sizes
For both - we've got objective real world empirical data that backs up the studies
For both - we've got a sound theoretical model to explain the differences
and for the bonus round:
For both - we've got sexist zealots who try and say it's not true because 'muh sexism' and 'muh societal bias'

My belief may be wrong, as may yours, but mine may not be a sexist one as I make no distinction between genders; yours however, does and is.

Come off it mate, they're still not even close. In addition to greatly overstating your own evidence by unjustified grouping, there's a fourth one to that list you missed...