This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Mapletree Croydon 31 Dec 22 6.57pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
What utter horsesh1te. Ok, lets deal with your dangerous views and look at your points. I have an actual STEM degree yet your incredible arrogance thinks you can tell me what 'science' is.....I guess we can't expect much better from HR. First this claim that these definitions are 'science'. Let's be clear, this is 'social science' which many regard as having spurious claims. For example, 'critical race theory' is backed by the same 'science'. Whereas twenty years ago it didn't. The only difference between those two times is in the nature of politics of the field now. Now the social sciences are essentially progressives pushing ideology. Similar to paedophilia, there is nothing new here that we didn't know sixty years ago. The only difference is that these fields are now populated by the progressives. Jordan Peterson has talked about how this has happened and he comes from these fields himself. This claim that we should just accept something 'scientists' say. Yeah? Well the Nazis had 'scientists' backing their claims as well. Do you accept them as well then?....Guess not. Perhaps anyone left wing in a white coat is a kind of god for you. People representing 'science' talk crap all the time. Al Gore was telling us that the 'science' was making all kinds of predictions that turned out to be wrong. What consequence did he suffer for being wrong? Errr None. That's a clue to why a lot of this stuff is spread. Funding and lack of negative consequence. You can find social 'scientists' who will tell you that race doesn't exist? A conclusion that also just word play with categories designed for a political purpose and to keep their pay cheques going. You try to present 'science' as if it's something that isn't to be questioned, when the reality is that science isn't that at all. Science isn't about consensus and in fact most of its breakthroughs came from outside of it. Onto another errorous point you make. The idea that this 'science' and re-catogoring would work to reduce sexual offending. More horsesh1te. I heard the same crap back when sexual education was being promoted to be taught in schools. I watched t***s on telly telling everyone that we needed sex education to reduce teenage pregnancy and sex outside stable relationships. What was the result.....teenage pregnancies increased and marriage continued to decline. What did the geniuses tell us....oh we needed more sex education....what was the result, just more of the same outcomes. What price did these people pay for being wrong? Nothing, their goal was achieved they didn't have to answer for worsening the social metrics. In the view of anyone with common sense the exact same reality applies here. If you take away the social stigma attached to the sexual abuse of children you increase the incidents of it happening. If academics in the social sciences want to define categories amongst the sickos amongst themselves then that's one thing. When it results in our Police Forces adopting the same language a line has been crossed. Social conservatives holds the line. Progressivism is responsible for those lines being crossed and its adherents are responsible for all the worsening social metrics within society with all the increased suffering it has brought......from reduced social cohesion to fatherless children to the mentally ill thinking they are a different sex to increased child abuse sexual or otherwise and all the rest of it. People with common sense need to run society again. All we have are failures with egos. Edited by Stirlingsays (31 Dec 2022 6.49pm) Ah yes. Who needs experts when what you need is common sense Perhaps you’d like to look again at teenage pregnancy rates oh great scientist. Nobody is saying destigmatise child sexual abuse, idiotic comment. So, what IS your approach to dealing with child sex offenders? I just knew you’d make some superficial mention of social conservatism and have no other content.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 31 Dec 22 7.15pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Ah yes. Who needs experts when what you need is common sense Perhaps you’d like to look again at teenage pregnancy rates oh great scientist. Nobody is saying destigmatise child sexual abuse, idiotic comment. So, what IS your approach to dealing with child sex offenders? I just knew you’d make some superficial mention of social conservatism and have no other content. 'Experts'...That's the fallacy of authority. Whether someone is an expert or not comes down to their results not letters after their name. There are plenty of 'intelligent' people with little common sense and the fact that you can't seem to recognise that is a little concerning. I disagree that this isn't an attempt to destigmatise, I believe that is precisely what is being attempted and the left have form in this area. I think you are seriously misguided. I've just written a long post yet you are still moaning that I'm not covering enough ground for you. I've pointed out the error in your assumptions yet I'm expected to provide you with new social polices to avoid the damage progressivism is inflicting. You want me to lay out a programme to fix the mess your politics inflicts? That would take several long posts. The fact remains, it was a lie to suggest that introducing sex education would reduce teenage pregnancies. It was and is a giant waste of money whose's only use is to provide 'keep busy' jobs for waffle merchants. The pill has been used instead of social stigma to keep teenage pregnancy stable. I maintain this is a faulty approach. Before the pill only social conservatism via social stigma keeps it down. The recent small change in teenage pregnancy seems to be from the crash in 2008 rather than anything else. Edited by Stirlingsays (31 Dec 2022 7.17pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Glazier#1 31 Dec 22 11.11pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
'Experts'...That's the fallacy of authority. Whether someone is an expert or not comes down to their results not letters after their name. There are plenty of 'intelligent' people with little common sense and the fact that you can't seem to recognise that is a little concerning. I disagree that this isn't an attempt to destigmatise, I believe that is precisely what is being attempted and the left have form in this area. I think you are seriously misguided. I've just written a long post yet you are still moaning that I'm not covering enough ground for you. I've pointed out the error in your assumptions yet I'm expected to provide you with new social polices to avoid the damage progressivism is inflicting. You want me to lay out a programme to fix the mess your politics inflicts? That would take several long posts. The fact remains, it was a lie to suggest that introducing sex education would reduce teenage pregnancies. It was and is a giant waste of money whose's only use is to provide 'keep busy' jobs for waffle merchants. The pill has been used instead of social stigma to keep teenage pregnancy stable. I maintain this is a faulty approach. Before the pill only social conservatism via social stigma keeps it down. The recent small change in teenage pregnancy seems to be from the crash in 2008 rather than anything else. Edited by Stirlingsays (31 Dec 2022 7.17pm) You mean illegal abortions, babies given up for adoption, phantom 'brothers' and 'sisters'.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 01 Jan 23 12.06am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Glazier#1
You mean illegal abortions, babies given up for adoption, phantom 'brothers' and 'sisters'. It isn't the abortion that bothers your type, it's whether it's deemed legal or not....To me if you're ending defenseless and vulnerable human life then the legality of it is a rather secondary consideration....Jesus wept. Babies are still very much given up for adoption....pointless. Considering you lot allow surrogacy and same sex adoption you don't have any claim to morality that's worth a damn.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
MrWhyNot 01 Jan 23 5.51am | |
---|---|
Case in point, on the opposite asile, Stateside there are countless Republicans and those linked to the party who have been prosecuted for child sex crimes. Many high profile, many 'forgiven' and active politically. Found online, hundreds of examples are part of this list. Itself political, the list is yet another illustration of how this point scoring achieves nothing but a series of finger points in both directions that ultimately achieve nothing and means nothing [Link] Does this list therefore mean that abuse is a 'Conservative problem' that we can lump at that doorstep? No, grotesque conduct transcends political affiliation and doesn't fit glib, naive or radicalised social media storylines and a desire to stick it to those you don't like. Whether you're left or right tells us nothing about your conduct in this regard. The push to wed it to politics then becomes that 'the left' are trying to normalise it. Again, the main purpose of that is to make the aforementioned abuse by those they're politically aligned with have zero wider meaning, and to do the very opposite with their political 'enemies'; to broadly sully an entire political identity by pushing the same kind of individual examples as 'proof' of that. Repulsive. It's the same filth whoever is doing it. And when it comes to inappropriate level stuff that people may view politically, whether a drag show that should be adults only, or a creepy bible belt beauty pageant that get kids dressed up and parading in mini skirts with a full face of adult make-up, we can all say 'look at that!', but realistically almost nobody other than actual abusers in society thinks that child abuse is in any way acceptable. Anyone seeking to go ultra political on this, is politically bought and sold. You can see that from the other avalache of off unrelated views they inevitably hold. 'How to gift your mind and morals to social media echo chambers for free' replaces 'how to make friends and influence people'. Radicalisation for Dummies. My suggestion for these types. Communicate. Associate. Relate. Drawing opinions and perspectives from reality rather than an electronically transmitted feed tends not to be a bad choice in life.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
MrWhyNot 01 Jan 23 5.56am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
If you take away the social stigma attached to the sexual abuse of children you increase the incidents of it happening. I disagree that this isn't an attempt to destigmatise, I believe that is precisely what is being attempted and the left have form in this area. Edited by Stirlingsays (31 Dec 2022 7.21pm) You clearly hold such a rage against politics opposed to yours that you view this crass conjuring as a fruitful attack vector. In your other post it was 'your lot' approve of this ,aimed at basically more than half of the country. Hijacking child misery that happens in various forms for political advantage. Most people on 'the left' hold perfectly normal views, as do most on 'the right'. You certainly don't though, that's for sure.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
MrWhyNot 01 Jan 23 6.02am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Considering you lot allow surrogacy and same sex adoption you don't have any claim to morality that's worth a damn. 'You lot' again is it? Ironically considering I'm not even liberal, I still feel the need to call this stuff out. To be honest, from just reading a few threads, this included, you essentially cannot seemingly go a moment without trying to lump in gays and others with your breadcrumb trail to deplorable sexual conduct that basically no-one outside of the warped goes along with. If you want to do so realise that you're publicly saying this to people in your own life. Is political point scoring worth that? You seriously need to get a handle on your conduct and mods need to get a grip on and perspective on the fact that this is a Palace forum for all, not some comfort pillow for radicalised individuals with too much time on their hands craving lumping normal people in with deviants and abuse. Sort this crap out please, mods. Seriously. This does not look good. Edited by MrWhyNot (01 Jan 2023 6.47am)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 01 Jan 23 8.13am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by MrWhyNot
'You lot' again is it? Ironically considering I'm not even liberal, I still feel the need to call this stuff out. To be honest, from just reading a few threads, this included, you essentially cannot seemingly go a moment without trying to lump in gays and others with your breadcrumb trail to deplorable sexual conduct that basically no-one outside of the warped goes along with. If you want to do so realise that you're publicly saying this to people in your own life. Is political point scoring worth that? You seriously need to get a handle on your conduct and mods need to get a grip on and perspective on the fact that this is a Palace forum for all, not some comfort pillow for radicalised individuals with too much time on their hands craving lumping normal people in with deviants and abuse. Sort this crap out please, mods. Seriously. This does not look good. Edited by MrWhyNot (01 Jan 2023 6.47am) What doesn't look good is individuals demanding Mods neuter other peoples opinions. This is the political thread you can always choose to ignore it if you don't like some of the opinions on here. I don't always agree with Stirlingsays but I will defend his right to say it as long as he stays within the forum rules. I would also defend WE and Steeleye and others who I almost never agree with. If you want an echo chamber I would recommend the BBS they will welcome you with open arms.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
The Dolphin 01 Jan 23 10.05am | |
---|---|
I think we would all agree that -
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
HKOwen Hong Kong 01 Jan 23 10.23am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Ah yes. Who needs experts when what you need is common sense Perhaps you’d like to look again at teenage pregnancy rates oh great scientist. Nobody is saying destigmatise child sexual abuse, idiotic comment. So, what IS your approach to dealing with child sex offenders? I just knew you’d make some superficial mention of social conservatism and have no other content. HR, absolute joke profession, I have managed HR people over the years, generally payroll clerks who got a break when companies had to try and follow new employment legislation, the most damning comments came from professional recruiters. I have yet to encounter an " HR professional " worth the name.
Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
HKOwen Hong Kong 01 Jan 23 10.30am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Reminds me of the Paedophile Information Exchange that the likes of Harriet Harman gave a platform to in the 1970s. Yep, people need to be reminded. I don't understand how the word " stigma " came in to a discussion involving child sexual abuse ( I Have not read back every post ) which is apart from anything else is criminal.
Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Glazier#1 01 Jan 23 11.00am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
It isn't the abortion that bothers your type, it's whether it's deemed legal or not....To me if you're ending defenseless and vulnerable human life then the legality of it is a rather secondary consideration....Jesus wept. Babies are still very much given up for adoption....pointless. Considering you lot allow surrogacy and same sex adoption you don't have any claim to morality that's worth a damn. 'Your type' 'You lot' Generalised, scattergun nonsense assumptions, as usual. No point. You've made your mind up already over everything. Whilst you continue to adopt this attitude where everyone is categorised into your handy boxes, you will achieve nothing but a biased, closed mind. Good luck with that one. I'm much more interested in a proper, human discussion. Not to be found with you. Jesus did indeed weep.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.