You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Sexual Harrassment
October 26 2021 3.20am

Sexual Harrassment

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 28 of 32 < 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 >

 

View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 07 Dec 17 3.35pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

That's not the point. He ran for its leadership and chairs its committees and without Clinton's cheating would have probably been the candidate and all mainly on grassroot support.

He represents the heart of democratic belief systems and politics today.

He's not even as far left as many in the democratic party today.


Still, he's not a Democrat, which was your original claim.

He represents the heart of the progressive movement in the US today, not that of the Democratic Party. If he represented the latter, he'd be President right now.

As to claiming that the Party has members more to the left of Bernie...please show your work. Who and why? And I'm expecting lots of names because you said "many".

Edited by Ray in Houston (07 Dec 2017 3.36pm)

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 07 Dec 17 3.41pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Mapletree

The point is that nobody knows what is 'natural difference between the sexes' and what is enforced - either through disciplining or socialisation. That is why everyone should read the seminal work on this topic by John Stuart Mill.

[Link]

Modern biological research has uncovered many of the natural differences between the sexes.....Damore cited many of them....why would you even say 'nobody knows'?

Hormonal differences don't just change bodies they change mental drives and the idea that everyone's bringing up girls a certain way and boys another way and that accounts for differences is holding their heads deep in the sand..

Mill is writing over a 150 years ago and....I imagine writing purely as if differences were purely social constructs.


Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Dec 2017 3.54pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 07 Dec 17 3.47pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I have no idea how you can regard the current Democratic party as right wing when they embrace more progressive ideas than even the Labour party.

Your description to my mind is from ten years ago.


Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Dec 2017 10.54am)

Because Progressive ideas are not Left wing, they're liberal. You can't really be left wing and embracing pro-corporate policy over social policy. The democrats like progressive policy, because its a cheap give me to those more liberal leaning democrats.

Its like New Labour and fox hunting, a bone they threw to the left wing of the Labour party, whilst busily selling out the working classes to corporate agendas.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 07 Dec 17 3.53pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

Still, he's not a Democrat, which was your original claim.

Ok

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

He represents the heart of the progressive movement in the US today, not that of the Democratic Party. If he represented the latter, he'd be President right now.

Perhaps

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

As to claiming that the Party has members more to the left of Bernie...please show your work. Who and why? And I'm expecting lots of names because you said "many".

Edited by Ray in Houston (07 Dec 2017 3.36pm)

I don't know their names but I see them talking on YouTube videos.

Perhaps they are supporters rather than members I don't know.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Mapletree's Profile Mapletree Flag Croydon 07 Dec 17 3.54pm Send a Private Message to Mapletree Add Mapletree as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Modern biological research has uncovered many of the natural differences between the sexes.....Damore cited many of them....why would you even say 'nobody knows'?

Hormonal differences don't just change bodies they change mental drives and the idea that everyone's bringing up girls a certain way and boys another way and that accounts for differences is holding their heads deep in the sand..

Mill is writing over a 150 years ago and....I imagine writing purely as if differences were social constructs.


Then you imagine wrong. There is no doubt there are differences between men and women. It is just not possible to ascertain them with certainty due to the overlay of environmental and social issues. This was fully recognised by Mill. Better to read the original text, or at least a précis, rather than make assumptions that may (or may not) happen to fit your argument or world view.


And by the way, 'Science' has 'proved' many things in the past. Then subsequent research shifts the paradigm and all that 'proven' stuff is found to be the wrong way to look at it. It always amazes me how much it is American research that finds scientific rationales for 'convenient truths'.

This may help:

[Link]

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 07 Dec 17 3.59pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Because Progressive ideas are not Left wing, they're liberal. You can't really be left wing and embracing pro-corporate policy over social policy. The democrats like progressive policy, because its a cheap give me to those more liberal leaning democrats.

Its like New Labour and fox hunting, a bone they threw to the left wing of the Labour party, whilst busily selling out the working classes to corporate agendas.

We see liberals and progressives very differently.

Perhaps I identify more with classical liberals then, because these two schools have adherents who aren't seeing eye to eye.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Mapletree's Profile Mapletree Flag Croydon 07 Dec 17 4.00pm Send a Private Message to Mapletree Add Mapletree as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Modern biological research has uncovered many of the natural differences between the sexes.....Damore cited many of them....why would you even say 'nobody knows'?

Hormonal differences don't just change bodies they change mental drives and the idea that everyone's bringing up girls a certain way and boys another way and that accounts for differences is holding their heads deep in the sand..

Mill is writing over a 150 years ago and....I imagine writing purely as if differences were purely social constructs.


Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Dec 2017 3.54pm)

Ah, you mean James Damore, that well known scientist. Amazing how he hit on the differences so accurately when social scientists have been wrestling with them inconclusively since The Scottish Enlightenment. Not exactly a learned treatise taking into account all of the relevant research and theory available, now was it?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 07 Dec 17 4.00pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I don't know their names but I see them talking on YouTube videos.

Perhaps they are supporters rather than members I don't know.


You saw some YouTube videos that you can't now conjure but really, as you admit, you don't know. Classic.

Thanks! We now have a standard by which to judge all of the many facts you have expressed about which you seemed equally certain.

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 07 Dec 17 4.03pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Modern biological research has uncovered many of the natural differences between the sexes.....Damore cited many of them....why would you even say 'nobody knows'?

Hormonal differences don't just change bodies they change mental drives and the idea that everyone's bringing up girls a certain way and boys another way and that accounts for differences is holding their heads deep in the sand..

Mill is writing over a 150 years ago and....I imagine writing purely as if differences were social constructs.


Differences, aren't deterministic though. The influence of biological factors, such as neurotransmitters, genetics and hormonal secretions are very complicated, especially when dealing with behaviour. They tend to be associated with behavioural phenomena, usually in relation to abnormality (such as serotonin reuptake being linked with depression).

Of course, with that, the argument about misandry becomes somewhat justified, because most complaints about male behaviour linked to things like violence against women, sexual violence etc also has a strong biological basis as well.

The problem with this kind of generalisation, is that its false. Its based on studies of abnormality.

The role of equality should never be 'you must be this', but about opening up the opportunity for people to pursue options.

Granted we are limited by biological factors; I doubt women can ever achieve the same kind of physical achievement of most professional male athletes - But almost any women who puts in the physical focus to become a female athlete is going to rank men who don't put that effort in.

This stems from a problem in how we view biological differences, because they're based largely on evidence acquired from outliers. For example, when studying violence in men, there is a genetic trait common among murderers, but attributing this becomes problematic when you find out this genetic trait is present in about 20% of the population who have never committed an act of violence.

What we know about 'how parts of the brain function' comes more from studying the unlucky few that we know have suffered brain damage (again outliers).

Obviously, there are differences between men and women, and individuals, but these more define the limits of our ability, than the ability itself.

But I'd imagine that most physically fit men would struggle in a race against Kelly Holmes. Not because of genetic differences, but because of the capacity of effort put in by the latter.

And that's really what counts, in the end, what you make of yourself, rather than what you're made of.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 07 Dec 17 4.06pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Mapletree

Then you imagine wrong. There is no doubt there are differences between men and women. It is just not possible to ascertain them with certainty due to the overlay of environmental and social issues. This was fully recognised by Mill. Better to read the original text, or at least a précis, rather than make assumptions that may (or may not) happen to fit your argument or world view.


And by the way, 'Science' has 'proved' many things in the past. Then subsequent research shifts the paradigm and all that 'proven' stuff is found to be the wrong way to look at it. It always amazes me how much it is American research that finds scientific rationales for 'convenient truths'.

This may help:

[Link]


All written by you on a computer.

'Science has 'proven' stuff and then found out that is was wrong.....guess what found it to be wrong and made corrections? S C I E N C E.

It happens when ideas are contested.....where is the contesting in this area from science?

Mill had no access to the modern day research we have had from science on the biological differences between the sexes......it is standard and accepted in the field that men and women are biologically different and that results in behavioural differences....they aren't contested.

Please point out to me that areas in biological study where there is doubt on behavioural differences.

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Dec 2017 4.07pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 07 Dec 17 4.06pm

Originally posted by Mapletree

Ah, you mean James Damore, that well known scientist. Amazing how he hit on the differences so accurately when social scientists have been wrestling with them inconclusively since The Scottish Enlightenment. Not exactly a learned treatise taking into account all of the relevant research and theory available, now was it?

The last 117 years of so there has been an argument between biology and psychology, which biology has progressively been losing - Resulting in the 'Crisis of Social Sciences' in the 70s and 80s.

The problem really becomes on of paradigm - Biology does not deal with individuals, but species. Which means its good at generalisations, but very poor when it comes to specifics relating to individuals.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View dannyh's Profile dannyh Flag wherever I lay my hat....... 07 Dec 17 4.09pm Send a Private Message to dannyh Add dannyh as a friend

Question.

There are certain 5 a side competitions that allow for mixed sex sides, so what happens if a team score a goal and the female members join in the group hug, and latterly decide to claim sexual assault/harassment.

It very much seems that men are considered guilty before even a single statement is given.


 


"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 28 of 32 < 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Sexual Harrassment