tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post829786780259740300..comments2024-03-22T11:55:50.335+13:00Comments on Not PC: Tall Poppies, Cyber Bullies, Culture Wars & Antidotes–updatedPeter Cresswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comBlogger89125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-31215698843503797042014-03-08T12:32:58.085+13:002014-03-08T12:32:58.085+13:00OK, so Putin does not like gays. So, it is true th...OK, so Putin does not like gays. So, it is true that Rand didn't like them either. Now since she is infallible when it comes to Objectivism, the last word on the subject must be that gays is ungood. <br /><br />AmitAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-68071641926159529592014-03-08T09:27:03.400+13:002014-03-08T09:27:03.400+13:00Do you have a point to make regarding the topics w...Do you have a point to make regarding the topics we're discussing?Dolfnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-39861517340377461322014-03-07T15:44:05.446+13:002014-03-07T15:44:05.446+13:00Dolf, you are too much for me
just a day or so ag...Dolf, you are too much for me<br /><br />just a day or so ago you acknolwedged that me calling you Dolt was in retaliation for saying I was "fundamentally dishonest" . Bygones, right? <br /><br />Now you are reinventing it, saying you dont hold it against me because "I do like a good rational argument, even if it does involve the odd bit of name calling ". <br /><br />You contradicted yourself on this in one all-too-easy movement, and it disinclines me to engaging further with you.the drunken watchmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-71819596794176619632014-03-07T15:29:30.693+13:002014-03-07T15:29:30.693+13:00OK, perhaps we need a "Lighthearted" fon...OK, perhaps we need a "Lighthearted" font or something, because I genuinely don't know what to make of that. I am not actually having a go at you, or "enjoying a scrap". I do like a good rational argument, even if it does involve the odd bit of name calling (which is why I don't hold the Dolt comment against you)<br /><br />"Assuming gay bashing"? No. <br />Reading posts with prior knowledge of the poster. Andrei has made his disparaging view towards gays public <br />on this blog before. As such I read the 50/50 calls to the side that would fit in with the persona Andrei has portrayed on this site. I do the same with you, and you with me.<br /><br />Whether you were personally offended: I assumed so given you used the word "offensive" in regards to my comment. I would therefore assume you found them offensive? I don't feel offended on behalf of others, and I don't assume others to feel offended on my behalf. If Andrei found my remark offensive let him say so. Unless you are Andrei under a different name perhaps? (Hey, this is the internet, you never know).<br /><br />insistence on following it up? Mate you actually switched comments to another thread (you know I'm following). You are actually going to an effort to get more opinions/arguments out of it. <br /><br />I mean, not a single person, even Andrei himself, made as much as an oblique reference to my post. If you had let it go, it would have died quietly as the bad joke it was. Yet here we are , having a "scrap" about it. How do I interpret that?Dolfnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-16550670432702188382014-03-07T14:53:46.324+13:002014-03-07T14:53:46.324+13:00Jeez Dolf
why would I personally be offended by t...Jeez Dolf<br /><br />why would I personally be offended by the use of the word "homophobe"? I was referring to the fact that the word, if iinaccurately applied, will likely be considered offensive - by the recipient, dummy!<br /><br />":inaccurately applied" means that Andrei's comment "to make the world safe for gay marriage or something equally bizarre" can be interpreted in different ways - perhaps the notion that Obama has made such a thing a priority in terms of world safety is what Andrei finds bizarre? But, true to my expectations as outlined in my previous comment, you are ever so quick to assume 'gay-bashing'. <br /><br />Likewsie, as expected, you query my "insistence on following it up". This is a blog, for goodness sake, with a comments section.Imagine if you challenged every comment here with a query as to why the commenter commented.<br /><br />But, as I said before, It is always the same here when it comes to homosexuality. It seems to be taboo for some reason. <br /><br />By the way, you sure like a scrap, dn't you? <br /><br />That medication you are taking indeed works well :)<br /><br />the drunken watchmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-48452649764036940302014-03-07T14:33:01.231+13:002014-03-07T14:33:01.231+13:00Not being gay myself, I don't really have a ho...Not being gay myself, I don't really have a horse in that race. But since we are having a conversation:<br /><br />My comment on Andrei was aimed at his closing remark:<br /><br /><i>"Which is more than we can say for the moron in the White house who has shed copious amounts of it during his hope and change presidency - who has <b>taken it upon himself to make the world safe for gay marriage or something equally bizarre.</b>"</i><br /><br />Now, we know how Putin feels about gays. And we know how Andrei feels about gays. My comment, facetious as it may have been, was pointing out that Andrei and Putin have that view in common.<br /><br />Given that the view expressed (calling Gay marriage Bizarre) is quite "Anti-Gay", or homophobic in the modern use of the word, I don't think my comment was that far off the mark. <br /><br />Sure, I may have exaggerated, and maybe drawn a long bow connecting Putin's persecution of gays to Andrei's disparaging of them, but it was done in order to point out the fact that Andrei did not focus on politics in a post on political motives, but rather chose to focus on the various leaders position on Gay marriage.<br /><br />I found that amusing, and decided to point it out. I am sorry if the word homophobe offended you, but given the comment wasn't even aimed at you, I don't quite get your insistence on following it up.<br /><br />Regarding the "Is being Gay genetic or learned" I'll ask a mate of mine. Being gay, he'll know a lot more about it than I would. Perhaps our friend Monos should do the same.<br />Dolfnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-9060816815944916822014-03-07T13:13:58.570+13:002014-03-07T13:13:58.570+13:00Dolf
pedantry notwithstanding, a salient feature ...Dolf<br /><br />pedantry notwithstanding, a salient feature of this blog and many of the commenters is their sensitivity to any comment even remotely able to be construed as a criticism or dislike of homosexuality, and their zealous readiness to construe same.. <br /><br />Unless I have missed something, your offensive name-calling of Andrei was because of his comment about 'dildos and arses' vis a vis the practicing of Christianity in the USA?. I mean, seriously, even opposition to legislation for 'gay marriage' (which I didnt notice in Andrei's) necessarily means homophobia? I thouight you were trying to present yourself as a well-reasoning person, and then you go and say something dumb like that? .<br /><br />Anyway, you have seen Monos' comments about homosexuality and choice. My guess, based on my above observations, is that this blog will go eerily quiet, and there will be few if any responses to Monos' comments on the subject.the drunken watchmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-46276636804244505352014-03-07T13:06:03.325+13:002014-03-07T13:06:03.325+13:00>I have yet a to hear a rational answer as to w...>I have yet a to hear a rational answer as to where you derive a right to tell people that their suffering is not real.<br /><br />but I'm not claiming that ppl's suffering is not real. one can suffer while having no underlying organic condition. that's common in fact. and I said to u "I don't doubt u suffer". so ur misinterpreting my words. <br /><br />why u do think I have a problem with the idea of phantom pain?<br /><br />Monos Yuannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-53541710664908361462014-03-07T12:09:41.877+13:002014-03-07T12:09:41.877+13:00yeah, dw, our sexual orientation is a choice. ppl ...yeah, dw, our sexual orientation is a choice. ppl do change their choice of sexual orientation. but they often rationalize it to make out that it wasn't a choice. <br /><br />even if we got our sexual orientation from our genes we could still change it. after all, it's a preference and any preference can be changed. <br /><br />ppl seem to think that if we get preferences from our genes then that makes them hard or impossible to change. not so. preferences that we learn r harder 2 change than any we might inherit. this is because when we learn a preference we learn the reasons for our preference and can criticise the alternatives. genetically inherited preferences don't come with reasons or criticisms of alternatives and so are easy to change. <br /><br />we have free will and are free to choose our sexual orientation. or free 2 choose not to hv a sexual orientation. or whatever.<br /><br />gay rights ppl should celebrate this. they don't. they want to make out that sexual orientation is inborn and can't be changed. that's 2 deny ppl free-will. <br />Monos Yuannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-61471012998504465812014-03-07T12:02:04.086+13:002014-03-07T12:02:04.086+13:00DW: Yes that was my jibe at Andrei, but to be fair...DW: Yes that was my jibe at Andrei, but to be fair his comment did revolve around Obama being evil for supporting Gay marriage. You being pedantic about definitions, I would assume you would agree that one who hates homosexuals and their supporters are homophobes?<br /><br />Monso: You keep going on about underlying conditions, and not diagnosing a disease by it's symptoms.<br />I asked you a question earlier on pain. you avoided it, preferring sophistry over rational arguments.<br /><br />I have yet a to hear a rational answer as to where you derive a right to tell people that their suffering is not real. You talk from an uninformed position with no training and a very selective set of background reading. <br /><br />I will repeat what I said at the beginning of this: <b>You have no idea what you are talking about. </b>Luckily through this thread you ignorance has shown, and I am confident that should anybody read the thread in it's entirety your opinion will shown for the hogwash it is. That was my only goal.<br /><br />I am not going to waste any further time on this, as I am essentially trying to teach a pig to sing. (no doubt with your well read mind you will get the reference)<br />Dolfnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-56509620956817566222014-03-07T11:14:55.773+13:002014-03-07T11:14:55.773+13:00dolf - medical help can be valuable if it is disco...dolf - medical help can be valuable if it is discovered, say, that u have an underlying condition like epilepsy. but it ain't helpful at all if ur let to believe that ur ep is bipolar disorder and given drugs for bd. and that happens.<br /><br />by all means get the medics if you believe something is wrong. but beware. make sure proper checks 4 underlying conditions are being done and that u are not getting a diagnosis based on symptoms alone. as in the epilepsy example, diagnoses from symptoms can b wrong. that's why doctors do blood tests and take piss samples. but in psychiatry there is no underlying condition, only the symptoms. so that check against an underlying condition can't happen.<br /><br />u should b concerned that inappropriate medical help can and does kill ppl. psychiatric drugs do cause harm. it's not jst they hv side effects. ppl expect to be helped by them and are not and that compounds their problems.<br />Monso Yuannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-65339192210337774042014-03-07T10:58:14.631+13:002014-03-07T10:58:14.631+13:00Monos
I was out of this, but I got another questi...Monos<br /><br />I was out of this, but I got another question (prompted by the recurrent accusation of 'homophobia' on this blog every time the subject comes up (or is even vaguely hinted at) in any other than a positive light) .....<br /><br />(specifically, this time, comment by Andrei, responded to by Dolf. on one of the Ukraine threads)<br /><br /><br />IYHO, is homosexuality a choice? 100% choice?<br /><br />the drunken watchmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-42334482423806435872014-03-07T07:18:15.844+13:002014-03-07T07:18:15.844+13:00Monos, Your argument against antidepressants may h...Monos, Your argument against antidepressants may have merit, if properly presented. Antidepressants, like any medication, has side effects, and we have seen, by some estimations, an over prescription of them.<br /><br />However, you do not present your argument rationally. You go the route of the anti-vaccination brigade, throwing out the baby with the bathwater and completely ignoring the positive effects of the drug.<br /><br />On any given treatment/breakthrough/theory there will be dissent. That is a good thing and I encourage it as it leads to improvement and refinement. However, discarding a century of scientific study, wholesale, because a handful of professionals disagree with a single aspect of it is just, well, stupid.<br /><br />On a slightly different note, I want to ask a serious question (Which I will extend to the blog owner): What is in this for you? I mean, I know why I am arguing with you, namely that I do not want people to avoid medical treatment because your voice is the only one they hear.<br /><br />What I don't get is why do you argue? What harm is caused to you, by my use of fluoxetine? What do you gain out of people avoiding getting help? <br /><br />It reminds me of people telling moms to not vaccinate their kids because there may be some side effects. Why would you do that?Dolfnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-21040970125546782702014-03-07T06:24:41.253+13:002014-03-07T06:24:41.253+13:00"aren't these sort of philosophical argum..."aren't these sort of philosophical arguments enough for you?"<br /><br />No, why would they be, Galileo? You're making empirical claims without producing any evidence. It's faith-based, and remarkably similar to Scientology as it happens. Care to explain the difference? Chaznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-71392611955795679382014-03-06T21:58:27.368+13:002014-03-06T21:58:27.368+13:00chaz - u seem to think ideas alone cannot have the...chaz - u seem to think ideas alone cannot have the power to make someone feel chronically low. <br /><br />ideas can be powerful. some ideas have been handed down to us over the generations. those ideas contain lots of evolved knowledge because while other ideas died, those survived. that's y some bad false ideas survive over generations: they contain true knowledge abt how 2 survive. so ideas have in them more than their explicit content. a lot more.<br /><br />if i'm right then artificial intelligences of the future won't be immune from feeling chronically lo aka depressed (hi marvin). but ur position is that can't happen because it's a disease and a disease couldn't affect a robot.<br /><br />aren't these sort of philosophical arguments enough for you? u keep wanting evidence but if u don't understand the philosophical arguments you'll misconstrue the evidence and won't understand what reseachers might be doing wrong.<br /><br />Monos Yuannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-36901423454314103262014-03-06T20:27:46.024+13:002014-03-06T20:27:46.024+13:00So there's no such thing as depression just pe...So there's no such thing as depression just people with bad ideas, morals and philosophy, eh Galileo? Can you provide some evidence for this assertion (published and peer reviewed, please)? I can find a number of people on the internet who think the moon landings were faked, L Ron Hubbard is a prophet and that 9/11 was an inside job. However, this is not evidence. Thanks now!Chaznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-40474170604157400572014-03-06T18:32:11.585+13:002014-03-06T18:32:11.585+13:00> Your view on mental illness was common many d...> Your view on mental illness was common many decades ago. Then came advances in neuroscience, clinical trials of new medications etc which produced evidence that changed the way rational, educated people see these issues.<br /><br />ur like the warmists saying there is a consensus. well these is a lot of disagreement. take Hirsh, the author of the (newly published) book I linked to above. he says:<br /><br />"Antidepressants are supposed to be the magic bullet for curing depression. But are they? I used to think so. As a clinical psychologist, I used to refer depressed clients to psychiatric colleagues to have them prescribed. But over the past decade, researchers have uncovered mounting evidence that they are not. It seems that we have been misled. Depression is not a brain disease, and chemicals don't cure it."<br /><br />does it make u happy that it is not jst me saying it? and that this author has all the "proper" qual's and it's a new book? <br /><br />yes there have been advances in neuroscience and yada yada but what where are the detailed explanations of how these drugs are supposed to change ideas and ingrained ways of thinking? there aren't any. <br /><br />Monos Yuannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-48116979778604361672014-03-06T17:35:43.585+13:002014-03-06T17:35:43.585+13:00Monos
Your view on mental illness was common many...Monos<br /><br />Your view on mental illness was common many decades ago. Then came advances in neuroscience, clinical trials of new medications etc which produced evidence that changed the way rational, educated people see these issues.<br /><br />To use the Galileo analogy: by your logic you would be arguing against the new mainstream view after Galileo had proved his theories, thinking that going against the 'mainstream' inherently makes you cleverer.<br /><br />And being deluded or ignorant and stupid is not the same thing as having a mental illness. You clearly don't even know what the definition of mental illness is for fucks sake.<br /><br />I'll say it again: You're a fucking idiot.Jeffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-286647429286218292014-03-06T13:43:33.858+13:002014-03-06T13:43:33.858+13:00Monos
I suggest you drink a couple of slabs of Wa...Monos<br /><br />I suggest you drink a couple of slabs of Waikato, the beer they named a province after. That should fix it :)the drunken watchmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-43791428432955385092014-03-06T09:12:33.021+13:002014-03-06T09:12:33.021+13:00chaz - look at what ur doing. ur declaring me a nu...chaz - look at what ur doing. ur declaring me a nut. aka mentally ill. 4 saying that mental illness is a myth. rather than rationally dealing with the argument ur saying I'm sick. that gives u an excuse 4 ignoring me. and u don't even see the irony.<br /><br />if galileo had been wrong would he then have been a "nut"? how do u distinguish between a "nut" and someone who just plain has wrong ideas? <br /><br />what drugs do u recommend I take 2 deal with my mental illness that "mental illness is a myth?"Monos Yuannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-23998833084963901282014-03-06T08:02:54.804+13:002014-03-06T08:02:54.804+13:00"new ideas that are true and that end up chan..."new ideas that are true and that end up changing the world are always a minority opinion at first"<br /><br />That might or might not be true, but that doesn't mean that every idiot who ignores reality is Galileo. Sometimes, as in this case, a nut is just a nut. Chaznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-58326386518346767502014-03-05T22:17:09.306+13:002014-03-05T22:17:09.306+13:00why r u trolling? why do u come 2 this blog?
if ...why r u trolling? why do u come 2 this blog? <br /><br />if u insist on following authority and going with the mainstream u will make huge mistakes because u r not seeking the truth. ur jst conforming. new ideas that are true and that end up changing the world are always a minority opinion at first and it is common for the originators to get pissed on by ppl jst like yourself. <br /><br />so stop being an arse and try to learn something. <br />Monos Yuannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-86017562476779648172014-03-05T21:36:40.667+13:002014-03-05T21:36:40.667+13:00"so u ignore ideas that don't have the ba..."so u ignore ideas that don't have the backing of authority, are not mainstream, and are put forward by "nobodies"?"<br /><br />You mean like those around chemtrails, the moon landing being a hoax and there being no such thing as mental illness? Ummmm yep. Why do you accept such notions as fact?Chaznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-90382250214353032002014-03-05T20:48:53.145+13:002014-03-05T20:48:53.145+13:00One of the warnings on the label of antidepressant...One of the warnings on the label of antidepressants is they may cause suicidal tendencies. WTF.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-52687156469514580382014-03-05T19:58:30.848+13:002014-03-05T19:58:30.848+13:00jeff so u ignore ideas that don't have the bac...jeff so u ignore ideas that don't have the backing of authority, are not mainstream, and are put forward by "nobodies"? so if u want to see who's a "fucking idiot" look in the mirror.<br /><br />and ur wrong there is agreement in the peer reviewed science abt anti-depressants. many researchers are coming round to the view they don't work. u know how to use google right? it's pretty easy to find this stuff. the reality is these drugs are harmful. <br /><br />btw, i don't give a shit abt insults.Monos Yuannoreply@blogger.com