TakeYouToTasker Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, GoBills808 said: Ehh. Tough to argue one's an 'evolutionary' act and the other isn't. And nobody's arguing for the subjugation of men. No it isn't. One was necessitated by the real physical limitations of primitive man. The other is a choice built on politics. And any argument which grants special rights to one sex at the expense of the other subjugates that sex to the other. Edited December 13, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 1 hour ago, T-Bomb said: Small companies is where it is at. Mine has been sold a couple of times, getting more corporate each iteration. Early retirement just may be in my future as well. Good luck! I'm sure they do exist, and I'm sure plenty out there are smarter and better than I, but when the issue is forced, that's when it's total BS. We live in an era where it's predominately forced to satisfy PC requirements. Same could be said for the software side of the IT industry...although I haven't met very many female programmers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 22 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: No it isn't. One was necessitated by the real physical limitations of primitive man. The other is a choice built on politics. And any argument which grants special rights to one sex at the expense of the other subjugates that sex to the other. I'm less sure of your first proposition. It's convenient to label what's past as necessary due to evolution and what's present as elective due to political influence, but IMO characterizing male/female dynamics (and really the entire scope of our species' interactive existence) as such makes far too many assumptions regarding the concept of evolution as it pertains to both physical and societal norms. But that's a broader topic. And the argument here isn't granting special rights to one sex versus the other as I read it, it's more a matter of (as we were discussing earlier) allowing that logically, the historical context of male to female sexual advances inform perception of claims of harassment made against men today. Similar to how judges will grant admissibility of prior convictions if their prejudicial effect does not outweigh their probative value. Whether that's the case in our current climate, I suppose, is similarly up for debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 34 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: I'm less sure of your first proposition. It's convenient to label what's past as necessary due to evolution and what's present as elective due to political influence, but IMO characterizing male/female dynamics (and really the entire scope of our species' interactive existence) as such makes far too many assumptions regarding the concept of evolution as it pertains to both physical and societal norms. But that's a broader topic. And the argument here isn't granting special rights to one sex versus the other as I read it, it's more a matter of (as we were discussing earlier) allowing that logically, the historical context of male to female sexual advances inform perception of claims of harassment made against men today. Similar to how judges will grant admissibility of prior convictions if their prejudicial effect does not outweigh their probative value. Whether that's the case in our current climate, I suppose, is similarly up for debate. A legal hierarchy built on Post Modernism? Good grief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 4 hours ago, Capco said: Holy crap. There is so much testosterone pulsating through this thread and it's almost as if it's making people stupid. Do you guys know how absolutely imbecilic you sound talking about your "T"? If someone was chilling with my group of friends and said that, we'd laugh them out of town. This thread is dripping with examples of why the accussed don't come forward right away, and the worst part is that you guys don't even realize it. The best way to fix the "problem" of accusers coming out years down the road is to bring down as many of these sexual predators as possible in the public's eye and thereby create a culture where coming forward is acceptable rather than immediately showered with skepticism and doubt. Those who say "innocent until proven guilty" must not understand that it's not as if Matt Lauer was fired immediately after one accuser came forward. There was an investigation, a "process" (thanks McD), and that process played out behind closed doors until there was sufficient belief to proceed with the termination. That's probably what will happen with these NFLN guys. It's not like there is this wave of thousands of innocent men having their lives destroyed by this orchestrated effort from a group of hateful women. Some men's lives are getting destroyed, but so far all I'm seeing are men who had it a long time coming. The fact that anyone who's ever clumsily tried to get with a girl who wasn't interested is now being lumped in with sexual predators is precisely the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capco Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 1 minute ago, Rob's House said: The fact that anyone who's ever clumsily tried to get with a girl who wasn't interested is now being lumped in with sexual predators is precisely the problem. Oh really? And where are all these examples of innocent men having their lives destroyed again? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 8 minutes ago, Capco said: Oh really? And where are all these examples of innocent men having their lives destroyed again? We're not just talking about the handful of celebrities you see on Access Hollywood. It's also not just about ruining lives. These things seep into the culture and if taken too far make it worse. A little fun flirtation or office romance isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's actually a great thing that makes life fun for men and women as long as people recognize and respect each other's boundaries. Once again the easily offended moral crusading puritans need to take another step towards sucking all the fun out of life. As with everything these days we take a very reasonable position (i.e. people shouldn't be subjected to persistent or overtly inappropriate unwanted sexual advances) and take it beyond all rational thought to a place of absolute insanity. And there are plenty of people who have lost their livelihoods and/or freedom over false allegations of sexual misconduct. But I guess they don't matter because they're not on TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capco Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 4 minutes ago, Rob's House said: We're not just talking about the handful of celebrities you see on Access Hollywood. It's also not just about ruining lives. These things seep into the culture and if taken too far make it worse. A little fun flirtation or office romance isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's actually a great thing that makes life fun for men and women as long as people recognize and respect each other's boundaries. Once again the easily offended moral crusading puritans need to take another step towards sucking all the fun out of life. As with everything these days we take a very reasonable position (i.e. people shouldn't be subjected to persistent or overtly inappropriate unwanted sexual advances) and take it beyond all rational thought to a place of absolute insanity. And there are plenty of people who have lost their livelihoods and/or freedom over false allegations of sexual misconduct. But I guess they don't matter because they're not on TV. I understand your concerns, but I don't think you need to be concerned. That's my point really. Anyone who gets falsely accused absolutely does matter. It does happen, but the alternative of not taking every accusation at face value initially will result in more sexual misconduct and less justice for the actual victims. In no way, shape, or form do I condone such behavior from false accusers. We need to tell our boys how to treat women respectfully, and we need to tell our girls to do the exact same to men. Part of that includes telling girls about the very serious repercussions of a false sexual allegation. "These are the lines that you're not supposed to cross." This is a slow process. It won't happen overnight and there will be bumps along the way. But in the end it will be for the better. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 https://nypost.com/2017/12/13/nfl-network-nightmare-exec-asked-if-i-planned-to-get-knocked-up/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 14 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said: A legal hierarchy built on Post Modernism? Good grief. Dare I say things evolve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 (edited) 13 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: Dare I say things evolve? Post Modernism is hardly evolution, but rather is regressive, reporting back to failed dogma's of the early 20th century, and undoing all human progress chartered by the enlightenment. You, for instance, would use it to create a hardened caste system, and to try sons for the crimes of their fathers. We've been there already as a species. That's not evolution. Edited December 13, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 That's exactly what I'd do. I'd also outlaw good cheer and mandate kicking puppies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 22 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: That's exactly what I'd do. I'd also outlaw good cheer and mandate kicking puppies. You're joking, but you've already told me that's exactly what you'd do. You'd revamp law to adhere to Critical X Theory. That necessitates the formation of a rigid legal caste system, and allowing into evidence historical observations about different groups of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Just now, TakeYouToTasker said: You're joking, but you've already told me that's exactly what you'd do. You'd revamp law to adhere to Critical X Theory. That necessitates the formation of a rigid legal caste system, and allowing into evidence historical observations about different groups of people. ...which judges do already when considering sentencing, in addition to persistent offender laws in the US affirmed constitutional en banc. This isn't a difficult concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 15 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: ...which judges do already when considering sentencing, in addition to persistent offender laws in the US affirmed constitutional en banc. This isn't a difficult concept. No, judges do not currently sentence based on their feelings surrounding group identities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Just now, TakeYouToTasker said: No, judges do not currently sentence based on their feelings surrounding group identities. Prior convictions and past histories. What we were talking about earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: Prior convictions and past histories. What we were talking about earlier. Prior convictions and past histories of the individual being sentenced, not the prior histories and convictions of people unrelated. IE. You have served time for larceny in the past, and you're being sentenced for larceny again. You punishment shall be greater the second time, because your first punishment clearly wasn't a deterrent. NOT: You are black, and black people are more likely to commit crime, so you are guilty. The first is reasonable, the second is a gross miscarriage of justice. Of course you aren't talking about black people, as they are awarded a meritorious place is the legal intersectional caste system you're looking to create through their racial history. The people you're looking to harm are straight, cis gendered, white men. Edited December 13, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 5 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Prior convictions and past histories of the individual being sentenced, not the prior histories and convictions of people unrelated. IE. You have served time for larceny in the past, and you're being sentenced for larceny again. You punishment shall be greater the second time, because your first punishment clearly wasn't a deterrent. NOT: You are black, and black people are more likely to commit crime, so you are guilty. The first is reasonable, the second is a gross miscarriage of justice. Obviously, I agree. Similarly obviously, I was extrapolating for effect which has since taken a pretty wide turn. You don't believe the historical context of male/female interaction should be considered when viewing these sexual assault allegations, and I tend to think otherwise. IIRC that's where we started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 12 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: Obviously, I agree. Similarly obviously, I was extrapolating for effect which has since taken a pretty wide turn. You don't believe the historical context of male/female interaction should be considered when viewing these sexual assault allegations, and I tend to think otherwise. IIRC that's where we started. No, I do not, because justice isn't prejudiced, and I oppose legal caste systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 18 hours ago, T-Bomb said: I'm sure they do exist (female engineers), and I'm sure plenty out there are smarter and better than I, but when the issue is forced, that's when it's total BS. We live in an era where it's predominately forced to satisfy PC requirements. Let me put it out there: in principle, I'm against affirmative action or any policy that promotes forced equalization of numbers. In practice, then we have this: 18 hours ago, T-Bomb said: IMO, the office sucks with women, it was much better without, and I'm not some 60 year old "good 'ol boy" either. ...which is kind of like a big 'ol flag printed "if I'm hiring, not giving no wimmens no fair shake less I'm forced to it", don'tcha think? Paradox: fair-minded people who recognize there are smart, maybe smarter - good, maybe better - potential employees who are different than them in some way (sex, skin color, what-have-you), and are happy to recognize that - as long as they aren't asked to be sharing a cubby farm or a job site with 'em. Which brings us to: in practice, sometimes change has to be pushed, or things just won't...change. You got a better idea, I'm all for it. 3 hours ago, \GoBillsInDallas/ said: https://nypost.com/2017/12/13/nfl-network-nightmare-exec-asked-if-i-planned-to-get-knocked-up/ But it's a level playing field now, dontcha know. Them wimmins just bitchin' cuz they want to subjugate them mens. Soyboys. 1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said: No, judges do not currently sentence based on their feelings surrounding group identities. Course they don't. What's his name down in Alabama, "Judge" Roy Moore? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts