Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: list of posters you're not allowed to respond to in my threads.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - borealis

1
You are being dishonest, Pingu. For once in your life try to be 100% honest.

Does someone have to post the meaning of 'dishonest' for you?

Nothing Pingu has posted is remotely 'dishonest'.

You're the one who doesn't care to compare results.
2
I think you're setting yourself up for a major disappointment, Dave.
3
Oh I'm sure only home grown 'natural' teaching is useful in Dave's mind. None o yer ivory tower tall tales.
4
Every one of Dave's 'points' is a concept thoroughly argued, corrected, refuted, etc., by people who actually know what they're talking about. All pointless afa Dave's brain goes. He's gone right back to his square one half-arsed notions in every single case.

Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!' Nothing beside remains.

Who knew the subject was really Dave Hawkins?
5
Beginning to guess why they got forgotten.

Okay that's probably not fair.
6
I'm really sorry that you people don't like me calling you out whenever you lie or spin or misrepresent. Some days I may not as much because I might not be in the mood, but these past few days I've been in the mood.

You get called out again and again on this issue. People are not lying. You either don't understand what they say, or you pick at some irrelevancy, or you plain disagree or don't believe what's presented. Instead of reacting like a normal person, you start calling completely honest people liars, which is insulting and ridiculous and childish. That is you being an ass, Dave. It doesn't win you friends or followers.

ETA: (that's an edit, Dave)  You DON'T "see people here lying every day". That in itself is a BIG FAT LIE FROM DAVE HAWKINS, of which you should be ashamed, had you any sense of shame.
7
I'm really sorry that you people don't like me calling you out whenever you lie or spin or misrepresent. Some days I may not as much because I might not be in the mood, but these past few days I've been in the mood.

You get called out again and again on this issue. People are not lying. You either don't understand what they say, or you pick at some irrelevancy, or you plain disagree or don't believe what's presented. Instead of reacting like a normal person, you start calling completely honest people liars, which is insulting and ridiculous and childish. That is you being an ass, Dave. It doesn't win you friends or followers.
8
Succumb, Bro D.
9
A chair is so totally out of place in space. Or a toaster. Or a sewing machine.

A car just sounds like an homage to Heavy Metal. This one:



from this film:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_Metal_(film)
11
"What do you think these marriage destroying differences are?"

All kinds of stuff.

"Stuff."

Iow, you have nfi.
12
You have a realistic view of one man - yourself. ...

:unsure: 

Quote from: Dave Hawkins
Someday, you may figure out that I have a high speed mind that runs circles around most people.
Quote from: Dave Hawkins
I'm a pretty unusual guy and it's not stupidity that has gotten me where I am. It's brilliance.


Lol! Point taken.
14
Borealis I finally agree with you on something... That fundies have worse marriages than most other people. Of course I don't know that to be the case for sure, but I could believe it.

But my larger point is that there are very few really great marriages. I'm convinced of that. I'm not sure why but I suspect that differences in men and women have quite a bit to do with it.

I dunno. I've witnessed plenty good marriages, mine included.

What do you think these marriage destroying differences are?

As for fundy marriages, it is the absurd expectations placed on the man and woman partner that help drive up the divorce rate. You once stated that you'd be upset if your wife decided to go back to university, because that wasn't part of the deal or something. No marriage is going to be happy if people feel locked into a stagnating role dictated to them by a partner, or worse, and outside agency such as a church.
15
I'm not extrapolating. Look at the researchers who research this stuff.

The 50% divorce rate is essentially an anomaly, is declining, and is misleading. Society is changing. The reasons people marry at all are changing. Divorce isn't necessarily a bad thing, either.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/upshot/the-divorce-surge-is-over-but-the-myth-lives-on.html
16
No Borealis I don't have a low opinion of men. I have a realistic view of men because I am one.

You have a realistic view of one man - yourself. Otherwise, as even evidenced by the men in this thread, your view is jaundiced and cynical, and clearly wrong.

Quote
And once in awhile I run across women who also have a realistic view of men. I had a business partner one time who had a wife like this. She understood that men are more visually oriented than women and she made sure to meet that need for him in some pretty creative ways.

Ffs, Dave, you're describing a consensual sexual long term relationship. I'm sure your business partner made an effort to be attractive for her also. Men are only marginally more 'visually oriented' than women' and think about sex onlt marginally more often. Furthermore there is a great variety from one person to another. I had a long term partner once who failed to notice for over a week that I'd cut 18 inches off my hair.

https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/sex-lies-men-myths-0217137

Quote
You have misjudged me and if you are like most women, you have misjudged all men.

Bullshit. You are ONE man, and if I've misjudged you it is on the side of thinking you better than you are. And afaict you know fuck-all about women, likely because you don't listen and are remarkably ignorant.

Quote
There are very few women on the face of the Earth who really understand men properly and on the flip side there are very few men who truly understand women. This might explain why a pastor friend recently confided in me that he believe that half of all marriages split up and of the half that stay together only half of those are truly happy.

Maybe your main problem is failing to recognise that men and women are human, and far more alike than different. Your pastor friend might want to look into the marriage failure statistics for fundamentalists - it's higher than average most likely because fundamentalists teach stupid attitudes towards women, which results in unhappy partnerships.

You learn nothing by trying to shove people into boxes marked 'men' and 'women'.
17
Many, maybe most, men are constantly dealing with conflicting signals from the brain and the balls.

Are they, though? This is one of those ideas that loads of people seem to take for granted, that they treat as self-evident. We also used to take for granted that women constantly received irrational impulses from their wombs, and that this explained that they were simply not as suitable for positions of authority and responsibility, so we still use the word hysteria to describe a lack of rational control.

Why is it that when we look for an explanation for standards of male behavior, we are so comfortable saying "Ah well, you know. Men will be men, because Testicles!" as if that explains anything?

It is always tempting to explain the status quo as a sort of biological inevitability. But in this case that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. It is not sexual attraction that is the problem. It is the way men feel entitled to express it. My balls are plenty active, but I do not think that they are transmitting the message that it is OK to press my advances on anyone. It is not like I am receiving a complex set of instructions from them, or from wherever my sex-drive comes from.

I get the feeling that what we are doing is a bit like pretending that experiencing a craving for cheeseburgers is just natural and inevitable. Superficially that may seem true enough, while still being too simplistic an explanation to be useful, with the added drawback that it makes cheeseburgers seem like the only possible outcome.

Because strictly speaking, what we crave is fat. We have learned to *associate* cheeseburgers with fat, hence the mere image of a cheeseburger can make us hungry.

But the impulse itself is not towards cheeseburgers, and the existence of this impulse does not make cheeseburgers somehow inevitable. The cheeseburger is a cultural thing, a recipe for something that satisfies an appetite, but it is not the only possible one. It is just that we have been allowed, by ourselves and others, to be lazily unhealthy, and this has resulted in some unfortunate conditioning.

Are we not kind of doing the same thing when we say "Ah well. Men will always receive conflicting messages from their balls and their brains"? Pretending that the conditioning is the same as the impulse, because it makes for a convenient way to explain the status quo?

Reposting because this is the truth that Dave and men like him refuse to acknowledge.

Blaming a person's gonads, be they male or female, for bad or antisocial behaviour, is bullshit. A man can have a strong sex drive, be very very horny, and very turned on by a person he find sexually appealing, but the vast, vast majority of men don't feel the need to immediately objectify, accost, or assault that person.

I have a great deal more respect for men than Dave does. I don't expect men to act on the messages their balls send them; I expect most of them to use judgement and thought and empathy in their interactions, including when it comes to their sex lives. When some men don't, I don't assume all men are like that. I assume those men are scum, or at best ignorant and immature teenagers.

Long ago, I cited a large study of date rape and rape on campuses in the US. Despite the confusion re consent that is much whined about by MRA types and touted by some feminists as a necessary educational effort, that study found that only 6% of all university men committed 80% of all assaults. IOW, most of these guys are serial offenders and there aren't that many of them. Their actions aren't impulsive, they are calculated and predatory.

Male privilege and sexist culture is in many ways a separate issue, but it enables that six % (or whatever that % is when all of society is figured into the equation). We are hearing about lots of powerful men who've used their money and position to act, with impunity, in a sexually predatory manner. We aren't hearing about all the equally powerful rich men who aren't evil assholes and have never acted like this. Some of those men, though, have been part of the culture that made it easy for the Weinsteins and Cosbys.

I have known and been alone with thousands of men in my life, and only a handful acted inappropriately, in spite of my being for most of those years a stereotypically attractive woman. That handful had an outsized impact on me, because it is traumatic to be assaulted, even if you are a big strong young woman who fights back enough to cause that kind of man to retreat quickly. I was lucky.

So Dave, you have a far worse opinion of men than I do. And you seem to think men behaving badly is normal. It isn't.

18
Ok this is just stupid.

Stupid and typical dumb rich man gesture: "Haha I'm so cool."

It's not about "cool".  The motivation was what was the craziest thing they could put on the rocket.  The car is little more than .1% of the cost of the launch.

How is a car 'the craziest thing' etc? It's a car. It's not, for example, an outrageously 'crazy' work of art, or a device that allows the sound of a thousand elephants conversing to be played in a vacuum, or a virtual flea circus. A. Car.

The cost is irrelevant, really, other than 'rich man can do what he wants.
19
Oh boy here we go again on a week-long self-righteous preaching rant.

Then quit trying to justify your gross written attitude towards young girls, Dave. You're coming across as a real creep, and believe it or not, no one here wants to believe that's the real Dave Hawkins. It's revolting.

Do you see anyone anywhere on TR drooling over really young girls? No, you don't. You're the exception here.
20
I never had the thought "Ah this bunch are heathens... they will high five me for woo hooing."

The only thought I had was ...

"Bingo. Borealis is full of s*** about Maasai not living very long. Here's an old geezer that is sprightly enough to marry a young hottie ... Woohoo!"

That's honestly the only thought I had.

And you were promptly schooled on what the word 'average' means, so it was a dumb response to begin with. You're so desperate to 'prove borealis is full of shit' that you put yourself in these really awkward situations.

Besides which, most 'old geezers', provided they haven't got a serious medical condition that interferes with their plumbing, are 'sprightly enough' to have sexual intercourse. Have you not heard about the unfortunate prevalence of STDs in senior housing? They aren't catching gonorrhea from toilet seats.

Also the whole concept is disgusting. 'Young hotties' - Jesus Christ Dave, why the hell would you use that term to describe a 15 year old girl?
21
Politics and Current Events / Re: The Fourth Estate
This is bizarre and hilarious.
22
The purpose of that article was to respond to those who were basically saying ... in effect ...  "Poor 15 old bride ... she's stuck having sex with an old geezer who probably can't even get it up."
Wow. This is utter BS.

And you have the nerve to call others liars.
I see I was multiply ninja'd. Not surprising. But not only is it not what anyone else said, it is exactly the abhorrent perspective that people piled on him for.

The truly cringe inducing thing here is that I find it hard to believe Dave himself really felt that 'woohoo!' moment, and it is for that reason he's retrofitting it to other 'self righteous men'.  I think Dave believes it is natural for 'worldly' men to applaud the idea of fulfilling fantasies of perpetual access to young beautiful women/girls, and so didn't anticipate that people (TR men) would instead be appalled. In effect, he was expecting that Trumpian locker room moment even if he normally would feel like an outsider in such an atmosphere.

Or perhaps I'm giving him too much moral credit. But one has to take into consideration that he relates to women as a separate, alien, and possibly hostile species.
23
I have yet to see anybody here except me give a truly honest account of the conversation about the 15 year old Maasai bride marrying the 70 year old man. It's always told in such a way as to try to make me look like some sort of pedophile.

Classic fake news practice.

Oh stop it. If you'd thought for one minute before posting that anecdote you'd have realised how awful it was. If you'd then paid attention to all the information people offered you about child brides, Maasai women trying to make it illegal, the actual physical dangers of early childbearing, and plain admitted you had not thought of those things, no one would have accused you of anything.

But typically, you doubled down, insisting it was culturally fine and that it was okay because a young south african woman said so. I gave you the benefit of doubt, guessing you are just plain ignorant and unread, given FGM was pretty well news to you, and you seem to have no notion re South Africa, and are totally out of the loop on human reproduction. It's you insisting 'Dave has to be right' that gets you into these idiotic standoffs, not everyone else 'lying'.
24
TR Embassy and Animal Shelter / Re: The Cat Thread
Lol, msg check cat gif thread.  :grin: