things make sense

Check out @realDonaldTrump's Tweet: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/701868541545295872?s=09 Also http://www.infowars.com/trump-it-is-important-to-audit-the-federal-reserve/ I wonder what Ron/Rand Paul supporters think of this.

Why are you being sarcastic and quoting me out of context? did you even watch the video or do you need me to explain the valid point I was talking about? The previous poster said the myth is "so primitive and so stupid". And I responded with that's not an argument.

If they put labor in a certain geographical location, the product of the labor is theirs. The lady made a valid point (that I sympathize with) that 5000 units of African currency is worth one USD. "So primitive and so stupid" is not a counter-argument.

Just watched it. First time seeing a 50s film. Holy shit... acting was phenomenal and the characters were so believable. I know rape is a contentious topic, but to Stanley's defense, he is just acting in accordance with his values as honestly as he can. When a man loses respect for a woman, he treats her exactly as how he sees her and I think that is how it should be.

a little off topic but I thought it might be useful for some

I don't agree with that. Even if the genders were reversed, I would probably arrive at similar conclusions. I agree with MagnumPI that when two consenting adults are in an abusive relationship, both are at fault. To answer your other question, I think she was attracted to his fame because I think he had something like 6 million subscribers at one point and he was attracted to boobs.

I added more thoughts in my original post

I just discovered this guy and found this conversation very helpful so I wanted to share. I did a quick search on fdr and it seems like no one mentioned this guy yet. Anyway I hope you take something away from it!

I could be wrong, but that guy seems like a full blown psychopath. Pay attention to the emotional manipulative language he used and compare it to her video. "I was in a relationship where I was made to do things".. also, the order in which you watch the videos matter. Watch halfway of the first video and watch the second video all the way and then finish the first. This is what I did. Edit: I have not much more to say, except that I will never really know what happened and that I can only go off of my initial reaction and intuition based on watching the 2 videos you posted. Like someone else mentioned, he had way too many cut scenes and he knew exactly what he was trying to do while he was editing his video. And something tells me he knew exactly what would happen after making the video public. He knew that the fat-shaming lady has a lot of haters already and he probably is aware that there is a growing trend on Youtube promoting men's rights and anti-feminism. Just look at a young white girl uploading a video about why we should all become feminists and look at the like-dislike bar. These kind of videos get shredded by people like Sargon, tldr, Karen Straughn and their followers. A person who purposefully engineers a video to evoke strong emotions from the viewer doesn't seem like a genuine person to me. It's kind of like someone who pretends his personality to gain affection from others. He is trying really hard to make me feel something with his careful video edits and I'm not cool with that at all.

haha you beat me to it!

Thomas Sowell has previously made claims about welfare state destroying the black family. There is a YT video that I watched which suggests that Divorce rates and government spending are not correlated at all. There seems to be a contradiction here. Please watch https://youtu.be/4wpca1ZDIRQ?t=20m13s and let me know your thoughts.

I remember tofu defense and dodge the rapist. Damn that was such a long time ago.. I will forever cherish my moments playing sc-bw and wc3 in my youth.

Wait a minute.... How do we know that the people who attempted to replicate these studies are not biased themselves? This is one of those self-detonating arguments.

If "the authors did not provide enough data to replicate their work", then by definition, that is not good science. So the title of the article "Research that's just too good to be tested" doesn't really make sense. “Aren’t scientists supposed to be competitive? Why aren’t these guys trying to destroy each other?" I'd say no because science is mostly collaborative a process and are driven not by profit but rather, the excitement of uncovering new knowledge. It's a win-win situation if both parties come out with a better understanding of a certain phenomena.

was wondering how difficult it was to find the therapist you have now? I'm still looking for one. I've seen 2 therapists so far Are you satisfied with the level of service? I was very unsatisfied with the service because I didn't feel connected with my therapists. After I said something, I rarely get a response that I want. This could be my problem because it makes it seem like I'm conditioning their response by carefully crafting what I say to them. Where do you live? Mid South Question for y'all How much of the convincing should the therapist be doing to their clients and the clients to their therapists? What % would you assign?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Yaq27hYen0

I don't like her at all. Says one thing, does another. "she acknowledged my concerns and told me that I was the only person who understands her...." " she burst into tears. I asked her if she truly respects me as a good person, and her answer was yes." Judge people by their actions, not by what they say. If they didn't earn your virtue, don't give it to her.

Check this game out: http://philome.la/jesspretend/ayn-rand-simulator/play Edit: sorry about that. Turns out the game wasn't that funny at all. Don't waste your time on it. Can I request this topic to be deleted?

Do you think Stef's relationship with some of his listeners follow, to some extent, the teacher-student model that you described? I could be completely wrong, but I think the transference thing is a red herring because your entire post felt like it was devoid of raw emotions. You are talking about incredibly sad things but I feel a bit frustrated because I'm just reading compressed facts after another with heavily regulated words. Could it be because other people's needs come before your own so you felt the need to keep the post short? Also, you went through all that experience but you are more focused on making the show enjoyable and helpful for others. Stef mentioned that we live in a society where people run away from you when you start talking about your past trauma, and that is one of the reasons why people have a tendency to self-attack and put other people's needs over their own. Is this relevant to you?

I was extremely skeptical at first, especially when he said that cancer is not a genetic disease. I then proceeded to watch the entire presentation to have my mind blown and fundamentally change the way I think about cell biology. I study inflammatory pathways so I definitely want to incorporate this to my research. "People have their whole livelihood wrapped up in gene theory, and you are not going to change the mind of those people, especially when their salary depends on them not believing in this." Can privatization solve this problem? We currently have enough evidence to warrant follow-ups and further investigations but people at top medical schools and hospitals like Sloan Kettering are pleading ignorance, shielding themselves with academic authority and elitism. I guess it is only a matter of time. Remember our old friend Gregory Mendel? He was branded an outcast by the scientific institution of his time and he ended up with the title of "father of modern genetics" years after he died. It's quite tragic that we still do not learn from our past.

Does this really work? I get where you're coming from because people react to incentives. If you play this game, I think the girl will be virtuous not for virtue's sake, but will "pretend" to be virtuous in the short term to get in your pants. You might be attracting the type of girls that you wanted to avoid in the first place. I could be wrong though.

Maybe overthinking it is not a good idea. It seems like you listed only 1 positive emotion (relief) and 3 negative ones (sadness, regret, and fear). Don't focus so much on the negative emotions and look forward is my suggestion.

I don't mean to go all SJW on fdr, but I think there is something to be said w/r to culture playing into privilege. And I'm only speaking in generalities here. When I say Asians are more privileged in certain aspects of life, or when I say Whites are more privileged in certain aspects, I don't mean ALL Asians nor ALL Whites. Certainly the western freedom culture has made many positive impacts to whites in general (lets forget about current wave of feminism and all that for a second). Whites are in general, live in much more civilized environment and are more privileged compared to say blacks who live in Africa who still worship witch doctors and other nonsense. Here, we can objectively point out to a trend that may be used as evidence for the claim that Whites are more privileged than other race in certain aspects. Another example is with the Asians who make higher salary than whites or blacks here in the US. This, I would argue is the result of Asian culture normalizing stricter parenting. (Oh god, I actually just used the word "normalize" in this context...I swear I'm not a femnazi). Anyway as a result, Asians study much harder and get higher paying jobs. You can then make an objective claim that Asians have some form of income privilege because they were born into this culture and grew up with these environmental influences. Thus, the statement "'White privilege' does not exist." is wrong because not everyone is equal and some people are more privileged than others. If we look at the big picture, surely we can make generalities to extract some useful information out of them right? Do you remember Stef's example of the tall chinese person being the exception to the majority of short chinese people? Yeah, come at be bros.

One more thing to note is that majority of the redacted papers are for clinical research. Clinical research is very messy and results are rarely reproduced. One of my friend in med school published over 8 clinical research papers while being a med student. It's pretty safe to assume that the quality of these papers are not particularly that great and I would consider them a tier below most basic research papers. I've read many 100s of papers and I consider majority of basic research papers to be mostly garbage anyway. So we're talking, the bottom of the bottom trash-feeders in the world of academia. It's not my intention to have this post drip with academic elitism or anything and I'm certainly not in a position of high authority, so take my opinions with a grain of salt! Also clinicians have hospital work to fall back on when their academic career is going down hill. It's a bit different with basic researchers because their life's work is on the line and require much more discretion with regards to committing fraud.

Hmm your post was illuminating. I agree with the last part- poisoning the well. Thanks.