@MilkmanDan
@ChaosEngine

thanks for the love gentlemen.
these guys really brought me back to a time where we would drag our milk crates of our favorite albums to a friends house just to introduce them to new music.

music that we loved.

and these guys react in such a genuine and honest way that i found endearing.

(and yeah chaos,i wasted waaaay too much time on their channel,so i hear ya,the check is in the mail.)

fuck..is it really 4AM?

Hmm. Seems like an obvious omission to fail to cut to the seismograph reacting on their custom-made soot paper there at the end...

And those extras (how that much steel survived 2 world wars, etc.) are really fun and interesting details. Too bad they couldn't get worked in, but I guess including them in description text works.

The Fine Bros' React To Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXhyIPYiiLw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pisY6J2Ky6U

There are a few times in this thread where I would describe a lack of appreciation for degrees of the term "forced"

Part of why I don't consider what happened to me to be rape is because I had a mouthful of tea at the time.

Getting burned by hot tea because the other person doesn't react exactly the way I want when I want them to is a risk I was willing to take when we started pouring tea into each other's mouths. A touch too much or too little is to be expected given the situation.

I'd argue that only after that touch-and-go phase is where the place that "the line" gets crossed, and I'm annoyed at the lack of thorough acknowledgement that errors get made in those moments.

Fuck, girls go fucking crazy when they are climaxing. They dun like break a dude's dick in half and shit. Sheeeeeeeet.

dr peterson is a professor of psychology at university of toronto,and former harvard professor.

i like him but often disagree with some of his criticisms,but he does source all his claims on his website and his books.

though his book "maps of meaning" is a bit of a slog.

one thing i admire about peterson is his careful use of words,which is where the interviewer was getting tripped up.

she was not really listening,and was instead reacting based on assumptions,rather than his actual words.which is why she kept with the "so what you're saying.."

the extreme left has labeled peterson an "alt-right" demagogue and a "transphobe" but both of these allegations are patently ridiculous with even a tertiary examination of what peterson is saying.

you don't have to agree with him,but as this interviewer found out,presume at your own risk.

he will may you pay for your presumptions and arrogance.

i find both dr peterson and dr haidt invaluable in understanding the psychology of human societies.peterson is an evolutionary psychologist while haidt focuses on moral psychology.

but what do i know..i am just a ghetto white trash kid from the burbs.
still interesting.

There isn't one single statement in this post that I don't support 1000%. Period.

It's just nothing to do with the point I'm making.

Rape is a crime. A violent assault.

Groping is a crime. Less violent, but still assault.

Patting someone on the butt is wrong, but is unlikely to be pathological behaviour like the above. It's condescending. It's disturbing to the person being marginalized. It creates embarrassment mostly when yes, there should be outrage. I just feel it's a lack of knowledge that should be informed, not a power-based assault requiring punishment.

My personal view is, how would I react to a specific action being used on my mom, sister, girlfriend or wife. If I'd kick the guy's ass so hard he'd have to undo his collar to take a shit, I don't do it. Hell, if I found it mildly irksome I'd avoid it too.

Philosophically I am conflicted, but gotta admit, I am very curious to know what I'd actually do.

but I don't think I'd get past the screening. It would be interesting to see if the people that may have a predisposition to some sort of trauma would react differently in the moment. I mean, obviously completely unethical to find out, but still interesting.

Also, did any of participants have knowledge of the trolley problem before? Were they able to recognize the scenario without the deception being revealed? Would having thought about how they'd react previously prompt them to make a decision faster in the heat of the moment, or would perhaps doubts about the realness of the scenario cause them to be passive?. questions. so many questions

I love how most of the drivers don't even react when they hit a car.

Sorta like the way bad apple cops react to unarmed black kids.

So much wrong.

Reality is not subjective. That's insane. Your perception of reality is subjective, but only if you aren't careful.

(Redacted)

Mental defect doesn't mean mental illness. It means your brain chemistry might be abnormal and react abnormally to drugs. Parkinson's isn't considered mental illness for example.

This story was about him stupidly taking totally unknown drugs from unknown sources, why on earth are your panties in such a bunch because I stated the obvious, that this is not a normal marijuana overdose experience?

Pretty weak, bro.
(You've already been chastised for the silly name calling)

I can give you a description of the bit and my opinion.

A Tom Thumb bit is jointed in the middle and has shanks for leverage. So it has a dual action. When light pressure is used it works on the gums and corners of the mouth. When the reigns are pulled harder the jaw is squeezed while the shanks multiply the force and the center joint folds upward to apply pressure to the roof of the mouth. It's kind of like the volume going from 1 to 11.

Uses:
In theory it should act like a traditional Western bit with the added advantage of rotating the shanks independently...so you can make pressure changes on each side of the mouth independently. In actual practice, it pinches the horses lip in this situation and horses tend to react by tossing their head up or holding their head in an unnaturally high position. With a strong pull it becomes extremely severe. Using it requires a very light hand.

I have used a Tom Thumb successfully with a well trained horse that required no head control but had developed a bad habit of testing his rider by picking up his gate and then bolting. The bit allowed me to ride with no hand but when the horse stretched his neck to take control he ran into the bit. When he relaxed back to the correct position, the pressure was gone. Eventually he didn't want to cause his own discomfort and once he'd broken his bad habits the bit wasn't necessary.

In my opinion, the Tom Thumb appears to check a lot of boxes but in reality it does few of them well. It can work for the right horse, with the right rider, in the right circumstances.

Roy is clearly an inexperienced rider and his personality demands that he assert control, even when he's out of his depth. He's riding a gaited horse (I think it's a Tennessee Walker but my daughter disagrees) and he seems to be trying to make it move like a Quarter Horse. My guess is he's trying to ride in like a cowboy but the horse naturally moves like pretty princess horse. Chaos ensues.

I hope that makes sense. I tried to avoid horse-people terms. If something's unclear or if anyone feels I'm wrong, then I welcome comments.

I think her husband poisoned her

I worked at a place that used a chemical that could absorb through your skin and then react with the calcium in your bones; that's always been a disturbing thought for me

I think the reason they were telling her she was fine was to calm her down, because the more she reacted, the more aggressive the dog would be.

Sorry, re-reading that, it is badly worded. I meant I don't understand what upset him so much that he was disciplined for it.

But that leads back to my whole point about lack of context.

We don't know (from this video) WHY she talked about white male privilege and whether it was warranted, and equally, I don't understand why he reacted the way he did.

So, doing some research on this, it turns out that, when presented with the statistic that transgender people are 3.32 times more likely to experience police violence, he said "My wife has never been part of police violence, Most of the people that I know have never accused the police of violence. So I guess I don't get where that statistic comes from."

Ok, let's put the white privilege thing aside for a second. Can we all agree that that is a fucking dumb arse response? "People in Africa are starving." "Nonsense, I just had a cheeseburger". FFS.

It's at that point that Weber says "it's because of your white male privilege".

Now whether that response was merited is debatable. Personally, I feel like it's probably uncalled for, but I can also see where she's coming from.

Either way, it certainly doesn't merit Weber being put on administrative leave. As for the response, it was definitely unnecessary, but it was also not THAT bad.

I fail to see why the whole thing needed to go to disciplinary proceedings at all, when it could have been sorted out by making them both sit down and talk like grown-ups.