Absolutely agree with you, but if I can't convince someone intelligent like you to eat a plant-based diet, I don't like my chances att convincing Sharleen and Damien from having 5 kids :-)

The other thing is if you look at the consumption in Western civilisation, we use somethng like 80% of the resources, even though our populations are the smallest. Which would suggest it's mostly lifestyle related.

In 1934 the Thompson submachine gun was banned partly because of it's image and connection to Gansters and gangster lifestyle.
In the same way the AR-15 has an image and connection to a different lifestyle: that of the special ops badass chuck norris/arnold/navy seal killing machine. then they join a militia, all sporting these military weapons. there's a fuckin LOOK to it. a feel, a code, an expectation there. It's socialized into us.

That image is big fuckin factor in just how attractive that particular weapon is to a delusional teenager.

American Christianity is extreme because it's a business. Is it any surprise that the US excels at selling the "Christianity" product? Lifestyle marketing is our specialty and religion provides the ultimate product for building Brand Identity.

Apple
Anthropologie
Urban Outfitters
Focus on the Family
Saddleback Church

Christianity in the US sells an identity to its followers. When done right, it's a carefully tuned brand that collects profits in both money and power.

In the finest tradition of religion.

"they were doing just fine with stones"

Were they? What was the average life expectancy? How about childbirth mortality rates? Hell, how's their dental health?

Obviously, a bit of iron isn't going to fix those problems, but it might make them more efficient hunters. Maybe their diet has improved because of this?

"Now there aren't any known pure stone age people left at all now"

Is that necessarily a bad thing? We had the stone age, we grew out of it.

I feel like it's easy for us to want to preserve their way of life, but no-one is giving them the option. If presented with a choice, most people wouldn't opt for a neolithic lifestyle. Even the so-called "paleo" adherents aren't really living that way.

I completely get where you are coming from, but part of me also feels like we are keeping humans in a zoo.

I honestly don't know what's the right answer.

@jwray

*facepalm*

You realize the link you just posted is titled "IQ dominates socioeconomic background data for white men" (my emphasis).

Sure, there is a correlation between IQ and crime and it is hotly contested to what that actually means.

To some, that means only dumb criminals actually get caught (meaning we don't know the true average IQ of criminals because the smart ones get away with it).

To others, it reflects the socioeconomic status of the people most likely to commit crimes (i.e. likely grew up poor in a neighborhood without strong educational opportunities and therefore does not share the cultural values that IQ tests inherently load into the questions and furthermore the test-taker may be openly hostile to standardized test-taking).

To still others it reflects the RESULTS of crime (i.e. leading a criminal lifestyle makes it more likely that you are going to suffer traumatic physical injuries to the head that literally make you dumber).

The 7-8 point difference you quoted is not nearly enough to make a difference on the crime rates. 100 IQ is the normally distributed mean and Japanese people on average, score around 106. For reference, a standard deviation on the IQ test is 15 points, meaning that for all intents and purposes Japanese people are still roughly in the same ballpark as Americans with their 98-point average.

And literally the first Google search result when I looked up Japanese IQ scores was this one, explaining how national average IQ scores correlate with the per capita income and national rates of economic development.

In other words, economic factors correlate with IQ, which correlates with negatively with crime, which seems to further reinforce the idea that socioeconomic forces are a key factor in criminal behavior.

Look, we're getting really far afield of what the video is about. I think it is a no-brainer that few gun crimes are committed in Japan because guns are so heavily regulated. We do have stabbings, in fact we have mass stabbings (which is something you don't see so often in the U.S.). The thing we both agree on is that it is impossible for the U.S. to replicate these crime statistic results, whether that be for cultural reasons or whatever other cause you want to throw out there.

If the documentaries are focused on the dead bodies like this one is, probably.

The girl seemed to be in a lifestyle of unthinking foolishness. She will only not drive drunk again because she probably won't ever legally drive again. I doubt even this will teach her, some people simply cannot learn.

These films did little when they used to be the norm in drivers training classes, that's why they stopped using them. They simply weren't effective.

I can deny that this film made me think about being more cautious, because I'm not a moron that doesn't understand the outcome of a bad wreck, having seen a few in person, so beating me over the head with 'wrecks can kill you' is just boring. When I saw these as a teen, while learning to drive, I was titilated by the gore, but not effected otherwise. Most teens don't fully grasp that dangerous things are dangerous to them, and a large percentage are actually drawn to the dangers.

If humans were rational and only irresponsible by accident out of naivete, you would be right, but they just aren't. You have to be pretty brain dead to not grasp that high speed car wrecks can kill without a filmstrip telling you.

To be fair:

Microsoft made a better OS for integrated work computers than Apple.

Apple made a better phone device than Microsoft.

Android based smartphone manufacturers made better phone devices than both Microsoft and Apple.

All of the above have been massive technology innovators who have earned their market shares.

Choosing one over the other for a specific purpose is sometimes a practical choice, sometimes a lifestyle choice and sometimes just a matter of familiarity. If one choice seems cooler than the others to you, then that's a reflection of your criteria when making a choice and doesn't reflect on anyone else's choices.

I hear you, but the interpretation part is where I think the problem lies.

While you have a fairly benevolent interpretation, someone else who has trouble getting laid could read it as a god given justification to own sex slaves. That's a pretty extreme example of course, but you can imagine that there would be interpretations varying between your example and my extreme example, many of which could be used to oppress women.

When all that was needed was a simple "no gossiping in church" rule. It's a clear command, unmistakable and unexploitable for anything other that it's original intention.

So a 3rd testament would start with the words READ THIS LITERALLY :-)

Right now though - How do we know whether or not take the bible word for word? It's not even clear whether that is up to us to decide.

It's your interpretation that's made you decide not to read it literally, but instead to interpret it with the overall goal of viewing the good in the bible. And that says more about you being a good person, rather than the contents of the bible. I think you would be advocating living a compassionate lifestyle whether or not you read the bible.

That's why I'm thinking it's unnecessary to even have religion, when we can just teach ethical behavior, and ethical thinking in a very clear way, which leaves no room for error, or danger of allowing people to justify their bad behaviors.

Are you here to show us a video of the miss treatment of a dog and it's revival of trust?
Or are you just trying to preach Veganism like a religion.
Please don't - it will never win you votes or support. It just pisses people off.

This is coming from someone who is practically Vegan now and slowly switching my lifestyle but will NEVER claim to be vegetarian or vegan.

@Payback: Forgot to say, because I was on a Jean-Pierre Jeunet rant, but David Fincher directed Alien 3, so *thumbs up* -- it wasn't that boring of a film, with some strange elements of a monastic lifestyle among criminals. I thought it was more thought provoking than Prometheus.

I'm not a professional debater, everything I have said has been my honest point of view, and at least I have been fairly civil during our discourse.

In almost every post, you accuse me of trying to spread falsehoods, make claims about my intelligence, and generally come off as accusatory towards me as a person. Like I said, I don't do this professionally and I never took debate in school, so perhaps this is what people do when they are discussing an issue they disagree upon. I simply do not know.

Perhaps I should have referred to encouraged instead of forced, I do not believe they were encouraged specifically to come here. If they had access to a similar country, with a similar standard of living, and with a porous border they might have went there. Again, I don't know.

Yes, businesses in the United States took advantage of their labor to make more profits. How is that my fault? I don't own a business, I don't employ illegals, and I am a common middle class citizen. I can't pick and choose where I shop, where I eat, or other daily lifestyle choices based off of what people businesses are hiring. I am comfortable in my savings, but only the truly upper class elite can try to spend extraordinary amounts of their discretionary income to avoid getting products sourced from places they might disagree with. The sad thing is, at least in my experience, is that those people are far more likely to directly exploit the labor of illegals as nannies, builders, or lawnscapers.

In any case, as I mentioned earlier, I respect your opinions even if I don't share them. Have a wonderful weekend.

Thing that really sticks in my throat here.

The most generous current estimate of trans % by population is 0.6%.

The mother of the child here is a vehement and very pro-active trans rights campaigner.

I don't know the proportion of life long trans campaigners, but I'm pretty sure the odds of them having a trans kid are vanishingly small. Much more so for such an extreme and unusual case as this one.

We are both relegated to pure speculation here but, I know at least one example (my brothers partner) of a girl being raised by a lesbian mother, who had deep emotional problems instilled into her from a very early age. i.e. men are bad, she should be attracted to women etc.

Took her well into adulthood to get over that and she is still a mixed up person (mother is to put it politely; a bit mental)

This is a different example of course, but the underlying problem and how it messed her up for most of her childhood seems like it could be similar. We are so used to the prejudices against "normal" gender roles and sexual orientation that it is perhaps easy to forget that this can work just as easily in reverse.
The problem can essentially be asshole parents instilling a mixed up and narrow concept of what is normal. Which either restricts their existing exploration of identity, or actively coerces towards a particular outcome.

IDK, you may just be right and the kid manifested this underlying genetic problem at a very early age. Her mother may be a perfectly even handed and caring person etc. etc.

It just concerns me that it could so easily be the other way around. But you are right about many people simply adopting alternative gender roles rather than physically transitioning. But if this kid starts the hormone blockers, she is sterile for life and will undergo irreversible changes in her development.

If she were to change her mind later in life as she matures... that 40% suicide rate is no joke

& yeh there are certainly strong arguments from inside the trans community against ideas of non binary genders. Most trans people are one gender wishing to transition to, or be treated as the other gender.

I can see an argument for perhaps having a third intermediary gender, beyond that it seems more like lifestyle choices than actual gender issues. e.g. like you say a T.V. man who likes to dress as a woman isn't someone who wants to be a woman, or even gay. It's just a man who likes to feel beautiful in a dress and makeup (to quote Eddie Izzard "male lesbian").

Anyway I don't think you have said anything offensive. This is a mire of a subject and anyone reasonable is going to appreciate your (our) confusion & concerns.

*ban
Business Lifestyle Success
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKAHa7K6FFc

@gorillaman

It's almost as if some countries have different cultural values than the United States. For example:

Japan:
--Distributing pornography is illegal and punishable by up to two years in prison and a $25,000 fine (under Article 175 of the Penal Code, which defines pornography as showing the naughty parts of a man or woman, hence mosaics on all Japanese porn)
--Domestic violence and rape laws are often unenforceable
--LGBT community has almost no legal recourse in the face of discrimination of virtually any kind (housing, work, banking, etc.)

America itself has its share of bat-shit insane laws (from the rest of the world's perspective at least) such as legalized death penalty, and "well-intentioned" Christians are still fighting to deny gay people the right to marry in court at this very moment.

Should we come to the conclusion that Americans and Japanese people are "bad people" because these laws exist? Or maybe, as Ahmed Ahmed suggested, we should stop lumping huge groups of people (in the case of Muslims literally millions of people from an extremely culturally diverse group of countries) together and assuming they're all alike and believe exactly the same things?

Shit I'm fine. Older, but fine. I'm going to be fucking 50 next January, if you can believe that shit. And my son graduates from high school next year too. Hell, you must be settling into your mid 30s, I estimate. Getting pumped for that mid-life crisis? Good times, let me tell ya. You still with Gen (or is it Jen)? Or are you out grabbing chicks by their pussies? I hear that's a thing these days. I've had a few brief relationships in the last several years, but I'm single now, and I don't see myself ever marrying again. Relationships are too much work for me anymore, and I really don't want to change my lifestyle to accommodate someone else. Pretty selfish sentiment, I know, but why should I sacrifice watching cartoons all evening in exchange for semi-regular sex? That's why God invented masturbation, my friend.

Well, that's basically it. What's up with you?