Advertisement
by Jetan » Thu Mar 31, 2016 7:17 am
by Utceforp » Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:40 pm
Jochistan wrote:The East Marches wrote:
I meant it to bring people back down to earth. Its just a difference in opinion at this point. I'm of the opinion that what really gives a country the right to exist is military might. The Israelis have more, the Palestinians less. They proved they couldn't keep the land, so they lost it. Arguing of meaningless justifications for the sake of the "moral high-ground" is an exercise in futility.
Okay, so you're one of those nihilistic misunderstood people of the opinion that life is a joke that only you get. And it is your duty to enlighten the masses that are small minded enough to find meaning in things and have never read and misinterpreted a wikipedia article on Machiavelli.
A'ight.
But really what gives a country a right to exist is the value of the culture and cause of the people who live there.
by The Alexanderians » Fri Apr 01, 2016 5:11 am
Galloism wrote:Or we can go with feminism doesn't exist. We all imagined it. Collectively.
by The Princes of the Universe » Fri Apr 01, 2016 8:39 pm
Thermodolia wrote:Wait we are a bundle of sticks now?!
The Princes of the Universe wrote:No. We're cigarettes; get it right.
Thermodolia wrote:Aww I like sticks, they're nice big, hard, and sometimes sticky.
by Kxcd » Sat Apr 02, 2016 8:06 pm
Souseiseki wrote:Evil Wolf wrote:
Well, that process seems ripe for abuse. Why not just let the cards fall where they may? I'm sure Defenders will snap up most of the regions anyway.
In any case, the best term I know to describe what I am seeing is Damnatio memoriae. I have been playing this game for nearly 11 years and I have seen some crazy punishments dished out, but all of them pale in comparison to this. This makes the punishments griefers got under the old Pre-Influence Invasion Laws look like a playful slap on the wrist. This is nuts.
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, everybody dies." -NationStates Moderation Handbook
by The Princes of the Universe » Sat Apr 02, 2016 9:17 pm
Luminesa wrote:Tutukerala wrote:I have pictures of my favorite Saints, and theologians in my room, next to my Black Sabbath poster lol.
But I hate pictures of Jesus. Depicting Jesus as a white guy is really weird to me.
Let's hope you didn't put St. Francis of Assisi next to Ozzy. Probably won't be too pleased to hear Ozzy bit a chicken's head off on stage, once.
by Wisconsin9 » Sun Apr 03, 2016 1:03 am
Ifreann wrote:Risottia wrote:
It's not about "letting" anyone pass. ANYONE is allowed to pass through an EEZ. Trying to stop anyone to pass through an EEZ would be an illegal act.
It would also be an exercise in futility.
"British vessel, this is the ARA Sarandí. You are approaching Argentinian waters. Turn back at once."
"u avin a go m8"
"...British vessel, please repeat last transmission."
"ill bash ur head in m8, sware on me queen"
by Anollasia » Sun Apr 03, 2016 6:50 pm
USS Monitor wrote:The Blaatschapen wrote:
I figured you would be more into steaming vegetables, rather than putting them into the frying pan.
(glutton mutton here, very much into appreciating the culinary arts)
I am talking about IRL. Monitors don't eat vegetables. Unless you count coal as a vegetable... Knowing the US government and their regulations on school lunches, it's possible they do count coal as a vegetable.
by The United Holy German Reich » Sun Apr 03, 2016 7:57 pm
by Grenartia » Wed Apr 06, 2016 8:02 pm
Linux and the X wrote:Traditionalism wrote:Well, I'm not going to attack them physically or kill them.
No, you'll just support an environment that encourages other people to do so, and tell yourself your hands are still clean. They are not. You are complicit in every drop of our blood that is spilt, and may your god judge you for that.
by Jochistan » Fri Apr 08, 2016 11:12 pm
by Soldati Senza Confini » Sat Apr 09, 2016 4:01 pm
Digital Planets wrote:TheDrunkenLlamas wrote:http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/young-louie-gohmert-wouldnt-have-resisted-temptation-enter-girls-bathrooms
It is starting to look like that the threat in public restrooms comes not from lecherous transgender people but rather creepers like Gohmert Pyle.
So, anyone here want to defend Louie's comments?
So, a quick lookup at Louie Gourmet: I found out that when he was younger, he was gay and a Deadhead, which have no relationship to each other, even if you drive a Cadillac. By the mid 80's, he was arrested on a few charges of:
-Resisting arrest;
-Vandalism;
-shitpostingSelling alcohol and tobacco to minors.
In 1994, he was raped by a male partner in St. Louis while on vacation. This, in turn, led him to being straight, getting married to a woman, and having kids. In 2002, he was diagnosed with mental issues, notably schizophrenia, which appears to have went away before turning in 2011.
As for his commentary, he may have also developed pedophilia, but that's not the point. The point is from all this, Louie Gohmert is a real-life Pee Wee Herman and an asshole at the same time.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.
by The Princes of the Universe » Sat Apr 09, 2016 7:04 pm
The Florence Union wrote:What the history channel should do is drop all of it's stupid shows that have very little to do with history and are more reality tv shows, and go back to doing documentaries and air programs where history, is the main point, not Aliens, or gators, or pawn stars
by Anollasia » Sat Apr 09, 2016 8:57 pm
Unpredictable Galaxy wrote:Fatatatutti wrote:We're adding Blobfish to our list of potential names for Fish-class submarines. And if your blobfishes can act, they can probably find careers in Fatatatutti's film industry.
"Wonderful! I am glad that these cute gelatin-based creatures could charm you into its way of your country. And as far as acting, they can fit many roles. There are the two that are provided originally, and then here's a few more:
A religious figure like Jesus.
A pimp/rapper/rich jerk.
An aged father.
Or even a human that is equally made of expired jello (I mean, just look at that skin!).
So when can I get paid?"-Dictator Vegemite LV
by Hostenia » Sun Apr 10, 2016 6:39 pm
Forsher wrote:Soldati senza confini wrote:How would it result in them being weaker on average? You're claiming that they are weaker on average, yet the average woman can beat plenty of "average" men in strength, and vice versa.
The "average" when it comes to strength is as fuzzy as remarking that black people run faster than white people on average.
The average woman is a pretty precise idea. It is very different to an average woman.
Humans, and to my knowledge most mammalian species, demonstrate sexual dimorphism. Consequentially, the average male is taller, heavier, with greater muscle and bone density than the average human female. They are also faster (at sprinting) as a consequence of this and skeletal differences. This translates to the average male being able to move heavier loads (i.e. is stronger). This may not translate to being able to win an arm wrestle, however, because that is also mechanic and favours shorter forearms... I'm not sure of the exact details there. This is a pretty indisputable observation. Where this thread seems to have run into trouble is the matter of interpretation (it's grasped the idea that the average person is a theoretical idea rather than reality but hasn't understood what this means specifically).
An average man or woman, in contrast, is a man or woman who does average things. This is a less, say, mathematical idea and more semantic: what the phrase "an average joe" suggests. That is, they do not spend all their time "working out", they are not professional athletes, they are not doctors, they are not criminals... An average woman, then, may well be stronger than an average man. But you cannot make a meaningful comparison between the average man (which speaks of the "on average men are") and an average woman (which speaks of average behaviours). They are different ideas and it is either ill informed or disingenuous to compare them.
The argument presented in the OP can be imagined fairly simply. Imagine that males and females follow normal distributions for competency (at whatever the hell an 11x actually is: it doesn't actually matter to the point I am making). This is quite possibly true (but again doesn't actually matter here). On the left we have people who would be utterly incompetent and on the right we have the eminently qualified. Plot these distributions and then imagine that they follow exactly the same scale. Now, the OP's argument is that there is some objective assessment of competence and more specifically that if you were to compare the number of women versus the number of men who are at that point or exceed that point, then there are too few women for recruiting women to be economically viable.
I don't know if that is true. And, frankly, I really do not have the time right now to look into it. However, assuming the above is true, then it works because even if the two distributions have the same variance, they have different centres. The OP proposes that the difference is such that the centre of the male distribution is concentrated closer to the point of competency. It follows from the nature of the distributions that more males could do this job. (And if strength is the driver of competency, this is what we'd expect given how sexual dimorphism plays out in our species.) It is these greater numbers that the OP uses to make the economic viability case. (If the variances are different than this is not necessarily the case, but it is perfectly clear that the OP is arguing that there are more males in the competent region and there are other ways that this can be true.)
However, the economic viability argument, as framed above, is definitely not true. You would have to suggest that women, who meet the competency standards, are going to have statistically higher turnover than men who meet the competency standard... this could be true but it is not developed in the OP and, in any case, would probably be related to hazing and related phenomena (which should be worked at regardless)... for it to be true. An investment is made in a particular individual, not in all teh womez or teh menz. If you increase the pool of individuals you can invest in, each individual is still independently invested in (although maybe this is less true... for instance, it is harder to feel welcome when there is no-one else like you... in practice)... plus relatively minor housing expenses.
tl; dr -- the average man is not the same as an average man, the average man is stronger than the average female, because these are averages individual variation exists, investment in a soldier exists on an individual level, question is therefore not one of averages (i.e. thread reached right conclusion on flawed reasoning).
by The Princes of the Universe » Tue Apr 12, 2016 7:44 pm
Xanama wrote:As someone who lives with depression, you seem happy to everyone else, buy behind the false smile, all you want to do is die, you think no one can help, like you're alone in this fight...
by The States of Balloon » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:17 am
The States of Balloon wrote:Derelldia wrote:My new problem seems to be picking a land for Alex. Mostly because her running theme seems to be having to deal with herself in so many different ways and forms. Like her life was a mess from having to deal with another her occasionally intruding on her life, now she has to put up with a sprite version of herself and subsequently imps that are sorta like her but also a mess of everything.
Its a very interesting time.
Everything on her planet is her body, stretched and distorted to become trees and stuff.
Wait what
by Eastfield Lodge » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:43 am
by Kushan Rajavamsa » Wed Apr 13, 2016 7:10 am
by The Alexanderians » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:46 pm
Renewed Imperial Germany wrote:The Alexanderians wrote:Ha, the Soviets were just as bad to LGBT. We didn't need to wait for the Chinese Communists to see their homophobia. Some such nonsense like "it's a sign of western decadence" and I wish I was going off stereotypes with that line.
"There is no homosex in Mother Russia comrade! Mother Russia completely straight! Homosex sign of western decadence, comrade!"
Yeah replace a few words and you literally have Iran.
Galloism wrote:Or we can go with feminism doesn't exist. We all imagined it. Collectively.
by The Brand New Salvatagard Republic » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:50 pm
by Wallenburg » Wed Apr 13, 2016 7:04 pm
The Brand New Salvatagard Republic wrote:"Take one, give two."
DON'T SELF-PROMOTE. By which I mean posting your own quotes. You can do one ego boost post, if it makes you happy, just don't be a prick about it.
Listening/following the second rule's second part.
by Reploid Productions » Wed Apr 13, 2016 7:07 pm
The Brand New Salvatagard Republic wrote:"Take one, give two."
DON'T SELF-PROMOTE. By which I mean posting your own quotes. You can do one ego boost post, if it makes you happy, just don't be a prick about it.
Listening/following the second rule's second part.
Yumyumsuppertime wrote:USE CONTEXT. If a line isn't funny or awesome on its own, either explain the context or include the line or lines lines that it's in response to. Don't expect us to go chasing it down.
[violet] wrote:Maybe we could power our new search engine from the sexual tension between you two.
by Zoice » Wed Apr 13, 2016 7:58 pm
Uxupox wrote:
I can believe in what I want without your interference.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Galactic Powers, Hypron, Kastopoli Salegliari, Shrillland, The Lone Alliance
Advertisement