Bobby_2021

What about creatine? Does it also have heavy metals?

I was only replying to him. Proof is ridiculous in these contexts. Even if you prove anything, it will not be accepted, emotionally. If n number of people apply for assisted suicide, will you accept all those n people for AS? At some point, you got to say no. I wonder what that point is. To covert your empathy to get something done in reality is a whole different ball game. Conservatives yap about having kids but block any social schemes that may take care of kids. Liberals yap about social programs but they are more interested in sending that money abroad to wage wars in fuck knows where. The problem plaguing these people is ignorance. Mere empathy is not enough. You need understanding and strong will. You need to be clear on what your guidelines. This is how you make things practical.

I didn't say taxes are unnecessary. I said taxes do not stand in the way of social programs.

If you want results within a month, take creatine not protein powder. Your diet already has enough protein. No need to supplement it further. 3g/day would work wonders. All that you have to do is to make sure to take 3L of water per day. Good luck. And put the work in the gym.

GDF is a gold mine. Especially that Iraq video.

Yup. The more I dig into this, the more depressing it gets. There is solution in sight and everything can go wrong at any point. What a time to be alive.

https://theconversation.com/sex-differences-dont-disappear-as-a-countrys-equality-develops-sometimes-they-become-stronger-222932

Any liberal who is pro Israel isn't a liberal. I don't know what to call them. I expect these blue haired people to vouch for Palestine, but it's the opposite that happens.

Not impressed by the therapist.

https://wordsrated.com/cost-of-free-higher-education-statistics/#:~:text=A debt-free tuition-free,billion in the initial year. 70B for free college for a year. 130B for Ukraine was already given. This could have been put to use at home. When you talk about free college and forgiving students debt, the discussion begins on how to fund it. Then he discussion turns to, how to increase taxes to fund the free college. This is where the bullshit happens. None of these discussions happen when sending billions in aid to fund genocide and wrecking Ukraine from the inside out. When it comes to discussion social programs, everyone talks about taxes. I am pointing out this bogus.

And then they blame the rest of the world for Africa being a shithole. Great video.

I don't give 50-50. Maybe it could be 80-20. I don't know. Which is why I say that AS is not the solution. You are free to prove me otherwise. ------- I don't intend to convince anyone out of this since it's out of my power. If you are loser and you die, you are dieing a loser. When you are living, you still have lots of time to win. Dieing is giving up on that power especially at a young age. I don't give a fuck if you are 60+ and wants AS.

Because we are dirt poor in India. Women and Men are forced into high paying careers whether they like it or not. As a consequence more people choose stem fields. Even if you are man and you do not like stem, you have to study it. Women are not exception. There are not many choices here. In Sweden, you have a lot more freedom to choose your career choices. So women naturally opt for traditionalist career choices. More power to them. The idea that women faces discrimination in STEM and face more hurdles than men is way overblown to fit their narrative. In fact more women are forced into stem, because they generally pay more.

The whole point of the study was to eliminate the effects of culture/environment. And then extrapolate the findings. We can measure the freedom and cultural limitations placed on individuals from different cultures. So the less limitations there are, the more women choose traditional career choices. Which is why India has more participation of women in stem than the United States or Sweden. In fact the more freedom you give to individuals the more they choose careers that are in alignment with their genetics. If you eliminate the effects of culture, all that remains is genetics. Which is why I said genetics is the reason for the differences in interests of men and women. But now you will say, " What proof do you have that genetics determines the gender differences? " It is a bias from the "environmental/nurture" gang. They will demand proof for why genetics is the reason for the gender differences while they do not feel any obligation to prove why environment/culture is the deciding factor in determination of choices of individuals. They gloss over that point. We are supposed to accept that culture is the main factor in the differences without question. The thing about environment/culture is that you can control it, eliminate it's effects and measure the effects of gender. The research has been done. I am not pulling this out of my ass. Also, I am not saying that environment has zero effect at all. Obviously if you don't have access to food and water, then it is going to affect you a lot in the choices you make. But you can study people who are not binded by any cultural/environmenal pressures of any kind. The only explanation left is genetics.

@zurew All I am saying is that killing yourself is not the solution to end the suffering. Because I do not see how it is the solution. It could end up better or worse. If you are advocating for suicide as the solution, then the burden of proof is on you to prove that it gets better. Else it would not be a solution. I do not discount the possibility that it could better after killing yourself. But like you said, you do not have proof for it.

That is their definition, not mine.

Gender is a social construction. I have my own definition of gender and sex, which is a solid definition. Gender fluidity literally means you can identify as whatever you want whenever you want. Such a world view is not even internally coherent, and ambiguous. I do not have ambiguity in my definitions. Which is what a definition is supposed to be. I want clarity not mental gymnastics. I heard that 50% of those papers in academia could not even be replicated. It is just a boatload of crap. You can also derail a conversation by bringing in unnecessary complexities and technicalities and make the discourse go nowhere.

You not having seen the proof is not proof of it not existing. Go research on the "Gender Equality Paradox". Then what is the source of those differences? Having an advanced paper to support your claims does not mean what you are saying is true. If that was the case, all the experts should be agreeing with each other. Women get plenty of social acceptance for being engineers as well. There is a strong push to include more women in stem from the powerful institutions, spending millions of dollars into diversity hiring etc..which men do not have. I was talking about that difference. Heck, the supposed more patriarchal countries have more women in stem than the advanced liberal countries. You do not address any of this and say there is not any proof. The acceptance that men get is a consequence of the money he makes from engineering roles, being of higher pay, not because he choose engineering per say. If women makes that much money in nursing, she would as much acceptance. I do know. You are the one who does not know to be frank. And you also assume that not knowing is somehow gives validity to the claim that all gender differences are merely a social construction, which is the real bullshit. Also I would like to read on your position? Are you claiming that none of us know? or do you have proof to substantiate your position rather than glossing over possibilities?

Watch these videos if you are stuck in western propaganda. Come down to the ground reality. Brilliant Discussion from Seven Dagdelen: Blocked Peace deals: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/09/us/politics/biden-putin-tucker-carlson-peace.html?smid=url-share

Man I read the title as "Joe Biden Won" with BiBi in the background. I was so pissed lol.

@Hardkill I don't say that taxes dot help in strengthening the economy. In fact that's the only purpose of taxes. But I disagree that it could be used for reducing inequality. The economic growth under Biden and increases taxes on the rich was a way to counter the massive economic stimulus. Of course all these money would eventually end up in the hands of corporations and the 1% so increasing taxes was the bare minimum you could do. If you give cash to people without assets, they would give away that cash to people with assets. Simple logic. So it will eventually exacerbate inequality for the short term benefits of boosting the economy. The economic boost is that stimulus money moving to the top, around 800 billion. And even more went to develop vaccines which is more money to the big pharma. These are not reducing inequality, in fact the exact opposite of it. Not actual value was added to the economy during the pandemic. But there was increased spending, which is enough to qualify for economic growth, but it's not meaningful growth.

No one disagrees that life can be hard. What's the solution? Is the solution to end yourself? You got no clue if you can end the suffering, by ending the body. If it's the body that's torturing you, then you would be correct. But if it's the mind that's torturing you, then killing yourself will NOT end the sufferings of the mind. It's not a joke when you say, killing yourself is not the answer. It's literally true. You don't know if killing yourself will end the suffering or makes it worse. Most people don't think about this. It's like taking huge debt with no concerns on paying it back. Life will make you pay no matter what. Do not die in debt.

You can have even more nuance. The fact that we even have women excel in engineering roles is not because women love engineering, but because of a contrived push from society to make more women engineers and mathematicians against their will. Do men have such encouragement from society? Nope. They become engineers at large because of their neurological wiring. But women have many incentives to become engineers and advantages offered to them by society. And still there aren't enough women engineers. Which is why India and the middleast east has more women in stem as opposed to US or Scandinavian countries. Because we force women to take up engineering against their will for obvious reasons. Given enough freedom, even lower of women will choose engineering because of their own genetics and their interests. It's not like women were desperate to be crane operators only to be disheartened by seats being oversized and have to return home. Women are not interested in operating cranes in huge numbers. If they were, we would be building them to fit their size. It would also mean an economic incentive since women would be paid less, according to their own words.

I am not saying that you couldn't publish a book citing gender differences. There are plenty out there. The claim was that you cannot use those books to teach students in academia. That was the context of the discussion. ------------ @Leo Gura Those people are not overly political. These are normal parents of kids who are radicalised. There are plenty of such people in the general populace. Let's just say even one woman exist who is so pissed off by the textbooks. She will take it to the court: "My lord this textbooks are so patriarchal and misogynistic Women can be engineers as men or better, if not for the hundreds of millions of years of oppression". Court makes observation: "This woman sad. Make woman happy. Pass law. Ban textbook." Courts can be used by anyone to overthrow popular stuff with or without political will. Take abortion for example. Most people want access to abortion. But courts can simply take it out given that there are a motivated small group of people who can make it happen. Which is why the structure of the society itself makes it impossible. It is meant to appease crazy people. Not for consciousness or Truth.

This matter is more complicated than most people give credit to. I agree that I didn't do justice to explain it well. Taxes are necessary. But they serve a different purpose in the economy than most people think. It's just that the purpose is to not fund things. You might think that you need to raise taxes to do stuff. But taxes are here to hold the economy in shape. It is a tool used by the government on the economy. The government do not need taxes to fund its own stuff. At the end of the day, you need a functional economy. That's the first priority in economics. Taxes help in a functional economy. Taxes will not be helpful in idealistic causes like reducing inequality by taxing the rich. That is not what taxes are meant for and that is coming from a fundamental misunderstandings of how the economy and taxes work.