Women are better hunter, science suggests

[Leo Gura]

@Elliott Stop being so hostile. You are being a jerk.

Even if you are right, don't be a jerk about it.

[Wilhelm44]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

With the fucken thighs (innocuous aussie accent) 

 

 

Cracking skulls 

[Thought Art]

@Elliott Not how lies work man. You have an attitudinal approach to these things which is distasteful. You should be aware that saying a view of mine is a lie or retarded is an unfriendly, and disingenuous way of relating to me here. 
 

You discovered example of female hunters which I didn’t know. Thanks for sharing that!

You are misusing the term liar. And when you use it you are creating unnecessary conflicts. 
 

Your also accusing me of lying, which isn’t true. And your ignoring my more nuanced posts where I stress my humility and sharing of more nuanced views of the subject. I’m aware of female hunters and I even acknowledged them in prior posts. Forgive me that I made a too universal of a statement in one of my posts.

Edited 1 hour ago by Thought Art

[Nercohype]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

But there is a whole ideology built around that.

Leftists in universities are not just being aware, they created an ideological echochamber to push an agenda of equality. It sounds innocent and well-intentioned, and often it is, but it becomes an entire paradigm that projects itself on the world and ends up with absurd conclusions like that weight-loss medicine is genocide of fat people, or that fat people are equally beautiful as fit people.

University leftists hold plenty of foolish and false views thanks to ideology.

That i do agree with and understand. Thank you! 😁

[Thought Art]

This is a pretty sprawling subject, sometimes I make a post from a wider lens, and sometimes I am too myopic, universal and ideological in a given statement though in my more broad understanding and openness to the possibility that humans survival in many unique ways I am unaware of. 
 

I am more interested in knowing what’s true than being right. I am humble in this. Human survival is more intelligent than my initial theories or partial perspectives. 
 

I will be wrong on many things. But, lying is not what I’m doing when I am wrong. 
 

Again, what is COMMON and what is UNIVERSAL, is so important here. Female hunters exist but are they COMMON? Idk. We would need more research.

Edited 1 hour ago by Thought Art

[Elliott]

5 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@Elliott Not how lies work man. You have an attitudinal approach to these things which is distasteful. You should be aware that saying a view of mine is a lie or retarded is an unfriendly, and disingenuous way of relating to me here. 
 

You discovered example of female hunters which I didn’t know. Thanks for sharing that!

You are misusing the term liar. And when you use it you are creating unnecessary conflicts. 
 

Your also accusing me of lying, which isn’t true. And your ignoring my more nuanced posts where I stress my humility and sharing of more nuanced views of the subject. I’m aware of females hunters and I even acknowledged them in prior posts. Forgive me that I made a too universal of a statement in one of my posts.

You knew that you didn't know what you were saying was true, that's a lie because you stated it as a fact. Just because you heard someone else say it doesn't mean you know it's true and you know that.

Edited 1 hour ago by Elliott

[Ulax]

@Elliott You gotta work on your anger issues

[Elliott]

Just now, Ulax said:

@Elliott You gotta work on your anger issues

Ya, to allow pieces of shit to be pieces of shit. Fuck off

[Thought Art]

@Elliott Well, I was wrong. What I said is generally true but not universal.

Most people would be satisfied to bring a correction to my attention and have me acknowledge it, adjust my views and contributions to the conversation.

But, not you. Your clinging onto it as if I was a liar. That is strange behaviour. 
 

This is a casual chat board. Part of casual speech includes being a bit sloppy. Part of the reason I share a view is to see how others respond and to improve my understanding. 
 

If you wanna hold on the lie thing. I see that and I’ll conclude speaking to you unless you wanna contribute to the thread meaningfully. 

A liar would typically double down and not acknowledge they were wrong. Note, I did not do that. My universal statement was not true. Only partially true. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Thought Art

[Elliott]

7 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@Elliott Well, I was wrong. What I said is generally true but not universal.

Most people would be satisfied to bring a correction to my attention and have me acknowledge it, adjust my views and contributions to the conversation.

You don't really have views on this as you've effectively admitted you're just parroting others.

 

Quote

But, not you. Your clinging onto it as if I was a liar. That is strange behaviour. 
 

This is a casual chat board. Part of casual speech includes being a bit sloppy. Part of the reason I share a view is to see how others respond and to improve my understanding. 
 

If you wanna hold on the lie thing. I see that and I’ll conclude speaking to you unless you wanna contribute to the thread meaningfully. 
 

You're the one that keeps bringing it up, I'm just responding. I have nothing personal against you, I'll talk to you in the next breath like nothing happened, I don't hold what you said against you I think you're a great person. I didn't mean for my initial reaction to be taken personally. Sorry

Edited 1 hour ago by Elliott

[Thought Art]

I will say, in most tribes but not all. Men were the primary (note primary) hunters. In fact most have only history or men hunting according to some researchers. You’ll find a variety of roles and shared roles in tribes and some (though the large minority) had female hunters where they were primary hunters.

Edit: My current understanding is: 

Edited 1 hour ago by Thought Art

[Elliott]

Just now, Thought Art said:

I will say, in most tribes but not all. Men were the primary (note primary) hunters. You’ll find a variety of roles and shared roles in tribes and some (though the large minority) had female hunters were they were primary hunters.

Do you actually know this. No, you dont do you

[Thought Art]

@Elliott Jared Diamond here. AMA 

No, but I can say it with high level of certainty based on common knowledge, common sense AND the research I just looked at online. We all basically know that already from what we were taught in school and in our cultures. What I am saying is the common rule, while acknowledging it’s not universal. 
 

But, of course there is nuances, examples that don’t follow the "rule", etc. 
 

We will find conflicting studies in this space too. I’m willing to take in more views, adjust over time and be wrong. 
 

But, I think what I’m saying holds up with lots of evidence… 

Edited 1 hour ago by Thought Art

[Thought Art]

What we should be careful not to do, which I did a few times is over generalizing a historical pattern of sex based roles as rigid rules. Human survival is too complex for that. Even if generally men hunted women raised babies of course that’s not a whole picture and can be misleading.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Thought Art

[Alexop]

4 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

What we should be careful not to do, which I did a few times is over generalizing a historical pattern of sex based roles as rigid rules. Human survival is too complex for that. Even if generally men hunted women raised babies of course that’s not a whole picture and can be misleading.

 

Sure, male lions hunt too. But only in special situations like hunting big game that the females cannot overpower.

Luxury life to be a male lion. 

[Elliott]

31 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@Elliott Jared Diamond here. AMA 

No, but I can say it with high level of certainty based on common knowledge, common sense AND the research I just looked at online. We all basically know that already from what we were taught in school and in our cultures. What I am saying is the common rule, while acknowledging it’s not universal. 
 

But, of course there is nuances, examples that don’t follow the "rule", etc. 
 

We will find conflicting studies in this space too. I’m willing to take in more views, adjust over time and be wrong. 
 

But, I think what I’m saying holds up with lots of evidence… 

So, in nazi Germany, you think it was okay for men to say jews were evil, because it was written in a school textbook, that's what makes it okay.

And what point do this have to do with the OP. It's not the OP, OP is "may have been better"

Edited 1 hour ago by Elliott

[Thought Art]

@Elliott Well, you’d have to use discernment. I don’t live in Nazi Germany so I can’t compare.  Have a good day man!

You like to cherry pick and twist things don’t you? How can I talk to someone who does that? 
 

What is your goal here? Is it to beat or own me? Really get me good?

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Thought Art

[Ulax]

45 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Ya, to allow pieces of shit to be pieces of shit. Fuck off

I'm surprised your parents let you speak to people like this

[Elliott]

2 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@Elliott Well, you’d have to use discernment. I don’t live in Nazi Germany so I can’t compare.  Have a good day man!

 

But you're not using discernment, you just said you're purely parroting something you just read

[Elliott]

Just now, Ulax said:

I'm surprised your parents let you speak to people like this

My dad would knock these cu*** teeth out, my mom would run them over