Louise O'Neill on manned mission to Mars: "Why not go to Venus?" (MOD Warning post 1)

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

Dear lord, you really are something else.

Sorry but you are the one who spouted unverifiable statistics, then started spouting nonsense that 'oh i actually meant across a range' :rolleyes: As if stating that a completely plucked from the sky stat is somehow statistically significant. You do realise the top end of your range, i.e. 60% is more than half?

Now you come up with more crap, 60/30/10 made up numbers on those supposedly personally attacking LON instead, seemingly because 2 or 3 posts out the the last what, 100, comment on her appearance.

Again on this sexual assault v harassment, I specifically corrected that at the time and repeatedly drew your attention to it while you 'had your fingers in ears' calling me a liar and dishonest.

You equate using a percentage with a claim of statistical significance. That's not the case. Percentages exist outside the field of statistics. I said multiple times that I wasn't claiming to have evidence (I don't think it's possible.to get evidence of how many men harass as opposed to how many women are harrassed) and was using it as a shorthand to encompass a range of possibilities.

I can't help it not you're not going to actually read my posts.

As for my top range being greater than half, my.bottom range was FAR LESS than a half. If you can equate a range with its most extreme values then why not focus on the opposite extreme of 20%. By your logic I'm saying 80% of men have never harrassed.

So using your logic I said that over 50% of men have harrassed and 80% have not harrassed. Well that adds up to 130%. Do you see the problem with how.youve interpreted my post now?

And yet again, you make another pathetic post insinuating a lack of intelligence. Seriously, you should take a long hard look at your own posts making those kind of comments about others.

At this point I can only assume you're trying to annoy people until they stop engaging with you or the thread entirely.

I really don't think statistics are your strength, so don't embarrass yourself further by trotting out more made up ones.

A little hypocritical no?

Will I Am Not

Boom_Bap wrote: »

F'sake, nothing to help solve the burger debate.

Big Mac doesn’t belong in the same sentence as. Whopper.

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

You equate using a percentage with a claim of statistical significance. That's not the case. Percentages exist outside the field of statistics. I said multiple times that I wasn't claiming to have evidence (I don't think it's possible.to get evidence of how many men harass as opposed to how many women are harrassed) and was using it as a shorthand to encompass a range of possibilities.

I can't help it not you're not going to actually read my posts.

As for my top range being greater than half, my.bottom range was FAR LESS than a half. If you can equate a range with its most extreme values then why not focus on the opposite extreme of 20%. By your logic I'm saying 80% of men have never harrassed.

So using your logic I said that over 50% of men have harrassed and 80% have not harrassed. Well that adds up to 130%. Do you see the problem with how.youve interpreted my post now?





A little hypocritical no?

TLDR, essentially the above = I was pulling figures out of my arse. Thanks for confirming.

Here's one for you, anywhere between 1 and 99% of your posts are absolute horse****. I'm just using this as a shorthand to encompass a range of possibilities.

cantdecide

KrustyUCC wrote: »

..once the blinkers are off and you see how deeply ingrained misogyny is in every tenet of our society, it is very difficult to 'unsee' it."

The only things the lady can't unsee is her confirmation bias and the lip service doesn't mask the bile of the ideology that flows through it.

Does she realise that those publications are just using her as a box-ticking/ diversity-hire type role, I wonder? I suppose being there on merit is more difficult.

Boom_Bap wrote: »

F'sake, nothing to help solve the burger debate.

This is obvious. Whoppers. Big ones.

Boom_Bap

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Big Mac doesn’t belong in the same sentence as. Whopper.

I know the Whopper is the franchise burger, but we should really be talking about the XL Bacon Double Cheese when it comes to BK. It's a titan of a burger.

cantdecide

Boom_Bap wrote: »

I know the Whopper is the franchise burger, but we should really be talking about the XL Bacon Double Cheese when it comes to BK. It's a titan of a burger.

It's just everything a man needs and wants. It's like the patriarchy of burgers. Just delicious.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

TLDR, essentially the above = I was pulling figures out of my arse. Thanks for confirming.

Here's one for you, anywhere between 1 and 99% of your posts are absolute horse****.

Really when someone resorts to a post like this it's time to stop engaging. They've already lost.

cantdecide

LLMMLL wrote: »

Really when someone resorts to a post like this it's time to stop engaging. They've already lost.

That's very defeatist.

Zulu

LLMMLL wrote: »

Really when someone resorts to a post like this it's time to stop engaging.

Really? You're going to stop posting??

I dont know how I feel about that. On the one hand, it's mostly gibberish and slogan you're posting. On the other hand, it's keeping us all somewhat entertained; it's like Speakers Corner where you're sure to find a crackpot entertaining (back in the day).

Will I Am Not

Boom_Bap wrote: »

I know the Whopper is the franchise burger, but we should really be talking about the XL Bacon Double Cheese when it comes to BK. It's a titan of a burger.

I was always a BDC man myself but the double Whopper is a fine burger to be fair.
The Big Mac is an awful yoke, a McDonalds double quarter pounder blows it out of the water.

LLMMLL

cantdecide wrote: »

That's very defeatist.

I know, it is, but when someone writes a post that aggressive it's best to give them some time to themselves.

LLMMLL

Zulu wrote: »

Really? You're going to stop posting??

I dont know how I feel about that. On the one hand, it's mostly gibberish and slogan you're posting. On the other hand, it's keeping us all somewhat entertained; it's like Speakers Corner where you're sure to find a crackpot entertaining (back in the day).

I'm just not going to respond to givyjoe's abuse Zulu. I'll always be here for you.

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

I'm just not going to respond to givyjoe's abuse Zulu. I'll always be here for you.

Abuse?! Next you'll be telling me I sexually assaulted you in 130% of my posts. :pac:

KrustyUCC

KrustyUCC wrote: »

"Recognising that is key. It's something I still do every day, observing any thoughts that arise that aren't helpful in a feminist capacity, and making a conscious decision to challenge and dismiss them. I also believe that once the blinkers are off and you see how deeply ingrained misogyny is in every tenet of our society, it is very difficult to 'unsee' it."

Well, that really gives her great perspective on the behavior of the male gender when everything must be from a completely feminist angle. She's just admitted ignoring anything negative about women, or how women have contributed to our culture. Hilarious. Never take responsibility for your own life.. It's just so pathetic.

professore

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Some of Louise's intereview in the Sindo yesterday

https://www.independent.ie/life/louise-oneill-sometimes-i-dont-quite-live-up-to-maybe-what-i-would-like-to-be-but-thats-ok-too-36857325.html

Louise wrote in The Guardian in January 2015: "While identifying as a feminist, I starved myself and made myself vomit after meals in order to satisfy an idea of what I thought an attractive woman should look like. I called myself a feminist, but, in truth, I was buying into the patriarchy. I was internalising all of that misogyny, making it my own, making it my truth, and I didn't even realise it."

How did you stop internalising the misogyny?

"I think the most important step is acknowledging that we all have internalised some misogyny, men and women alike," she says. "None of us exist in a vacuum - we've all been raised in this murky mire of patriarchal standards and beliefs, and it would be almost impossible for us to emerge unscathed.

"Recognising that is key. It's something I still do every day, observing any thoughts that arise that aren't helpful in a feminist capacity, and making a conscious decision to challenge and dismiss them. I also believe that once the blinkers are off and you see how deeply ingrained misogyny is in every tenet of our society, it is very difficult to 'unsee' it."

"I think it's more important than ever to call yourself a feminist in Ireland in 2018," Louise says, "and that goes for men and women. Ireland is a wonderful country and one that I'm very proud to call home, but it can sometimes feel like a hostile environment to women."

How do you stop internalising the misogyny? What the actual **** is this about? Woman has eating disorder and blames men hating women for it. How ridiculous is this statement? It really sums up modern feminism in a nutshell. Everything is men's fault, even your eating disorder.

You catch a cold? - That's misogyny.
Ed Sheeran tickets sold out? - Misogyny.
Cheaper car insurance for women? - Misogyny.
Aung San Suu Kyi perpretrates genocide against the Rohynga in Burma - you've guessed it, she's internalised her misogyny - since she's a woman it must be a man driving her to do it somehow.....

Utterly crazy philosophy.

cantdecide

I think we all need to pause, reflect and just take a minute.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DmYLrxR0Y8

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

She's just admitted ignoring anything negative about women, or how women have contributed to our culture. Hilarious.

Has she?

"I think the most important step is acknowledging that we all have internalised some misogyny, men and women alike," she says.

Boom_Bap

I wish Louise O'Neill could actually give us her burger preference. I think it should be the primary goal of this thread to figure it out.

pjohnson

If you dont understand statistics dont use them.

cantdecide

LLMMLL wrote: »

Has she?

Happy thousandth post, LLMMLL

cantdecide

Boom_Bap wrote: »

I wish Louise O'Neill could actually give us her burger preference. I think it should be the primary goal of this thread to figure it out.

It would be nice to find something we can all agree on and enjoy together. We're all in this together, right?

LLMMLL

cantdecide wrote: »

Happy thousandth post, LLMMLL

Thanks Hun xxx

Will I Am Not

Boom_Bap wrote: »

I wish Louise O'Neill could actually give us her burger preference. I think it should be the primary goal of this thread to figure it out.

I’d tweet her and ask but I don’t want to find myself accused of meatsogyny.

Boom_Bap

cantdecide wrote: »

It would be nice to find something we can all agree on and enjoy together. We're all in this together, right?

I agree, everyone accepts the burger divide, but also embraces the divide. It could help us all find some peace.

Will I Am Not wrote: »

I’d tweet her and ask but I don’t want to find myself accused of meatsogyny.

Brilliant.

cantdecide

Boom_Bap wrote: »

I agree, everyone accepts the burger divide, but also embraces the divide. It could help us all find some peace.

You of all people should know it's called the bap-gap

taserfrank

I remember a while back, Louise and some of her friends were at a Beyonce concert, and Louise was calling out some guys on Twitter because they were complimenting their clothes.

Outlaw Pete

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/594557120617574400
https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/470938301663559680
https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/226277822803615745

cantdecide

No pics?

taserfrank wrote: »

I remember a while back, Louise and some of her friends were at a Beyonce concert, and Louise was calling out some guys on Twitter because they were complimenting their clothes.

Guys at a Bouncie concert? Male feminists, probably so she'd be right to be concerned.

Boom_Bap

So she uses McDonalds to judge people and use their facilities?
And she didn't have a burger in BK?

The plot thickens.

LLMMLL

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/594557120617574400
https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/470938301663559680
https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/226277822803615745

Wow you really must've spent a LOT of time on that. Going back to 2012??? You are dedicated.