Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The SJW thread The SJW thread

08-07-2017 , 10:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shame Trolly !!!1!
The relevant law regarding colleges in CA is indeed Prop 209, and because of Prop 209 it's illegal for UC, CSU, and the JCs to collect any racial information. You didn't mention any other spheres than college. Of course, we get to follow all the federal laws... just like anywhere else, so when we fill out a mortgage application/etc, we'll be asked for voluntary racial information on those forms... just like anywhere else.

I missed your reference to MA... sorry about that.

My point is that it varies all over place, state by state, county by county, and city by city. There is no same answer that works the same everywhere. If you are really interested in this shiz, like you claim... you really should do your own damn research.
It's not even illegal for the colleges to collect that information. I cited the relevant law stating they MUST collect it.
08-07-2017 , 10:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
Most of that research is bunk or pushing an agenda, but cite away with your "wall of research". I'm listening.


Oh, really. That's easy to say.
08-07-2017 , 10:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
I posted about false equivalencies now Jiggy talks about them in every post. Someone learned something new today! How cute.
Awwww Clovis, did someone let you out of your crate? Are you done with your nap. Did you go outside to do your business before you started slamming your paws on the keyboard again?

08-07-2017 , 10:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanktehbadwookie
Oh, really. That's easy to say.
How the brain of the right works...

All evidence, no matter how strong, which counters my belief is fake news and all evidence, no matter how weak, that support my belief is clearly established fact.
08-07-2017 , 10:34 PM
I literally have no idea how jiggy thinks he is insulting me. Must be some /thedonald inside joke they laugh about while mass producing bedsheets with eye holes.
08-07-2017 , 10:40 PM
is this even real


Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
Not at all.

Policing speech has nothing to do with how you treat someone as a business.

If what you say has nothing to do with your policies as a business, then it doesn't matter what you say.

If you'd like a more nuanced explanation, see Ben Shapiro discussing the LA Clippers owner and boycotts:



Stop policing speech - I'm not interested in Thought Crimes.
08-07-2017 , 10:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6ix
is this even real
You are behind. The cliffs are jiggy thinks everything posted on the yooootuuubes is scientific fact.
08-07-2017 , 10:45 PM
He can't answer basic questions about the free speech of policing speech with free speech. Or about the inner workings of thought policing.. NoobyMac.
08-07-2017 , 10:55 PM
wow...




Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
...

If you want to say "Hey, I'm not interested." That's fine too. But then you're kind of in the wrong forum for that....

p.s.

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Spoiler:
oooooooooooooool
08-07-2017 , 11:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
It's between 1/32 and 1/16 of a nationality. I've seen as high as 1/8.





What is the variability in chromosomes when it comes to gender? What percentage is neither XX nor XY? Let's put it this way - more people believe in men on the moon. We're not talking about these exceptions.


She received bonus points on her application to Harvard. Are you not following along? And yes, women's gender benefits in courtroom procedings are directly relevent. Moreso for an even further marginalized minority, such as a transgender person, right?



Research is not leading in one direction. Activists are pushing an agenda. The science on difference brains is bunk.

Or are you saying male and female brains are different? Better not tell a feminist that they're "seperate but equal".





Not call yourself. Compete with other athletes.

Should this woman be beating up other women?
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...ox-youre-a-man

Should this woman be setting records in weight lifting - by 41 pounds?
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/23/health...rnd/index.html

How about this runner?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...stars-on-fema/
I'm now on my iPad so breaking up the quotes is too annoying, but I'll paragraph accordingly.

I'm not really sure how race and nationality correlate as I would use them. I'm 1/8 Irish but that has nothing to do with how I think of race.

The variability is people who identify differently to their chromosomes, and that I'm treating sex and gender as two separate somewhat related concepts.

I'm clearly not following along. I disagreed with your first sentence in that post. I have no idea what this Warren character has to do with anything yet. How is that an "entitlement"? Is there a points system where they have to given you extra for it?

Yes, male and female brains have differences. How much of this is down to socialisation and how it might affect behaviour is not well understood. Environment changes brain structure and there is a huge amount of individual variability here. However, research indicates that trans people share characteristics of the gender they recognise themselves as and not what that of their chromosomes.

As for the sport thing, this is another area where the answer is to go with the science. Since I compete in combat sports, that's the area I have most knowledge and reservation about. There's serious risk to the safety of fighters here, but I'll stress that this is a question for doctors and not me. In other sports I don't really care very much.
08-07-2017 , 11:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
Most of that research is bunk or pushing an agenda, but cite away with your "wall of research". I'm listening.
No, is probably going to be my response here. I'm not engaging with a conspiracy theorist.
08-07-2017 , 11:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
It's not even illegal for the colleges to collect that information. I cited the relevant law stating they MUST collect it.
OK sure, whatev.

How does any of this tie into the "virtue signalling" ??
08-07-2017 , 11:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bladesman87
No, is probably going to be my response here. I'm not engaging with a conspiracy theorist.
Just to be clear, you're forfeiting your "Citation please" card...just making sure.

Also, I'm going to say you don't have a "wall of research" backing up your claim.

Last edited by JiggyMac; 08-07-2017 at 11:18 PM.
08-07-2017 , 11:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
Just to be clear, you're forfeiting your "Citation please" card...just making sure.
Lol demi-glace.

Post nonsensical thing after moronic thing, without ever really engaging in debate, then when your opponent gives up out of sheer exasperation declare victory.
08-07-2017 , 11:16 PM
Agreed Bladesman - let's keep the walls of text down, I understand.

Yes, in an affirmative action situation, you do get "points" based on your ethnicity. That's how it works. - http://www.latimes.com/local/califor...ry.html#page=1

African Americans received a “bonus” of 230 points [on SAT scores]

“Hispanics received a bonus of 185 points.” [on SAT scores]
08-07-2017 , 11:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Lol demi-glace.

Post nonsensical thing after moronic thing, without ever really engaging in debate, then when your opponent gives up out of sheer exasperation declare victory.
Hey, back in your crate! Don't you have a peer-review journal to chew up? Bad dog, no biscuit.
08-07-2017 , 11:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
The science on difference brains is bunk.
Cite?
08-07-2017 , 11:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
Cite?
In before yoooooootoooooobz
08-07-2017 , 11:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
... someone who speaks in absolutes doesn't seem to be open to ideas and nuance. Stop thinking like a programmer and start thinking like a human being. Not everything is an algorithm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
You know what has tremendous impact on every day life - peer reviewed journals. Every day I wake up and live my life by the way some academic with zero real world experience tells me how to be. LOL!

...
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
... someone who speaks in absolutes doesn't seem to be open to ideas and nuance. Stop thinking like a programmer and start thinking like a human being. Not everything is an algorithm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
You know what has tremendous impact on every day life - peer reviewed journals. Every day I wake up and live my life by the way some academic with zero real world experience tells me how to be. LOL!

...
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
... someone who speaks in absolutes doesn't seem to be open to ideas and nuance. Stop thinking like a programmer and start thinking like a human being. Not everything is an algorithm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
You know what has tremendous impact on every day life - peer reviewed journals. Every day I wake up and live my life by the way some academic with zero real world experience tells me how to be. LOL!

...

Ok, here's my real question:

Did wil31459 actually hire you to post on this forum to make himself look like a gentleman and scholar by comparison?
08-07-2017 , 11:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
Just to be clear, you're forfeiting your "Citation please" card...just making sure.
No, I'm still into citations, I'm just not interested in pretending to have a serious conversations once someone's outed themselves as a conspiracy theorist. I'm not going to cite the argument because I'm no longer interested in making it.
08-07-2017 , 11:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
Cite?
It is incumbent on the one making the claim first. There is not a wall of research.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bladesman87
No, I'm still into citations, I'm just not interested in pretending to have a serious conversations once someone's outed themselves as a conspiracy theorist. I'm not going to cite the argument because I'm no longer interested in making it.

But once again, I have to do all the work.

This is the sum of trans-gender brain research. One team, in Spain, who used an MRI to examine the brains of 24 female-to-males and 18 male-to-females. All other work cites this work.

There were some low-level pheromone tests as well. And that's it.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...sgender-brain/

So, yeah, there's almost ZERO research on trans-gender brain differences.
08-07-2017 , 11:34 PM
Don't worry though, resident SJWers, there's a new class - even more oppressed than Transgenders. The Trans-Ablists.

Psychologist blinds woman with drain cleaner - because she wanted to be disabled


Let the virtues be signaled!
08-07-2017 , 11:40 PM
there it is


Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
To be fair, Theryn Meyer's video REALLY explains this point.
(She's trans, btw).
She makes it pretty clear:

"I will be respectful of you. I will try to accommodate you. But if I have to legally refer to you as something, then "****ing *****" will do just fine."

As if the Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton race hucksters haven't taught us something already.
08-07-2017 , 11:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggyMac
The issue with Trans is that

1) It's not always clear.
2) You're asking someone to change their natural language usage - almost through no fault of their own.
3) And her final point is - you're actually making more difficult to interact with trans people. Because if they're afraid of legal action for accidentally using the wrong pronoun, they're better of not bothering.

And yes, in victim based society, where you incentivize people to claim this status....legally, then of course you're going to get abuses of the system.

You don't have to conscientiously work at not calling a judge "spawny-eyed parrot-faced wazzock". You do have to conscientiously work to call a she a "they" (the example used in the video). Just listen to the lawyer in the Theryn video - "How to ask about pronouns" and "You must do this because it's the law".
NOBODY IS GOING TO WATCH YOUR STUPID ****ING VIDEOS WHAT THE **** IS WRONG WITH YOU
08-07-2017 , 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by auralex14
Cool, and you should look up pseduo-intellectual.

I never talked about equivalency. Obviously YouTube has a higher noise ratio, but there is no difference (in regards to veracity) between The Economist I read each week, and their channel on YouTube.

Dismissing YouTube out of hand, as you and others do, is silly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Jiggy and his ilk never post yooootubz of the WSJ, the Economist, or Science. It's always big bubba's conspiracy channel or deplorableAnnes opinion of the new world order.
Nah, auralex already understood the context and that point. I mean, if he didn't, and then trotted out the 'pseudo-intellectual' Sick Burn that would be really ironic and weird, right?

      
m