[photon]

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

... Talk about you not listening either. But that's just it. You ignored lots of what I posted and went on to attack mode.

You said she is "peddle the notion that life is just really really hard for women", I'm responding to that. If you changed your claim or modified it I didn't intentionally ignore I apologize I missed it, could you reiterate it or put it a different way?

Disagreement isn't attack mode. Attack mode would be me attacking you, I'm talking about what you are saying.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Come on. Most of the reactions here in this post you gave tells a different story. You really don't care or you come off this way. Lets belittle the guy.

Where did I belittle men? Where did I say I didn't care? What relevance does my post have anyway, your claim was about what she was peddling, that she advocates that life is only hard for women.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

It's naive to think that Feminism hasn't been exploited for the purpose of profit. Especially in the Capatalist Society of the USA.

So? No doubt someone does. Your claim wasn't just that some people may be profiting from feminism, you were implying that scientific studies were paid for and skewed in order to generate money for those that were paying for the studies (if they weren't skewed and were truthful then it doesn't matter who paid for them they're accurate representations of reality).

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

It's the only place where I found a digital copy of the actual study. Thanks for that though. Your link doesn't show the study. It shows a brief.

Your link doesn't have the digital copy of the study. Your link is to a digital copy of a from a Harvard Mental Health Letter brief. My link shows a digital copy of the brief as well, which you have to pay to get.

Sorry I should have been more clear, you called your link "A Harvard Study that disappeared from the Harvard web in 2010." when it's not a Harvard study, it's a brief which is claimed to have disappeared (which it didn't).

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

So you didn't find the study.

I said "And the study is also available online." meaning the study being online is separate from the link I'd provided.

The study isn't from Harvard, it's from the American Journal of Public Health, and Googling the first five words of the study title brings up the full study text as the first hit. My point is neither the study nor the brief disappeared anywhere. Any insinuations based on the disappearance are therefore false (like the disappearance would mean anything to begin with).

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Way to pick out single things I post in the thread. Talk about the whole post for once. You're a real fan boy of ignoring the message of a video and finding other ways to support your views.

A post is comprised of single things that presumably you post to support your position. How else am I supposed to discuss them reasonably except individually? If I say "I disagree" and state my view, that doesn't accomplish anything.

How seriously I take the message of a video depends on the seriousness of the video. A video that is supported by links to sources or has other indications of being well thought out is worth seeing. A video from a channel where the other videos also show similar properties makes it more worth seeing. A video who's title and description invokes conspiracy in a channel with lots of similar probably isn't worth watching, in my opinion anyway.

Not because I think they're wrong, but because I don't see signs that they've come to their conclusions properly. Like I said before, it's a heuristic, given that I can't watch infinite # of videos.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Here is the actual group that made the video.http://www.ourwatch.org.au/
Ourwatch is trying to educate on gender bias and behaviors. Nobody deserves to be hurt.

This guy just uploaded the video to his site. He didn't make it. Another sent it out and I found it on facebook...

I'm sorry but he didn't just upload the video to his channel, he made it. He says so himself. This is exactly what he says "I took relevant parts out of the video found at http://www.ourwatch.org.au/ which is yet another initiative to end violence against everyone but men."

He took pieces out that supports his view that feminism doesn't want to end violence against men. How do I know the context of what he took out? I'd have to watch the full video he cut and pasted from and compare it to what he's using it to say to see if he's misrepresenting what the original said or if it's even relevant. On a video that has 349 views. He doesn't even properly attribute the video.

This is the facebook page the video mentions:

https://www.facebook.com/ExposingFeminism

From that Facebook page:

Spoiler!

I'm supposed to take any of this seriously?!