J M

Lakewood, NJ, United States

About J

Bio

http://jmmac1234321.blogspot.com/2012/06/coreprinciples-from-beginning-physics.html

Auto didact; self taught at all that I do.

An idea worth spreading

Extremist facts are really paradigm crushing ones...

I'm passionate about

https://www.youtube.com/user/JmMac1234321/feed?filter=1

I'm interested in:

Philosophy
Science
Music Composition (and instrument playing)
Video game design
Art

Favorite talks

Comments & conversations

Noface
J M
Posted over 1 year ago
Leslie Morgan Steiner: Why domestic violence victims don't leave
There are more privileges (unconstitutional ones at that) for females in western society than for males; and the media is a steady stream of lambasting of men and empowering of females. Yet we are to believe females are oppressed and are "prevented" from leaving. And whats more this _voluntary staying_(on the part of the female) can be ameliorated by policy. And of course non of this applies in reversed-gender situations, _even though the measure of abuse is emotional stuff more than physical._ --- The same classes that fall for this stuff are the same classes who believe we have 'violence' 'cause of video games.
Noface
J M
Posted almost 2 years ago
Megan Kamerick: Women should represent women in media
Feeling like females are NOT privileged is not the same as them not being so. Any rational honest dissection of society --USING LIBERAL MEASUREMENT FOR WHAT IS PRIVILEGE AND REPRESSION-- will show that females are the privileged class. As for your '"biological" inferiority' comment there is obviously not enough aptitude here to grapple with even the vocabulary of such understandings. ...It can keep being flagged and I'll keep reposting. And humility is for slaves.
Noface
J M
Posted almost 2 years ago
Megan Kamerick: Women should represent women in media
"Shoving aside" is attempt to MIScharacterize the mission creep moving goal posts of feminism's snowballing agenda. Females --per democracy's screaming activisti demands --were originally integrated in the press, at college, in politics, in law etc. Then a later generation of screaming democracy complained that that was repressive to females --given female "unique needs and aptitudes" (thus negating the original premise which allowed female integration in the first place)-- and fems should therefore have their own special categories _while retaining their option in the integrated *common area*_ which is then absurdly falsely characterized as "men's space." That way females have two spaces-- their original female only space and the "integrated" male space (which is now "common" to all). Then the next generation of democracy tries to say (right above here) that these special gender exclusive options females have were actually forced on them through "shoving aside." No evidence for that shoving; just attempt to rile up more screaming democracy support for moving goal posts. (If the society was so prone to oppressing females rather than deferring to them historically one must ask how it is so susceptible to falling for pro female moving goalpost rhetoric / hypocrisy each generation.) Where are these media venues that have "shoved females aside"? (..."The media is repressing females" [eyeroll]...) Evidence that females have their own spaces is not evidence that they have been shoved aside. (Just like evidence of female absence in fields is not evidence of something keeping fems from applying. Eg military or other dirty jobs. Same with the `brooha over legos.) Though femi rhetoric asserts that that is the case. Also this assertion that female sections are prevented from covering "real stories" is once again an assertion. Females like what they like (for biological reasons) thus fueling that stuff.
Noface
J M
Posted almost 2 years ago
Megan Kamerick: Women should represent women in media
UN-evidenced assertions and lies or delusion on your part --typical of the entire movement of feminism. The fact that these assertions have not been challenged while they took over most of media, academia, law, justice, politics etc speaks volumes about the nature of privilege given to females on instinct and about human perception of un-evidenced assertion. Not to mention since there was a "rape victim story" and then a discussion about it, it demonstrates that there is not an ignoring of "female issues". Just because your feelings feel otherwise tells us nothing other than your feelings don't accurately dissect reality. --- A perfect example is the rape story discussed: females don't know how to frame an equation (comprised of variables) and solve "problems", instead focusing on "feelings" (specific to grey matter-less brains), which are akin to chimpanzees focusing on finger sniffing as the chimpanzee way of trying to get out of the rain. --- If females, given their lack of perspicacity, tendency toward hypocrisy, selfishness, sexism, etc, were measured the way society (males and females) measures men, they would have been marginalized to the labor pits a long time ago, not given control over the epistemology of society.
Noface
J M
Posted about 2 years ago
Improving female literacy in the maternal language as a significant contribution to helping women to control their fertility
"surprise, surprise, it turns out that they are actually human beings !" Everybody is a human being. Says nothing; typical political talk. Children are "human beings" Should they be in charge of the everyone's sex lives? Health? Child rearing protocols? Big picture decision making? Children are already protected and provided for. (If they were females --rather than children-- they would be the cause of everyone's' competition too.) What do they need "agency" for? For what purpose? So they can make it more difficult for the protector class and competing classes?
Noface
J M
Posted over 2 years ago
Jamie Drummond: Let's crowdsource the world's goals
Democracy is "letting the people decide". Ie your assertion that crowds _shouldn't_ be asked and your hailing of democracy as solution is _"cognitive dissonance"_ created by your male tendency (conservatism) for rallying around your culture's old order (which for Anglos is the word "democracy"). --- And while it is true that there is no liberalism (ie "feeding of children" etc) without capitalism, that doesn't necessarily make capitalism a self-aware good. Indeed the fact that MOST people don't understand that capitalism is liberalism (thinking instead that they are in something called a "dichotomy") just demonstrates how non self aware capitalism's breeding agenda is. Capitalism as a system of competition (ie way for men to win status so they can buy fidelity from females) --as opposed to sword-play-on-horses system-- breeds for and emboldens dumb people. Capitalism is the reason for the population explosion; and the explosion of the liberal bureaucrats (replacing ye olde Christian ones [who were the same breed of altruism-barking dog]) who demagogue about it. --- You assert capitalism and democracy religiously like they are some mystical force that wound up doing "good" (though most of the "goods", you would also call "bads" if they were framed differently [eg pop explosion of "non whites", immigration, feminism, homosexuality, art culture and liberalism) because it is in your nature to be a conservative.
Noface
J M
Posted over 2 years ago
Improving female literacy in the maternal language as a significant contribution to helping women to control their fertility
"But some time could also be spent educating men. Fertility takes two. If, for example fertility control is the goal," No it is not the goal. Marginalization of men is the goal; meanwhile creating niches for mediocre bureaucrats. (Ultimately allowing females to cheat while living off of the cheated on's labor is the goal since "liberated" "equal" females [ie total dependents protected by caste structures of winner-and loser-men who fight over female sexual value] _on the whole_ really just explore their serial "relationship" adventures, with the whole career and education thing --the ostensible goal of "liberation"-- just being a back drop for that core rockstar goal. (True unless a female is from the minority of Un-fecund females; but they were always part of male intellectual collectives anyway [eg monks and nuns].) Why females don't have different core goals for their liberation --eg academic or inventive/creative genius-- is female-aptitude based.) If population reduction was the goal, people would advocate _population reduction._ And they would communicate the goal to the men so as to get them on board rather than going around them talking about them in third person with their conspired with females.