Brainy boy, skeptical then supportive (but clueless) cute girl.
Barf.
What about the female college professor who ends up being instrumental in figuring out the answer?
shareThis is reality. Welcome to the Homo Sapiens species, delusional leftie.
shareThat's pretty funny considering that most of todays' female "righties" by any objective standards usually fall into more "Stepford'ish" classifications.
shareI don't know what you're talking about.
shareGiven your "delusional leftie" comment, I don't doubt it.
shareThe original poster commented complained that a male character is brainer than his girlfriend. IQ studies show women have a narrowly distributed bell curve, meaning there are much less very high IQ women than men. My reply to him was therefor perfectly justified. This is simply reality.
shareWell, you certainly seem to be using all of your IQ to justify it to yourself anyway. Also simple reality.
shareI have justified it in general, not just to myself.
shareYes, to yourself, as was pointed out. Thank you for the confirmation.
shareNot to myself. In general. If you disagree, feel free to tell me how my logic is incorrect. If you can't then shut the hell up.
shareNo need for me to ALSO disagree, YOU just disagreed with YOURSELF.
OvertonPendulum (2891) 2 hours ago - "I have justified it in general, NOT JUST TO MYSELF."
OvertonPendulum (2891) 37 minutes ago - "NOT TO MYSELF. In general."
Thank you for the additional confirmation.
Still waiting for you to tell me what is wrong with my original comment. Either point that out, or shut the fuck up and apologize, you imbecile.
shareBased on the fact that you obviously haven't been able to figure it out on your own based on the comments I've ALREADY made, you've made it very clear that the imbecile here is you...
...and a pretty reactionary one at that, which would also explain your generalized viewpoint regarding women and IQ. STFU indeed...or not...I really couldn't care less at this point. You're on your own 'bro'.
I understand everything. Your entire "point" is me using the term "also", which does not in any way undo the fact that my point justifies my comment in general.
How is pointing out the reality of gender IQ distribution "generalizing"? It is description of the data in totality, it's not generalizing. Generalizing would be for me to label all women as stupid, which I have never said. The OP complained that the movie portrays a boy as intelligent and a woman as "clueless". Since men have a much higher chance of having high IQs than woman is an undeniable scientific fact (which even you don't seem to deny) then what is wrong wit this being reflected in a movie? I simply replied this is reality. It's you who has some ideological issues with the arts like movies portraying reality, thus the problem is with you, buddy. According to you leftist ideologues, women and minorities should always be portrayed as the smartest, the hell with reality. It's you who has ideological agenda, not me.
If you think my entire point here has been your use of the word "also", then you've made it very clear you DON'T understand everything. Period.
shareHahaha bailing out, aren't we? Thank for admitting you lost.
share On the contrary. All I've done is reiterated that you obviously still haven't proven that you've ever under the point of my posts.
So there's no "we" to this "bailing out" that you speak of....that only, and obviously, includes you.
What is it that I have to prove to you?
shareDoesn't matter since I'm not holding my breath that you'd even try anyway.
However, a good start to proving to this board that you aren't just another troll skeptic that asks for evidence they'll never objectively consider would be that you've ever actually understood the point of my posts.
You made no points in your posts other than "this is offensive". You haven't even attempted to argue that my claim about gender and intelligence is wrong. Science about gender should not be offensive.
shareActually, I HAVE made the point repeatedly that your responses have proven that you've never understood the overall point of my posts. That you've continued to simply refuse to acknowledge that fact doesn't make your claim true that I've made no point(s). And your attempt to imply I've been operating under a sense of being offended is simply a false red-herring.
That said, I WILL admit to being wrong about one thing. Reviewing my last post and seeing my use of the term "troll skeptic" made me realize I'd mistakenly posted HERE what I'd intended to post on another thread. But while that term and the tactic of a person asking for evidence they have no intent of considering doesn't apply to you in this conversation, the part about actually understanding the point of my posts still does.
If you made a point somewhere, you sure seem to be hiding it as you have wrote another log essay and haven't presented it.
shareAgain, just because you've repeatedly illustrated that YOU'VE not understood the point doesn't mean there has been no point.
shareIf you're so keen on having your point heard, why don't you repeat it? Again, what is your point?
shareI never said I was "keen" on having the point heard...and never said I was keen on having to explain it just because others can't figure it out for themselves either.
shareAgain avoiding the topic. What is your point? If I'm so stupid, please repeat it to me.
shareSays the person AGAIN who claims to understand everything...
shareStill refuses to make his alleged point....
shareSays the person AGAIN who claims to "understand everything"...
shareAgain avoiding to make his alleged point.
If I don't understand it, more so of a reason for you to repeat it. You've now made 4 replies deliberately avoiding to make your point. I think it's because you have none.
You obviously free to "think" whatever you want, but the "thinking" you've illustrated so far has simply illustrated that you in fact do NOT understand the point being made, and as a result, do NOT "understand everything" as you "think" you do.
shareThat's the 5th reply that you deliberately avoided making your alleged point.
shareNo, that was the 5th time I've pointed out that you don't understand as much as you've repeatedly claimed to.
shareOK, I don't understand....according to you. That much more of a reason for you to repeat your alleged point. So, what is it?
shareThat you are even asking clearly illustrates that it is obviously NOT just "according to me".
But if you "understand everything" as you've claimed, you'd have known THAT too.
Hahahah again avoiding to make your point. What is your point?
shareWell, along with the original one that you obviously still haven't been able to figure out for yourself, would be the one where you've illustrated that you in fact DON'T "understand everything"...
shareThe 8th time you avoid making your point. How can I understand it, if you refuse to make it?
shareJust because you obviously don't understand the point that has been made doesn't mean no point has been made. Someone who "understands everything" would understand that.
sharePeople who make points that aren't understood are eager to repeat them. You don't have any points. If you had it, you would have repeated it.
shareSeeing as how you've STILL not been able to figure out the point for yourself despite claiming to understand everything, it is of course easy to for anyone else to understand why you've repeatedly tried to deflect attention away from yourself regarding that fact. Sad.
shareAgain deflecting away from the fact you have no points.
shareAgain deflecting away from the fact that you don't understand the point despite having claimed to "understand everything. Sad.
shareThere is nothing to udnderstand since you made no points.
shareAccording to you...based on your illustrated lack of ability to understand everything (despite your claimed ability to do so) anyway...
shareThen why do you refuse to repeat your point?
shareIf you "understand everything" as you've claimed, you wouldn't need that explained to you. Sad.
shareNo, because you haven't made any points. That's why you are avoiding to mention them.
shareAs a person who obviously can't figure out what the points have been, it's perfectly clear why you continue trying to deflect attention away that fact.
shareHahaha you accuse ME of deflecting? I DARE YOU TO REPEAT YOUR POINT
shareA person who "understands everything" wouldn't need a point literally spelled out for them. Sad. No surprise you've continually tried to deflect attention away from THAT point. ; )
shareI dare you to repeat your "point".
shareA person who "understands everything" wouldn't need a point literally spelled out for them. Sad. No surprise you've continually tried to deflect attention away from THAT point. ; )
shareI dare you to make your point.
shareA person who "understands everything" wouldn't need a point literally spelled out for them. Sad. No surprise you've continually tried to deflect attention away from THAT point. ; )
shareWh
y am I debating with a parrot who doesn't have any points?
No surprise that a person who claims to "understand everything", but can't figure out the points for themselves, would need to keep telling themselves that there haven't been any points. Also no surprise you've continually tried to deflect attention away from THAT point. ; )
sharesorry, overton won this at the top, long ago. you went off rails on your 3rd post and never recovered
shareYeah. How could they put people like that in movies? We all know they don't exist.
Suddenly, to discriminate is okay. Hmmm.....
you have to discriminate against the RIGHT peoples though. Please check the bulletin board to see who the right people are for this minute. It changes per group and whim. Try and keep up. :)
share