Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rationalism + feminism taking hold?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I think that realizing that the shit was going to hit the fan the "industry " sacrificed a pawn to get a bishop..
    Back when I was young the rumours were that for all aspiring actresses the road to success went via the " Casting Couch " and the industry had such control the girls just wrote it off,, Especially the ones who went on to have highly paying careers,, as being part of the price of success..
    Now Weinstein is taking the "fall " and the industry is very self righteously claiming to be policing its own act...

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Suna123 View Post
      When I translate both expressions into German it is the opposite. "importuné" is worse than "hit on" what seems to be the colloquial form for flirting - surely not in a prince charming way, but by far better than "importuné" what seems to be annoying behavior.
      But ok I don't speak any French and have witnessed "hit on" only two or three times in use by native American-English speakers.
      Yes, it's very much used by American English speakers but does occasionally get used by Australians and Brits. Pollution of the language :P

      Quite often, Google translate does mess things up from time to time - especially when the translation is not done from between the main 5 languages that they use as their reference. For "less common" languages such as German, the translation goes from English -> German but is not so rigorously checked.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post
        Yes, it's very much used by American English speakers but does occasionally get used by Australians and Brits. Pollution of the language :P

        Quite often, Google translate does mess things up from time to time - especially when the translation is not done from between the main 5 languages that they use as their reference. For "less common" languages such as German, the translation goes from English -> German but is not so rigorously checked.
        I did not use google translate of course. One of the best dictionary's online for German-English translates "hit on" into "anbaggern" "anmachen" "angraben" . (dict.cc) And none of these words has really a strong negative meaning. I did not need a dictionary at all since I knew this word before and was not surprised about the literally translation the dictionary gives out. When you say the meaning is strong negative then I have learned that expression not correct and the dictionary did not get it either.....or there is a different rating on what is appropriate behavior and what not.

        PS: I have checked google-translate now. It translates "hit on" into "schlagen" (what means beating). It does not get it at all.
        Bing-translater often does it a little better. In this case it translates "hit on" into "treffen" (what means meeting) .....so it does not get it either, but at least it is not violent :-P.
        Last edited by Suna123; 01-12-2018, 06:24 AM.
        In dir muß brennen, was du in anderen entzünden willst. What you wish to kindle in others must burn within yourself. [Aurelius]

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Suna123 View Post

          I did not use google translate of course. One of the best dictionary's online for German-English translates "hit on" into "anbaggern" "anmachen" "angraben" . (dict.cc) And none of these words has really a strong negative meaning. I did not need a dictionary at all since I knew this word before and was not surprised about the literally translation the dictionary gives out. When you say the meaning is strong negative then I have learned that expression not correct and the dictionary did not get it either.....or there is a different rating on what is appropriate behavior and what not.
          You'd probably use a phrasal verb something like "to come on to sb" to define that better and in a milder or more "neutral" manner if that was the intended message to convey - and using something that has real currency in British English.

          I suspect that the BBC used "to hit on" in the title to make it much more negative - and in particular using an Americanism in that manner when similar British English variants are probably too vulgar to put as an article title. This gives the game away somewhat and reveals bias in the BBC journalists who wrote that article.

          The problem I've noticed with online dictionaries and even relatively good monolingual ones such as even Oxford or Cambridge is that they don't do such a good job at giving real in-depth definitions of many, if not most, phrasal verbs - they tend to define them more generally in order to give some quick sense of their meaning. To give a proper description of phrasal verbs would make these dictionaries much longer. Hence you end up with synonyms which don't really give you the exact meaning and usually missing elements such as postiveness/negativeness or the formality in which the phrasal verb is used.

          This is all rather sad actually... over 30% of verbs used by native English speakers end up getting largely overlooked and quite rarely produced by non-native speakers of English.

          Originally posted by Suna123 View Post
          PS: I have checked google-translate now. It translates "hit on" into "schlagen" (what means beating). It does not get it at all.
          Bing-translater often does it a little better. In this case it translates "hit on" into "treffen" (what means meeting) .....so it does not get it either, but at least it is not violent :-P.
          All online translators do a very poor job of translating phrasal verbs. It tends to get very syntactically messy with the main verb and the particle/preposition.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Tux1 View Post
            It's just cowards who reply to the topic and the OP didn't even offer his opinion.

            Well, why coward?
            Sometimes is less more

            Originally posted by Tux1 View Post
            Yours was a good try, though. This narrative is controlled and I like the word you used, 'hypocrisy.' There wasn't just Trump, either. Clinton already was accused of the same thing but all those feminists and left-wingers were adamant in defending him and the 'Left' was accusing anyone who was a critic of just saying it out of partisan contempt.
            Yeah I'm like lauri and try always to derail a topic..... but by my all seriousness I find this is the similar hypocrisy as with cath. church and pedophilia. Some people have as far as they are usable for the establishment a "got of jail card" or an Indulgence paper. We have a term for it "Nietykalni" [untouchables] what doesn't describe an Indian cast just assholes which can murder, rape and oppress without consequences.

            Originally posted by Tux1 View Post
            I wonder what Weinstein did wrong for his camp to throw him under the bus. They usually are powerful enough to cover it up or at least spin it long enough for it to go away. But, this silly idea that this is some sort of generic 'bad behaviour on the behalf of men' or maybe we can be a bit more specific and say, 'men in positions of power' - etc. etc. is just pure spin to avoid the deeper issue.
            I suppose the blessing from establishment has ended, probably a new young pawn is ready for his place (usual generation pressure) or the turd pile in Hollywood is much bigger as this one (((isolated))) case and this guy is the scapegoat.
            Nevertheless it seems that in US establishment occurred last time some kind of division and competition, loss of Hilary despite 1 400 000 000 USD campaign, aggressiveness of the violent left what didn't existed some years ago and completely not credible and contradictory MSM are a sign of some kind of internal destabilization. Maybe controlled revolution and a revolution needs its victims, Weinstein is perhaps one of them.

            Comment


            • #21
              I've heard about it. Finally someone talks with common sense to these feminist retards. But I suppose they won't listen anyway.
              http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/...20100803203515

              Comment


              • #22
                Seems the postmodernist kooks who have very much hijacked the debate regarding sexual assault have ganged up on a feminist icon Margaret Atwood for daring to state that due legal process should be followed regarding rape and sexual assault allegations:

                http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42708522

                Her comments are very interesting and fit postmodernist kooks perfectly:

                She added: "In times of extremes, extremists win. Their ideology becomes a religion, anyone who doesn't puppet their views is seen as an apostate, a heretic or a traitor, and moderates in the middle are annihilated."
                and

                'This structure – guilty because accused – has applied in many more episodes in human history than Salem. It tends to kick in during the "Terror and Virtue" phase of revolutions – something has gone wrong, and there must be a purge, as in the French Revolution, Stalin's purges in the USSR, the Red Guard period in China, the reign of the Generals in Argentina and the early days of the Iranian Revolution. The list is long and Left and Right have both indulged,' she said.


                http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...feminists.html

                Comment


                • #23
                  what is rationalism?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Han1977 View Post
                    what is rationalism?
                    look at Wikipedia for philosophical explanation of rationalism
                    however i think colloquially for most people is rationalism wrongly connected to rationality, synonym for rational way of thinking as well as antonym of irrational way of thinking.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      , that's what I thought

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post
                        Seems the postmodernist kooks who have very much hijacked the debate regarding sexual assault have ganged up on a feminist icon Margaret Atwood for daring to state that due legal process should be followed regarding rape and sexual assault allegations:

                        http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42708522

                        Her comments are very interesting and fit postmodernist kooks perfectly:



                        and

                        [/SIZE]

                        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...feminists.html
                        thanks Aussie for the laugh.

                        "In times of extremes, extremists win. Their ideology becomes a religion, anyone who doesn't puppet their views is seen as an apostate, a heretic or a traitor, and moderates in the middle are annihilated."
                        This has been said dozen times here in forum, perhaps not in so glamorous english.

                        The dailmail article is very interesting because of reaction and counter-reaction to particular topic.
                        While opposer of her statement feel directly harmed in imagination of their ideology. All her supporters act like Lauri with shallow polemic as well as they try clearly to deflect the discussion away of particular subject on all them who dare to criticize her words.
                        Of course in feminist ideology the right of being a female victim stands above the right of this professor to defend his standpoint and reputation. Any university has clear rules for such cases where teachers have a relationship with their students. He broke the rule hence he has to accept the consequences. However the other question is female student's willingness to be involved into such romance. Such a question is according to modern feminism's ideology completely irrelevant, because women are never responsible for their choices and never aware what happens around them. LOL

                        It's for me like all discussions where the one side provides arguments, even if only those argument are based on their internal ideology. The other side try to ostracize people with those arguments as an ignorant and naive group whist using pseudo intellectual commonplace phrases. Like ever, no one in both of those groups can provide a rational analysis of this particular situation, the 'holly' progress of progressivity is here not given.
                        Postmodernists cook in their own postmodern shit.
                        Last edited by Hades91; 01-17-2018, 02:43 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Hades91 View Post

                          look at Wikipedia for philosophical explanation of rationalism
                          however i think colloquially for most people is rationalism wrongly connected to rationality, synonym for rational way of thinking as well as antonym of irrational way of thinking.
                          On "yes Minister " there is nothing sir Humphrey cannot rationalize...

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Elishar View Post

                            On "yes Minister " there is nothing sir Humphrey cannot rationalize...
                            Even if i didn't saw these british 1980-ties shows
                            rationalization means in economic terms again something different, it's a code word for budget, expenditure or personal cuts

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              It is very hard to express a personal opinion on some issues without getting into a row, and as much as I appreciate feminist groups being more visible, other voices need to be heard.
                              Unfortunately I couldn't read the whole thing, but the first arguments they raise sound valid and balanced. It's really strange that the media who overlooked those issues two or three years ago is now glad to build controversy against that letter and those who wrote it as if they were always first in line to stand up for women. There's definitely some old waste like Elisabeth Levy signing this letter, but on the opposite side they have their own hysterical waste too.

                              I talked about the whole debate with my daughter and my wife ; although she could understand the point of this letter, my daughter sees it with her generation's eyes. It really make us wonder about the education we thought we gave to our children. My wife was raised to become an independent, confident, strong woman and we brought up our kids accordingly. We thought our daughter was armed to stand up for herself, but she's self-victimising a lot, complaining about past situations she's been in rather than acting on the spot. The issue is quite complex and difficult to discuss with reasonable argumen, each side wants to "win" the debate, the only result being misunderstanding and unnecessary flaming. In the end, public opinion is blurred and the only winner is more doubt and less willpower to act.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Hades91 View Post

                                Even if i didn't saw these british 1980-ties shows
                                rationalization means in economic terms again something different, it's a code word for budget, expenditure or personal cuts
                                Perhaps in Poland it has a confined meaning but in broader terms this is not so,how for example does the Polish Prime minister Rationalise Polands immigration policies ?,, It of course depends on his audience...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X