I don't think that word makes much sense in this context unless you have psychopathic tendencies.
Morals or what is right belongs to those who write history, and those who write history are the victors, those who lost will of course either be demonised or erased.
I kind of agree partly. Yes to some extent because these guys lost they don't get the title "great". So if you use a word in a different way than what is normally understood it's good to give your definition beforehand so there is no unnecessary confusion.
I think you misunderstood me, when I say greatness, it means a man who has the ability to influence large sections of society.
No I don't think I am confused. You explained "your" definition and I understood. I said myslef that you use it as "influence" so no confusion here.
Because I’m talking about gender and violence. You’re saying no one cares about any type of violence except homicide, and gave those examples as ‘evidence’ of that when in reality those have nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Violence isn’t limited to homicide, it’s just that homicide is arguably the worst form of violence. But it being the worst form doesn’t mean “most important” because “most important” isn’t even a factor that comes into play here because it’s not even about the supposed ‘worst’. Those examples are comparing apples and oranges; they’re not the same thing. It makes no sense for the argument at hand. Just non sequitur after non sequitur. You didn’t even refute anything that I said either, you just ignored it and tried to dismiss and deflect.
It's not whether it's interesting to me or not, I'm just stating a fact which you glossed over because you wish greatness to be tied to morality.
Spaz man, you don’t have the perspective to understand what’s actually being talked about. You (mis)interpret statements in whatevere way you want so that you can think about how much ‘wiser’ you are than the rest of us ‘plebs’, all the whole not realizing that you’re only suffering from minor delusions of grandeur.
ImhoBecause I’m talking about gender and violence. You’re saying no one cares about any type of violence except homicide, and gave those examples as ‘evidence’ of that when in reality those have nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Violence isn’t limited to homicide, it’s just that homicide is arguably the worst form of violence. But it being the worst form doesn’t mean “most important” because “most important” isn’t even a factor that comes into play here because it’s not even about the supposed ‘worst’. Those examples are comparing apples and oranges; they’re not the same thing. It makes no sense for the argument at hand. Just non sequitur after non sequitur. You didn’t even refute anything that I said either, you just ignored it and tried to dismiss and deflect.
If you want me to address your claim that men are more violent than women, fine, I’ll bite: women commit more violence than men (as shown by the stats I pulled up), but men are overrepresented in cases of homicide because men are simply more present at the extremes of any thing; it’s the variability hypothesis at play here. In addition, men are far less likely to report violence against them, especially when it’s committed by a woman.
There you go, I **** on you with the whole women being more nurturing thing, and I **** on you with this thing too. You’re talking out of your ass with generalizations that were perpetuated by society’s pedestalization of women, and use stereotypes, logical fallacies, and textbook ego defense mechanisms to justify your bull**** belief in order to save face. You’re just wrong dude. No if’s, and’s, or but’s about it.
It's because ur perspective comes from 21 years of life on this earth which for all intents and purposes is only actually worth 4 years.
No I understand you perfectly. I am just saying you used the word in a non usual way for the society (not me) That's it.
The millenials say "Ok boomer" I guess they would have used it here but that
Society are fishes in the sea swimming happily.
Kids will always want to prove that they are right, it is normal.
I kind of agree to that mantra.
This coming from a dude who used the ego defense mechanisms that every psychology student has heard of lol
Some say some people are agreeable and some not that much. Some say T level plays a role sometimes.
My perspective is inclusive of all of those men on here because I always look at them and those they argue with before taking a stance. And the longer I live, the more experience I have, and the more people I talk to for wisdom, the more I come to realize that I was right all along. I've only gotten better at talking about it lol
It's because they are sheltered, try asking a kid from the slums, he'd be more adult like in his perspectives, superbly cunning and resourceful too.
