Peak Identity (SJW)


Recommended Posts

Peak Identity (SJW)

You just have to see this to believe what our educational system is doing to young minds.

This video is by a marketing professor at Concordia University In Montreal, Gad Saad. He numbers and names a YouTube series of videos as "The Saad Truth."

Saad said what he found is not satire. People are actually doing this.

My favorite part, though, is not from current professors. It's Saad's introduction as he's describing the way authors start their blurbs and articles on the Inside Higher Ed site. Taken from the video:

Quote

In many of these fields -- popular culture, women's studies, post-modernism, African-American studies, ethnic studies, all those-- whenever somebody begins an article or any form of communication they always start off by expressing what their identities are. Because this, in a sense, limits the scope of their experience. Because you couldn't speak about number theory, or any scientific theory without first saying: "Hello, my name is Sir Isaac Newton. I am a celibate white cisgendered male." And then you go ahead and discuss calculus.

:)

But the other stuff is hilarious, too. In fact, you can read the transcript and get links here: Gad Saad: This Is Not Satire, This Is Peak Identity Politics Being Reached.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the video in this series immediately preceding.

This one is not funny unless you like laughing at morons who live and breathe victimization so much, who virtue signal to their collective of peers so much, they no longer distinguish between imagination and reality.

The teacher Saad cites is one such moron--and one, I suspect, is hamboning it up, too. :) 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jts said:

Everything King Midas touched turned into gold.

Everything government touches turns into shit.

Don't nobody go to a government run school.

 

middle class people and poor folks may not have much of a choice.  Schooling is legally compulsory and the middle class and poor folks may not be able to afford anything but local tax loot funded illiteracy mill...

Private schools that meet government approval  generally cost a lot of money.  Home teaching is an alternative but if both parents are working that may not be possible.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

middle class people and poor folks may not have much of a choice.  Schooling is legally compulsory and the middle class and poor folks may not be able to afford anything but local tax loot funded illiteracy mill...

Private schools that meet government approval  generally cost a lot of money.  Home teaching is an alternative but if both parents are working that may not be possible.  

For a long time I've been skeptical of the idea that we need to go to school to learn things or that school is the best way to learn things.

Need I give examples? How many people would say they know nothing except what they learned in school? Many people learn multiple languages without school. Many people learn practical on the job skills without school. There is a story that Ayn Rand taught herself how to read at the age of 3 or something like that.

Brigitte Gabriel learned English in Lebanon from translations to English on TV shows. Not in school.

Some decades ago my brother Bob acquired a big fat textbook about welding from NAIT (Northern Alberta Institute of Technology). He read the book and then applied for a job as a welder with no experience and no formal learning about welding. The boss said, can you weld? .. Sure, no problem... Let's see you weld.  ... I see you know what you are doing. .. He got the job and that is how he became a welder.

The stuff you learn in school is not necessarily of more value or better learned than what you can learn on your own by a combination of books and on the job.

The main advantage of school is you get a diploma or degree. But once you prove yourself on the job, you don't need that. There are exceptions in some professions because of government requirement.

Some people get the diploma or degree and it doesn't do them any good and they owe $100,000 plus interest and they wasted some of the best years of their life. And they might be better without their education, especially if it's about philosophy.

In the age of the internet it should be easier than ever before to learn without school. The potential is there; there may be some questions about how to best use it, like what's worth learning and the order of learning it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jts said:

For a long time I've been skeptical of the idea that we need to go to school to learn things or that school is the best way to learn things.

Need I give examples? How many people would say they know nothing except what they learned in school? Many people learn multiple languages without school. Many people learn practical on the job skills without school. There is a story that Ayn Rand taught herself how to read at the age of 3 or something like that.

Brigitte Gabriel learned English in Lebanon from translations to English on TV shows. Not in school.

Some decades ago my brother Bob acquired a big fat textbook about welding from NAIT (Northern Alberta Institute of Technology). He read the book and then applied for a job as a welder with no experience and no formal learning about welding. The boss said, can you weld? .. Sure, no problem... Let's see you weld.  ... I see you know what you are doing. .. He got the job and that is how he became a welder.

The stuff you learn in school is not necessarily of more value or better learned than what you can learn on your own by a combination of books and on the job.

The main advantage of school is you get a diploma or degree. But once you prove yourself on the job, you don't need that. There are exceptions in some professions because of government requirement.

Some people get the diploma or degree and it doesn't do them any good and they owe $100,000 plus interest and they wasted some of the best years of their life. And they might be better without their education, especially if it's about philosophy.

In the age of the internet it should be easier than ever before to learn without school. The potential is there; there may be some questions about how to best use it, like what's worth learning and the order of learning it.

 

whether one -needs- school or not, attendance is compulsory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Wolf DeVoon said:

18118898_10210681249401297_7501997795037

That is the law in every State of the Union.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now we move into high-end scientific SJW gender culture with Bill Nye doing "My Sex Junk" with someone named Rachel Bloom.

You know it's bad when the most interesting thing up there is the weirdness of DJ Sea Horse (at the end). :) 

And just to make sure you realize that all this is scientific, Nye says so--and he says that three year olds choose their gender identities and it's so exciting to him.

I stand in awe at the sheer awfulness of it all.

If I wanted to make an imaginary scene out of the book Rand invented in Atlas Shrugged, "Why Do You Think You Think?", nothing I could come up with would hold a candle to this.

What's worse, they all seem like they're gathering material for a sequel based on performing arts instead of epistemology, "Who Needs Talent?"

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

That is the law in every State of the Union.

You can home school, in some states easier than others. I guess you mean no schooling is verboten.

You can't home school in Germany.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Brant Gaede said:

 

 

13 minutes ago, Brant Gaede said:

You can home school, in some states easier than others. I guess you mean no schooling is verboten.

yes.  Some kind of State approved schooling of youngsters is a legal requirement.  In some states home schooling is permitted,  but its form and content are legally regulated.   So for middle class or poorer folk with limited financial means  that comes down to home schooling (in some states) or placing one's child in a tax loot  funded illiteracy mill. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

Some kind of State approved schooling of youngsters is a legal requirement.  In some states home schooling is permitted, but its form and content are legally regulated. So for middle class or poorer folk with limited financial means  that comes down to home schooling (in some states) or placing one's child in a tax loot  funded illiteracy mill. 

Golly, you're a blockhead, Bob. All sorts of home school programs. We picked the one we liked best, solid core subjects, not expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2017 at 11:53 PM, Wolf DeVoon said:

Golly, you're a blockhead, Bob. All sorts of home school programs. We picked the one we liked best, solid core subjects, not expensive.

In some states the home school plan has to be submitted for evaluation and permitted before home schooling  counts as fulfilling the legal requirements of compulsory schooling for youngsters.  By rights,  home schooling should be a right,  but in some states it is a privilege granted by the State.  In short,  the State has first dibbsies   on one's own children.  This is absurd, but in some States it is also the Law. 

In New Jersey the State has to evaluate,  approve and bless home schooling plans. Otherwise one must deliver his/her youngsters to a tax funded public school or a licensed private school.  Everywhere you look the State has its grubby fingers  on the education of our youngsters. 

Thank you Horace Mann. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BaalChatzaf said:

In some states the home school plan has to be submitted for evaluation and permitted before home schooling  counts as fulfilling the legal requirements of compulsory schooling for youngsters.  By rights,  home schooling should be a right,  but in some states it is a privilege granted by the State.  In short,  the State has first dibbsies   on one's own children.  This is absurd, but in some States it is also the Law. 

In New Jersey the State has to evaluate,  approve and bless home schooling plans. Otherwise one must deliver his/her youngsters to a tax funded public school or a licensed private school.  Everywhere you look the State has its grubby fingers  on the education of our youngsters. 

Thank you Horace Mann. 

It's a privilege granted by the citizens of that state to that state to fuck over the citizens who don't want to be fucked over by those already fucked and like to share the fucking so they don't have to envy the unfucked and their unfucked children.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brant Gaede said:

It's a privilege granted by the citizens of that state to that state to fuck over the citizens who don't want to be fucked over by those already fucked and like to share the fucking so they don't have to envy the unfucked and their unfucked children.

--Brant

That is Democracy for you.  The worst form of government there is, except for all the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

XX equals girl. XY equals boy. YY equals Milo?

As I jokingly mentioned a few years ago at a Bette Midler concert in DC(?) Bette said a big hello to all her gay fans and when they roared back it wasn’t a feminine sound but instead it sounded like the guys from The Seventh Infantry. There was a lot of testosterone in that gay audience, and I heard nothing that sounded fruity or girlish.  ROAR!     

Peter  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Peter said:

XX equals girl. XY equals boy. YY equals Milo?

As I jokingly mentioned a few years ago at a Bette Midler concert in DC(?) Bette said a big hello to all her gay fans and when they roared back it wasn’t a feminine sound but instead it sounded like the guys from The Seventh Infantry. There was a lot of testosterone in that gay audience, and I heard nothing that sounded fruity or girlish.  ROAR!     

Peter  

There is no YY.  There are a few rare instances of XYY combinations.  But they are so rare as to be negligible.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill Nye, the lyin' guy, gets deeper and deeper into his hole.

From The Washington Free Beacon:

Netflix Edits ‘Bill Nye’ Episode to Remove Segment Saying Chromosomes Determine Gender

From the article:

Quote

When uploaded to Netflix, an episode of the educational children's show "Bill Nye the Science Guy" cut out a segment saying that chromosomes determine one's gender.

In the original episode, titled "Probability," a young woman told viewers, "I'm a girl. Could have just as easily been a boy, though, because the probability of becoming a girl is always 1 in 2."

"See, inside each of our cells are these things called chromosomes, and they control whether we become a boy or a girl, " the young woman continued. "See, there are only two possibilities: XX, a girl, or XY, a boy."

But in the version of the episode uploaded to Netflix, the segment has been cut entirely. While noncontroversial at the time, the 1996 segment appears to contradict Netflix's new series "Bill Nye Saves the World."

The new show endorses a socially liberal understanding of gender, under which gender is defined by self-identification rather than genetics and there are more than just the two traditional genders.

How's that for love of science?

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Bill Nye, the lyin' guy, gets deeper and deeper into his hole.

From The Washington Free Beacon:

Netflix Edits ‘Bill Nye’ Episode to Remove Segment Saying Chromosomes Determine Gender

From the article:

How's that for love of science?

:)

Michael

the XX, XY configuration in 99.999999999 percent of the known cases  determines whether the infant born with that genome is  a male or a female (check the primary genitals to see). If the child has a penis it is a male, if it has a vagina  it is a female, if both are present is is a hermaphodite which is rarer than hen's teeth.  What they do not determine is whether the infant will grow up to behave in a "masculine" or "feminine"  manner.   "masuline" and "feminine"  are to some extent social constructs.   In particular  the XX, XY configuration does not determine whether the bearer of those genes will be heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual  or asexual.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People who are “different” make up a very small percentage of the total population but their share of the news time is much greater. I understand the Progressives are trying to eliminate the “freak and geek” feeling many more ordinary people feel for those who are different but I am tired of that. And their various agendas like putting interracial couples in commercials? Enough! Which bathroom to legally use? If an observer thinks it is a woman going into the woman’s bathroom then don’t worry about it.

Did you know that they lock the doors to incoming traffic at schools now, and nearly every local school has an armed guard in my part of the country? Although libertarians are supposed to be opposed to public, surveillance cameras I think they are a wonderful way to stop crime or punish criminals, and not just on TV.

I like the show, “Designated Survivor” with Keefer but it is like the Progressive writers just can’t help themselves. Nearly the entire Congress, the President and Veep have been murdered but what does the Prez worry about? Refugees from other countries and federal government handouts for school bands.

Peter 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now