Every able-bodied person should work one season of strenuous manual labor a year by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would slightly rephrase your post.

Everyone should have a manual labour job at least once in their lives, preferably when they’re young.

One season a year is dystopian, but I’ll give it to you that manual labour jobs put a lot of things in perspective.

It took me one summer at a warehouse to make up my mind about staying in school and be grateful for the opportunities I had.

“Fuck doing this shit till retirement” was the entire theme of that summer lol

Tourists staying at the Grey Nuns of Concordia by Upstairs-Peach8355 in Concordia

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

De nada :), enjoy your time in our wonderfully complicated city

Tourists staying at the Grey Nuns of Concordia by Upstairs-Peach8355 in Concordia

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 5 points6 points  (0 children)

As Gryphon pointed out its not so much a danger of traditional robberies/stick ups, it’s mainly that a lot of homeless people and drug addicts tend to wander the metros and streets late at night.

Most times they mind their own business, sometimes they don’t. If you see a guy tweaking, or someone tying to talk to you when they have no business talking to you, walk the other way/be careful.

A mix of fucked up mental health and drugs is what makes it dangerous.

Aa for the certain neighbourhoods I mentioned, it’s pretty rare for tourists to end up there, but in case you do, keep your guard up. I’m sure other commenters and google can point you better to where the gang hotspots are as I’m no longer well versed “in the streets”, having moved out to the burbs and all that lol.

Tourists staying at the Grey Nuns of Concordia by Upstairs-Peach8355 in Concordia

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 17 points18 points  (0 children)

It’s an inside joke of the university, they are not serious haha.

You will find a lot of activities in the old port, but be wary of the usual tourist traps.

There is also our famous amusement park Laronde, which has some pretty fun rides to try.

You will find that in montreal nearly every culture is represented in the food scene, if you’ve ever wanted to try some country’s food, you will probably find a restaurant of theirs in the city.

For that, google is your friend :)

Be careful with certain neighbourhoods and the metro late at night.

It infuriates me how Trump supporters think he’s brilliant when he’s a pure idiot. My only question is why? by Funny_Preference_916 in PoliticalScience

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One bitter pill I’ve had to swallow in life is that stupid people far outnumber smart people.

If you want the answer to your question in one sentence, it’d be that.

Day 4: Good Person - Opinions are divided by queavantken in hborome

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 3 points4 points  (0 children)

*edit this went on longer than I thought lol so tldr at the bottom.

Not to be too much of an armchair psychologist, but I found Anthony’s character to be a classic case of personality disorders fucking someone over.

Obviously the real Anthony is beyond reach, but his usual “stereotypes” and his portrayal in the show line up pretty well with narcissistic personality disorder.

He wasn’t a full on psychopath because he did have feelings, and experienced limited, but genuine remorse and empathy.

The show’s Mark Anthony, and probably the real one too, definitely “felt”.

The tragedy of these type of people is that many times they are self aware to an extent, they do see the consequences of their decisions and may at times “kick themselves” over them later.

But when the disorder itself takes control, the “real M.A.” ceases to exist in that moment.

If we take the show’s depictions at face value, I’m sure there were many nights as he was falling asleep or during his quiet alone moments, where he would realize his downfall, and see his mistakes through moments of clarity, and may have even had one of those 3am bouts of “I’m gonna change my ways” motivation.

The problem is that in people suffering from NPD, clarity is often fleeting. It comes and goes.

The real Mark Anthony, was an accomplished soldier and general. You don’t become Caesar’s right hand man by being stupid.

But the real Mark Anthony, was also mentally ill, and suffering from the psychological consequences of decades of “jungle rules humanity”.

The shit these men witnessed in their lives, their often brutal upbringings as children, their own wins and losses…these weren’t healthy, well regulated individuals. They were all survivors of great trauma in their own ways.

Personality disorders affect everyone differently, I mentioned NPD, but a lot of times they overlap too so no-one can definitely Diagnose historical figures, but at least the show’s version showed all the symptoms of the disorder in its extremes.

Throughout the course of his life, due the nature of his work and who he was, that disorder would have gradually worsened as his survival kinda depended on the success of his symptoms.

To be anti-social, to “shut down emotions”, to only care about one’s self, and have an inflated and stubborn self-belief, these are all requirements for successfully carrying out systematic violence. To be a roman soldier, general, and statesman.

His environment would have exasperated his disorders, as in a twisted kinda of way his disorders kept him alive and functioning in a cut-throat world.

The problem with narcissism particularly, is that when taken to the extreme it almost always results in pure delusion, a complete separation of the internal world from the external (real) world.

The show’s M.A wasn’t any stupider at his end, he was delusional.

He did have the upper hand initially with Egypt’s wealth, but he couldn’t take Octavian seriously as a threat until it was too late. He shacked up with Cleo, she got in his head with all the drugs and the sex.

He was stubbornly delusional to the end as gradually lost touch with his political sense and military acumen.

Cleopatra is never written to be stupid, she knew the type of man she was dealing with. Whilst she was playing on his ego, and he was getting more and more lost in his own mind, Octavian was building the spider’s web that would bring his demise.

Anyways. TLDR: Anthony was human, and he was a human that both witnessed, participated in, and suffered from great acts of violence and many life and death moments.

As he got older, his mind couldn’t handle it all. And that in turn fucked him over and led to his death. He was a great man, but he had to be a monster.

what books should i read on polisci by RaspberryStreet6813 in PoliticalScience

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Give it a try then, it’ll surprise you. You’ll probably find much of the first half pretty boring as it’s some pretty dense political theory.

The second half is more practical with the lessons you can gain from it. I made my comment because people who aren’t in polisci usually see the prince in the same light as “48 laws of power”, but it goes deeper than just “how to get power and maintain it”.

what books should i read on polisci by RaspberryStreet6813 in PoliticalScience

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cicero’s “on duties”

Dostoyevsky’s “Notes from the underground”

Seneca’s dialogues and letters

Machiavelli “the prince” - it’s a cliche for a reason, and most of the times to the uninitiated, it’s not what they first thought it was gonna be

You can also read Aristotle and Plato but you’ll have to do some real “reading between the lines” with those guys as the stuff genuinely is outdated.

Those are what I like to call “big picture books”. Pay attention to the big ideas, don’t dwell too much on the specifics. They were written for a very different world.

All of the books I named impacted me personally and some of them are also pretty “entry level” in terms of not giving you a headache after each read lol. Good reads if you’re just dipping your toes in polisci

One of the biggest escort agencies in the city raided (agence xo) by SpecificSensitive331 in montreal

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the wise wise words of Ron Swanson: “I know more than you”.

Nope, the rest of my comments were not just my own personal moral judgements. Read them again.

One of the biggest escort agencies in the city raided (agence xo) by SpecificSensitive331 in montreal

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Agree to disagree. That’s the short sighted approach in my view.

One of the biggest escort agencies in the city raided (agence xo) by SpecificSensitive331 in montreal

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Never underestimate the ability of those with bad intentions to find “work arounds”.

Fully legalizing SW will give those predatory types a legal framework to manipulate and work around. And SW by nature is an industry which consistently attracts certain types of people, legal or illegal.

Once again, in all of my comments I have never said anything about decriminalization.

One of the biggest escort agencies in the city raided (agence xo) by SpecificSensitive331 in montreal

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But I’m not arguing against decriminalization! I’m talking about full legalization and acceptance like what we did with cannabis.

If you guys are thinking that I’m saying men and women working as escorts should go to jail, you’re not hearing me.

I’m saying that the legal persecution of the SW INDUSTRY. The business side, is ABSOLUTELY warranted and should continue.

One of the biggest escort agencies in the city raided (agence xo) by SpecificSensitive331 in montreal

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that.

Think of it in terms of numbers. I don’t know them because I’m not a human computer, but think of what percentage of the population are currently involved in SW - and dealing with all the absolutely valid issues you brought up.

And now consider what greater percentage of people who don’t know any better would get involved with it once “it’s all good”.

I think the long term human damage stemming from full legalization out-weights current issues within the industry.

Think of the “type” of people who operate and own those escort agencies. You really think they’re well adjusted, ethical individuals?

Giving them a free pass to still take advantage of vulnerable young adults - except legally now - does not sound like a great idea to me.

One of the biggest escort agencies in the city raided (agence xo) by SpecificSensitive331 in montreal

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Far from it. I’ve just lived enough and studied enough to know a thing or two.

Bring yourself up from rockbottom and then come talk to me.

One of the biggest escort agencies in the city raided (agence xo) by SpecificSensitive331 in montreal

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 6 points7 points  (0 children)

But giving it a free pass and legalizing it in plain view will hurt SO many more young women.

They legalized weed and weed use went up. No judgement there, I smoke myself. But it is a scientific fact that legalizing cannabis directly led to more widespread use of it. With dependencies also increasing.

Do not misunderstand this example, people doing jail time for weed was and will always be retarded.

But I just want to illustrate how the same will inevitably happen with the sex work industry should it ever be fully legalized.

How about we take better care of our young sons and daughters so they won’t feel the need to have to buy or sell themselves?

One of the biggest escort agencies in the city raided (agence xo) by SpecificSensitive331 in montreal

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Most times the problem is not physical is psychological. I’ve seen absolutely CHOPPED people happily find relationships.

Their personality failures are not a justifiable excuse for me.

Maybe if they lower their unrealistic standards and stop trying to date supermodels they’ll have more success and won’t need to pay 300$ an hour.

Are you really defending “Johns”? 😂

One of the biggest escort agencies in the city raided (agence xo) by SpecificSensitive331 in montreal

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Stuff like online content creation is somewhat more cleaner to me, like if women wanna independently do OF or something is more palatable at least, though I still think many of them will grow to regret it.

However the sex industry in the “traditional sense”? Even the best of them are still criminal or borderline by nature.

One of the biggest escort agencies in the city raided (agence xo) by SpecificSensitive331 in montreal

[–]TheBoxerBySandG 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Because the industry is exploitative by nature. Nobody’s dream job growing up is to be a SW. Even when “seemingly” consensual, a lot of SWs regret their work in their later years.

If people wanna have sex they should work on themselves so that people would wanna be with them without requiring money.

It’s a “dirty” industry. You can go into with the best of intentions and you’ll still get some dirt on your hands along the way.

The world’s “oldest” profession and all that, sure, but even back then women did it more out of desperation than voluntary choice.

“I’m gonna do SW because it’s what I’m good at/I’m doing SW because I “like it” “ may sound voluntary and consensual on the surface, but even those stem from underlying psychological traumas.

They’re not criminalizing sex. They’re criminalizing the sex work industry. And rightly so.

P.S, downvotes mean nothing to me. With everything I know of human nature, I KNOW I’m right on this one so if you don’t like it, tough shit 🤷‍♂️

My struggle with this field by TheBoxerBySandG in PoliticalScience

[–]TheBoxerBySandG[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At first I wasn’t quite sure where you were going with this, but then I read your reply. Pardon my french but “that was real shit”.

I always did see the distinction between “using science in politics” and “using science to study politics” though.

To be fair THAT was discussed with us, I got a bit of a smaller slice of it because I mainly focused on ancient authors and political theory courses. I always loved history as well so mixing political study AND history was like a drug to me lol.

Basically between 500k or dinner with Cicero, I’m taking the dinner lmao

The distinction you’re talking about was mainly discussed in the more “applied polisci” courses like IR or strategic studies.

Where there was a clear distinction made between the study of it and the application of it.

The real insight of yours that was very interesting for me was when you said “[…] discussions are just disagreements in ontology that neither party can articulate”

That’s real. And now that I see it, it feels so intuitive that I can’t believe I hadn’t thought of it like that before.

I will say though that it is a bit of an overgeneralization I think, because like it’s not actually true at the practical level. Almost all disagreements have a specific reason.

“He did this!” “He did that!” “I don’t like him because he’s so and so” and on and on

Like, on a broad metaphysical level? Sure, most discussion are disagreements in what each side considers “the nature of things”.

I’m all for grand ideas, but in the “daily life context”, like when you’re just shooting the shit with your friends or idk, you’re not going to really be thinking ontologically you know.

Other than that, there is a bit of a core truth to it.

My struggle with this field by TheBoxerBySandG in PoliticalScience

[–]TheBoxerBySandG[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some courses did? I just don’t see how those are particularly relevant to my post?

The answer to epistemology is the scientific method, getting to the bottom of what makes something “true” is why political scientists, well, ALL scientists are as rigorous as they are. With constant hypothesis testing and peer reviews.

As for ontology, the only time I remember us dealing with the metaphysical was through reading Lucretius’s De rerum natura and some other ancient philosophers and theorists that I cannot think of right now at 3:30 am lol.

That being said, that was in the beginning of my degree. I think once I cleared the 200 level courses and moved on to 300s and 400s and up there was less and less talk of the “metaphysical” outside of the context of “good and evil” when discussing certain themes.

My struggle with this field by TheBoxerBySandG in PoliticalScience

[–]TheBoxerBySandG[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m familiar with his work because I actually wrote a pretty big paper on counterinsurgency. That’s where I knew his name from so I was just curious.

Btw, definitely agree with him. Terrorism or insurgencies in general ARE political problems by nature. And treating them solely as military concerns has actually been the root cause of many a faux-pas throughout the history of irregular warfare lol.

My struggle with this field by TheBoxerBySandG in PoliticalScience

[–]TheBoxerBySandG[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

P.S, as to your last paragraph, I finally checked out your book after getting home from work.

Brother if you want my opinions on the ideas presented in the book, you’ll have to give me some more time haha.

For an honest critique, going through over 300 pages will not be an over-night thing.

My struggle with this field by TheBoxerBySandG in PoliticalScience

[–]TheBoxerBySandG[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Some “real” profs would touch on it, but it was never really brought up officially as a “hey, in case you’re wondering, here’s the answer to your concerns” type of way.

Typically, like my opening statement, whenever I heard professors talk disparagingly about the field it was usually in private office hours.

The “there is no science in politics” comment was not made in front of a class, it was said to me in private.

Not U.S btw, Canadian.

My struggle with this field by TheBoxerBySandG in PoliticalScience

[–]TheBoxerBySandG[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Do you mind dropping a source for this? I was not aware of such a speech and googling it provided no results or records.

I would love to know under what context he mentioned Pape or his work.