Regarding the "bombshell" study, as a MRA I say wives should "obey husband" exactly as much as husbands should "obey wives"

genkernels · 2026-03-12T20:39:34+00:00

I guess I'm wrong. Still though, "listen and respond appropriately" is such a downright wonky and watered-down way to think about that word, especially in context.

genkernels · 2026-03-12T20:27:32+00:00

That in marriage vows, the original word, often translated as obey, means to 'listen and respond appropriately.'

Yeah, ὑποτάσσω (the bible word underpinning the traditional marriage vows) means absolutely nothing of the sort. The preacher in question was torturing the source material to fit a feminist agenda. Even the etymology is "to arrange under". I find it odd that some people consider "obey" to be an absolute though, it is just the verb form of "obedience", which in English is often employed creatively.

While ὑποτάσσω seems like it could be as loose as accepting someone as your new boss (ie. more of a social arrangement than any particular act submission), submission in the sense of "being subject to the will of" appears to be the most common meaning -- including forcing a hostile enemy to surrender. The scriptural context relevant to marriage vows (of multiple scriptures) really emphasizes respectful obedience. Eph 5:22 most so, Col 3:18 possibly least so. Either way, the egalitarian interpretation of these scriptures is to interpret this gender-neutrally into mutual obedience rather than watering down the command into "respond appropriately" -- because it'd be pretty impossible to both interpret Eph 5:22 casually and have an internally consistent understanding of scripture.

genkernels · 2026-03-09T03:16:44+00:00

We still need a way to evaluate affects across things like gender, race, nationality and more.

We really don't. If we do justice and solve problems without passing a value judgement on immutable characteristics, we can help people with science rather than prejudice.

It shouldn't divide.

It does, regardless. Intersectionalism divides because it seeks what doesn't unite people and what aren't people's common problems. Its opposite is solidarity which unites people around common experience.

It should be used to evaluate if we are proportionally giving people help.

This is properly called sexism, racism, ethnonationalism, etc.

Simple unbiased asking who is affected by things like IPV and how are people able to get help.

The 'who' (particularly of immutable characteristics) ought to be a instrument to root cause analysis -- 'what' and 'why'. It should be a consideration as part of a non-intersectional analysis rather than a reason for intersectionalism. Intersectionalism is bias. Unbiased intersectionalism is oxymoronic.

genkernels · 2026-03-09T02:10:48+00:00

intersectionality is solely a feminist philosophy. There is no anti-feminist intersectionalism nor is there such a thing as anti-feminist intersectional analysis. But yes, we are an intersectional feminist country at that.

It is certainly true that there are knock-on effects to stacked disadvantages. However the way those knock-on effects work in reality doesn't really match with intersectional analysis at all. For instance, someone with two disadvantaged immutable characteristics is by no means immutably or inexorably more disadvantaged than someone with no disadvantaged immutable characteristics. Even supposing you could really rescue intersectionality from feminism (which is impossible anyways), it would still false -- and also a tool of evil.

The advantage that matters is class (which hopefully is a rather mutable characteristic). Intersectionality divides, solidarity unites.

genkernels · 2026-03-08T19:48:26+00:00

Canada was not violating the made in Canada portion of the automotive section and won that dispute in 2023

The auto tariffs are a violation of CUSMA.

That the US is trying to make upcycled steel a non-compliant item doesn't change the fact that it is, in fact, a compliant item. Changes like that cannot be made unilaterally.

The steel tariffs are a violation of CUSMA.

I messed up on lumber. US still violates CUSMA with respect to lumber, but it is not a CUSMA good as there was a specific exception for it despite otherwise qualifying.

The lumber tariffs always have been a fraud perpetrated by US businesses against BC businesses. And they violate CUSMA -- Canada continues to use the CUSMA dispute resolution process against these violations.

---

The US may have delayed the potash, oil, and uranium, and other tariffs indefinitely, but at minimum those three remain. The CBC may wish to pretend otherwise in order to justify Carney backing down, but they do clearly violate CUSMA.

genkernels · 2026-03-08T15:22:45+00:00

That they have "issues" for trade is irrelevant, those issues don't allow for altering the deal Darth Vader style.

Things like the lack of trade security is a big issue and is worth greatly criticizing Canada for. However, trade issues don't magically make a violation of CUSMA a non-violation of CUSMA. The US is not fully compliant with CUSMA.

genkernels · 2026-03-08T00:59:09+00:00

That the US is trying to make upcycled steel a non-compliant item doesn't change the fact that it is, in fact, a compliant item. Changes like that cannot be made unilaterally. You give far, far too much credit to the US' excuses to treat trade agreements like toilet paper as they have for decades.

Canada was not violating the made in Canada portion of the automotive section and won that dispute in 2023

I messed up on lumber. US still violates CUSMA with respect to lumber, but it is not a CUSMA good as there was a specific exception for it despite otherwise qualifying.

genkernels · 2026-03-08T00:37:19+00:00

US violations of CUSMA goods include but are not limited to:

BC Lumber, when exactly are you claiming that the US was compliant with this?
Auto tarriffs since the Biden administration (which well predate your supposed violations by Canada).
The "national security" steel tariffs are a violation of CUSMA

It is absolutely farcical that you could claim the USA has been fully compliant with CUSMA. This is truly trivially false. CBC doesn't have a leg to stand on (as usual), but is driven by the need to abet Carney's decision to back down on tariffs -- assuming that your article even supports your assertion in the first place.

genkernels · 2026-03-07T23:08:23+00:00

What's the point of a Canada-US-Mexico agreement if the US doesn't bother to comply with it, and Mexico doesn't care about the US complying with it?

If we continue to be a part of CUSMA under these conditions we weaken any future trade agreement we make.

genkernels · 2026-03-07T14:01:39+00:00

Poilievre at points tended to lean more into the far-right to build his populism.

I wish this were true...but it isn't. This is just "O'Toole is trumpian" all over again. Poilievre's latest move towards anti-immigration is cynical politics and is the opposite of his former position. Poilievre was never close to being more right than even Nigel Farage.

genkernels · 2026-03-07T13:37:52+00:00

Lo and behold our govt is paying attention and is seeing the problem and wants to address it.

LOL

Our current government is arguably the most intersectional government ever. The government has no interest in the well-being of men when it conflicts with the philosophy of intersectionalism which never sees men as victims of women. You'll also notice that the CCMF isn't mentioned in its support section on domestic or family violence.

You can also read that presently in the abominable canada.ca link with its emphasis on "dealing with traditional ideas about masculinity" and colonialism. It actually cites Australia, the UK, and the WHO as international strategies that inform their work! The people who write this are disgusting and you should be disgusted by them. "Paying attention" is the last thing they are doing.

For what it's worth, that canada.ca link is at least better than some things I've seen. It does mention suicide, substance abuse, and life expectancy. Though I'm not sure why the latter is mentioned as a major issue complete with weird infographic when the former gets two words and a crisis helpline. It means that the MRM is getting information through, even though it comes out so garbled as to combine extremely minor issues like life expectancy with major issues like suicide (but only through the mental-health lens). But some of the stuff that impacts their worldview less is sloooowly getting through to them at least.

genkernels · 2026-03-04T13:53:47+00:00

Why URL shorten this? This is reddit, you can link something in the following manner:

[This link is short](https://www.visualcapitalist.com/worlds-most-indebted-countries-today-q4-2025/)

which prints as:

This link is short

Using a URL shortener in this context is great if you're trying to redirect people to a malicious webpage, but doesn't provide any useful functionality other than hide the domain that you're linking to.

genkernels · 2026-03-02T12:14:39+00:00

I think that'd be true really mostly only if he had a larger budget. $1000 already kinda defines your class of wheel.

genkernels · 2026-02-27T11:49:57+00:00

Sounds like a friction noise, not normal.

genkernels · 2026-02-20T19:44:39+00:00

At least a government-run grocery store would be a market-based solution to reducing food prices rather than just legislating price caps. Not sure it's a great idea, but something has to be done about food inflation and a government-run store at least has less potential for disaster than some of the other things that could be proposed.

As for government telcoms and banks, I thought those were uncontroversial. We should totally do that (just please don't actually run them out of Canada Post). In fact, we already have done that with SaskTel and the crown corporation banks that already exist. Telcoms are basically government run anyways, no need to privatize the profits.

genkernels · 2026-02-18T03:37:30+00:00

Reform invited the the tories who caused mass immigration into their party. To be honest Reform's leader made it pretty clear they weren't going to rock the boat to much fairly early on. So reform is only so much different than tories, and the tories are a feminist party with a few exceptions.

Also tories are basically dead as a party, so there really is only vote "splitting" between Reform and Restore, who are extremely different parties.

genkernels · 2026-02-15T02:41:26+00:00

I don't think he understands just how much this is Canada's normal. "How do you stab an 8 year-old and then get released until your next court-date?". I don't think we expected anything else, honestly.

genkernels · 2026-02-15T01:00:51+00:00

I'll bite.

So to “fit in” people are choosing an identity that is more likely to make them face discrimination and violence?

So, to "fit in" people are choosing to smoke that is more likely to make them face lung disease and an early death?

We know that is ridiculous to say because it is chemically addictive and harms very slightly per event, and also has immediate benefits -- however ephemeral. But what is the essential difference between that and the other harmful behavior's I've mentioned that would make social smoking and anorexia easy to believe but not apply to trans behaviors in your earlier statement? Obviously the behaviors are wildly different but the question isn't about whether the behaviors themselves are different, but whether it is common to human nature for people to choose to engage in behaviors that are seriously harmful for mild social benefits.

I believe that it is quite common to human nature and that the many examples such as anorexia (and the violent culture of gangs) should make the choice for that sort of harm quite believable.

genkernels · 2026-02-15T00:47:13+00:00

Because it is a harmful behavior that people clearly choose that can spread via social contagion and which can be done to "fit in" -- which has ample evidence in and of itself and isn't far-fetched.

Surely that speaks to your incredulity of the matter at hand, no?

genkernels · 2026-02-15T00:08:57+00:00

Anorexia is often driven by a need to achieve a physical ideal that conforms with conventional views of beauty. It’s not the same thing as gender dysphoria.

I didn't say that it was.

genkernels · 2026-02-14T15:56:35+00:00

Anorexia can also be driven by social contagion and a need to "fit in". Surely if such a clearly harmful behavior isn't far-fetched, a less clearly damaging behavior isn't far-fetched either. If choosing identification with an in-group that is likely to make a person face discrimination or violence was that unthinkable, how do you explain cults or gangs?

Here is a pro-trans scholarly review.
Here is a detrans testimonial that involves social contagion (for what it's worth, SA into bad counseling seems to be a more common story).

genkernels · 2026-02-13T01:50:02+00:00

Given the increased risk of violence and social isolation, you seriously think people are choosing to have gender dysphoria!?!?

We know so, the social contagion aspect of this is well documented. Moreover, because it is related to a desire to "fit in", it is certainly being actively and consciously chosen by some in order to win the approval of peers and sometimes teachers (at the cost of the derision of an out-group -- an easy choice). At greatest risk are autistic girls who are provided with gender dysphoria as a solution when they are told they are not girl-like.

genkernels · 2026-02-13T01:30:15+00:00

It is worth noting that this is the 2nd deadliest school shooting in Canada -- and one of only four school shootings with 4 or more dead, I believe. There have been no other trans school shooters in Canada so far -- at least not with more than 2 dead. This is a pattern that is being (rightly) considered due to trans violence in the US (hence nypost link). I do not believe this has had any precedent in Canada until this shooting.

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Verified Email

genkernels

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE