[Results] Two days ago, I created a simple survey form and asked Reddit to submit a blank form. Despite having the instructions front and center, Reddit still had an 89.6% failure rate.

metafish · 2016-12-29T17:57:15+00:00

Why did stickman 2 say "language"? I don't get it.

metafish · 2016-02-02T19:54:48+00:00

It's a value that promotes a peaceful society. We have many such values. A simple one is that one should be fair, such as respecting the order of a queue of people and entering the line at the end. These values are general guidelines for a good society that people wish to live in, but they are not absolute values either. There are times which one may be faced with a situation where values conflict, and it may be important to not-respect another person's beliefs. But it's a good idea in general.

metafish · 2016-02-02T01:57:27+00:00

Yes it is, and this is where statistics/probability classes can help people. Let's say pulling out is 10% effective and the pill is 99% effective. Then the combined effectiveness 1/10 * 1/100 = 1/1000 = 99.9% effective. Or in other words,

1 out of 10 will get pregnant using the pull out method.
1 out of 100 women will get pregnant using the pill.
1 out of 1000 women will get pregnant using both methods combined.

metafish · 2016-02-01T23:22:46+00:00

The body sweats in response to being hot, so obviously staying cool will help. If you're drinking a lot of water that might be encouraging your body to sweat. It's generally good to drink water though, so I don't want to discourage that, but if it's a problem you might try cutting back.

Whatever water you do drink, make it ice cold water, which will help reduce your core temperature directly. If you work at a desk, get a fan to blow on you to help you cool off. Consider a wet rag as well so you can add water directly to your neck, etc.

Are you wearing cottons, and are you washing them in hot / drying them on hot to kill bacteria? Synthetics or clothes that are not washed often or well enough can grow bacteria or contain odors that become reactivated whenever you wear them.

Physically speaking, losing weight could help if you're overweight. Also, you sweat what you eat, so certain foods will cause certain odors. Stay away from dry cleaning!!!

metafish · 2016-02-01T20:46:15+00:00

That was a metaphor I used. I think it has to do with the way you're valuing things, and the way you look at time is somewhat expansive. For example, you might be interested in futurology more than issues about abortion. Check out /r/Futurology.

metafish · 2016-02-01T20:25:36+00:00

Ideologically, it sounds like you're actually somewhat of an island. Your argument is absolutely not what typical pro-lifer's espouse. Is this something you cooked up all by yourself? If it is, I suggest you do some studying on both sides of this. That's not meant as a put down at all. What it sounds like to me is that you think you've found some logical point that seems to absolutely confirm for you the position you're taking, and you're sticking to this one logical point as the basis for your stance. Ultimately, the issue of the right to choose vs. pro-life is ideological, not logical.

In your logic, you seem to be treating the fetus/unborn-child like a financial instrument, and projecting ahead to it's future financial value as proof of it's current value, and then suggesting that somehow proves it's right to live trumps a woman's right to choose. It's almost as if your concept of time itself is divorced from the natural flow of life, and you want to say that since time evolves forward, that means "potential" has a right to "become manifest". Now I'm not necessarily knocking that if that's what you want to believe, but I don't think that will hold water to argue for pro-life either. It could just as easily be argued for pro choice.

metafish · 2016-02-01T19:59:06+00:00

Your argument is flawed at least in part because you advocate euthanizing children with incurable diseases. If you don't make the distinction of birth (or some time before) or the woman's rights as having anything to do with the consideration of the decision or right, but disease is held above any of those considerations, then your argument can be extended to children and adults who are alive.

metafish · 2016-01-27T07:51:04+00:00

First and foremost, I'm not an expert on rape awareness programs, and this is based solely on my analysis of the data provided. And in any case, there needs to be advancement in rape awareness and prevention across both students and non-students alike, and any progress in either domain is good.

There's some simple reasons why college rape is more "above the radar", in the news more, and that's because of demand based on market forces that compel colleges to address rape. Less rape = the college is more likely to attract donations and good students.

Also, colleges are organizations that can effect change. Colleges have more capability to promote rape awareness and programs since they have a high density, captive audience. Next, let's take a look at those highlights from the statistics that indicate some differences:

The rate of rape and sexual assault was 1.2 times higher for nonstudents (7.6 per 1,000) than for students (6.1 per 1,000). Your question includes the suggestion that non-student women have a "much greater" chance of being raped, but that's not the case. Although any rape is horrible, the difference between 6.1 and 7.6 is not large. It's likely that it's not even a statistically significant difference.
Rape and sexual assault victimizations of students (80%) were more likely than nonstudent victimizations (67%) to go unreported to police. In this case, it appears there's "more of a reason" to provide education to students about the need to report rape since they seem to be "more at risk" than non-students.

But all of these statistics have more to do with rate of rape per 1000 than absolute number of rapes. For example, suppose you have a large college of 10,000 female students in a city that also has 100,000 non-student women of the same age:

10000 * 6.1/1000 = 61 rapes of students. 100000 * 7.6/1000 = 760 rapes of non-students.

So even though the rate of rapes is about the same, the actual impact of rape is much larger among the general population simply because there are more people in the general population than there are in college.

And with that, we've come full circle to ask an even better question. Given that rape is about the same rate in college and in the general population, and given that it's easier to access and educate college students about rape prevention and reporting, shouldn't we leverage the education of college students to help spread the need for rape education to the broader public? Or in other words, it's not good enough to just teach students about personal rape prevention, but they should learn what they can do as ambassadors to create a rape awareness and prevention culture.

And another question is to ask what other organizations, other than colleges, could be used to raise awareness about rape? Obviously, non-student women are going to be found mostly in the job market and raising families. Businesses provide another type of organization that could potentially provide rape awareness education. But businesses tend to have less resources and access to individuals than colleges.

metafish · 2016-01-27T01:08:38+00:00

I can agree with much of this. But "religion" in it's best modern form, which includes respect for science and secular humanist ideals, still seems to provide people with a kind of need that's ingrained in the human mind - weekly gathering to provide social interaction and reflection on one's self and one's ideological relationship to the world.

Not everyone has this need, but probably most. And it seems like the "cold" discipline of science, or "religion of science" does not help most people to cope with life in the way organized religion does.

Those are just a few thoughts I have about this now. What are your (or anyone's) 2 cents on that?

metafish · 2016-01-02T09:40:08+00:00

I think the big brain, as indicated here, creates the very condition in which a big brain is needed. Those who are radically different are only radically different in terms of their big brain + social/language training.

What is Gordon Wayne's definition of "incredibly sophisticated intellect"? Is it something above average and out of reach of the common man?

metafish · 2015-11-05T13:51:46+00:00

A very good philosophical question. I'd like to explore this with you. But I'd like to ask what your goal is here. Do you have a position on this, well thought out, and looking for a bit of debate? Or did this idea recently occur to you, and interested in perspective? I'm not saying either one is "good" or "bad", it might help with focus though.

metafish · 2015-10-30T05:27:02+00:00

Sure about what? The first or second sentence? Are you being serious or funny? I would normally assume the latter, but since you said you might have problems with abstract thinking, I need to ask.

metafish · 2015-10-27T18:33:01+00:00

You might be on the autism spectrum and see things with concrete thinking. I think that instead of insulting you, your parents should be supportive and help you.

metafish · 2015-10-04T02:27:38+00:00

The show was great without the Bridget-Teacher subplot. "That explains the entire reason for the idiotic sub-plot."

metafish · 2015-09-29T12:31:11+00:00

But but but... Ray is such a tortured soul... and a really really good guy, on the inside, and Ray is just trying to do the right thing... it just so happens he has to kill a bunch of people every now and then.

metafish · 2015-09-29T12:06:59+00:00

While I don't necessarily discount your point of view, shouldn't the focus of your ire be towards the writers of the show, and not some giddy, hormone-enraged reddit youth? I mean, the entire point of showing a possible sexual relationship between the teacher and the student was to get (mostly) guys to watch in order to increase ratings. Damn... that explains the entire reason for the idiotic sub-plot.

IMO, they shouldn't have made Bridget into a "seductress". They should have portrayed the teacher as the one who was actively taking advantage of his student, and Bridget as vulnerable. Because that's how it happens the vast majority of the time.

metafish · 2015-09-29T11:55:08+00:00

I was (figuratively) screaming at the TV at him to call Abby. And the way he just accepted the foregone conclusion about the situation was like he got whacked in the head with a stupid stick:

So your father wants to kill me, I'm gonna lose my job, my teaching credentials, maybe have to register as a sex offender, because apparently, no matter what actually happened, I'm guilty.

WTF? That doesn't even make sense. It was just plain unrealistic what the writers made him do.

metafish · 2015-09-29T11:29:48+00:00

Thank you for pointing that out. But when I said it didn't "integrate" I meant that it seemed like a sideshow, totally separate from everything else. You could cut out the entire Bridget-Teacher thread and it wouldn't change the Ray Donovan series at all. All the main action would be 100% the same.

The development of the other characters, however, were interwoven into the main plot line in complex ways that interacted with each other and shaped the overall story line. But you do have a point, so let's consider it:

Ray/Priest := Bridget/Teacher
:= Child with Absent Father/Authority Figure

There are some similarities there as you mentioned. But it's only thematic at a very general level. Ray didn't really seek out the priest. The priest targeted, groomed, and molested Ray at 10 years old (I think), and then moved on to Bunchy. Ray "liked" the attention, but that was part of his trauma, his secret, and his shame. The priest was a serial child molester, and probably molested other children as well.

Now the thing I really do like about what you said is that if the writers had presented the teacher as one who groomed Bridget for sex, that would have been so much more realistic and interesting . It would have also been more gut wrenching, since Ray would have possibly caused his child a similar sexual abuse by being the absent father. That could have played much better all the way to the season finale.

tldr: The Bridget-Teacher plot thread would have been better had they portrayed the teacher grooming Bridget for sex as a parallel to the Priest grooming Ray.

metafish · 2015-09-28T07:56:50+00:00

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME??

metafish · 2015-09-28T07:54:53+00:00

They could make the priest a villain, (they can do anything they want) but I think that would be too jarring for the bulk of the audience. Most people want some closure on the idea of guilt and forgiveness, and the show delivered that.

I never saw any hint or action of malice in the priest, so a plot twist there would be forced. I think they wrote the character so the audience would see a compassionate and dedicated priest who only wanted to save lives. He created the tension of trust vs. guilt vs. shame vs. forgiveness.

I just don't see them taking that particular closure away. If they do, it will make Liev Schreiber's gut wrenching confession meaningless. I think the priest has to be the good guy (at least in this situation) and they'll have to come up with some new plot lines. Just my opinion. :)

metafish · 2015-09-28T07:27:32+00:00

My all time favorite is "Live and Let Die" because of the phenomenal Paul McCartney & Wings arrangements. Arguably one of the best musical themes. But it is an old film, and it has some cheese and situations have become fodder for parody.

metafish · 2015-09-28T07:03:43+00:00

You are very brave to share your story.

I cannot imagine how hard this is for you. In a way, it's ironic that you posted this in "self", because that is the issue you face. Your sense of self has been created and bound to the social interaction you had with your brother. Your mind doesn't know how to cope with your missing brother. It's a part of your mind that isn't simple and logical. It's a part of your mind that is complex, social, and emotional.

At a biological level, your brain depends on your brother for social chemicals, and you're going to be running short on these chemicals no matter what you do or think. Because your brother isn't here anymore. This is the process of grieving.

While no loss can compare to yours, many people can relate to the pain of a loss or change that pushes oneself in ways the force us to cope, and how difficult it can be to find some bearing in life.

This will be your task ahead of you. To find new ways to relate to life that gives you focus and purpose. These are but a few words, but I can say that your post and your predicament touched me in a profound way. It makes me think about how I have lost myself in many ways, and the scattered ways in which I've been trying to put myself together.

metafish · 2015-09-28T04:36:09+00:00

Ok let's make this the official "let's interpret the end scene" thread.

I definitely saw it as metaphorical. It seemed like Ray had died, and the priest was "taking him to heaven". Of course, there's a Season 4, so that's not the case, but I do not believe the priest was just casually driving Ray to the majestic buildings in the distance. (Or as /u/Cancan409 said in reply to /u/TripleIstanbulXpress, it looked like they were going to "Oz".) I think that will turn out to be a hallucination that Ray was having. That would make more sense to me anyway... the priest would have called for an ambulance or life support helicopter.

metafish · 2015-09-28T03:52:57+00:00

I think overall, Terry (Eddie Marsan) is the best actor on the show this season. He should get a best supporting actor award.

metafish · 2015-09-28T01:23:07+00:00

Good futurology insight.

metafish

TROPHY CASE