Page 3 | Illuminating and disturbing view from a psychologist

Legselevens · 29/01/2023 07:55

Place marking, interested in this discussion

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 08:08

NicolasMerkinNemesis · 29/01/2023 05:49

Wondered if anyone else has listened to this? I thought his comments about the seriousness and significance of pornography were spot on and something that should be brought up more often.

Perfectly reasonable questionable in the OP. Looking for a discussion on what usually lovely peeps here thought of the points a guy talks about. All with regards a situation we have been mulling over on here for a while in various threads

I want to listen to it again properly when I finish work later.The interview covers psychopaths but mainly a specific sort. And the guy being interviewed talks about men and paedophiles and their typical behaviours regarding types of porn.

He also talks about drag queens and trans women amongst a lot of other things in the interview. (I'm assuming it's this bit and his thoughts that have brought disgruntled peeps to the thread).

So I'm at a loss to understand why some posters having made a statement without any context or expanding as to why they thought that way, when asked by the OP to possibly explain their post meaning or what the issue was, decided to have a go.

I am increasingly convinced that some newer posters who come on these threads just like having a go at people for the sheer hell of it.

If you want a conversion or discussion with us on this board, how about a bit of civility instead of coming on posting non - sensical posts and then launching an attack on the OP when she had the temerity to ask if you could maybe explain what you meant in your post.

You can keep doing it on threads, but we soon recognise the names and the writing styles.

So knock yourselves out. Have your fun. We will still be here when you've got bored and left us in peace.

we see you and we see your attacks on some posters.

For you OP

💐

It's just so silly and reductive and a misrepresentation of what has happened. People have disagreed with the man on the podcast. One poster has provided some resources, others have explained how the man's views are an oversimplification or inaccurate representation of science on these issues, I've pointed out some background information that should be a massive red flag and have quoted from the podcast to illustrate what I mean about the guy basically spouting nonsense.

The OP has replied to a couple of posters who have said that they don't agree that this is a particularly useful or enlightening source with rudeness, accusations of trolling/sock puppeting, and an arrogantly dismissive attitude. Yet obviously it's us launching personal attacks and being sooo horrible.

I'm glad you see me. I see you too. Sorry (not sorry) for not being part of an echo chamber I guess?

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 08:10

laurwalsh · 29/01/2023 07:41

I was looking forward ti this discussion but only a few posts in and I see people coming into the thread to just be difficult and try to wind the OP up. Why? Why waste your time. And why am I wasting my time writing this? OP thank you for the link, really interesting and looking forward to listening in full.

Disagreeing with someone is not winding them up.

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 08:27

I've pointed out some background information that should be a massive red flag

But we try to make a point of listening and reading sources from all sides regardless of their backgrounds or their affiliations. Even the really really red flags ones. Seriously I wish I could scrub the memory of Darren Mews from mermaids penis and fake breasts montage photo that was available to any 12 year old who looked, from my memory.

There are red flags everywhere. We aren't ignoring them, we are constantly looking tho see what they are hiding. Because otherwise that's how purity spirals start and blinkered views.

That's why the TRAs are having such a hard time right now trying to distance themselves from the double rapist transwoman, who you can guarantee has watched increasingly worseningg porn over time.

So regardless of what the red flags are if it's relevant to current threads and issues we are going tho watch it read it of listen to it, or fur some, in the case of the wonderful KJK travel the country and stand in the rain fur hours to hear women speak, even if she did once kiss the pet poodle of someone who once sat next to someone whose gran is a conservative voter.

Original poster

beastlyslumber · 29/01/2023 08:28

Another point I was interested in from the discussion is when he talked about how it's not true that abusers were abused - the "cycle of abuse" idea. I've long suspected that this is nonsense as every person I know who has survived CSA has become a defender and protector of abuse victims. Uhler says in his experience, child abusers use this as a story to get sympathy and leniency.

OP posts:

Original poster

beastlyslumber · 29/01/2023 08:32

Thanks for the flowers and chocolates, people! I'm not sure what the hell has brought people who are unable to articulate their own opinions to this thread. I've repeatedly asked posters to explain the substance of their disagreements and in return they accuse me of being a big nasty meany. Says it all, really.

OP posts:

Datun · 29/01/2023 08:34

CandlelightGlow · 28/01/2023 22:18

He's banned on Twitter if not most social media platforms. He has numerous controversial and inaccurate takes ranging from COVID to US presidency. He is not a trained psychologist. Science does not support his claims regarding porn and sexual offenses. He makes sweeping unsubstantiated comments that are ultimately meaningless like "men are designed to be chivalrous but by nature they are selfish". What does that even mean?

Literally so so many red flags around this guy. He was also charged with forgery so all round, just yikes. Does nobody do source checking as long as the source agrees with what you're saying?

Show quote history

Being banned from Twitter regarding anything trans related will often indicate more credibility, not less.

Plus taking the word of someone who disagrees with him is just daft.

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 08:35

beastlyslumber · 29/01/2023 08:28

Another point I was interested in from the discussion is when he talked about how it's not true that abusers were abused - the "cycle of abuse" idea. I've long suspected that this is nonsense as every person I know who has survived CSA has become a defender and protector of abuse victims. Uhler says in his experience, child abusers use this as a story to get sympathy and leniency.

Mine actually did try this line

His solicitor at sentencing tried, in the hopes of shortening his sentence, using the fact that Steve had had an exceptionally sexually abusive childhood. Not mentioning the fact that the sexual abuse had been Steve raping two younger children whilst still a child himself. He was the abuser even then, not the abused.

And here I am his sexually abused victim and I've never felt compelled tho sexually abuse a child.

And as fur the porn connection. Of course it's gets more deviant, I should know I was the person in the, then known as, child porn.

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 08:38

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 08:27

I've pointed out some background information that should be a massive red flag

But we try to make a point of listening and reading sources from all sides regardless of their backgrounds or their affiliations. Even the really really red flags ones. Seriously I wish I could scrub the memory of Darren Mews from mermaids penis and fake breasts montage photo that was available to any 12 year old who looked, from my memory.

There are red flags everywhere. We aren't ignoring them, we are constantly looking tho see what they are hiding. Because otherwise that's how purity spirals start and blinkered views.

That's why the TRAs are having such a hard time right now trying to distance themselves from the double rapist transwoman, who you can guarantee has watched increasingly worseningg porn over time.

So regardless of what the red flags are if it's relevant to current threads and issues we are going tho watch it read it of listen to it, or fur some, in the case of the wonderful KJK travel the country and stand in the rain fur hours to hear women speak, even if she did once kiss the pet poodle of someone who once sat next to someone whose gran is a conservative voter.

In the real world sources do matter though, and people can and should care who is providing their information and why. It absolutely should affect your opinion on the validity, accuracy and fairness of the information being provided. That's what critical thinking is. It's definitely not the reductive example you've provided about someone guilty by association and it doesn't even mean necessarily that everything they say is wrong. Also people need to understand that singularly accurate facts and statistics can be very easily selectively chosen and grouped together to form any narrative you like.

Do you listen to men like Andrew Tate and think their opinion on women is just as valid and fair and important as everyone else's? If not, why not? Is it because he's a well known misogynist and criminal exploiter of women? If you've drawn that conclusion, it's because you've not just blindly listened to him, but the content of what he's said has raised red flags that he might possibly have an agenda and prejudice against women, and you've probably looked into his online presence further and found that to be demonstrable by the content he puts out online. That would be looking into the source of the information and drawing you own conclusion into its validity, not just "valuing all opinions from all sides".

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 08:39

And witches full disclosure I was arrested and charged with shoplifting once. I accept that ffor some that will mean that I am no longer worthy.

I'll live with it.

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 08:42

Plus taking the word of someone who disagrees with him is just daft.

@Datun what does this mean?

Datun · 29/01/2023 08:43

In the real world sources do matter though

The only 'source' you're offering is your own post tho.

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 08:44

That's what critical thinking is

Critical thinking is not just taking someone's word for it. It's researching all sources for yourself and making your own mind up

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 08:48

An i the only one thinking that when someone argues so much for reasons not to watch something or read something it makes me want to know what they don't want me to find out even more?r

Why should I let someone else do my critical thinking f or me, when i can spend a bit of time and click on links and see what they are about?

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 08:48

Datun · 29/01/2023 08:43

In the real world sources do matter though

The only 'source' you're offering is your own post tho.

And the only "source" you guys are drinking up is this guys unsubstantiated bullshit!

As long as it offers confirmation bias for your views I guess let's not dig too deep eh.

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 08:49

it really is not the only source we are using.

Give us some credit for being able to Google more than one source and name

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 08:49

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 08:48

An i the only one thinking that when someone argues so much for reasons not to watch something or read something it makes me want to know what they don't want me to find out even more?r

Why should I let someone else do my critical thinking f or me, when i can spend a bit of time and click on links and see what they are about?

Um, when did I say don't watch it?

Critical thinking is not just taking someone's word for it. It's researching all sources for yourself and making your own mind up

Please, please do go ahead and do this, and see what you come up with.

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 08:50

Oh believe me. I have

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 08:54

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 08:50

Oh believe me. I have

I can tell by your excellent points which back up in an evidenced way what your mate on the podcast is saying 🙂👏

Datun · 29/01/2023 08:54

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 08:48

And the only "source" you guys are drinking up is this guys unsubstantiated bullshit!

As long as it offers confirmation bias for your views I guess let's not dig too deep eh.

Show quote history

You do know you're only making people more interested in watching it, don't you?

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 08:57

Datun · 29/01/2023 08:54

You do know you're only making people more interested in watching it, don't you?

Show quote history

Awww shucks aw noo damn it! My obvious attempts at not discussing this podcast have failed!

Guess online radicalisation is my fault, especially when I tell men Andrew Tate is bad, I've just thrown them right into his arms. My fault again, sorry guys.

In all seriousness this enlightening discussion is not going anywhere good is it.

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 09:00

^ So I won't be bothering anymore, so if you've got any lengthy replies save yourselves the energy and I'll leave you in peace to get back to your murmurings of agreement.

Original poster

beastlyslumber · 29/01/2023 09:06

DontdothisDothat · 29/01/2023 00:49

I have already mentioned the work of Hare and there are other many psychologists & neuroscientists who have published well controlled, experimental work on psychopathy. If you do a Google search, you can find them: Raine, Belafoutas, Cleckley, Semple, Cooke & Michie, Skeem. You can find the papers yourself. I’m not a teacher.

Show quote history

Yes, but what exactly do those researchers say that is different to what Uhler is saying? I mean, he mentions Hare and other researchers in the interview - is he misrepresenting their research? If so, in what way? What is it that Uhler is saying that you think he's got wrong?

If you can't answer that, then all you're doing is saying, "He's wrong? Why? Because I said so." I'm not sure why we would take your word for it.

And no, definitely don't go into teaching. You do not have any of the necessary qualities or character.

OP posts:

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 09:07

CandlelightGlow · 29/01/2023 08:54

I can tell by your excellent points which back up in an evidenced way what your mate on the podcast is saying 🙂👏

Show quote history

You mean the parts were I agree with things he said due to my observations from my actual lived experiences?

I mean there wasnt people there doing scientific studies whilst the abuse happened or the photos etc were taken, which have led my to find some of what this guy says to be in the money.

So shucks not much i can do about that especially as this is a discussion thread about his words not a fact finding statistical analysis thread.

and I did actually take you're very useful advice the other day. You said if I didn't like your post to report it. So I did and they deleted ones I hadn't even pointed out to them.

Thanks for the advice it was much appreciated.

Boiledbeetle · 29/01/2023 09:09

1/10 for the flounce

Must try harder

I mean Robin at least insinuated we were witches.