Message from @ManAnimal

Discord ID: 644318599913275404


2019-11-13 23:28:51 UTC  

What we think beyond a reasonable doubt happened

2019-11-13 23:28:52 UTC  

daily reminder about the australian gender bias study that got cancelled as soon as it became evident women are favoured

2019-11-13 23:28:58 UTC  

you are the postmodernist, mar

2019-11-13 23:29:01 UTC  

not myself

2019-11-13 23:29:06 UTC  

no u

2019-11-13 23:29:14 UTC  

you substutute your perception for reality

2019-11-13 23:29:20 UTC  

i am a post-postmodernist as per ian cohen, jack stewart

2019-11-13 23:29:22 UTC  

@ManAnimal false realities are lies but the people still believe the reality is real

2019-11-13 23:29:41 UTC  

I'm post-postmodernist, MA.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/633966934622208031/644317990250348575/At_a_glance_small.jpg

2019-11-13 23:29:45 UTC  

there is no difference between those two

2019-11-13 23:29:52 UTC  

no one has a monopoly on truth

2019-11-13 23:29:54 UTC  

is that focault

2019-11-13 23:30:20 UTC  

the past 100 years, we've all lived in a false reality, anyone saying so is drowned out by the people believing the false reality

2019-11-13 23:30:40 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/633966934622208031/644318244194353182/2Q.png

2019-11-13 23:30:50 UTC  

im shite with faces somebody help

2019-11-13 23:31:21 UTC  

@svarozhyc That looks like the dude from The Weather Channel

2019-11-13 23:31:25 UTC  

i find it odd, Mar that while you can admit the possibilit that someone like Sarkeesian might be acting out of something else other than intentional dishonesty, yet you cannot fathom the possibility that YOU might be doing the same thing

2019-11-13 23:31:47 UTC  

In what way am I being dishonest?

2019-11-13 23:31:50 UTC  

pot, are you a kettle?

2019-11-13 23:32:04 UTC  

we've had 1 lie after the other that require the previous lie in order to maintain

2019-11-13 23:32:05 UTC  

not what i implied by that statement

2019-11-13 23:32:14 UTC  

you assert Anita is NOT being dishonest

2019-11-13 23:32:25 UTC  

I fathom the possibility all the time, but that's different from whether I am or not

2019-11-13 23:32:26 UTC  

yet the result APPEARS dishonest

2019-11-13 23:32:40 UTC  

perhaps your result is no different DESPITE your intention

2019-11-13 23:33:15 UTC  

you nor i are in a position to make such an objective evaluation

2019-11-13 23:33:31 UTC  

Fact check: I never said Anita wasn't dishonest. I can't possibly know that. I've always said that it's my opinion she's not and I've seen no conclusive evidence that she is. So ... innocent until proven guilty.

2019-11-13 23:33:35 UTC  

one set of observations does not an objective evaluation make

2019-11-13 23:33:41 UTC  

would still smash ngl

2019-11-13 23:33:46 UTC  

ich auch

2019-11-13 23:33:49 UTC  

smash

2019-11-13 23:34:29 UTC  

Marushia, that is splitting hairs and quite irrelevant in the context of my statement

2019-11-13 23:34:44 UTC  

you acknowledge the possibility

2019-11-13 23:35:00 UTC  

There's plenty of evidence she's dishonest. The best example I could think of is the Hitman Absolution take

2019-11-13 23:35:17 UTC  

there is plenty of evidence to SUGGEST she is dishonest

2019-11-13 23:35:17 UTC  

If you read my article, you'll note the myriad times I've acknowledged the possibility she could be, just that it has never been proven to my personal satisfaction

2019-11-13 23:35:30 UTC  

Dodge. Pretentious Dodge

2019-11-13 23:35:37 UTC  

link the article?

2019-11-13 23:35:44 UTC  

soz been outside

2019-11-13 23:35:55 UTC  

"Read principica mathmatica and THEN you'll understand my math is correct"

2019-11-13 23:35:58 UTC  

ELSE:WHERE