Why do fools do this crap.

James331 said:
What happened to the old days :(

37a503f22454adebf089ec18ac7442ed.jpg


Reason #341 why I’m not airlines.
Click to expand...

Society finally started realizing that women aren’t just sex objects meant to please men?
 
AKiss20 said:
Society finally started realizing that women aren’t just sex objects meant to please men?
Click to expand...

What sex object? I loved these sweet friendly helpful Stewardesses back in the day and it wasn't sex I was thinking about. The FA's today are overworked, often frazzled and surly. Service was better back then, sexy or not.
 
Rushie said:
What sex object? I loved these sweet friendly helpful Stewardesses back in the day and it wasn't sex I was thinking about. The FA's today are overworked, often frazzled and surly. Service was better back then, sexy or not.
Click to expand...

I've actually had some fantastic FAs who have gone out of their way to make my trips better, several times over the last few years. On both Jet Blue and American, their service is comparable to what I remember in the '80s. I also flew on Alitalia in July, they weren't nearly as good, but on the whole most I've encountered lately have been great. As far as sexy goes, I much prefer competent over sexy although both in the same person is fine too.
 
PaulS said:
I've actually had some fantastic FAs who have gone out of their way to make my trips better, several times over the last few years. On both Jet Blue and American, their service is comparable to what I remember in the '80s. I also flew on Alitalia in July, they weren't nearly as good, but on the whole most I've encountered lately have been great. As far as sexy goes, I much prefer competent over sexy although both in the same person is fine too.
Click to expand...

I have to admit many are wonderful. To the extent they aren't I blame the circumstances.
 
Rushie said:
I've been binge watching YouTube videos of a certain psychologist (not Jonathan Haight) and in one of this other guy's lectures he discusses the data that shows this.

This is DATA, scientifically collected. Not someone's opinion and not a political viewpoint. This data demonstrates that man-babies are created by two things: 1) lack of a strong father figure- no surprise there - but surprisingly, 2) lack of normal "violent" interaction with other males when very young.

Young boys, from about age 2, will tend to physically hit or tackle another boy who has wronged them. This usually leads to the boys becoming friends! Turns out that fights, up to and including physical violence (but not to the point of serious injury) seem to be one way males initiate social relationships. This way they size up and test each other. As they mature the physicality abates, but always remains as a last resort (if seldom used) in encounters with other males. Boys who are prevented from interacting with force when small actually grow up to be more violent as adult men. It's as if their aggression has been bottled up, or they have somehow failed to develop normally with respect to relating to peers.

Females are completely different. Females rarely engage in physical fights but when they do, they remain enemies for life.

These traits and sex differences are seen across most primate species including monkeys, great apes and humans. And there is strong evidence they are inborn. One study compared girls who had a congenital condition that bathes the brain in too much testosterone (for a girl) while in still in utero to boys and to normal girls. The boys preferred stories involving violence (fighting or conflict) while the girls preferred stories involving romance, but the girls who had the excess male hormone before birth preferred violent stories but not to the same degree as the boys. One presumes the amount of male hormone in the girls with this condition was not to the level of normal males. Maybe there is a linear relationship between exposure to testosterone and preference for violent stories. This suggests these preference differences between the sexes are not socially created.

The "healthy" male violence in the young does not apply to bullies. It is only acceptable if you have been provoked or wronged. Males who stand up for themselves in this way gain status in the eyes of their peers. But bullies attack the innocent and the weak. These males lose status in the eyes of the other males and tend to be rejected by the group.

This has interesting ramifications for the anti-bullying movement. It seems to me that trying to stop all violence, regardless of cause, may have unintended consequences, disrupting normal male social development.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. I can only recall getting in one fight as a young boy. In middle school, some of us used to do some "rasslin", kind of like freestyle wrestling but not so disciplined, where the goal was to pin the other guy. There were rules, sort of, so nobody got hurt. Reading this makes me wonder what kind of romantic stories the girls would like. I have two daughters and I don't recall them wanting to be read romantic stories when they were preschoolers, more things like "Goodnight Moon" or Dr. Seuss. I'd assume those were stories when young men did romantic things for young women, since it's so rare that women do romantic things for men. I can also see where that would set them up for disappointment when they find out how jerky teenage boys are.
 
FormerHangie said:
That's interesting. I can only recall getting in one fight as a young boy. In middle school, some of us used to do some "rasslin", kind of like freestyle wrestling but not so disciplined, where the goal was to pin the other guy. There were rules, sort of, so nobody got hurt. Reading this makes me wonder what kind of romantic stories the girls would like. I have two daughters and I don't recall them wanting to be read romantic stories when they were preschoolers, more things like "Goodnight Moon" or Dr. Seuss. I'd assume those were stories when young men did romantic things for young women, since it's so rare that women do romantic things for men. I can also see where that would set them up for disappointment when they find out how jerky teenage boys are.
Click to expand...

Disney's "Little Mermaid" was what my first was obsessed with, of course it's a movie not a book but at age 5 she would watch it over and over. My grandson on the other hand at age 2 is all about trains and trucks and rocket ships. You can't convince me there's no inborn differences.
 
Rushie said:
You can't convince me there's no inborn differences.
Click to expand...
There may be differences, but they are shades of grey, not black and white; or blue and pink as it might be. I didn't like girly pink when I was young, and I still don't. Romantic stories, ugh. They ruin action/adventure stories by injecting token romances.
 
Everskyward said:
There may be differences, but they are shades of grey, not black and white; or blue and pink as it might be. I didn't like girly pink when I was young, and I still don't. Romantic stories, ugh. They ruin action/adventure stories by injecting token romances.
Click to expand...

I agree completely, I think of it as a spectrum and these differences are average with a lot of individual variance. I myself tried to build a robot when I was a kid and also wanted to be an astronaut but also loved baby dolls. When I was little I liked Grimms' Fairy Tales but only the least watered down versions. The wolf has to eat the two pigs that build their houses of straw and wood. Even as a child I understood Darwinism, the version where they run to the pig with the brick house is offensive to me.

Oh wow I just found they're publishing the original first versions that had never been translated to English which were even worse.

It's a mix of violence and romance. Rapunzel gets pregnant by the Prince and the Evil Queen is Snow White's biological mother, not stepmother, and tries to have her own child killed so she can cannibalize her organs. I would have loved these versions when I was a kid.

The original stories, according to the academic, are closer to the oral tradition, as well as being “more brusque, dynamic, and scintillating”. In his introduction to The Original Folk and Fairy Tales of the Brothers Grimm, in which Marina Warner says he has “redrawn the map we thought we knew”, and made the Grimms’ tales “wonderfully strange again”, Zipes writes that the originals “retain the pungent and naive flavour of the oral tradition”, and that they are “stunning narratives precisely because they are so blunt and unpretentious”, with the Grimms yet to add their “sentimental Christianity and puritanical ideology”.

But they are still, he believes, suitable bedtime stories. “It is time for parents and publishers to stop dumbing down the Grimms’ tales for children,” Zipes told the Guardian. The Grimms, he added, “believed that these tales emanated naturally from the people, and the tales can be enjoyed by both adults and children. If there is anything offensive, readers can decide what to read for themselves. We do not need puritanical censors to tell us what is good or bad for us.”
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/nov/12/grimm-brothers-fairytales-horror-new-translation
 
Rushie said:
I agree completely, I think of it as a spectrum and these differences are average with a lot of individual variance. I myself tried to build a robot when I was a kid and also wanted to be an astronaut but also loved baby dolls. When I was little I liked Grimms' Fairy Tales but only the least watered down versions. The wolf has to eat the two pigs that build their houses of straw and wood. Even as a child I understood Darwinism, the version where they run to the pig with the brick house is offensive to me.

Oh wow I just found they're publishing the original first versions that had never been translated to English which were even worse.

It's a mix of violence and romance. Rapunzel gets pregnant by the Prince and the Evil Queen is Snow White's biological mother, not stepmother, and tries to have her own child killed so she can cannibalize her organs. I would have loved these versions when I was a kid.

The original stories, according to the academic, are closer to the oral tradition, as well as being “more brusque, dynamic, and scintillating”. In his introduction to The Original Folk and Fairy Tales of the Brothers Grimm, in which Marina Warner says he has “redrawn the map we thought we knew”, and made the Grimms’ tales “wonderfully strange again”, Zipes writes that the originals “retain the pungent and naive flavour of the oral tradition”, and that they are “stunning narratives precisely because they are so blunt and unpretentious”, with the Grimms yet to add their “sentimental Christianity and puritanical ideology”.

But they are still, he believes, suitable bedtime stories. “It is time for parents and publishers to stop dumbing down the Grimms’ tales for children,” Zipes told the Guardian. The Grimms, he added, “believed that these tales emanated naturally from the people, and the tales can be enjoyed by both adults and children. If there is anything offensive, readers can decide what to read for themselves. We do not need puritanical censors to tell us what is good or bad for us.”
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/nov/12/grimm-brothers-fairytales-horror-new-translation
Click to expand...

Lol, that's pretty dark....
 
PaulS said:
Lol, that's pretty dark....
Click to expand...

Yes it is, I'm a totally non violent person in real life, I have never even slapped someone's face. Go figure. Yet I'm well trained in firearms for self defense and I'd use it if need be. I think it's got something to do with justice. I love to see evil get its comeuppance.
 
Everskyward said:
There may be differences, but they are shades of grey, not black and white; or blue and pink as it might be. I didn't like girly pink when I was young, and I still don't. Romantic stories, ugh. They ruin action/adventure stories by injecting token romances.
Click to expand...
 
from the posted link

http://ftpcontent6.worldnow.com/kvoa/ReportGeneratorFile.pdf
In a resume submitted to his last employer, dated October 2016, the pilot reported a total flight
experience of 15,100 hours, including 13,000 hours as pilot-in-command. He reported 9,500
hours in multi-engine airplanes, over 9,000 hours in turboprop airplanes, 3,500 hours in jet
airplanes, and 3,900 hours in amphibious/float airplanes. Between 1979 and 1988, he served
on active duty in the United States Air Force. Throughout his aviation career, he flew as a line
and corporate pilot for various companies. He also flew in Afghanistan and Iraq as a contracted
pilot through the Air Force and as a captain for various companies in Africa and Saudi Arabia.

<snip>

Toxicology testing performed by AXIS Forensic Toxicology at the request of the medical
examiner found tetrahydrocannabinol (THC, the primary psychoactive substance in
marijuana) at 6.4 ng/ml and its inactive metabolite, 11-carboxytetrahydrocannabinol (THC-
COOH), at 22.8 ng/ml in cavity blood. In addition, amphetamine at 238 ng/ml and
pseudoephedrine at 452 ng/ml were found in cavity blood. Amphetamine and 7-
aminoclonazepam were detected in urine.
Toxicology testing performed by the FAA's Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory,
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, identified venlafaxine and its metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine,
alfuzosin, and pseudoephedrine in liver and cavity blood. In addition, amphetamine was found
at 265 ng/ml, THC at 10.9 ng/ml, and THC-COOH at 15.1 ng/ml in cavity blood. Amphetamine
and pheniramine were detected in liver; THC was detected in lung; and THC-COOH was
detected in liver and urine.
Click to expand...
 
https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/how-alan-turing-cracked-the-enigma-code
In 1952, Alan Turing was arrested for homosexuality – which was then illegal in Britain. He was found guilty of ‘gross indecency’ (this conviction was overturned in 2013) but avoided a prison sentence by accepting chemical castration. In 1954, he was found dead from cyanide poisoning. An inquest ruled that it was suicide.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing
it has been estimated that this work shortened the war in Europe by more than two years and saved over fourteen million lives.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top