Research article: Female hunters of the early Americas

submitted by anonymale from advances.sciencemag.org

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Rather than explain your points or make a case on behalf of whatever it is you're arguing, your go-to tactic seems to be just to tone-police, throw out ad hominems and to repeat your assertions, which are not as clear to others as they seem to be to yourself.

You've not engaged with any of my points or spelled out your objections.

But boy oh boy, it's very clear that a forthright woman expressing her views really sticks in your craw.

[–]anonymale[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

...not as clear to others as they seem to be to yourself.

It's clear to anyone with a reasonable grasp of words like 'ethnography'. If I spelled it out for you, I expect you'd take that as condescension.

...it's very clear that a forthright woman expressing her views really sticks in your craw.

LOL, tell that to my wife and sisters. What sticks in my craw is that your response to this paper is egregiously wrong because you haven't understood the first sentence of the abstract. Guessing (wrongly) at what I'm feeling will not help you understand it.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Again, you don't explain whatever point you are trying to make. In fact you say you won't spell it out for me coz you have decided ahead of time how I will react. You seem to think you are so clever, powerful and omniscient that you can can read the minds of strangers on the internet and predict the future too!

You say I do not have "a reasonable grasp of words like 'ethnography' " apparently because you think I am ill-informed, unable to consult a dictionary and/or incapable of reading what is written there. BTW, ethnography is not a complicated, difficult, arcane or novel word; it does not require quotes around it.

And pray tell, what are the other words that in your manly opinion I do not have "a reasonable grasp" of?

In earlier comments on this thread you have impugned me for - in your opinion of one - inventing "strawmen," arguing "rantily" and "misreading." Yet you've never taken a moment even to attempt to build a case for why you say this. Now you say I "haven't understood" and that I'm "egregiously wrong" just coz you say so but you won't bother to explain why you would say this because that "will not help (me) understand it."

Mate, you're talking bollocks. From how you've behaved not just on this thread but on others, it's clear you are very good at huffily hectoring, but not so good at presenting a convincing argument and backing it up with evidence.

Telling people that they are egregiously wrong, unreasonable, ranty, ill-informed, mistaken, stupid the way you do is not the same as showing why your claims might have merit and should be taken as true.

I really feel sorry for your wife and sisters. And your poor mum. You come off like a caricature of man who always has to have the last word and whose knee-jerk reaction to smart women with different POVs to yours is to cast aspersions on our intelligence in order to maintain your wholly unearned sense of intellectual superiority. The term Dunning-Kruger effect comes to mind.

[–]anonymale[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You seem to think you are so clever, powerful and omniscient that you can can read the minds of strangers on the internet...

The irony.