|
|
|
|
enigma
Apr 13, 2011, 3:43 PM
Post #151 of 190
(1878 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2279
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: enigma wrote: happiegrrrl wrote: I would never say I led a route if I was clipping someone else's pre-placed gear. Part of leading on gear is the consideration of gear and how it builds the system. But I also don't really agree with calling the work of a Second Top-roping. Climb at the Gunks with some of our airy, thinly protected traverses!(Or climb with a leader who either thinks you can handle the risk if less pro on a traverse, or doesn't think to protect their poor, less string a climber, second. Top roping doesn't involve cleaning and racking gear, other than the occassional directional, either. The belayer on top-rope also doesn't often have the duties of the second as belayer either. I have had a lot of leaders tell me they took on a route with me as second, which they wouldn't have with some other partners(and I know others who have the same experinece). Can't say so much for the TR... I have noticed a trend it seems like the leaders who lead easier leads want to share leading . While the guys who climb harder seem okay with whatever! So I still have trouble understanding why I can't enjoy being a second on a 5.10 if my partner and leader is happy and stoked. Even on my longest climb 21 pitches where I was a second. I have my nut tool, get out the cams. 2nd. belay well. Why can't we all just be friends, and happy climbers??? Hmmn. If I want to lead, something easy, I will. If a guy wants to follow some 5.10 he can't lead , there's nothing wrong with that either. If a women leads 5.11's and her partner follows and is a guy who can't lead that hard, That's great too.  If you and your partner want to swap leads , go right ahead. I can't believe there is no-one here that knows Tony Robbins tapes or books. Its so relevant to this discussion.  The problem with inductive reasoning is clear. When you continue to project from your specific without awareness of your limitations and influences, you will fail not only to incorporate new facts but you will generate scorn for your biases. In this case, because the male climbers you associate with all act with a particular bias, when you project that as a universal truth the idea is ridiculed.
On the surface your comment sounds plausible.
But you are way off base. I've climbed in many areas with various partners, , I'm a open good natured individual ,always hoping to have a great experience climbing.
.
Its hard to have this discussion . unless someone is familiar with Tony Robbins.
He is quite upbeat for athletes , and and his insight helps each individual develop their strengths, leaving behind their weakness, in all areas of life.
|
|
|
|
|
snoopy138
Apr 13, 2011, 3:57 PM
Post #152 of 190
(1874 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2004
Posts: 28992
|
enigma wrote: Its hard to have this discussion, unless someone is familiar with Tony Robbins.
Somehow we all have discussions, amongst people that aren't crazy, about all sorts of topics, without any familiarity with Tony Robbins. So I don't think that's the issue here.
|
|
|
|
|
Diphthong
Apr 13, 2011, 4:03 PM
Post #153 of 190
(1871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 5, 2011
Posts: 2639
|
snoopy138 wrote: enigma wrote: Its hard to have this discussion, unless someone is familiar with Tony Robbins. Somehow we all have discussions, amongst people that aren't crazy, about all sorts of topics, without any familiarity with Tony Robbins. So I don't think that's the issue here.
He peed on the Dude's rug.
|
|
|
|
|
snoopy138
Apr 13, 2011, 5:07 PM
Post #154 of 190
(1849 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2004
Posts: 28992
|
Diphthong wrote: snoopy138 wrote: enigma wrote: Its hard to have this discussion, unless someone is familiar with Tony Robbins. Somehow we all have discussions, amongst people that aren't crazy, about all sorts of topics, without any familiarity with Tony Robbins. So I don't think that's the issue here. He peed on the Dude's rug.
Tony Robbins is the chinaman?
|
|
|
|
|
Parkerkat
Apr 13, 2011, 5:25 PM
Post #155 of 190
(1837 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2008
Posts: 263
|
Are you honestly implying that all men are the same? Frankly I've met a number of strong women who climb hard, have major climbing ambition and will gladly take the lead. often there is a male, proud and happy to have a women at their side that could out climb most of thier pals or even them.
Yes - guys who are actually human beings can admit this. I would gladly follow - I look at climbing as a partnership, therefore I expect at least 50/50 lead/follow ratio, but depends on the route, the type of climbing and my partner's strong points....or my strenghts and weakness for that matter.
No - ego has nothing to do with male or female, though you may find a slightly higher Ego propensity in guys - I've met a number of strong men that simply share the load when outdoors.
...and "guys don't like other guys to climb harder than them?" Perhaps in bouldering, or if you're douche bag. Are you kidding? I dunno what morons you're hanging out with but I like to do something called Learning. Typically you learn from someone with more experience, and who is most likely stronger(though doesn't have to be).
I would gladly rope up with a stronger Male climber any day - see with my own eyes what it takes to hit those moves, learn more about placements and moving quickly. Learn a new System, or better rope management. Never met a guy that wouldn't climb with someone based on them being strong - everyone I know look at that as an opportunity.
Where I come from, that is much more of the standard that these "typical" males you speak of.
...So, by asking these questions I ask you:
are all/most ladies weaker than males and need strong man to take the lead? Can ladies admit that?
(sounds stupid doesn't it) Stereotypes usually do.
One size does not fit all.
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Apr 13, 2011, 5:45 PM
Post #156 of 190
(1828 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 5208
|
enigma wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: enigma wrote: happiegrrrl wrote: I would never say I led a route if I was clipping someone else's pre-placed gear. Part of leading on gear is the consideration of gear and how it builds the system. But I also don't really agree with calling the work of a Second Top-roping. Climb at the Gunks with some of our airy, thinly protected traverses!(Or climb with a leader who either thinks you can handle the risk if less pro on a traverse, or doesn't think to protect their poor, less string a climber, second. Top roping doesn't involve cleaning and racking gear, other than the occassional directional, either. The belayer on top-rope also doesn't often have the duties of the second as belayer either. I have had a lot of leaders tell me they took on a route with me as second, which they wouldn't have with some other partners(and I know others who have the same experinece). Can't say so much for the TR... I have noticed a trend it seems like the leaders who lead easier leads want to share leading . While the guys who climb harder seem okay with whatever! So I still have trouble understanding why I can't enjoy being a second on a 5.10 if my partner and leader is happy and stoked. Even on my longest climb 21 pitches where I was a second. I have my nut tool, get out the cams. 2nd. belay well. Why can't we all just be friends, and happy climbers??? Hmmn. If I want to lead, something easy, I will. If a guy wants to follow some 5.10 he can't lead , there's nothing wrong with that either. If a women leads 5.11's and her partner follows and is a guy who can't lead that hard, That's great too. If you and your partner want to swap leads , go right ahead. I can't believe there is no-one here that knows Tony Robbins tapes or books. Its so relevant to this discussion. The problem with inductive reasoning is clear. When you continue to project from your specific without awareness of your limitations and influences, you will fail not only to incorporate new facts but you will generate scorn for your biases. In this case, because the male climbers you associate with all act with a particular bias, when you project that as a universal truth the idea is ridiculed.
But you are way off base. I've climbed in many areas with various partners, , I'm a open good natured individual ,always hoping to have a great experience climbing.
.
Its hard to have this discussion . unless someone is familiar with Tony Robbins.
He is quite upbeat for athletes , and and his insight helps each individual develop their strengths, leaving behind their weakness, in all areas of life.
The accuracy of your inference is influenced by the breadth of your experienced, but inductive reasoning is never fully complete. It is ok, we all have some inductive based opinions. I have them, you have them, even the most scientifically based soap box regulars have them. It is ok to have them. The need is to recognize when those inferences don't apply and give them up.
Let's look at an example. Say I regularly go to comps and I observe that all of the successful women climbers don't have cellulite. In my head I now think that cellulite is bad for climbing. So I post up here a question on how my wife can lose her cellulite so she can climb better.
It would take about 10 minutes before a butt shot picture would appear here of someone with cellulite climbing something difficult. (And no that wasn't a request).
What usually happens its "yeah but" posts instead of an admission that my induction was wrong. But that belief I formed is wrong. I can coat it all I want, but that idea is wrong.
It isn't that I can't find more butt shots with cellulite at lower grades than someone else can find at higher grades (again not a challenge to RC.com), but none of that matters not a bit. My inference was wrong.
Inductive logic is dangerous and best used with extreme caution.
And forget Tony, google "logical fallicies"
|
|
|
|
|
Diphthong
Apr 13, 2011, 5:58 PM
Post #157 of 190
(1822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 5, 2011
Posts: 2639
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: And forget Tony, google "logical fallicies"
I did, it didn't tell me anything about Tony, just gave me this link:
http://www.learntospell.org.uk/
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 13, 2011, 6:19 PM
Post #158 of 190
(1807 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Diphthong wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: And forget Tony, google "logical fallicies" I did, it didn't tell me anything about Tony, just gave me this link: http://www.learntospell.org.uk/
Oddly enough, I did the same search, but got something about a "comma splice."
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
Diphthong
Apr 13, 2011, 6:30 PM
Post #159 of 190
(1799 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 5, 2011
Posts: 2639
|
jt512 wrote: Diphthong wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: And forget Tony, google "logical fallicies" I did, it didn't tell me anything about Tony, just gave me this link: http://www.learntospell.org.uk/Oddly enough, I did the same search, but got something about a "comma splice." Jay
I think that you're lying.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 13, 2011, 6:33 PM
Post #160 of 190
(1795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Diphthong wrote: jt512 wrote: Diphthong wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: And forget Tony, google "logical fallicies" I did, it didn't tell me anything about Tony, just gave me this link: http://www.learntospell.org.uk/Oddly enough, I did the same search, but got something about a "comma splice." Jay I think that you're lying.
Oops. Somehow I mistook you for someone with a sense of humor.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
Diphthong
Apr 13, 2011, 6:38 PM
Post #161 of 190
(1795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 5, 2011
Posts: 2639
|
jt512 wrote: Diphthong wrote: jt512 wrote: Diphthong wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: And forget Tony, google "logical fallicies" I did, it didn't tell me anything about Tony, just gave me this link: http://www.learntospell.org.uk/Oddly enough, I did the same search, but got something about a "comma splice." Jay I think that you're lying. Oops. Somehow I mistook you for someone with a sense of humor. Jay
Now the search is returning links about something called a "false dichotomy."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Apr 13, 2011, 7:04 PM
Post #163 of 190
(1782 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 5208
|
jt512 wrote: Diphthong wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: And forget Tony, google "logical fallicies" I did, it didn't tell me anything about Tony, just gave me this link: http://www.learntospell.org.uk/Oddly enough, I did the same search, but got something about a "comma splice." Jay
Don't make we whip out the double ellipses..the stoner one..your head almost exploded in that thread..
|
|
|
|
|
enigma
Apr 14, 2011, 3:23 AM
Post #164 of 190
(1742 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2279
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: jt512 wrote: Diphthong wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: And forget Tony, google "logical fallicies" I did, it didn't tell me anything about Tony, just gave me this link: http://www.learntospell.org.uk/Oddly enough, I did the same search, but got something about a "comma splice." Jay Don't make we whip out the double ellipses..the stoner one..your head almost exploded in that thread..
Were you the guy 2 years ago who left his children unattended , while using an auto-belay device at Josh?
Then said to me "Hey , wanna smoke,?"
"What about your kids?"
"Oh they will be okay, .... where are they going to go"
"Well, they could fall down that crevice you are in, and you can't see them or hear them"
" They will be fine"
" Listen, It would be better if you left your children at home, with a babysitter or a family member"
" Well, I promised my wife, I would take care of the kids, so she could go shopping, ... they are having fun"
" All right, I guess its time to go home, I would like to climb sometime. Here's my number..."
"Are you okay to drive?...Sure, I do it all the time"
"But, your kids...."
" Aren't they cute?"
"Well be safe, next time find someone to watch them, they could get hurt while you are using that auto-belay"
" They are fine, they have never gotten hurt"
|
|
|
|
|
enigma
Apr 14, 2011, 3:33 AM
Post #165 of 190
(1736 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2279
|
Parkerkat wrote: Are you honestly implying that all men are the same? Frankly I've met a number of strong women who climb hard, have major climbing ambition and will gladly take the lead. often there is a male, proud and happy to have a women at their side that could out climb most of thier pals or even them. Yes - guys who are actually human beings can admit this. I would gladly follow - I look at climbing as a partnership, therefore I expect at least 50/50 lead/follow ratio, but depends on the route, the type of climbing and my partner's strong points....or my strenghts and weakness for that matter. No - ego has nothing to do with male or female, though you may find a slightly higher Ego propensity in guys - I've met a number of strong men that simply share the load when outdoors. ...and "guys don't like other guys to climb harder than them?" Perhaps in bouldering, or if you're douche bag. Are you kidding? I dunno what morons you're hanging out with but I like to do something called Learning. Typically you learn from someone with more experience, and who is most likely stronger(though doesn't have to be). I would gladly rope up with a stronger Male climber any day - see with my own eyes what it takes to hit those moves, learn more about placements and moving quickly. Learn a new System, or better rope management. Never met a guy that wouldn't climb with someone based on them being strong - everyone I know look at that as an opportunity. Where I come from, that is much more of the standard that these "typical" males you speak of. ...So, by asking these questions I ask you: are all/most ladies weaker than males and need strong man to take the lead? Can ladies admit that? (sounds stupid doesn't it) Stereotypes usually do. One size does not fit all.
True, So where is your favorite place to climb?
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Apr 14, 2011, 3:43 AM
Post #166 of 190
(1728 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 5208
|
enigma wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: jt512 wrote: Diphthong wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: And forget Tony, google "logical fallicies" I did, it didn't tell me anything about Tony, just gave me this link: http://www.learntospell.org.uk/Oddly enough, I did the same search, but got something about a "comma splice." Jay Don't make we whip out the double ellipses..the stoner one..your head almost exploded in that thread.. Were you the guy 2 years ago who left his children unattended , while using an auto-belay device at Josh? Then said to me "Hey , wanna smoke,?" "What about your kids?" "Oh they will be okay, .... where are they going to go" "Well, they could fall down that crevice you are in, and you can't see them or hear them" " They will be fine" " Listen, It would be better if you left your children at home, with a babysitter or a family member" " Well, I promised my wife, I would take care of the kids, so she could go shopping, ... they are having fun" " All right, I guess its time to go home, I would like to climb sometime. Here's my number..." "Are you okay to drive?...Sure, I do it all the time" "But, your kids...." " Aren't they cute?" "Well be safe, next time find someone to watch them, they could get hurt while you are using that auto-belay" " They are fine, they have never gotten hurt"
I'm the mr safety of the family with full I.L.C. kred.
But my kid is the kid at the playground who climbs on top of the roof of the play structure and waves at his mom while all of the other moms look on on horror. My wife waves back.
And no, she really doesn't have cellulite.
|
|
|
|
|
drivel
Apr 19, 2011, 12:37 PM
Post #167 of 190
(1670 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2010
Posts: 2459
|
tower_climber wrote: enigma wrote: If you are a guy; I am. the man-hater wrote: I presume your male ego forces you to lead? You presume wrong. I presume you're an idiot. the wacko feminist wrote: However given the chance would you rather follow? Rather? Maybe not. Be willing to? Sure. the douche wrote: Can guys admit this? Apparently... the group-thinker wrote: I also have heard guys don't like other males to climb harder then them. Is that true? Wow. I heard all black people hate whiteys and rob gas stations. Is this true? the bigot wrote: What's your opinion on this subject? Check the quote author titles. My opinion should be pretty clear.
little late to this party but god damn fuck all you misogynistic swollen assholes who think "feminist" is a good insult to throw in with the crazy.
even if it were offered in sincerity and not in ambien communion, feminism: this is not that.
|
|
|
|
|
enigma
Apr 19, 2011, 3:57 PM
Post #168 of 190
(1642 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2279
|
drivel wrote: tower_climber wrote: enigma wrote: If you are a guy; I am. the man-hater wrote: I presume your male ego forces you to lead? You presume wrong. I presume you're an idiot. the wacko feminist wrote: However given the chance would you rather follow? Rather? Maybe not. Be willing to? Sure. the douche wrote: Can guys admit this? Apparently... the group-thinker wrote: I also have heard guys don't like other males to climb harder then them. Is that true? Wow. I heard all black people hate whiteys and rob gas stations. Is this true? the bigot wrote: What's your opinion on this subject? Check the quote author titles. My opinion should be pretty clear. little late to this party but god damn fuck all you misogynistic swollen assholes who think "feminist" is a good insult to throw in with the crazy. even if it were offered in sincerity and not in ambien communion, feminism: this is not that.
Your analysis is way off.
Its hard being part of performance art when you show up late. Better late than never ! 
(This post was edited by enigma on Apr 19, 2011, 4:08 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
drivel
Apr 19, 2011, 4:31 PM
Post #169 of 190
(1623 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2010
Posts: 2459
|
enigma wrote: drivel wrote: tower_climber wrote: enigma wrote: If you are a guy; I am. the man-hater wrote: I presume your male ego forces you to lead? You presume wrong. I presume you're an idiot. the wacko feminist wrote: However given the chance would you rather follow? Rather? Maybe not. Be willing to? Sure. the douche wrote: Can guys admit this? Apparently... the group-thinker wrote: I also have heard guys don't like other males to climb harder then them. Is that true? Wow. I heard all black people hate whiteys and rob gas stations. Is this true? the bigot wrote: What's your opinion on this subject? Check the quote author titles. My opinion should be pretty clear. little late to this party but god damn fuck all you misogynistic swollen assholes who think "feminist" is a good insult to throw in with the crazy. even if it were offered in sincerity and not in ambien communion, feminism: this is not that. Your analysis is way off. Its hard being part of performance art when you show up late. Better late than never !
posterity.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Apr 19, 2011, 5:36 PM
Post #170 of 190
(1607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
I lead to piss off crazies like enigma.
|
|
|
|
|
tower_climber
Apr 19, 2011, 6:35 PM
Post #171 of 190
(1597 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 25, 2010
Posts: 157
|
Misogynistic doesn't really apply here. I don't hate women. I just hate enigma. Enigmagynistic?
(This post was edited by tower_climber on Apr 19, 2011, 6:42 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
drivel
Apr 19, 2011, 6:44 PM
Post #172 of 190
(1592 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2010
Posts: 2459
|
tower_climber wrote: Misogynistic doesn't really apply here. I don't hate women. I just hate enigma. Enigmagynistic?
sorry, throwing "feminist" into the bag of insults, just because it's a lady ranting, makes you a hater. it's not ok to use "feminist" as shorthand for "psycho bitch."
|
|
|
|
|
tower_climber
Apr 19, 2011, 6:45 PM
Post #173 of 190
(1588 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 25, 2010
Posts: 157
|
drivel wrote: sorry, throwing "feminist" into the bag of insults, just because it's a lady ranting, makes you a hater. it's not ok to use "feminist" as shorthand for "psycho bitch."
That's why I added the "Wacko" designator!
|
|
|
|
|
drivel
Apr 19, 2011, 6:46 PM
Post #174 of 190
(1588 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2010
Posts: 2459
|
drivel wrote: tower_climber wrote: Misogynistic doesn't really apply here. I don't hate women. I just hate enigma. Enigmagynistic? sorry, throwing "feminist" into the bag of insults, just because it's a lady ranting, makes you a hater. it's not ok to use "feminist" as shorthand for "psycho bitch."
misogyny harms teh gays, in case you're wondering why i care.
|
|
|
|
|
drivel
Apr 19, 2011, 6:47 PM
Post #175 of 190
(1586 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2010
Posts: 2459
|
tower_climber wrote: drivel wrote: sorry, throwing "feminist" into the bag of insults, just because it's a lady ranting, makes you a hater. it's not ok to use "feminist" as shorthand for "psycho bitch." That's why I added the "Wacko" designator!
you're fucking stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
