Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About smokeBomb

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator


  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Fig Backer
  1. Perhaps ‘delusional’ is strongly worded. This is not an attempt to ‘diagnose’ anyway, regardless. I’m implying he thwarts the facts and in doing so fabricates evidence and twists words. How could he possibly have not seen that one word in an image with only one sentence? There's no way that's possible to miss. A lie is a lie. Another example: != Because...wait for it...see the word ‘things’ that you use? The ‘s’ means plural. That’s multiple versions of the item to which it refers. The quote you used from me emphasises the singular: ‘I only used ‘women won’t’ to descr
  2. Here’s another from the NCBI from 2017 confirming everything once again. Where is your source that specifically disproved something from the NCBI? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5516591/ we conducted a voxel-based morphometry (VBM) analysis along with global volume analysis for white matter across sex. We analyzed 384 T1-weighted MRI brain images (192 male, 192 female) to investigate any differences in white matter (WM) between males and females. In the VBM analysis, we found males to have larger WM, compared to females, in occipital, temporal, insular, parietal, and fron
  3. You need scientific research to talk to me about women, mate. Think about that for a second. But here you go: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3110817/ larger overall brain sizes in men and larger global gray matter (GM) proportions as well as regional GM volumes and concentrations in women (Schlaepfer et al., 1995; Gur et al., 1999; Nopoulos et al., 2000; Good et al., 2001; Luders et al., 2005; Leonard et al., 2008). Similarly, larger measurements in women compared to men have been reported with respect to cortical thickness (Narr et al., 2005; Im et al., 2006; Luders
  4. They never do this. Never meaning the majority not the less than 1% that do. We’ve already proved nobody believes any scientific facts around this, only their own scientific facts. So unless you're actually a researcher on this topic and produce scientific evidence from your own research, you have no evidence whatsoever to back this up. We can all google for links that contradict everything you just said. So I said – give me examples from your own experiences with women. I've already given mine, and I'm giving no more. I have a hundred things in reality that are backing up b
  5. This is your opinion and I have my mine that says I disagree. This is just vapid preaching: verbal fumes - weightless, insubstantial without any explanation/personal theory backed up from reality or otherwise. Sweeping statements, no evidence from reality or otherwise once again. I’ve given my evidence from reality, and I stand by it. Weak sauce preaching again – anyone can do that. Examples of how there are no masculine and feminine traits? The subject of the post is ‘beauty’ and my research regarding attractiveness is immaterial to that subject. Eh... Do you want to put ‘a
  6. @Initates Yes, the cultural differences you talk about are significant and real. Europe is full of cultural differences that influence social behaviours and accepted norms – even counties in Ireland can have wildly different social norms. That wasn’t the topic of my argument, however. It was male versus female behaviours, which no matter the country, continent or cultural norms, male versus female behaviours have a distinctive consistency in the areas I described, no matter where you look. My gf is French – she couldn’t be more different to me culturally. Any time I visit France, I
  7. Science has already proven there are vast differences between the quantity of grey and white matter between the male and female human brain – and also its dispersal and density in certain regions. And that’s only the tip of the iceberg regarding this thing that’s solely responsible for how you think and behave. There are, in other words, multiple intelligences, some of which women were designed to excel in over men – and vice versa. 'Intelligence' itself is a rather meaningless word in that sense, since there is no one all-governing intelligence. But what it does mean is that it's safe to say
  8. Some of these may already be there and I just didn’t see them, but here’s a few quick ones I can think of: target === ally && partyMemberName === ‘Eder’ (or whoever you want to target specifically) I saw ‘self: animal companion active’, but it didn’t work for summoned creatures, so I’d like to see a ‘self: summon active’ check – because otherwise summons are occasionally unsummoned for a new summon if 2 behaviours invoke different summons A simple count function/feature: if (count(usedLevelSevenSpellTotal) === 0 && count(usedLevelSixSpellTotal) === 0 && count(usedLeve
  9. There are NO SPOILERS in this review. I’m beginning with the bad and ending with the good, because I believe the bad is so significant that I can’t believe no one else has written about it. I’m not holding back, but every criticism is intended to be constructive, and I’m not careless with words – no one, no matter their gender or orientation, should take offence to the points I raise. With the disclaimer out of the way, I want to jump straight in to Deadfire’s most glaring problem: what's surely the most slavering, turgid adherence to politically correct characterisations around gender and
  • Create New...