text stringlengths 0 9.69k |
|---|
i want to be clear that this flips almost the entirety of opening opposition's analysis, whether it's about gender norms, whether it's about the pressure to eventually move in and get married, everything that Aditya says is the most important part of their contribution, is completely flipped. I don’t know why they made... |
<POi> This is a crazy argument, not only does closing government strawman us by saying I just don't believe their reasons, which guys, come on, it's a debate, like actually respond to them. But the bigger problem is it has to be so massive. Like think about how small the current trend is in order to convince everyone t... |
i’ve already answered this, so Plum and I are dating, we’re going to be living in a long-distance relationship for the next few years, and Aditya, you can tell your parents about that, even though all of your friends may not be doing it. So I think you only need a few examples for these conversations to make sense, and... |
Second extension: Why do women get significantly more freedom, both in terms of their career and in the long term? I think first, this normalizes the idea that women don’t have to be subordinate to their husbands. That is to say, there's massive social pressure on the status quo for actually women to live with men in t... |
Finally, I think that this also means that even in the long term within relationships, men are more likely to see it as like— for example, if a woman has the option to live apart from the man and the man knows that, and it may be in a slightly conservative part of the world for example, then the man is more likely to t... |
First, I think that this is probably the most important way to reduce pressure on women in the long term. The primary pressure on women isn’t just social, it’s financial. it’s that if you sacrifice your career to live with your boyfriend for three years, even if you don’t want to marry them, and even if your family is ... |
Second, I don’t think this is necessarily going to continue into marriage. So, for example, like after you’ve been dating for four or five years or six years or something, maybe you’re able to figure out a way to reconcile both your interests and live together, but even if it does, I actually think this is probably goo... |
We also just think it’s a good role model for daughters. That is to say, it’s nice, it’s good for them to see that their mothers are working, they’re not sacrificing for their careers. This literally liberates half of the population. With that, very proud to propose. |
</mg> |
<mo> |
One point of framing, two points of rebuttal, then extension. |
in terms of framing, I think the reasonable way to read this phase is that it is probably most impactful for those couples that actually consider this to be a viable long-term option for themselves i.e. at the point where you don't, then you probably reverse engineer that to indicate that you shouldn't be living like t... |
Two points of rebuttal: A) On opening government, kind of also on closing government that you make worse choices because you don't maximize your career and therefore you don't find values, like, I just think that this requires a massive, like, intuition cap for you to buy, which is that people otherwise make great choi... |
Secondly, presumably, that I think it’s actually relatively likely that I make vaguely okay decisions about the relationship that I stay with. And so far as I have already got some experience with that relationship as is, i’ve already interacted with my partner and presumably know how they make me feel, etc. At which p... |
Secondly, with regard to freedom for women from closing government, i'm sure Lucy has more structural rebuttal to this. i'm just going to intuition pump that for the husbands that are probably, like, most affected by this norm and who are most willing to take it at face value and believe that it doesn't mean that the w... |
Why do you ultimately make better choices on the opposition side? A) With regard to worst communication, I think opening opposition, being reasonable to Tim. They explain why you don't bring up problems effectively and therefore you don't effectively resolve them within your relationship. On gov bench, however, it is r... |
Note that most other forms of relationship commitment are ultimately about words and they are even at the point where you are getting married, at the point where you don’t live together, getting married is a much lower level commitment. it means that you're less certain about whether your partner is just doing this out... |
Secondly, communication at low points. That means that at the point where you are not living together, there’s a couple of things that make this difficult. The first is that it’s just hard to be the first mover to be vulnerable in any given relationship because you feel like it's unclear whether the other person is act... |
At the point where you live together, there is a default that at some stage, while you're feeling bad, you will be in the same place. The fact that your partner cares about you—they have empathy—meaning that when they see you feel bad, they feel bad in a similar way and they want to resolve it out of impulse to no long... |
This is more important than the stuff on falling out of love with someone that we get from opening government or like stuff on excitement, because I think excitement is just ultimately much less important than you feeling like your partner cares about you and is effectively providing you emotional support. Even if my p... |
OG, 15 seconds, go.<POi> in a world where you’re all very extremely vulnerable and tired yourself. What is this obligation of being forced to interact at all points of times without any personal space?</POi> |
Like, i’m sorry OG, I have no idea why the fuck you think that being alone when you are tired and sad is actually good for you. it’s likelier to lead to you going to bed over a bottle of wine and being equally sadder in the morning. I have no idea why that's good. |
Secondly, why you make better relationship choices ultimately about things. I think the first thing is you are likely to oh well say that you see habits that will break up relationships. There's a question though which is why you act on most things correctly. There's two reasons for this: A) you are likely to experienc... |
The second layer is that, given how big of a materially important step moving in together is, you're likely to have scrutiny by others: your parents, your friends, etc., at that step because they think it is important to do so. This is significantly likely to be avoided if it's just an over-time gradual process. if the... |
</mo> |
<gw> |
I think it is outrageous that it took until closing government, aside from a half-hearted attempt from the DLO to give a real argument about the people who are benefited most by this trend. |
That is women who feel that they cannot prioritize their careers because they feel that they must stay in the same place as their husband as his career for their children or for a host of other social reasons. I think that we gave you two extensions of the closing government neither of which got adequate engagement fro... |
<poi> |
the vast majority of people don't like distance and are going to live close by regardless long distance is just not the debate, given that cg fails to show why living 15 minutes away versus in the same apartment magically grants you a better career, be realistic. |
</poi> |
for the reasons you identified about financial reasons by social pressures, the vast majority of cases in which this happens, is long distance between cities i.e that's exactly, i.e having to take different jobs, having to live separately because your parents for exactly the reasons you gave. OO well quickly why would ... |
</gw> |
<ow> |
I'm going to do things in the speech: number one - on scrutiny about how we're preventing bad relationships, secondly - the positive case for why living together is regionally good, makes people happier, that's a good thing. First thing is just in terms of framing who this debate applies to and how norms and pressure a... |
<poi> |
Often when people are sad or tired they might also need space for themselves just as much to reflect, communication not being a foundation why the debate is more of. |
</poi> |
I get it okay if I'm sad and I want to have space for myself, I'm going to go and sit in my bedroom, in my office, I'm going to go outside and sit in a park or I'm going to go and sit in the bathroom on the toilet. The point is that I can do that if I live with someone, the problem is I can't do it if I want to not to ... |
</ow> |
<pm> |
Panel, religious extremism is rising in the west, it can look like lone wolf attacks from those inspired by isis or other islamic terrorist groups, it can also look like christian fundamentalism on the rise and attacks on things like blm, for instance, or other kinds of protest movements. It is generally on the rise an... |
What is the problem in the status quo? I think the existing alternatives to fighting religious extremism are already failing. These are failing in two respects and we just need to look at what the kinds of responses from governmental authorities are over here. The first kind of response is retrospective or after the fa... |
You're only trying to bring people to justice as opposed to preventing the harm to begin with. The second thing is you're often aggressive and reactive when you're trying to preempt harm. So this looks like more securitization and more policing of communities. This looks like what happens in France, for instance, where... |
Why is this harmful then? Because I think in the first instance, this is useless because this is happening after the fact. But secondly, this is oftentimes counterproductive. That is to say that you perpetuate cycles of violence because these people specifically feel discriminated against from things like the police or... |
<poi> |
this is a clarification there are different educational systems in the west some of which allow parents to opt for their kids to go to certain schools others of which force kids to go to certain schools would this be part of a system which forces kids to go to specific types of schools you set up |
</poi> |
I mean in in areas where you're forced to go to school we're happy with including some part of you know religious education within your syllabi like, an extra class for muslim students, I don't care. Okay, in terms of buy-in, two reasons for why we have nuy-in, one, clerics and religious authorities have said that this... |
</pm> |
<lo> |
The problem with opening government is that they assert they're going to get imams and religious scholars to work with them but they at no point explain why this in their interest or why this is something that's likely to happen. We pose that the interest of these religious authorities is to maintain control and mainta... |
<poi> |
Based on your logic, would you then oppose the existence of Sunday school for Catholics or is there something different about that? |
</poi> |
Yeah, we are fine opposing that as well. What is the root of radicalization? I think the main reason why people are radical in these states is because they feel like the state has failed them or the state doesn't support the identity and they're isolated. I think the other major problem is that you have religious autho... |
</lo> |
<dpm> |
Opening opposition's policy is like the Spiderman meme where they're basically doing the same thing we are except stupider. Their policy, secular schools and supporting liberal mosques. Somehow our policy doesn't have a efficacy where why would their parents send their children to religious schools but their policy of ... |
<poi> |
Sure. So, the comparative clearly isn't one where unfortunately Muslim people aren't going to stop being stopped at airports or for example, going to continue to not have these reactionary policies. So in that context, do you really think this motion is beneficial? |
</poi> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.