andrewducker (
andrewducker) wrote2018-01-25 12:00 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
- abuse,
- argument,
- belief,
- boardgames,
- business,
- canada,
- canal,
- dogs,
- electricity,
- europe,
- feminism,
- government,
- lgbt,
- links,
- maps,
- money,
- muppets,
- newzealand,
- philosophy,
- politics,
- population,
- psychology,
- rape,
- relationships,
- scotland,
- self-esteem,
- society,
- space,
- specialeffects,
- transport,
- usa,
- viaswampers,
- wikipedia,
- women,
- work
Interesting Links for 25-01-2018
- Think your country is crowded? These maps reveal the truth about population density across Europe
- (tags: population europe maps )
- How Private Equity Killed Toys “R” Us
- (tags: business money )
- This Is What Domestic Violence Is Like When You're LGBT
- (tags: lgbt rape abuse )
- Scotland to ban electric shock dog collars
- (tags: dogs scotland )
- Working in female-dominated workplaces means worse access to flexible working arrangements
- (tags: women work )
- How Canada may use Sweden's gender-balanced snow-clearing to adjust their budgets
- (tags: Canada feminism government money )
- The Humanity Star
- (tags: space )
- This 19-year-old Kiwi farmer accidentally became a character in a US board game
- (tags: newzealand usa boardgames wikipedia )
- Conflict Theory vs Mistake Theory
- I'm Mistake Theory by nature - with a few bits of learned Conflict.
(tags: politics philosophy argument belief society ) - World's first electric container barges to sail from European ports this summer
- (tags: electricity transport europe canal )
- It’s not all in their heads: people with low self-esteem really do have less responsive partners
- (tags: psychology relationships self-esteem )
- Possibly the finest special effect of all time
- (tags: specialeffects muppets viaSwampers )
no subject
Low self esteem
no subject
no subject
It's not clear that Toys R Us was thriving business with great grown prospects that was ruined by the people who bought it.
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Anyway, I am a Mistake theorist among peers and a Conflict theorist where significant power imbalances exist, and I feel like this is such an obviously correct way to be that any other position baffles me.
It's rather as if I were asked whether people losing a lot of wealth in a transaction is a function of them making poor financial decisions, or them being robbed. In situations where they have a lot of control over their wealth, I assume the former. In situations where they don't have control over their wealth, I assume the latter. If someone says to me "no, never mind how much control over their wealth they have, just which do you think more likely?" I stare at them bewildered.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)