So there was no motion for at one point 8 seconds (OK maybe) and at another point over 40 seconds while she was out there, (less believable)
Funny Events of the "Woke" world
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
He wasn't "reliant" on a very specific timeframe for any important reason. When she didn't give a specific time, he immediately leapt into recrimination and hostility, without any simple inquiry; and his only given reason was that he /might/ want to do something.
We hear him throw out a bunch of unimportant recreational stuff that he /might/ want to do, without any pre-existing plans. If you want to speculate that he had solid plans that she would be messing up... then that's just speculation. And he could have just said that, rather than leaping straight into belittlement and aggression.
Yeah, how dare she not schedule when she leaves the house hours in advance!!
Jesus Christ, its as if you have no understanding of how normal, empathetic people might talk to eachother.
When harsh words are flying, reiterating that you love the other person is a common approach to try to build common ground and de-escalate. It's depressing and bizarre that you're seemingly unaware of that, and can apparently only conceive of it as a manipulation. That says a lot about how you view people.
Straightforward reductionism.
...for the bunch of recreational activities he pulled out of his ass specifically to stop her going anywhere
Except you didn't say that. You rewrote it as an insane, unrecognisable scenario in which no word the wife says can be trusted, she's a "sociopath" who would only say she loved him to manipulate him-- and meanwhile he's essentially off the hook for the gross hostility and denigration.
We don't know the dynamic outside this video.
The bit with the car sure sounds like excessively controlling behavior, because the reason seems weird as many have pointed out. Otherwise, considering "red flags" and such, apart from obvious signs of two people talking completely past each other we have to remember this is a dude who hosts debates called Change My Mind in which he's not actually going to change his mind. I've "eavesdropped" on couples' arguments on some occasions and sometimes they end like Steven here tries to two times: give a solution and declare it done. He must think of himself as a smart debater and so on, but if that comes out to his wife as manipulation and condescension then maybe he should try becoming less narcissistic in the next marriage.
edit. Imagine Mrs. Crowder got the gloves and then the Uber. Steven would've been proud of himself: solved two mundane problems so that he and his wife can carry on with the day.
No, we don't. But irrespective of the wider dynamics, what Crowder is displaying there is the classic sort of behaviour an emotionally abusive partner displays. If he does that routinely, I would call it an abusive relationship.
I'm not sure what you mean about talking past each other, as they're on the same topic: she wants to leave the house in the car and he doesn't want her to. It is, as they themselves say, an "impasse". Nor do I really get what you're talking about with the show, as it seems meaningless: if he's not willing to debate, he's just making demands. Of course, if his primary tactic is simply to belittle his opponent in the hope they give up, that's not debate either, it's just abuse.
Well, duh. Everybody knows that the goal of all women is to cut off our balls and make us carry their purses when they go shopping, because Eve got us kicked out of Eden.
Apparently he thought this made him a treasure.
She doesn't want Steven to tell her how to do things despite describing mundane problems that are rather easily solved. Maybe she wants to discuss something else or try to reach out to her husband or something. Steven is having none of that and to me it looks like he tries to make things clear about the chores they've discussed (in his non-compromising way, but still). Basically Steven thinks the Mrs. is just complaining over nothing while she seems to be more concerned about Steven trying to control her for apparently no reason. A situation like this is burdened by all the previous fights they must've had.
Of course not. He's a professional debater, and so she must know that it's a waste of time.
Last edited:
My grandfather is an old man, he actually lived in the vaunted time that Conservatives weirdly wish to go back to with all the social regression it implies. And if he’d caught me talking to my wife like that when she was eight months pregnant, he’d have kicked my teeth out through my arsehole. And my mother - who smoked like a chimney - would probably have removed my heart with a spoon had I been observed smoking a cigar within a mile of my pregnant wife.
I mean I get that couples argue but this really has the stench of a control freak about it, like seriously.
I mean I get that couples argue but this really has the stench of a control freak about it, like seriously.
He is no debater. When he is approached by an actually debater, he will run away screaming 'what a nightmare.'
I don't know why being a debater has relevance
I would note how he talks about relationships all the time on his podcast. Because what he says to his listeners is exactly what he says to his ex-wife.
She probably did when she wasn't pregnant because her doctor would have advised her against such a thing.
Do you really not see the difference between acknowledging pregnant women as human beings and making them do something that could be dangerous to them or the children they're carrying? Are you this obtuse?
Yeah, he's a moron. No one is denying that. It still doesn't make his ex a controlling sociopath.
What evidence? That she asked to use the car and said "I love you"? Any lawyer who used this argument in court would have been laughed out of the room by all involved.
You might want to educate yourself on the nuances of an abuse victim's behavior.
Then why was he complaining about not going to see his parents or go to the gym?
If I were to be charitable, I would say the sociopath you lived with did quite a number on you because your inability to recognize actual controlling behavior is almost coemedic.
Because he can spin around some debate tactics to make most unprepared people if not unable to respond then bemused at least. I bet Steven has done it a million times before and she is sick of it.
That's what I mean when I say there is no communication. If Steven wasn't a narcissist, because honestly that's a pretty safe bet, these issues would be solvable in marriage counselling or couples therapy. But that guy will never admit he's wrong. He'll never... change his mind.
Funny how you removed the part where they did the complete same procedure and still came up with the same results...
The articles written by doctors are literally called "The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real" and "Dunning-Kruger Isn't Real" but no, they said nothing like that at all...
You just literally won't accept anything that goes against your predetermined beliefs.
They didn't. The procedure involved self-evaluation. Random numbers cannot self-evaluate.
This is why we don't just find individual articles by doctors that confirm things we already want to believe, but rather look at consensus.
You can find articles by doctors for and against every recognised psychological phenomenon.
In Dr. Nuhfer’s own papers, which used both computer-generated data and results from actual people undergoing a science literacy test
You and your scientific consensuses that are hardly what you think them to be... Psychologists are not mathematicians (who as linked below are the ones finding all the errors in the original study) don't forget. And, Dunning-Kruger is not some linchpin type theory vital to tons of other theories, no one really cares that much about it. What happened to all those covid consensuses that proved to be wrong...?
The Dunning-Kruger Effect is Autocorrelation – Economics from the Top Down
Do unskilled people actually underestimate their incompetence?
economicsfromthetopdown.com
Yes, but it's the comparison between computer generated data and human data that you have based your claim around.
Computer generated data which categorically cannot be put through the same process.
You wouldn't know a scientific consensus if it slapped you in the face with a wet fish.
It's still the same fucking study. I provided the paper showing how they did basic math wrong.
And how many times are these "scientific consensus" wrong? A helluva fucking lot. Also, your scientific consensuses only seem to include experts that agree with your opinion vs like, you know, all the experts in the world.
Thing is, you won't get the same results. Why don't we just random number the vaccine studies? You ain't gonna get the same results.
Someone being a professional debater is neither here nor there. Hardly anyone comes home and does their day job with their spouse.
As you yourself note, he's basically a prick. This is him being a prick in a domestic situation. The way he "debates" in his day job derives from him being a prick.
No. The core of the argument is simply that she wants to leave the house and he doesn't want her to.