I also googled it, and it sure looks like she's incorrectly repeating some random poster's comment from 2017 from some forum. I suspect she was scanning down the thread past all the other definitions of short approach until she got to "ATC chief told me one time", and that one short reference to an authority figure immediately cemented the following statement in the post as the official definition going forward for her. Whole argument gave me the vibes breadtube internet debate tactics, but she somehow managed to prop up her "I'm an expert" facade with something less credible than the opening paragraph of a wikipedia article.
The youtube video has a few comments from people who have had to deal with this chick flying into that specific airport too, general consensus being that she's an obnoxious Karen no one wants to deal with(not that it wasn't already obvious from the clip).
it's fascinating when you think about this. women are observedly and objectively more social creatures than men.
If you look at hobbies for instance, hobby spaces that are dominated by men tend to be about the activity itself, and groups around that hobby are formed for the purpose of having other people to share that hobby with, therefore having more ways to participate in the hobby. however, when the hobby space is dominated by women, it tends to be more about talking about the hobby and wearing the hobby as some sort of fashion statement so as to signal that you want to talk to other people about this hobby. female groups around a hobby tend to be about the group itself getting together and sharing stories, with the hobby being an excuse to get together.
applying this to the intellectual space, it's easy to see how men would be more interested in observed facts, whereas women would be more interested in consensus around said facts.
Men can also have hobbies all on their own, indefinitely.
Like, there are people right now who play video games or sit in a shop by themselves, doing what they love, and have been doing it alone for decades. Some of them don't even share that they are doing it or the finished product, as the time spent is the goal itself.
In addition to concensus, women also overly rely on authority figures to derive their information. It's one of the reasons feminism has been so destructive. It's separated women from their men, and propped up government and other corrupt entities as authority figures, who lie and manipulate, especially with appeals to authority, popularity, and emotion, which easily sways women. Google is viewed as an authority figure over a veteran in his field by normies.
Oh boy, storytime. I have had a normie buddy ask me to double-check engineering figures he did for a roof. He's not an engineer. His numbers were wrong, very wrong. I told him so. "Well, I have done months of research on this subject, and you haven't done this in a while..."
I've dealt with the same issue. I see it as a multi pronged issue.
Firstly, and most dangerously nowadays, is that most normies are propagandized. Convincing them they've been lied to is almost impossible to break, unless they feel immediate and sharp pain (in some way) because of the lies they've been fed.
Secondly, is that people, regardless of background, education, status, etc., are quick to justify their own actions, words, arguments, and beliefs, no matter how wrong they may be, so they don't have to accept responsibility for being wrong and admitting they have to change. People are very similar to simple physics equations when it comes to changing (a body at rest tends to stay at rest kind of thing), where comfortable people are loathe to change or accept alternative viewpoints unless the falsehoods and lies they believe cause themselves pain. The sharper the pain the more likely they'll change.
However, some people can be so hardheaded/dense/propagandized that they're perfectly willing to walk right off a cliff even if you shout at them the danger. Even truly evil people will justify everything they do. Unfortunately, the success of Western civilization has enabled this problem to get worse, from both aspects. It's enabled evil people to infiltrate our institutions and pump out endless propaganda, and it's enabled comfort among the populace (which is rapidly disappearing). It's like the stages of civilization meme: good times create weak people. It's the paradox of success. When times are hard, nature has more sway, allowing it to more easily weed out stupid people and stupid behavior. People work hard to overcome the challenges of those hard times, erecting barriers between ourselves and the dangers of nature. These barriers make life safer and easier, weakening the people over time, making them comfortable, and infringing upon nature's ability to weed out stupidity.
I also googled it, and it sure looks like she's incorrectly repeating some random poster's comment from 2017 from some forum. I suspect she was scanning down the thread past all the other definitions of short approach until she got to "ATC chief told me one time", and that one short reference to an authority figure immediately cemented the following statement in the post as the official definition going forward for her. Whole argument gave me the vibes breadtube internet debate tactics, but she somehow managed to prop up her "I'm an expert" facade with something less credible than the opening paragraph of a wikipedia article.
The youtube video has a few comments from people who have had to deal with this chick flying into that specific airport too, general consensus being that she's an obnoxious Karen no one wants to deal with(not that it wasn't already obvious from the clip).
Women are ruled by consensus
it's fascinating when you think about this. women are observedly and objectively more social creatures than men.
If you look at hobbies for instance, hobby spaces that are dominated by men tend to be about the activity itself, and groups around that hobby are formed for the purpose of having other people to share that hobby with, therefore having more ways to participate in the hobby. however, when the hobby space is dominated by women, it tends to be more about talking about the hobby and wearing the hobby as some sort of fashion statement so as to signal that you want to talk to other people about this hobby. female groups around a hobby tend to be about the group itself getting together and sharing stories, with the hobby being an excuse to get together.
applying this to the intellectual space, it's easy to see how men would be more interested in observed facts, whereas women would be more interested in consensus around said facts.
It's all natural from God. If we didn't deny these things of ourselves things would be much better.
Yes they work together well when everyone acknowledges the difference and goes their separate ways on this type of stuff.
Men can also have hobbies all on their own, indefinitely.
Like, there are people right now who play video games or sit in a shop by themselves, doing what they love, and have been doing it alone for decades. Some of them don't even share that they are doing it or the finished product, as the time spent is the goal itself.
Most women I know would find this sad.
In addition to concensus, women also overly rely on authority figures to derive their information. It's one of the reasons feminism has been so destructive. It's separated women from their men, and propped up government and other corrupt entities as authority figures, who lie and manipulate, especially with appeals to authority, popularity, and emotion, which easily sways women. Google is viewed as an authority figure over a veteran in his field by normies.
Exactly, it's insane how badly we are fucked from just destroying the idea that men and women are different and act differently
Oh boy, storytime. I have had a normie buddy ask me to double-check engineering figures he did for a roof. He's not an engineer. His numbers were wrong, very wrong. I told him so. "Well, I have done months of research on this subject, and you haven't done this in a while..."
I've dealt with the same issue. I see it as a multi pronged issue.
Firstly, and most dangerously nowadays, is that most normies are propagandized. Convincing them they've been lied to is almost impossible to break, unless they feel immediate and sharp pain (in some way) because of the lies they've been fed.
Secondly, is that people, regardless of background, education, status, etc., are quick to justify their own actions, words, arguments, and beliefs, no matter how wrong they may be, so they don't have to accept responsibility for being wrong and admitting they have to change. People are very similar to simple physics equations when it comes to changing (a body at rest tends to stay at rest kind of thing), where comfortable people are loathe to change or accept alternative viewpoints unless the falsehoods and lies they believe cause themselves pain. The sharper the pain the more likely they'll change.
However, some people can be so hardheaded/dense/propagandized that they're perfectly willing to walk right off a cliff even if you shout at them the danger. Even truly evil people will justify everything they do. Unfortunately, the success of Western civilization has enabled this problem to get worse, from both aspects. It's enabled evil people to infiltrate our institutions and pump out endless propaganda, and it's enabled comfort among the populace (which is rapidly disappearing). It's like the stages of civilization meme: good times create weak people. It's the paradox of success. When times are hard, nature has more sway, allowing it to more easily weed out stupid people and stupid behavior. People work hard to overcome the challenges of those hard times, erecting barriers between ourselves and the dangers of nature. These barriers make life safer and easier, weakening the people over time, making them comfortable, and infringing upon nature's ability to weed out stupidity.