(Part 3) Top products from r/MurderedByWords

https://www.amazon.com/When-Hes-Married-Mom-Mother-Enmeshed/dp/0743291387/

https://www.amazon.co.uk/When-Hes-Married-Mom-Mother-Enmeshed/dp/0743291387

"When a Woman Is in an Emotional Tug-of-War for Her Man's Heart Why can't he commit? Many women find themselves asking this question when in love with a man who won't get married, won't stop womanizing, or refuses to give up his sex addictions. Often this kind of man is bound by an unhealthy attachment to his mother. This phenomenon is called "mother-son enmeshment" In When He's Married to Mom, clinical psychologist and renowned intimacy expert Dr. Kenneth M. Adams goes beyond the stereotypes of momma's boys and meddling mothers to explain how mother-son enmeshment affects everyone: the mother, the son, and the woman who loves him. In his twenty-five years of practice, Dr. Adams has successfully treated hundreds of enmeshed men and shares their stories in this informative guide. He provides proven methods to make things better, including: - Guidelines to help women create fulfilling relationships with mother-enmeshed men - Tools to help mother-enmeshed men have healthy and successful dating experiences leading to serious relationships and marriage - Strategies to help parents avoid enmeshing their children When He's Married to Mom provides practical and compassionate advice to the women who are involved with mother-enmeshed men, to the mothers who wish to set them free, and to the men themselves."

Hey buddy, thx for the tip about dictionaries, I'm glad you know how to use them.
But to try to burst my bubble (and maybe learn something about the concepts of ethnicity and/or ethnic groups), you should check out some of these other small books first:


-https://books.google.pt/books/about/Ethnicity.html?id=jYsYJSDXflYC&redir_esc=y


-https://www.amazon.co.uk/Race-Ethnicity-Basics-Peter-Kivisto/dp/0415773741


-https://www.amazon.com/Ethnicity-Oxford-Readers-John-Hutchinson/dp/0192892746


-https://books.google.pt/books/about/The_Ethnicity_Reader.html?id=9yBQtExDppkC&redir_esc=y



To jumpstart, and I'm not even kidding, just try to read the introduction to "ethnic groups and boundaries", by Frederick Barth: the text is from 1969, and it's absolutely seminal on nowadays' understanding of ethnic group formation and, above all, ethnic group persistence in time. (link to pdf: http://www.bylany.com/kvetina/kvetina_etnoarcheologie/literatura_eseje/2_literatura.pdf)


If you wanna go further down this road, check "ethnicity without groups", by Rogers Brubaker: the best modern critical thinking around ethnicity and group formation, IMO. (link to pdf: https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/podzim2015/SOC587/um/Brubaker_Ethnicity_without_Groups.pdf)



Now, lets move on to the next part of your comment. I did love the end of it. The part where you assume I have a bachelor's degree (IF I even managed to graduate yet, ofc - 'cause I'm so dumb) is nice.

But the best part is that amazing scientific lesson you gave us all: "Since the beginning of life animals have had hunting grounds they fought for, later evolved to humans with specific racial, social traits with country borders."


Seriously, I am thinking about printing this and framing it.
Thx a bunch, bud. I should start making calls, because entire academic fields will disappear and universities will close down: you just solved social science AND evolutionary science in a single sentence!


Finally, I just want to clear this up for ya, buddy: I do not have any spanish comments, and the fact that you think that I'm mexican (and that what I wrote in my reddit's history is spanish) says a lot more about your ignorance than it says about me.


Cheers

I'm not sure where you got that. According to Harold Holzer (who literally wrote a book on the speech we're talking about):

A synopsis of the book by the Chicago Tribune:

>Finally, he rallied Republicans with a call to be true conservatives by holding firm to what he saw as the anti-slavery heritage of the American republic and standing strong against Southerners who were trying to expand human bondage. " 'Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it,' " he admonished Republicans.

Here's the book:

https://www.amazon.com/Lincoln-Cooper-Union-President-Schuster/dp/0743299647

As I understand the speech, Lincoln was seen as a radical. This speech was written to establish himself and his party as conservative, to demonstrate such so that he could be elected.

Now, I think what's confusing the issue is that the act was progressive, right? No doubt slavery was an established part of US culture at the time of the speech. But the TONE of the speech is conservative, and Lincoln is making a very good argument that the increase in slavery in the US was in fact the "progressive" movement, and that going back to the original intention of the country was the truly conservative path.

Now, you can cry foul and say that Lincoln overstepped, but there are some problems:

1. you're disagreeing with Lincoln, and he was a pretty damn smart dude
   
2. he was re-elected, so apparently his message rang true for people of the time, it's hard to say what connections they had to the constitution since some states were rebuking it at the time.
   
   even if you are ok with those points, Lincoln pulling one over by claiming to be conservative while making progressive moves, it doesn't change the fact that the republican party was a conservative party, led by a conservative identifying person.

The idea that the middle ages were "the dark ages" is a modern myth. The middle ages were a period of scientific and artistic progress, and their was no great revolution caused by the enlightenment. It was a continuation of midieval thought. The roots of modern science lie in the middle ages

​

Read Rodney Stark, James Hannam, or edward grant

​

There is a lot of scholarship about the progress of Europe during the middle ages, so this wikipedia article is a nice summary of why it's a misleading conception of the era

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography)

https://www.amazon.com/Reason-Middle-Ages-Edward-Grant/dp/0521003377

yeah, he had numerous collections of reviews, i would read page after page, not focusing on a particular movie. I worked at a video store so had lots of time to read
these are two that i remember:

home companion

https://www.amazon.com/Roger-Eberts-Book-Film-Tarantino/dp/0393040003/ref=sr_1_90?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1537107121&sr=1-90&refinements=p_27%3ARoger+Ebert


he also turned me on to Pauline Kael.

Also i remember once he lost his voice, he started writing about more than films on his blog. I didnt read much i just remember that he had some really good essays that were not about films and i liked pretty much every point he had made (cant remember what they were about now)

Are you referring to when human development was at a standstill? Sure, caveman.

We didn’t start progressing until trade routes and the exchange of values, ideas and cultures became prevalent though.

https://www.amazon.com/Guns-Germs-Steel-Fates-Societies/dp/0393317552

"Destabilize" kind of implies doing things subtly tho.

When was the last time we even practiced that? It's been pretty direct since the Banana Republic days. We've six years to fix it, or else expect another 150 years of revolving door dictators in SA and the ME

[This was a good read] (https://www.amazon.com/Idiot-America-Stupidity-Became-Virtue/dp/0767926153)

This book is a fun read.




The author keeps a running kill count, it's great.

Check this recipe out

Credit to Zach Golden and his book

He's still really popular. Just because it is trendy to hate him on reddit and Twitter, it does not mean his popularity has waned.

His most recent book. It spent 48 weeks on the NYT best seller list.

But he's not popular, right?

I'm not aware of any documentaries but there was a book published based on the research: Affluence and Influence

Have you read this? Well written and thorough treatment of this subject -> https://www.amazon.com/American-Sphinx-Character-Thomas-Jefferson/dp/0679764410/ref=nodl_

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+to+be+antiracist&s=g


There's also a book.


https://www.amazon.com/How-Be-Antiracist-Ibram-Kendi/dp/0525509283/

Have you read Spoken Soul ? We read it in my linguistic anthropology course in college.

Is it just that you don't want to google it yourself because you're afraid of realizing that more than one person actually believes this shit?

https://www.amazon.ca/Mommy-Wars-Stay-at-Home-Choices-Families/dp/0812974484

https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/family-friendly/201204/will-there-ever-be-truce-in-the-mommy-wars?collection=101067

https://www.someecards.com/usercards/viewcard/sahmstay-at-home-mom-it-also-means-sick-of-asking-husband-for-money--03a10/

https://www.someecards.com/usercards/viewcard/sahms-say-they-have-a-hard-job-try-doing-it-in-half-the-time-plus-getting-dressed-and-brushing-your-teeth-and-hair-is-required-daily-d87b9/

Our numerals as symbols are related to Western Arabic numerals. [EDIT: Chrisomalis calls them 'Maghribi numerals'] The number system is Indian. There doesn't seem to really be a contradiction here.

Religion Poisons EVERYTHING.

https://www.amazon.com/God-Not-Great-Religion-Everything/dp/0446697966

> LOL. Wait, when was it published?
>
>
>
> December 14,1988



um... I don't know where you got that date, but it was published in 1946, not 1988

>"A magnificent job of theoretical exposition."

>—Ayn Rand

She's not wrong.

>So to clarify, you recommend two books, one of which is thirty years old

No. much older. The age of a book does not correspond to the quality of said book.

>another which is by man who died in 1937

Yes.

>was virulently racist even by the standards of his own time

True, but that doesn't mean his fiction is any less spectacular. Lots of people back then were racist. It doesn't mean that they can't also be good authors of good fiction. If you're worried that buying a book of his would be financially supporting a racist, he's been dead for 80 years, so you don't have to worry about that. He's not going to get any of the money you may spend on his fiction.

>Gollancz published a compendium of the Mythos and some of his other tales in 2008, called Necromicon : the Best Wierd Tales of HP Lovecraft

Yes, that's the one.

>but Lovecraft never published a book called The Necronomicon

If you want to get technical, Lovecraft never published a single book. He wrote mostly short stories and the longest story he wrote was a novella, not even a full novel, and most of his stuff was published in old pulp magazines.

>Certainly not an 1000+ page one.

Well, it's 900 pages so close enough.

Read “American Prison: A Reporter's Undercover Journey into the Business of Punishment” by Shane Bauer if you want the breathtakingly infuriating facts on the slavery to modern prison pipeline.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0735223602/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_c_api_i_s3qjDbQRR2T9J