A men only club?

[HRM Resident]

https://www.mensshedscanada.ca/

If this isn’t a joke site, how can such an organization
exist?

--
HRM Resident

[James Warren]

On 2024-01-21 6:48 a.m., HRM Resident wrote:
> https://www.mensshedscanada.ca/
>
> If this isn’t a joke site, how can such an organization
> exist?
>

Why not? There are INCEL groups.

[HRM Resident]

No, Mens Sheds is not an incel group. Mens Sheds
are community-based organizations that provide a
space for men, typically older men, to come together,
socialize, and engage in various activities such as
woodworking, metalworking, and other hobbies. It
is important not to make unfounded assumptions.

My question was how can it exclude women and
not be in violation of the Constitution (Charter of Rights
and Freedoms?) It may be a right leaning hate group,
for all I know, like the Proud Boys. But jumping to a
weird conclusion like you did is, well, weird!

--
HRM Resident

[lucr...@florence.it]

On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 10:48:43 -0000 (UTC), HRM Resident
<hrm...@gmail.com> wrote:

>https://www.mensshedscanada.ca/
>
> If this isn’t a joke site, how can such an organization
>exist?

I think somebody made the organisation so old men can go to it and
leave their wives/women back home for a few hours of peace :)

Joking aside I see Germany is protesting the far right groups starting
up in their country, shades of the 1920/30s.

[HRM Resident]

lucr...@florence.it writes:
>
> I think somebody made the organisation so old men can go to it and
> leave their wives/women back home for a few hours of peace :)

I saw the website on a UK TV channel this AM and looked it up on the
Internet. It was described as you say . . . and they said a number of
"Western" countries had branches, including Canada. That lead me to the
web-site I posted. It seems to be mostly Alberta based, although there's
one "chapter" in Nova Scotia in Kentville. I never heard of them
before.

I seem to recall there was "Men Only" club in Dartmouth. In the
late 1980s or early 1990s a female lawyer tried to join, was denied
because of gender, and took it to court. She won and then went to a
few meetings. Whatever it was, she lost interest, but wanted to make
the point you can't say an organization is "Men (or Women) Only." This
Men's Sheds outfit seems to imply no women, and that's why I wondered
if it would stand up in court.

>
> Joking aside I see Germany is protesting the far right groups starting
> up in their country, shades of the 1920/30s.

Populism and nationalism, borfering on facisism, is growing
worldwide. Donald Trump is not the real problem in the USA, for
example. It's the fact that he has a huge group of people who think
like he does. Were he to die tomorrow, another like-minded person would
take his place and likely win. It's happening in Canada to a lesser
degree. This sort of trend preceded both world wars. My hope is that
it will fade away, but historically a terrible event like a huge war is
needed to teach the new generations the consequences of ultra-right
thinking.

WW I = 20 million dead
WW II = 60 million dead
WW III = ???

--
HRM Resident

[James Warren]

What conclusion did I jump to. I merely said that all men groups are
possible and INCEL is a example of one.

Whether it is legal or not is an interesting question. I suspect it
probably is.

[HRM Resident]

On 2024-01-21 11:54 a.m., James Warren wrote:
>
> What conclusion did I jump to.

"Why not? They are INCEL groups."
That sounds like a conclusion. "They are" <> " "Maybe they are" or
"I think they might be." It's an assertion of fact with no evidence.

> I merely said that all men groups are possible and INCEL is a example
of one.

No you did not. See above. BTW, INCEL is not a noun. It is an
adjective to describe many things, often used to describe priests, boy
scout leaders, orphanage managers, etc. What you are doing is like
saying words like "fast" and "slow" are things. They are not. There are
fast and slow cars. Who says stuff like "There goes a fast?" Or, in
your world, "There goes an INCEL." You are making no sense.

>
> Whether it is legal or not is an interesting question. I suspect it
probably is.

Excluding people based on gender is legal in Canada?

--
HRM Resident

[axemen99]

On 1/21/2024 5:48 AM, HRM Resident wrote:
> https://www.mensshedscanada.ca/
>
> If this isn’t a joke site, how can such an organization
> exist?
>

Just came across this joke for old man,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTSddOEY9Rg

[James Warren]

> C

You're right. I meant to type "there are", not "they are".

INCEL means INvoluntarily CELibate. So INCEL groups are a thing.

[lucr...@florence.it]

On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 11:47:36 -0500, axemen99 <axem...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Lol you got them both with that one Axe!

[HRM Resident]

James Warren <jwwar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You're right. I meant to type "there are", not "they are".
>
> INCEL means INvoluntarily CELibate. So INCEL groups are a thing.
>

I know what INCEL stands for. What I meant was it is
wrong to label a group neither of us heard of before today
as an INCEL organization. If you made a typo implying that
Mens Sheds are an INCEL group, it is noted and it is
corrected.

I did a bit of digging on their website and I found there
are many chapters in Alberta. As you know, Alberta is the
heartland of White Supremacy, WASPs, and alt right
activists in Canada. I think it is fair to say there might be
a correlation between Mens Sheds and Alberta style
conservatism given the disproportionate number of them
in that province.

However I can not find anything negative about this
organization online. It might be what they say it is. A
collection of real and virtual man caves for old men. If
that is what it is, we should join. Why not give it a shot
and let me know how you make out? :-)

--
HRM Resident

[Mike Spencer]

HRM Resident <hrm...@gmail.com> writes:

> https://www.mensshedscanada.ca/
>
> If this isn't a joke site, how can such an organization
> exist?

My shed, circa 1975.

See also: uk.rec.sheds

--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

[Mike Spencer]

HRM Resident <hrm...@gmail.com> writes:

> https://www.mensshedscanada.ca/
>
> If this isn't a joke site, how can such an organization
> exist?

My shed, circa 1975.

http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/temp/shed.html

See also: uk.rec.sheds

(Sorry; omitted URL from first post.

[Mike Spencer]

HRM Resident <hrm...@gmail.com> writes:

> My question was how can it exclude women and
> not be in violation of the Constitution (Charter of Rights
> and Freedoms?)

I spent two years at a college with, among ca. 1800 students, two
blacks and zero Jews. It was, of course, investigated by a Jewish
group whose report allegedly said, "No self-respecting Jew would ever
go here."

I think there is a notion, not 100% correct, that women would not want
to engage in the Shed experience. See uk.rec.sheds

[lucr...@florence.it]

On 22 Jan 2024 13:48:35 -0400, Mike Spencer

Seeing what a 'shed' seems to mean to you, no women just do the same a
different way. Embroidery/Knitting Guilds or just get togethers, I
don't think I have ever heard of a female Incel group. I saw one of
the Arguebots gave an interpretation of Incel and I am still wondering
if that was a joke or fact :)

[James Warren]

An article on incels.

https://counterhate.com/blog/what-is-an-incel-inceldom/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAwbitBhDIARIsABfFYIIRpnlcGnhf_VhvQN2f2nM50mpTOdeZHCKG_XhoACvyhGvcddv-oWMaAppNEALw_wcB

[lucr...@florence.it]

OMG I never bothered to look them up - it's hard to credit such an
attitude :( Were their parents at fault when they were kids always
making excuses for them and telling them they were wonderful?

[HRM Resident]

Mike Spencer <m...@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> writes:
>
> My shed, circa 1975.
>
> http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/temp/shed.html

A young looking Mike, and and older looking shed!
>
> See also: uk.rec.sheds
>
I didn't read every post, but I did scroll through approximately
the last 200 or so. There is a remarkable lack of trolling, politics,
and religion. A slight bit, but very little, And quite a bit of posting
of interesting topics. It makes one wonder why this group (that was like
that ~1998-2003) degraded into what it is now. No wonder almost
everyone left. What happened here that didn't happen in uk.rec.sheds?

--
HRM Resident

[HRM Resident]

lucr...@florence.it writes:
>
> OMG I never bothered to look them up - it's hard to credit such an
> attitude :( Were their parents at fault when they were kids always
> making excuses for them and telling them they were wonderful?

INCELs exist, and frequent groupd where older people, mostly men,
hang out. I wouldn't blindly accuse every group of old men of being
full of INCELs without evidence.

Regarding men or women only 'groups' or 'clubs,' I tend to agree
with LB and Mike. While the Charter of Rights and Freedoms would make
them illegal if they actively barred people of the opposite gender,
there are male and female activities. Most women won't join a group
that discusses welding, fixing car engines, or the like. Most men
wouldn't join a club for knitting, crocheting, etc. Hence these outfits
are likely self-regulating.

--
HRM Resident

[lucr...@florence.it]

On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 10:35:53 -0400, HRM Resident <hrm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I must not forget to say that the best knitter at our Guild is in fact
a man! He has also invented his own patterns for things like double
reversible toques etc. I used to collect the knitted goods people
wanted to donate and deliver them all in the fall to relative places.

I grew disenchanted when I went to that cottage downtown to give them
a whole lot of scarves, toques, gloves, mittens, socks, everything
wonderful and warm for people living outside. 4 green garbage bags
filled with stuff donated. The man at the desk heaved a sigh and
said, 'Oh put that stuff over there' After that I started taking it
to Souls Harbour and they were totally the opposite and thanked the
Guild for the generosity. They've had all donations since :) He was
so effusive about 'you ladies who knit' I told him the best knitter
was male!!

[Mike Spencer]

HRM Resident <hrm...@gmail.com> writes:

> Mike Spencer <m...@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> writes:
>
>> See also: uk.rec.sheds
>
> I didn't read every post, but I did scroll through approximately
> the last 200 or so. There is a remarkable lack of trolling, politics,
> and religion. A slight bit, but very little, And quite a bit of posting
> of interesting topics.

Just so.

> It makes one wonder why this group (that was like
> that ~1998-2003) degraded into what it is now. No wonder almost
> everyone left. What happened here that didn't happen in uk.rec.sheds?

It had a decline over recent years, with a slight reversing uptick in
the last year or so with some old regulars returning after a prolonged
absence. There's a distinct tilt toward setuagenarians and
octagenarians.

[HRM Resident]

Mike Spencer <m...@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
> It had a decline over recent years, with a slight reversing
> uptick in the last year or so with some old regulars
> returning after a prolonged absence. There's a distinct
> tilt toward setuagenarians and octagenarians.
>

We have all septuagenarians and octogenarians here.
I am in my 70th year and I think I am the kid of the group.

I suspect it is a carryover from the old British civility
combined with their adherence to not feeding the trolls.
We could not stop arguing from about 2003-2005
onward. Had everyone ignored Al Smith, the two MHs,
eschewed most politics and religious opinions, this
might have survived. But we did not, and I am as guilty
as anyone.

Remember when you could ask if anyone knew where
to find things like an 8-inch stainless steel bolt in HRM
and get a sensible answer? Now the response will be
the PM has them all stuck up his ass, PeePee gave them
to Trump, or ask the pope, you f***ing d**khead.

--
HRM Resident

[Mike Spencer]

HRM Resident <hrm...@gmail.com> writes:

> Remember when you could ask if anyone knew where
> to find things like an 8-inch stainless steel bolt in HRM
> and get a sensible answer? Now the response will be
> the PM has them all stuck up his ass, PeePee gave them
> to Trump, or ask the pope, you f***ing d**khead.

I forget many of the street names so this a little clumsy:

Get on the main drag below Burnside in Dartmouth, headed toward
downtown Dartmouth. When you've passed by most of Burnside on your
left, there's a fork in the road. The left fork takes you to bridge
access. The smaller, older right fork takes you along the water.

Take the right fork. Then watch for a short side-street on your left.
On such a street, fairly close to the above-mentioned fork, is a low
building where you can buy any bolt or bolt-like fastener you ever
heard of in quantities from one to a pallet-full. (Probably not
bolts/screws for watchmaker-scale instruments, optical devices
etc. but anything macro.)

If that fails:

Start again at the fork, headed in the same direction, but watch for
Wrights Cove Rd. on the right. Turn in to the right, follow onto
Greenbank Ct. At #30 Greenbank Ct., where there will be metalworking
evidence around the shop/garage, ask for Barbara the blacksmith &
sculptor and solicit her help in finding the sought-for bolt.




How'm I doing?

[HRM Resident]

Mike Spencer <m...@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
> How'm I doing?
>
Pretty darn good! That is the kind of answer we used to
get pre ~2024. Maybe not as detailed, but this was a
group of friendly people new to the Internet and not
tainted by social media and hidden agendas.

Around 1990 I lost a 48-foot steel tower anchored in a
5-foot cube of concrete. It jackknifed in a windstorm while
covered in ice. It was twisted a bit, but I got it apart and a
local welder fixed it. I needed a lot of 2-inch long 3/4 inch
galvanized bolts. I got them from that place in Dartmouth
you described in the first part of your message.

I am not sure how I found out about it. I recall it was
pretty much as you described. A zillion types of bolts,
screws, and every other kind of fastener known.

--
HRM Resident

[Mike Spencer]

HRM Resident <hrm...@gmail.com> writes:

> Mike Spencer <m...@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
>> How'm I doing?
>
> Pretty darn good!

Oohhh! Well, here's a bonus for you:

https://xkcd.com/2113/

[jvangurp]

Great idea! I love this!

[jvangurp]

On Sunday 21 January 2024 at 11:49:31 UTC-4, HRM Resident wrote:

> I seem to recall there was "Men Only" club in Dartmouth. In the
> late 1980s or early 1990s a female lawyer tried to join, was denied
> because of gender, and took it to court. She won and then went to a
> few meetings. Whatever it was, she lost interest, but wanted to make
> the point you can't say an organization is "Men (or Women) Only."

I believe it was the Owl's Club... https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/joanne-bernard-questioned-about-party-at-owl-s-club-1.2871902

[HRM Resident]

jvangurp <jvan...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> I believe it was the Owl's Club...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/joanne-bernard-questioned-about-party-at-owl-s-club-1.2871902

That sounds like it. I think that article was well after the legal
precedent was made, and women are probably allowed to join if they want.
The article implies none want to, and there are politics woven in.

I don't like 'clubs' and organizations in general. The 20/80 rule
gets me. 20% of the members do 80% of the work. They set the rules and
form cliques. Those who do not agree with them are branded lazy and
uncooperative. This is true for volunteer fire departments,
Lions/Lionesses, unions, and just about any other 'organization.'

I joined a Ham radio club circa 1985 and went to one (1) meeting.
80% of those there sat quietly and looked bored. The other 20% argued
and gout into a shouting match over 3-4 feet of missing cable from a
1000-foot roll. I never went back.

--
HRM Resident

[HRM Resident]

Mike Spencer <m...@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> writes:
>
> Oohhh! Well, here's a bonus for you:
>
> https://xkcd.com/2113/

I think the other 'Arguebot' is sulking. Too bad, as that pretty
much sums up the both of us! :-)

--
HRM Resident

[HRM Resident]

lucr...@florence.it writes:
>
> I must not forget to say that the best knitter at our Guild is in fact
> a man!

There will be exceptions, and this is a good example. However, I
doubt if the gender split in a knitting guild is 50/50. :-)

When I was 8-10, my mother taught me a bit of crocheting. Just as I
was getting the hang of it, my aunt bought be a BB gun. It was a lot
more fun that crocheting to shoot at birds . . . but I was a lousy shot
and never hit a single one! I did hit by cousin a few times with it
until he got one and started shooting back.

Before I was born, a couple of the teenagers in our village started
playing cowboy with .22 rifles. Apparently it was thought to be OK (I'm
guessing this was in the late 1940s.) However, one hit the other in the
ankle or foot. When I knew the 'victim,' he was a grown man and walked
with a slight limp from being shot. I don't think anyone involved the
authorities, but the ankle shot put an end to using real guns to play
with. I think this sort of thing is still OK in places like Texas.

--
HRM Resident

[James Warren]

I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.

Groucho Marx

[HRM Resident]

James Warren <jwwar...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.
>
> Groucho Marx

I would join a club if the members were just you and me, and if you
did 80-90% of the work.

--
HRM Resident

[James Warren]

That club would accept me as a member, so I would refuse to join.

[jvangurp]

On Thursday 25 January 2024 at 11:14:56 UTC-4, James Warren wrote:

> I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.
>
> Groucho Marx

Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck !

[HRM Resident]

James Warren <jwwar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That club would accept me as a member, so I
> would refuse to join.
>

Until you take action either to join the club or not,
your status is both a member and not a member. The
act of joining (or not joining) is akin to opening the
Schrodinger cat box, collapsing the superposition
into one definitive state.

--
HRM Resident

[James Warren]

So what is the random event that will precipitate a decision?

[HRM Resident]

James Warren <jwwar...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> So what is the random event that will precipitate a decision?
>

Two of the approximately 86 billion neurons in your brain have to
fire at exactly the same zeptosecond (zs), which is 10^-21 of a second.

When this happens, the box is opened, and the decision is made.

--
HRM Resident

[James Warren]

This is an argument, not for free will or determinism, but for
randomness in decision making. On second thought, the joint firing of
two neurons might be random but the consequences are determined, so it
might be an argument for determinism after all.

[HRM Resident]

James Warren <jwwar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is an argument, not for free will or determinism,
> but for randomness in decision making. On second
> thought, the joint firing of two neurons might be random
> but the consequences are determined, so it might be an
> argument for determinism after all.
>
>

You have presented a field of discussion that spans
several disciplines. It challenges me to think about
decision-making in the brain, not just in terms of binary
concepts like determinism and randomness, but as a
complex interplay of both, governed by principles I do
not fully understand.

--
HRM Resident

[James Warren]

But in no circumstance is there room for free will.

[Mike Spencer]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_cognition

[Mike Spencer]

James Warren <jwwar...@gmail.com> writes:

> On 2024-01-26 11:59 a.m., HRM Resident wrote:
>
>> James Warren <jwwar...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> So what is the random event that will precipitate a decision?
>>>
>> Two of the approximately 86 billion neurons in your brain have to
>> fire at exactly the same zeptosecond (zs), which is 10^-21 of a second.
>>
>> When this happens, the box is opened, and the decision is made.
>
>
> This is an argument, not for free will or determinism, but for
> randomness in decision making.

No, it's an argument for complexity. In a completely deterministic
complex system [1] the landscape representing the optima and minima
becomes "rugged" and optima smaller. Choices made logically tend to
be indistinguishable from random choices. Much of politics and
economics consists of trying (with typicaally hrrible results seen in
every day's headlines) to force complex realities into a Procrustean
bed of non-complexity, a system with a single optimum where choices
are unequivocally good or bad in outcomes -- "win/lose" or "put a
dollar value on it" in the cases of politics and economics.



[1] Kauffman's "n/p model"

[James Warren]

Didn't understand it, but my initial response is bunkum.

[James Warren]

Complexity and chaos are deterministic, just not predictable.