social "scientists" = people who believe their opinions are facts, i.e dangerous idiots.

I'm all for navel gazing. The problem is they feel that policy should be build on their shaky science and instead of using sound reasoning or proven results they use peer pressure and labeling to bully everyone into acquiescence. And it works (the pressure part, the policy part has created a race to the bottom)

This was surprisingly good! Harald Eia is a well known Norwegian comedian (which is why people appear to not want to speak to him, as they expect something else than seriousness) so i wasnt expecting this to be honest. But im glad i got past my initial expectations.
And it speaks volumes about how ideological the Norwegian "scientists" truly are. They dont realy give a shit about why humans are the way they are, they just want to create a society that fits their fake world view and then dismiss anything that doesnt fit that.
This definitely belongs here in /r/conspiracy as this attitude of "experts" if you will is quite prevalent in Norwegian society all the way to the top.

I always wonder what Freud would think about all of these social science experiments?

Weren't all his hypotheses disproved though?

All but a few. His work on the "human condition" is still talked about. Which would be very interesting to see why humans feel the need to falsify physical data to prove a thought.

Not exactly. It's just that he couched his theories in the purview of the Oedipal Complex, or, more appropriately, Oedipal Project; to be the cause of oneself.

His contemporaries, especially Otto Rank, and later pioneering psychologists saw Freud's folly. They later ascribed most of the phenomenon that Freud put forth as having their cause in the "death anxiety".

Edit: added words and fixed grammar

Weren't all his hypotheses disproved though?

Nah, nothing Freud ever suggested had a shred of evidence behind it. They were never "proven," and, in fact, they weren't even disprovable. Freud wasn't a scientist.

He just made up a bunch of crazy shit about fucking his mother while he was high on cocaine.

Considering what's going on in social sciences today, that doesn't downgrade his "legit" score.

Many of his theories, while based on individual case studies, and not hard science, still remain the foundation for many real psychological disorders today, i.e. OCPD (which he called anal retentive personality).

Just watched Part 1, this is really good stuff. Thanks for posting.

Oh yeah. One of my all time faves. Anyone notice Sascha ben Cohen's cousin at Oxford in there too? Smart guy, can't remember which Part he was in. Use this series for any dummies that are lured into the big "gender" fraud. We need think about what their (the "gender" people) agenda is. Remember all scams start with ostensibly feel-good terms like "equality" "rights" and "kindness" and so on, but their motives are nothing of it. But people are so dumb, so gullible, that they take everything at face value.

Fascinating. Thank you for this.

Watched two episodes. Very, very interesting. Thanks for posting.

Is there a reason that part 6 is password protected? Is there another link that is not?

From these videos it appears to me that Norway has a severe case of feminism.

Most Nordiques country are like this. Quebec is very much the same. It's got good side and bad. I certainly ain't not against equality. But let's keep common sense and facts dictate public policies.

His series would have been better if he wouldn't have gone back to that same guy every episode. The one that is wrong about everything with the earring.

I have a theory abput this, that sort of makes me sympatize with women It's the games children play. Games male kids play are more logical and involving yhan girls games. They also give males years of training in devekoping motor skills and coordination that girls don't get. The end result is that technical stuff are easier for boys to get their heads around, and also have built up motor skills to cope with demands of crafting and engeneering.

Girls are better at dressing for much the same reason.

edit: they kind of go into that in the documentary, I just reached that part.

in simple terms, boys play material games, girls play verbal games.

this all goes back to the hunter-gather part of human society, males did the building and hunting and guarding, girls made home and kept the social bonds in good working order.

one side aspect of safe home making verses dangerous hunting, HG societies tend to be matriarchal not patriarchal, not matter what the king or chief is, the females live the longest and pass on the power and stability.