@Botond173's banner p

Botond173


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 06:37:06 UTC

				

User ID: 473

Botond173


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 06:37:06 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 473

how Darwin and Margaret Sanger were racists

I'd look at those separately as they're just lame-ass attempts at the DR3 narrative.

They of course are spinning it as the eventual chickens coming home to roost from having men that do zero child rearing and housework and also having the women work outside the home too (which is what they wanted!).

Yes, it's what they wanted, but without social dislocation and other unintended consequences (heh). That is, I'm sure what feminist women generally assumed back in 1970 or so was that men will be OK with picking up the slack when their wives and girlfriends start abandoning their restrictive gender norms i.e. men will be willing to make dinner, look after the kids, go on parental leave etc. and women will like it.

(If you really want a laugh, turn this technique back on them. Next time you see some twentysomething university student reeking of weed wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt, point out to him that the man in question once asserted “The negro is indolent and lazy, and spends his money on frivolities”.)

It's not only that. It's much more telling that, in fact, every single political endeavor Guevara engaged in on his own initiative was an utter failure with idiotic planning: 1. his ministerial role in Cuba 2. the war in the Congo 3. the war in Bolivia. It's almost comical when you really think about it. Among all the prominent political figures of the 20th Century, he was the biggest loser. Mussolini and Hitler don't even compare.

It's just the same old shit. They get their "information" about the West from clickbait trash sites, and conclude that Western men are different, when, in fact, men are just men everywhere, and women are just women everywhere. Also, women want fried ice.

I'm in fact not American.

Plenty of married couples rent?

I'm sure they do, generally as long as they're still childless. Once they're not, I'm not sure most people see that as a viable option.

There's a graph that circulates on Twitter frequently about how Western youth are supposedly polarizing sharply away from each other, with women becoming more left-wing and men becoming more right-wing, and if you actually look at the graph it just shows men becoming mildly more conservative, a change that is barely perceptible, while women are stampeding to the left.

South Korea is an exemption though, as far as I can tell.

Okay, but how bad is it really?

Surely bad enough to result in probably the lowest fertility rate anywhere in written history. So yes, pretty bad, I think.

Apparently such time-wasting is also the norm among Chinese wives.

To emphasize the point, men in their cohort who enter the workforce had their mandatory military service counted as work experience and so enter at a higher pay level.

Well, there's a rather self-evident political option to remedy this.

Buying a house is a precondition to marrying under Korean social norms.

Is there any society where owning a house/apartment is not generally considered necessary before marriage?

You can't write this and then not give us anything!

Check the quotes in the original comment, I suggest.

I'd say the decisive factor was the armistice in 1953, and the Americans not leaving. The war was never terminated in a clear manner, and was instead transformed into the mess that persists to this day, with the DMZ and so on. Had the North Koreans been capable enough to successfully and swiftly reunify the country through force, as it happened in Vietnam, Korea today would be a more or less normally functioning, average Asian nation, as Vietnam is. This'd be preferable to the current situation. One consequence of American military presence was the widening exposure of the populace to American cultural concepts, such as radical feminism. Also, there wouldn't be any Sarah Jeongs in the US.

Another factor was the assassination of President Park Chung Hee in 1979, which the Americans probably had some role in by either abetting it or supporting it. If there was one South Korean leader after 1953 who had both the willingness and ability to turn the country into a more or less normally functioning Asian nation without the current social dystopia of implemented cyberpunk, it was definitely him. If given 5 or 10 more years, it might have worked. But it was not to be, and he was replaced by a stooge of Washington.

Russia is actively taking refugees from the middle east and elsewhere and shipping them to the Finnish border where they are provided with bicycles and told to cross.

How is that, in effect, different from what Serbian, Macedonian and Turkish authorities were doing in 2015?

Given all the political realities at play, even an Ukrainian military collapse would not be likely to result in anything more than the loss of territorries East of the Dnieper.

The common narrative on all NAFO-adjacent and NAFO-sympathizing mainstream news outlets was that the Russians will not be able to replace their losses in armor, will run out of cruise missiles, their fortified positions will be pounded into dust because they're a paper bear, they're so dumb that they thought they can overrun Ukraine in 3 days with fewer than 200 thousand soldiers etc.

They never even reached the vicinity of Odessa. This cannot be taken seriously.

I don't fully understand why Russians are so obsessed with this particular city

Because of the legacy of Catherine the Great. We've discussed this on this forum before.

The Moral Majority indeed got a lot of attention. On the surface it could indeed appear that the Christian Right is influential. But the social reality was that the abortion rate, the rate of adolescent sex and alcohol consumption, violence, and teenage pregnancy were all peaking in the late '80s and early '90s. It was also the time when the distribution of porn in VHS format was becoming normal in the first place.

It's hardly realistic to assume that any Russian offensive in the future will even reach the Moldovan border.

I know what I've seen and heard. They claimed with absolute certainty that Ukraine will win decisively in a relatively short time.

The distance between Kherson and the Moldovan-Ukrainian border is more than 300 km though. A very likely target that is not.

Somehow invading Moldova from a separatist region which is geographically akin to a leather belt in appearance, is landlocked, and bordered by Ukraine on the other side would be the mother of all pro-gamer moves, I guess.

Who is denying Ukrainian asylum applications now in the West?

Currently nobody, I suppose, but I imagine the Ukrainian government is eager to force their hand.

Their armed forces in their entirety are bigger. The forces they can realistically deploy in the Ukraine aren't.

Yeah...lol. The current narrative, as far as I can tell, is that the next target of the orcs is Moldova of all places, because reasons.

Ukraine should institute an immediate draft where women who are not pregnant or rearing children are drafted into the frontlines

Or, if not to the frontlines, at least to auxiliary service or work in the defense industry. (Which is basically how single, childless British women were drafted during WW2.)