@Grant_us_eyes's banner p

Grant_us_eyes


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 12 12:05:58 UTC

				

User ID: 1156

Grant_us_eyes


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 12 12:05:58 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1156

appease their loud contingents of leftist female employees

You would think so, but apparently not. It has little to do with female appeasement, and has far more to do with trans appeasement.

My experience with the DKE can basically be translated as 'I am knowledgeable and skilled at one thing, therefor, I am knowledgeable and skilled at everything.'

Often with lawyers.

I recall an article/blogpost from way back when about a woman doing exactly tit for tat, though if you ask me for specifics, I'm afraid it'll take a while for me to find it.

It did not work out the way she was expecting. Spoilers: The guys loved it.

The purpose of sports is to win. It is, at it's core, a competition. And the goal of competition is to be the victor.

There is no high-minded 'pushing the physical limitations' involved here. I assure you, the last thing you want is to have transhuman philosophy applied by people that, while not insane, are atleast slightly off kilter from the rest of humanity.

You have to be. Consider; These are the people that literally and metaphorically torture themselves just for... what, five minutes of glory? If that? You have the apex, the celebrities, yes, but that's some long odds to bet with chancy return on that investment.

And you don't find reasonable men at the top of mountains.

Sports and competition are the last places I'd be applying transhumanism.

To quote 'A man for all seasons', 'Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!'

I feel like doing a minor victory lap, gruesome as it is, as I was one of those whom viewed euthanasia permissible, but the last thing I want is to have state-sponsored euthanasia in place. (And, yes, before you ask, I've yet to square that hole as to allow for such a thing. The world isn't perfect, sadly.)

Every time I see this advocated or hearing for Op's scenario, I can't help but envision myself at 75 going in for a minor medical procedure only to have the working professional suggest I commit state-sponsored self-die. I'd rather just skip that entire possibly, thanks.

I'm someone who's both fairly frugal and has no issue purchasing clothing/items second hand with the plan to wear them until they fall apart. This, combined with being patient, means I've acquired some choice deals over time.

It's also lead to moments where I realize that I'm out and about for outdoor chores while wearing clothing(shirt, pants, shoes, watch) that, had I bought new, would be edging toward a thousand dollars. So... shrugs helplessly

The two crucified next to Jesus were thieves according to the Bible; do you have some other source of information on that?

Metatron did a video about the arrest of Christ, looking at the 'original' Greek text of the bible. Very interesting look on the matter, and going by the various gospels, it's heavily implied if not out-right stated that Jesus was crucified as an insurrectionist/rebel, alongside the other two.

The Romans can obviously want him dead for many reasons, one of which being that their handpicked puppets were whining about him.

This I would disagree on. My interpretation of the trial of Jesus by Pontius Pilate is very much a case where Pilate is having to deal with politically charged Pharisees hell-bent on seeing Jesus killed due to his teachings. Going by the Gospel, Jesus literally argued his case with Pilate so well that Pilate was begging the Pharisees to allow Pilate to declare Jesus guilty, so much so that he offered them up the choice between Jesus and a man accused of murder.

And we know who they picked.

Well, it was less 'settling' and more 'being forced to move there due to the British crown of the time trying to get rid of two problems at once'. The history of the Scots-Irish is certainly... colorful.

but the US Civil War did not fundamentally slow the trajectory of US economic or geopolitical rise.

The US Civil War occurred at the right point in history, around the time of the Industrial Revolution, to allow for this. While the South was economically devastated(and was so for at least a century afterwards), the Northern regions now had an entire breadbasket of cheap agricultural workhorses to harvest from without caring about the consequences.

Well, TIL. This is both startling and rather depressing, as 1) I'm somewhat certain that this is the first I've heard of this, and 2) I'm definately in the unpartnered category with little chance of that changing any time soon.

Atleast they try and give a reason as to why this all may be later in the article;

Researchers have considered why this relationship between partnership status and economic outcomes exists, particularly for men. Is it driven by the fact that men with higher levels of education, higher wages and better prospects for the future are more desirable potential spouses? Or is there something about marriage or partnership that gives a boost to a man’s economic outcomes? The research suggests that both factors are at play. Married men earn more because high earners are more likely to marry in the first place. Cohabiting men also receive a wage premium. In addition, marriage or partnership may make men more productive at work, thus adding to the wage premium that already exists.

None of which speak well of possible solutions, though. Christ.

You get to enjoy it after a while, then eventually you find you can't imagine yourself living without it.

Preaching to the choir, speaking for myself. Mind, it can be easy to fall off the bicycle for some people. There's a wide gulf between people who do this in their early twenties/thirties and the guys who are still doing this well into their twilight years.

Maybe I'm just biased, as I hang out with alot of older guys who are still fit and active.

testosterone

I'm hesitant to give chemistry all the credit, but that's due to my personal experience. I've gone from 'I hate PE' in high school to 'I need to do this for my own well-being' as I've gotten older. I feel there's a critical mindset there that's more prevalent(or becomes more prevalent) in men(which isn't common to begin with, imo) that's less prevalent in woman.

Electronically controlled sex toys are a thing.

I've seen the argument touted about for far longer than Hulu's version of the Handmaid's Tale, so. (And I won't go into a minor aside regarding Margaret Atwood, or the fact that said book was taking pages from what happened in Iran, or...)

I think it's a fairly silly take, myself.

Getting punched does not entitle you to shoot.

Uh, no, that's exactly the point when you should start shooting(if capable) or running away(if not).

Punching someone has too much potential for a lethal outcome to be anything but attempted murder/manslaughter, which is why most people experienced with fighting, when questioned what you should do in a fight, typically reply with some varient of 'Run the fuck away'.

Conversely, this is why any serious martial art instructor is going to advise you to never get into a fight, because if you're seriously fighting someone, you best options for dealing with them are all potentially lethal.

I would suggest 2016 was less the cause and more the 'masks off' moment.

Hanging around various fan forums in the early 2000s, one common thread I saw pop up time and time again was the typical 'Whatif' of 'What would you have done differently in the treatment of the South post civil-war' and the thread wouldn't even get past the first page before the notion of 'Kill them all' would get thrown out.

Ground-level liberal/progressives have had a common genocidal fantasy toward Southerners for a very long time, with very little if no pushback against it.

(I have 13B happily running on mine; it's... interesting)

You can't just casually drop that and expect someone not to beg for more information.

It's me. I'm begging for more information. Interesting howso?

Nick Fury

Nick Fury was cast by Samuel L Jackson due to a version of the Comic having the character be a blatant Samuel L Jackson expy.

Jackson then basically went 'I get to play him in any movies that happen and won't sue'.

And here you are.

The original character of Nick Fury was white, but when he was effectively 'recast' was before alot of the culture war blew up in a big way, so it was seen more of a 'huh, neat' among comic circles than an active purging of whites.

In the same way people rate disaster recovery based on whether the local waffle house is open or no, you could probably do similar based on how the local supermarket is structured.

I always do get a twisted sort of amusement seeing how the same store chain can have a radically different structure and layout based on the local socio-economics.

Ah. Good to know. Thank you for this.

It explains a lot, really.

Good god, it's been a while since I've cracked open my econ degree.

TLDR, M1 and M2 are basically how much free-flow, readily available cash is in the hands of the public(as opposed to Banks, the federal deposit, and other entities.)

Or, put another way, how much money do civilians and John Q Public have available at quick notice.

If it's been falling, well... that means they have less cash on-hand. Why that is could be due to... well, a long list of reasons.

Also, that redefinition of m1 annoys me to a horrendous degree for some odd reason.

Which is a third-party prosumer item that not everyone has.

That's the point. You shouldn't need a third-party item to understand where the fuck-up is. Even if it's a hidden option in the background, cars come natively with enough computers that you should be able to pull up an error-code read-out without spending additional money.

Instead, we get new cars and trucks with 18 different cameras built in so the software can construct a to-down view when backing up and then wonder why everything is so expensive nowadays.

Typical-minded fallacy is the one fallacy I've noted with alot of Motte posters.

Hint: If you're posting on the Motte, you're very likely nowhere near mediocre.

(I'm exempting myself from this, I will point out. If we plotted every poster out on a bell curve measuring various factors, I'd definitely end up in the shallows, and not on the far end thereof.)

I think I've lost count regarding the number of posters who've made commentary over the years about their dating experiences, only to end with the commentary of 'It's not so hard!' All the while seemingly glossing over their blatant advantages as if they somehow don't count, to the point where I wonder if I'm being gaslit or they're so privileged that they've never stopped to think why their dating experience was so painless.

It's gotten just a little bit tiresome. But hey, that's life...

he's going to act like the Harkonnens

I mean... if you've read the books, there's a very good reason for this.

My search and reference skills are clearly lacking at the moment, so I have to be the one to ask; 'The Hock'?

Female Dating Strategy.