@The_Nybbler's banner p

The_Nybbler

In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.

9 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC

				

User ID: 174

The_Nybbler

In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.

9 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 174

The usual formulation is that women have value for what they are, and men have value for what they do. This does not give all women huge, Elon Musk level value.

Nature itself thinks men are as valuable as women. Slightly prefers them even, at 1.05 to 1.

More are produced. This does not make them more valuable; more Honda Civics are produced than Porsche 911s, after all. Slightly later in life, it makes them far less valuable.

I originally thought "emancipation" was just acting as a floating signifier, an applause light. But she actually does define it and her form of "freedom" in a few places, if not in terms that are very concrete themselves.

It touches upon the very essence of what it means to be free. I remain loyal to the feminist promise, however battered or dimmed, of genuine emancipation for women. This vision is not content to merely manage or glorify womanhood, but to transcend its limitations altogether, to be more than a body assigned a function, to move beyond the scripts of sex and tradition, and to claim the dignity of self-authorship. I never wanted merely to be accepted as a woman; I wanted to be free.

Freedom is not safety. It is the fragile space in which one may choose what binds.

To be free is not to become a better woman; it is to cease being one, politically.

But the first and last of these are impossible, and for a feminist, self contradictory. One might reasonably imagine a world where skin color failed to matter aside from one's household sunscreen budget, but a world in which one's sex doesn't matter is not one populated with humans. And to be a feminist is to be concerned with the interests of women, politically.

The second is also impossible for most. At the trivial level, one must eat and drink, one must obtain protection from the elements, and one has no choice about that. Further, one's role is limited by both social and biological realities. Oddly she scorns the people who deny this the hardest -- the trans activists.

So, she seems to be asking for something impossible and which men also don't have. It is no surprise she is disappointed.

Obama is frustrated over not having EVEN MORE POWER (as is Trump), but neither consider power a curse. Nor Clinton, nor Trump.

I can think of two rulers throughout history who were actually reluctant -- and the second (Washington) is probably just American lore.

We don’t know all the clients of Epstein because the client list wasn’t released.

Why would there even be a "client list"? Epstein wasn't a straight-up pimp brokering fee-per-throw or fee-per-hour transactions; he would have parties where the guests could make use of underaged prostitutes he provided. If there's a list of exactly which guests used exactly which underaged prostitutes (or video of the same), the FBI probably doesn't have it.

Elsewhere, someone else talked about a marriage needing to be in service of something greater than the marriage. To many social conservatives, it seems like the answer to this is a deity. To me, it seems like you should just be able to make the marriage in service of the children.

Children are not "greater than the marriage", so they do not provide an answer to that, if one is needed.

If you want progeny, though, you have to have the conditions for it. Social conservative communities provided those conditions, but I don't think they can do so any more. Modernity, however, seems to be failing more and more. I have no answers, but I'm fairly sure "more of the same" won't work.

Whatever happened with Obama's birth certificate?

On September 16, 2016, Trump announced that Obama was born in the United States.

Most spies don't "need" to be "turned" against their country; they just need to be found.

This is only two sorts, and there are conventionally four. Those who do it for the money, those who do it for the ideology, those who are coerced into it, and those who do it for ego. You can find those who do it for ideology or ego; those who do it for money or (especially) because they are coerced have to be made.

It's not, the product is still not available. Which makes me suspect "entirely fake".

I might not want to hang out with a Yakuza but I respect their commitment to their lifestyle more than I do 'oh I've got Milhouse smoking weed'

This is pretty much "I mean, say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos." Their "lifestyle" is organized crime, up to and including murder.

The cases that actually do still arise from legal drugs are "addict (i.e. end-user) runs out of money and becomes a career criminal to get his fix" and "stimulant-induced mania/psychosis". These are cases which are unambiguously "this is not due to prohibition; this is just due to drugs being available at all".

Both of these are made worse by prohibition -- the former by making the drugs more expensive, the latter because prohibition results in badly controlled doses leading to faster escalation towards mania-inducing doses.

There's also "drug user loses interest in anything but drugs, becomes criminal/welfare case" which I associate with pot. It's somewhat confounded by the fact that a lot of the people who ended up there would have been losers anyway, but I suspect that's not the only effect.

Power is a curse, all those who actually tasted it will tell you. It eats at all of your life until nothing is left, and for what? In the end you only can make the decisions that allow you to maintain your station.

Does this describe Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, or Donald Trump? I don't think so. Vladimir Putin... LOL.

But what has humanity ever hoped for if not for someone else to deal with anarchy? Entire societies built just so we don't have to do this dirty work ourselves. Whole religions spent on dreaming someone is doing it for us when we are too weak.

A very Hobbesian view, but there are clearly many men (and a smaller but not insignificant number of women) who love power much.

The real reason is that blaming the Jews is always popular, but Mossad in this case makes it easy by being an intelligence agency with plausible motive, means, opportunity, and most of all enough competence that it wouldn't leak.

A strawberry picker that's slow, isn't actually available and apparently works only on hydroponic berries? I think Juan Enrique still has his job. Maybe another 5-10 years it'll make a dent, assuming the product isn't entirely fake.

Tomatoes are indeed largely automatically harvested. The catch is... well, do you think a tomato you buy in the grocery store could stand up to what that robot is doing? Nope... those are tomatoes for processing, not for eating fresh.

7.77 million tons of rice production annually isn’t trivial

It's about 15% more than US rice production, and Japan's biggest crop by far. Meanwhile, the US with only roughly 3 times the population also produces 8.5 million tons of sorghum, 48 million tons of wheat, 117 million tons of soybeans (which Japan imports a good deal of), and 370 million tons of corn. Of course, these are all cereal grains and all subject to harvesting and processing with automation; Japan no longer has to rely on peasants with sickles and hand flails. That's why nobody talks about rice pickers but rather fruit pickers. Automated fruit harvesting, at least for first quality fruits, is something that hasn't been solved for many fruits.

Green tea is a little more like fruit, in that the top quality stuff is hand picked, but harvesting of lower quality stuff is automated. But 77,000 tons really is trivial.

Imagine trying to convince my 1800s great great grandmother that my great grandmother, who just kicked her from the inside, was not a baby.

Illegals and ex-cons. Apparently current-cons too; some meatpackers employ people on work programs from prisons, which is as close to slavery as you can get legally.

Child support payments are part of modernity, not social conservatism. Anyway, if people are discussing them they are discussing obligations owed to (in practice) women; the usual complaint here seems to be the obligation is one sided. (Which it is; the child support payments are owed even if the money is not used for the child or if visitation and/or joint custody rights are denied)

Why do you think MAGA was united against bombing Iran or about Epstein? Aside from the very-online right portion? (Anyway, if there's nothing there with Epstein, Trump can hardly produce it) But if this was true, it would demonstrate the opposite of your point -- that MAGA is NOT what Trump says it is.

Stephen Miller obviously advised Trump against any sort of farmworker amnesty, but Trump had to know he would. The question is why Trump would listen to Miller in this instance. And that could well be because MAGA really was fairly well united against that.

So they claim. But the king is unlikely to be willing to trade places with the peasant, so it seems this is an uneven bargain.

Japan imports a massive amount of food. This would be pretty dumb for the US to do, considering the massive amount of farmland we have.

(I believe the US is a net food importer by dollars, but not by calories)

Americans should mow their own lawns

Eh, f--- that, I've got hay fever.

I don’t think farming is grunt work

It is, whether you think so or not, which is why historically when people got the chance they fled the farms for horrible factory jobs.

I don't see any reason it would be "innoble" or "beneath human dignity", but it's backbreaking.

AOC at least used to have a large group she spoke for, but if AOC and Nancy Pelosi disagreed, you certainly couldn't say AOC spoke for the left as a whole.

If Trump announced some kind of amnesty for farm workers, that would be MAGA.

No, in fact, MAGA got upset when it seemed he might and Trump backed off. Also note that MAGA was COVID-vaccine-skeptical and Trump was the opposite. That MAGA won't immediately dump Trump if he deviates from what they want doesn't mean MAGA is what Trump says it is.

But the "dissident right" just isn't MAGA in the first place.