hydroacetylene
No bio...
User ID: 128
It's worth noting that 'not being an antisemite' is a historical anomaly. I'm not saying anything for or against the Jews here, just that there's clearly a lot of people they rub the wrong way.
Oh dear, as an actual literal rad trad is this a dynamic I'm familiar with. Groypers like traditional Catholicism- far more than vice versa, we mostly think Nick Fuentes' brain is rotting from aids- because we are a bit antisemitic, very socially conservative, and distinctively western(and proud of it). We do not like their attitudes towards women(we think they actually hate them, rather than recognizing their different role in the order of creation). We're skeptical of their piety. Actual rad trads are often shocked by the things twitter tradcaths put their name behind(and DR twitter has a running joke about how they don't actually go to church- actual rad trad twitter is a different world) and are not happy to be associated with spicy DR takes about race or whatever. When this happens out loud in real life there can be fallouts and shunning rather than flame wars.
I'm apparently wrong about that one; my assumption had been that smart wordcels took classics degrees(IIRC classics and philosophy have average IQ's on par with the physics department) but apparently English is as rigorous as history and most of the 'Mrs. degree' and 'what degree doesn't require math?' type switch to psychology or ethnic studies.
And indeed, "25-year-old girl": #Fightfor35.
Girl just refers to an unmarried woman in this context. Similar to 'senorita'.
I mean, if the Chinese censorship apparatus works off of blacklists, the motte is probably just too small to be listed.
Yes, that’s why I said ‘or’. They didn’t have a psychology or communications department.
Medicare expansion, tax cuts for stay at home moms, and routing charitable grants through explicitly Christian organizations(which worked well enough that there isn’t a constituency for rolling it back) are the three big successes, so yeah.
I believe history, philosophy, classics etc are still reasonable IQ proxies- dummies get degrees in, like, English or something that wouldn’t have been recognized as a fit subject for academic study in 1900.
But the point of a four year degree, for the ones people actually get, is proving you can answer emails, use grammarly, keep drama to a minimum, etc. Not showing mathematical literacy.
It’s possible that standards for a bachelor’s in English/psychology/communications/etc have been so reduced that it doesn’t even do that. But that is a different argument than ‘they don’t learn calculus’- that’s what ‘for non-math majors’ means, we already knew.
In most Anglosphere countries the barrier to fertility for couples is mostly ideological; women strongly prefer to bear in wedlock. They might not, but there's plenty of natural experiments(eg the fertility of military bases) showing that replacing cohabitation with marriage leads to babies.
Seconding this- tradcath women have babies from marriage to menopause. Lots and lots of babies with forty-something mothers. Of course these women mostly had their first baby at twentysomething.
The institute for family studies has some interesting research showing that states in the US with more alimony have a higher percentage of married women as homemakers and a higher fertility rate within marriage.
How much of that is specifically wanting a foreign husband rather than having a shortage of local men? There could be a variety of reasons for the former; either they think Russian men are all wife-beating drunks so they're better off with a foreigner(there are at least some Latinas who prefer gringos for this reason, so it's plausible), or they would like to live in a country with a higher purchasing power parity than Russia(of which there is no shortage), etc, etc.
Do you think they're doing this?
In any case, Iran is unlikely to be executing gay soldiers only. Either the follow the geneva conventions or they don't.
Aggression and physical conditioning are still very important to infantry combat, though- men sprint faster, jump better, etc. The physical advantages are all around, not limited to upper body strength(and given modern combat kit loadouts, this is likely less reduced in importance compared to the age of the phalanx than you might think). And non-infantry combat specializations might have different demands, but if one of them favored women the Israelis, Soviets, or North Vietnamese would probably have figured it out, and they didn't. IIRC competent artillerymen basically have to be male because it involves a surprising amount of moving heavy objects, at the very least.
I think the main motivation was that senior male employees preferred to spend time working with women, especially young women.
And of course some of this is that women are, in general, more pleasant to their bosses than men. They tend to be politer, they tend to document things better, and they tend to be easier to boss around. These seem like, from a management perspective, genuine advantages.
Your daily reminder that 40% of Mexicans are phenotypically white, and most Hispanic people prefer to be regarded as white if possible, and the justice system is more than happy to let them because it doesn't care.
Define 'white'. I'll bet you the definition used in these databases is different from yours- probably self ID(and in Hispanic cultures 'white' can mean something very different from what it does in the anglosphere).
I think the legitimacy principle of two terms only is far too strong- we're more likely to get a king than a president for life, and we're more likely to get a libertarian president than either.
An annointed Trump successor, on the other hand, is very plausible.
The federal government's internal troops are not marines, though. The federal government has law enforcement paramilitaries(under the DHS and DOJ), and if they aren't good enough there's the national guard. 'Federal paramilitaries and national guard units willing to follow questionably legal orders if they're backed by the republican party' are surely a thing- as Greg Abbott demonstrated in his border standoffs with the Biden admin.
The MAGA right is probably even better armed than normie Republicans.
I don't know about that. The MAGA right almost by definition are a different group from core ideological conservatives, who do indeed have lots of guns. MAGA is probably better armed than average, and the most heavily-armed groups are indeed pro-MAGA, but Trump>republican challengers is not their ideology. YMMV, but my most heavily armed cousins supported Cruz in the 2016 primary and Desantis in 2024.
That being said, I do think you're mostly correct that the red tribe would win a civil war, although it would be a lot uglier than you're counting on. I also think the actually competent groups on the left know this, so they won't try anything.
Almost certainly underrepresented; cholos were pretty much all born here. Theres thé occasional illegal psycho or serious criminal from the old country but the street trash which actually personally commits most of them crime grew up in American ghettos.
But very few conscripts in general are going to frontline combat in modern militaries anyways.
You call the billing department(call don't email, you need to speak to a person) and say you're not paying the bill they sent you. They will almost immediately begin negotiating the price, because the alternative to half a loaf is literally nothing.

There was a late Victorian right wing heterodox intellectual movement- the oxford revival. High church Anglicanism is mostly downstream from it today, including the parts that eventually became Catholic(this latter part was not, contrary to the criticisms in 1900, inevitable, but rather historically contingent on the Anglican communion deciding to have gay bishops).
More options
Context Copy link