Can confirm, even in media that has explicitly queer characters, the queer part of the community seems to love adopting someone else as their "blorbo", whether they claim the character is somehow "-coded" or not.
Boy, all those people with the thick book and the huge churches must be really wasting their time, then.
What it looks like to me is that we're not lacking in 150 IQ people as much as we lack in resources/cooperation required to obtain them, and cooperation doesn't magically spawn from enough smart people. Plenty of smart people are in politics and other zero-sum pursuits.
If it happens that making robots to clean toilets is more trouble than assigning people to toilet duty, I expect the 150 IQs to clean toilets.
Motte: science doesn't explain everything so there could be something like a God
Bailey: science doesn't explain everything so Bible is fact
Well - when looking at the spectrum between "shut down all mention of sexuality and let them figure it out naturally on the wedding night" and "be so open that some people are selling fetish gear to children", what I see is that one extreme is totalizing and bad in itself, while the other's bad parts are the outliers. Much as people here love to mention "kids getting dollars in their underwear in strip clubs", I have never actually encountered people who would endorse that, or endorse similar enough things, in the wild.
It's common advice to "give your children the Talk, or the streets will". Since not all parents follow that advice, I'd rather there be people whose job it is to openly give children the Talk, so they do not have to turn to less official and less scrutinized sources.
Who is being implied in passive voice here? Certainly not me, I'd prefer the Chinese stop being racist. AshLael doesn't appear to be "expecting" the Australians to open up their membership, just stating he is Australian and he does.
What does it matter what their homelands are like? AshLael wasn't claiming the Chinese in China are his people, but that the Chinese in Australia are.
Is it not within your conception of the psychologically normal person that they can change their mind? Even about something they loved? Yes, sure, according to some worldviews no one ever changes their own mind, but just assuming you believe in freedom of will.
It's just that it looks like, according to you, there is no purpose for this forum as a platform for seeking truth, because everyone who's normal is just going to defend what they love instead of what's true.
Why the assumption that this person cannot make his own decisions and can only be "brainwashed"?
They're able to buy iPhones as well, doesn't mean they can afford them.
"Being considered an appropriate topic for any setting and company" is not the same thing as "not pretending it doesn't exist, or that's it's horrible and evil when it does exist".
You respect people more for admitting mistakes. Others decide people who make mistakes are unreliable and respect people who don't appear to make mistakes.
Do you see how people might get skeptical of "European identity" when European identitarians suddenly introduce arbitrary limits on what is "real Europe"?
Not like you'd believe me, but the key traits here are "a once well-off person who decided to fuck around with the Labyrinth that is modern finance and found out that the Minotaur lives there".
Georgia Landers is paler than me after a sunny day, and Chloe Coleman doesn't look even slightly African even after I double-checked. I'm sorry I haven't developed the one-drop radar pure-blooded European-Americans apparently wield.
Well - cold logical rationality's argument can be reduced to "my survival is a priority", really, unless my life is so shitty I'd gladly accept death over having to trudge on (with blood on my hands on top).
If your husband can "guarantee you food and rent" on a single income he isn't a fuckup by the definition established (that a fuckup is someone who can't hack it on their own).
So the ones who can be harmed by that are the ones who are rich enough to trade stocks?
You're overstating the utility of marriage to women, I believe. If you're a fuckup woman, does it really help to marry a fuckup man?
What counts as deliberate agenda pushing? If I happen to Notice that white people seem to need less help going to college and setting up their life absent intervention than Hispanic people, and so I decide to set up the dynamic in the movie according to how I see it - the white guy helping the Hispanic guys because it'd look weird the other way around, is that "deliberate agenda pushing"?
Speaking of inverted examples... aren't "The Black Guy Dies First" and "Vasquez Must Die" tropes for a reason? Genuine question, I haven't been tracking death/saviourhood ratios by race.
(D&D Honour Among Thieves did have the Hispanic barbarian woman as the only casualty of the finale. White guy protagonist then spends the one-use resurrection tablet on her instead of his white wife as he was planning, because he realized she's practically the real mother to his white daughter now and he cares about her as a platonic friend more than his wife).
If you have a habit to pray and wait for it to work, it's not implausible that a few times in your life you actually notice it to appear to work. Do you count the times when you pray and do not get instant results delivered?
Event 2 in particular sounds like "you were returning from an event in the same college that she goes to, you were looking for her so you saw her, duh". I suppose I don't have handy explanations for the rest of them other than "stuff happens sometimes, that doesn't mean there's got to be a superintelligence out there looking out for you".
"Spiritual confirmations" you described also look like, well, literally just internal monologue to me. There was a book I heard about - something something "Bicameral Mind"? - that basically theorized that the ancient man conceptualized internal monologue not as his own voice of reason, but as Athena or the equivalent bestowing wisdom upon him in his time of need.
Judging by your derisive tone, I must assume you get paid to post, then? How much?
I suppose they're addressing the average person, who doesn't even own most of the tools you used, much less knows how. For them it'd be a waste of 18 dollars (likely more since they aren't as efficient) to try.
It is rightly considered hostile to suggest just removing needs. How would you like a proposal for a communist state where the need to stand out and personal achievement is mentally excised from everyone?
More options
Context Copy link