The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
No bio...
User ID: 174
You know who WAS able to produce the dress? Monica Lewinsky.
The statute of limitations has run.
The fact that the Supreme Court can lay down very clear precedent and lower courts are free to plug their ears and say "lalala I can't hear you" is bordering on a constitutional crisis.
It's only a crisis if the Supreme Court does not yield, and they have.
It just means the Second Amendment has been replaced with the anti-Second Amendment: "None of your other rights apply when guns are involved".
I believe the standard darwinian playbook is that you draw the line so it encompasses the cases that support the things you are trying to prove, and does not encompass cases which do not. And the line applies only in the instant discussion and not to any other discussions involving the same evidence.
I describe our current situation as a K-selection spiral. We put a lot of effort into protect and raising each individual child, which results in fewer children. Fewer children results in making each child more precious, and thus demanding of more effort to protect and raise, etc.
Does such a person exist in reality, or is this a hypothetical?
Caster Semanya comes close, but does not have ovaries. I'm not aware of an 46,XY DSD condition which results in ovary development -- all I know of result in either testes (as with 5-alpha reductase deficiency, which Semanya has) or non-functional undifferentiated gonads.
Doesn't matter, though; those are intersex conditions, and are rare enough to simply be taken as exceptional cases. That there are a few edge cases that blur the lines doesn't mean the lines don't exist.
And Roddenberry was definitely doing '60s Cold War analogies.
Personally I offer nothing. But there are alternatives to the Calvinist ideal that one should be suffering all the time; hedonism and epicureanism are diametrically opposed, for instance.
It's fairly easy to find references in Google Books both ways in the first half of the 20th century, though the only non-fictional contemporary one with an opinion I find asserts that blue is for boys and pink is for girls. This is post-Victorian (and American, besides).
I find nothing from the Victorian era, the only thing I find before the 20th century is this 1833 work, which also asserts that "pink is for girls".
I'm surprised by the photo. Acid attack to me would indicate foreign Muslim (some form of brown), not probably-domestic black.
They've discovered it loses votes so they're keeping it under their hat until they're back in power, at which point trans-everything is back on the agenda.
LOL, this is like on Star Trek when they presented Nomad with an irresolvable paradox, except instead of making him get a higher-pitched voice and explode, it made him quote Ronald Reagan.
Turns out you can do the chart in FREDs interface. Here's median mortgage payment for a house bought in a given year as a percentage of income, assuming a median-rate 30-year mortgage. Very different look!
From my perspective, having kids is the most sure way to ensure some decent and adequate standard of care in my twilight years.
Might want to ask King Lear about that one.
On the one hand, it really was about women entering into a "boys' club" space, not ethics in gaming journalism.
No, it never was.
"Suffering is the only part of life" is what you're offering.
The second chart appears to be comparing nominal mortgage payments to real incomes. That is, I can reproduce it by using the mortgage payments from the first table (which are clearly nominal, showing $2207 in 2024 and $141 in 1971) and the incomes in the second table (which are in 2023 dollars, as can be verified by looking on FRED)
If you properly use nominal incomes (from FRED) it looks a lot different.
The ideal of maturity seems to be that you suffer through childhood preparing for an adulthood that you spend suffering through preparing your children for adulthood then spend a couple of years when you're old playing with your grandkids and then die. It is certainly no surprise people opt out of that if they can.
2010 indeed was a good year, though 2012 was better. But it was actually historically good right up until COVID hit, and we saw a lot of the same whining then. NOW it's actually bad.
So we're too fat and lazy and stupid to actually get good at sports, but at least we're rich enough to buy up talent from other, more sporting countries?
Getting talent from everywhere else is 100% American. Even a lot of our multi-generational American sports talent is derived from stock originally bought from Africa.
Are we going to win the world cup by taking advantage of anyone worldwide with a vague connection to America and bribing them to play for America?
Eh, if we ever give enough of a shit about men's professional soccer we might do that. Seems unlikely; like cricket, men's professional soccer is just somehow un-American. Maybe if the rest of the world were to stop calling it "football"
If it happened I would say "Well, looks like they're fucking around so we should make them find out". But it's still war, not terrorism. The boundaries can be blurry sometimes (because it's advantageous for states to blur them) but the hypothetical here is that Iran is doing it, not one of their associated "terrorist" militias, right?
Contra MadMonzer above, I would say it's not "perfidious", but just because it's "fair play" doesn't mean the US doesn't get to respond.
Yeah, because it would be an act of war.
What compensation is owed by a childless person to a parent for raising their own child? What if that child turns out to be a lifetime NEET instead of providing any useful services?
- Prev
- Next

And that only happened because a cranky old white guy at the Washington Post was willing to call BS.
More options
Context Copy link