domain:badcyber.com
The Israelis are delusional and wrong about regime change. It’s strange that critics of Israel seem to be so heavily invested in Mossad’s infallibility (even ‘October 7th was allowed to happen’ etc). The only way regime change happens in Iran is if the Tehran middle class get fed up enough to make it happen. That will be independent from Israel.
What happens after that, though? So now you have a fourteen year old who has completed the school requirements up to age eighteen and can graduate four years early. Maybe they get into college four years early. But now they're fourteen on a campus with eighteen year olds who are theoretically their peers, and unless there is someone there to act in loco parentis they may not cope well.
If I were managing a school like this, I’d send the kid to the local community college with night school classes and have them start farming up two years worth of college credits and do something like productive wage labor on the side to drag things out. Possibly I’d see how challenging it would be to get my own school thus accredited.
At 18, apply to a four-year with two years of credit and plan to graduate at 20, which is not that far off from the larger cohort and is a fine time to go for the first rung of a white-collar job. Most American four-years permit this. It’s something I did myself, with the ages shifted around somewhat (I got my two years of credit while working starting at 18, and went to an ordinary high school).
Respecting your partner? Nah, they like to be degraded.
I was wondering where the hell all the "women like/want/demand to be choked during sex" was coming from, and it seems it's from porn. And what boys (and I do mean boys, not even young men - in the linked article "transition year" is aged 15-16) are learning from watching porn is "when having sex, I should be choking my partner". That's something that can go very wrong very fast if you have no idea what you're doing, and how the hell is a fifteen year old having sex for the first time going to know what they're doing with breathplay?
For the last eight years, Eoghan Cleary has taught transition-year students a module about the dangers of pornography and how to navigate safe and consensual sex. During the class at Temple Carrig Secondary School, the teacher asks his students to make a list of what they believe is expected of them during sex.
Speaking at the launch of a new Irish report outlining the stark dangers of pornography on Thursday, Mr Cleary said the recurring things that students are putting on this list are “shocking”. Young boys said they feel they need to chase women, be dominant, be aggressive, want anal sex, and be with as many partners as possible.
In the past four years, Mr Cleary said the majority of teenage boys now say they believe they need to choke a woman during sex. Similarly, when girls were asked to make the same list, a high number said they need to be submissive during sex by allowing their partner to choke or slap them.
Other common things young girls said they feel the need to do during sex include having no pubic hair, making pleasurable noises, doing what the man says, and orgasm or pretend to. Mr Cleary said students admit that these expectations are coming from porn.
Being fair to Alexander, he's not a racist. He's a classist. He doesn't want white trailer trash having litters of kids, either. That's why he always bangs on about religiosity: you Bible-thumpers and Catholics, you pro-lifers, don't you realise what you are doing by encouraging teenagers and low-economic status women to have babies at a young age that they can't possibly support themselves?
There's a great FCCfromSCC post...maybe on reddit about confederate monuments...
Ope not FCCfromSCC, but here you go: https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/71ydqb/comment/dnfdfl3/?context=3
From the public school's perspective, the problem is that there are all these families where the parents don't read, and would like their kids to read better than they do, but don't necessarily do things like reading in front of their kids, making the whole thing much more difficult and tedious. And there are also kids with various processing differences, who have to be taught very concretely, but English is a bit odd phonetically, it takes up a lot of memory space, so they have to drill a lot
Oh gosh yes. Reading aloud fluently and easily, you need to practice that, and the best way in school still is "have everyone read out loud in class and take turns reading several paragraphs". If there's no reading at home, and no practice with books, that's hard to pick up (having said that, my parents never read bedtime stories to us, but my father used to tell us stories every night). You can only do so much in school, and if it's not happening at home, then what you get at school is even more vital.
I was about four and a half when I went to school (no such thing as kindergarten in my day) and I was able to read. Learned at home, can't even remember learning so I can't brag about "I was two (or three) when I learned to read". That wasn't a sign of me being particularly smart, it was (a) the result of freaky genes on the paternal family side where everyone is an early reader, for some unknown reason (possibly bound up with the strongly suspected but not formally diagnosed autism spectrum/Aspergers we got going on as well through the generations) and (b) my maternal grandmother lived with us and she did a lot of the childminding of infant me, and what is a bedbound old woman going to do with a two year old but start them on the alphabet etc.?
All that means that I have no idea what the optimum age for learning to read is, or what is the best method for teaching reading, but there's definitely a range between "will pick up reading anyhow be it late or early" and "need to be taught or will fall behind" where school is useful.
effectively nullifying the condition Congress put in place
This is not true. Congress when creating conditions gets to create both the rule and define the process by which it is enforced. That is their prerogative. They can chose whether it can be enforced by {individual plaintiffs bringing suit in Federal court} and/or {the HHS secretary decides and can withhold the money} and/or {any other enforcement scheme}.
Now if the statement is that Congress passed a law with no reasonable enforcement mechanism, I don't think that's terribly controversial. Indeed they do that all the time, which is comparable (after a fashion) to not passing the law at all. But they are entitled by Art I to do so, at least in the sense that there isn't a judicial remedy if they don't provide for one.
Seeing the hoops that the first private school made them jump through just to get their kids in, the headmistress could well afford to have the attitude "we fire you, you don't quit" towards the parents. Let them take their kid out and leave, that just opens up a gap for the next affluent, anxious, and aspirational parents on the waiting list to get their little budding genius in. Demand definitely outstripped supply, even at that level of fees.
Homeschool coops with no facility costs are much cheaper than that.
If the strep throat screening cost $10K to provide, then not. The question seems to be whether it's a cross-subsidy.
whatever ruleset upper class academia emphasizes?
Quis paget entrat, is the joke about that. Though upper-class academia does have its share of clever, as well as well-connected, students.
St Cake's School is an imaginary public school, run by Mr R. J. Kipling (BA, Leicester). The headmaster's name is part of the joke regarding the name "St Cake's", in reference to Mr Kipling cakes. Articles featuring the school parody the "Court and Social" columns of The Times and The Daily Telegraph, and the traditions and customs of the public school system. The school's motto is Quis paget entrat (He who pays gets in), although variations on this arise from time to time, such as when the school decided to admit only the daughters of very rich Asian businessmen, and the motto became "All praise to the prophet, and death to the infidel". While the school's newsletters feature extraordinary and unlikely results and prizes, events such as speech days, founders' days, term dates and feast days are announced with topical themes, such as under-age drinking, drug abuse, obesity, celebrity culture, anti-social behaviour and cheating in exams. The school is sometimes referred to as "the Eton of the West Midlands", in reference to that area's relative lack of such schools and the magazine's founders' attendance at Shrewsbury School in that region.
So, what are you reading?
I'm adding Shapiro's Contested Will to my list.
Whilst I agree with the general sentiment of your post I think there are is a very valid reason for why a child should be placed in this sort of program over public education, at the very least.
Considering the child will largely grow up to be similar to mom and dad, barring bad friends and unlucky accidents, why not put them in a program that maximally conforms to whatever ruleset upper class academia emphasizes? It's a good use of time if we assume the kid will inherit the brainpower to meet the demands of higher learning. Instead of being potentially stifled by public education, which is poor, it can potentially be motivated to pursue education and have the resume to enable that pursuit.
Since their parents did it the same when they came, why not?
Honestly, aside from the non binary thing, this basically reads what I vaguely learned at that age in the 90’s.
It took me into my 20’s to think about that the water I use here has no effect on the Chinese (why not African??) kids with no water.
do gay or trans versions of those get commissioned? should it recognize any kink at all, if in very 'correct' ways?
Sure for lesbians, gays and trans. Actors who are bisexual in that they have partners of different partners in different videos are also fine. I am under the impression that group sex is not something which a substantial fraction of minors will end up doing, so how to organize a safe and fun gang-bang is probably not required. Perhaps some light BDSM, if that is not too niche, safewords and all.
The idea is not to provide a nice version of every porn genre there is, because most of the kinkier stuff is unlikely to make it into their sex lives. Most people's first sexual experiences do not involve needle play and a couple who is into that is likely to search for best practices beforehand, while a couple who is into vanilla sex might be under the impression that as they went trough sex ed and watched some porn, they are sufficiently prepared. Focus on pacing, boundaries, contraception, lube and how to have a great time when PIV is too uncomfortable.
There's even been some, albeit mixed, efforts along those lines (one 'documentary' is very popular among het breeding fans, which... uh, Shinzo Abe meme, but probably not intended).
While from the WP description, this looks like a good effort, it is notably targeted at girls, which would still leave boys to learn sexual behavior from porn.
You even get really awkward discussions about what the 'correct' age for this involves, and that's not a fun thing to even consider.
I think that until minors have unrestricted access to the internet, there is no reason to give them access to sex videos to prevent them from going to pornhub instead. Realistically, I would not want any 6-yo with unrestricted internet access. At age 12, a kid is going to have access to the internet. If you lock down their devices (and are more tech savvy than your kid), there will always be a classmate whose parents are less concerned and let them have a smartphone. Ideally, their smartphone would be configured so that it blocks hardcore porn but allows access to educational sex videos from that age, without the parent or state pushing this too much into the face of the minor. If they never google for "sex video" until age 18, no problem.
There's a lot of motions in both law and psychology about how any exposure to even 'normal' sex early on can cause harm, but then we're relying on a bunch of (mostly 1970s) psych research, and I would prefer not to.
Humans have been around millions of years longer than privacy has, so I have every reason to believe that in the ancestral environment, children would be exposed to more sex than in the contemporary Western world (though with worse illumination, depending on the taboos of their specific culture). I think a kid of any age watching its parents have sex through their ajar bedroom door will perhaps pick up a fetish or two out of the experience, but not be traumatized for life. By contrast, being made to watch, being flashed or being made to participate in sex acts is obviously very likely to disturb the development of a child (especially if it is against the cultural norms of their society).
This is just my gut feeling, but I think that my gut feeling is about as valid as 1970s psych research :)
ThisIsSin covered it pretty well, the only thing I would add is GunJesus tries very hard (and succeeds!) at not taking sides in the culture war and keeps his videos and other endevours open to all. In this day and age, thats a very admirable thing and one of the main reasons he is universally respected.
Karl, on the other hand, at least by going off social media posts, rather vocally and militantly left wing, and not in a family friendly way either. (Drinking cum out of skulls is, uh, certainly a choice).
I enjoyed this write-up. It was informative and written in an engaging style.
One thing that I think makes psychedelics effective is the work that is done after the trip. Being in a supportive community after the trip seems to produce a lot of benefit. Talking to other people who have also done psychedelics can help you feel a sense of deeper connection. If I was designing a psychedelic therapy trial I would include a mostly peer driven support group for people that have participated in clinical psychedelic trials.
I agree that your experience sounds like the 10mg dose. If you took a higher dose and had a mystical experience or ego death I suspect it may have given you more motivation/desire to make a bigger change to your life. I’m interested in how the results between 10 mg and 25 mg will vary in the trial. I suspect that the higher dose benefits would be more noticeable and would last longer. If the effects from 10mg start to wane it may be an interesting personal experiment to try something approximately equivalent to the 25mg dose.
Okay, that's enough 4chan-level shitty comments out of you, dipping into personal antagonism.
A lot of users are eagerly anticipating your banning. I try to factor in your unpopularity for just running against popular sentiment when you get reported constantly, but the fact is, your reports are increasingly for low-effort shitty comments and you seem to be trying to do a speed run on how many digs you can get in before you're banned. You actually occasionally have some interesting things to say, but it's mostly buried beneath snark and disdain.
You've gotten a lot of warnings and no bans yet. Here's your first one-day ban. I am disappointed that once again a left-leaning poster cannot control himself enough to avoid getting banned, but that seems to be the path you are on. Change my mind.
Plan one entrance to the house with no steps.
Specifically, in accordance with ICC A117.1 § 1104.2 and ch. 4.
That's a big house. Think about how you're going to use the rooms.
Architectural Graphic Standards for Residential Construction pp. 40 and 46–48 have some nice diagrams of bedrooms, living rooms, dining rooms, home theaters, and home offices, including typical furniture dimensions and clearances.
Take pictures of the inside of all the walls before you close them up. Write notes and measurements.
Or just keep a copy of the construction/as-built plans!
28 Years Later may be in my top ten favorite films … just need a rewatch so solidify my opinion on that.
Top 5 are:
Event Horizon Suspiria (2018) Once Upon a Time in Hollywood Stop Making Sense
5th is always floating - just completely variable at anytime but it’s probably another Tarantino
Specific random things, because most things are going to be covered by smarter guys than me:
-
Plan one entrance to the house with no steps. Almost nobody does it, because it's difficult to handle the architecture/landscaping to make a ramp look good, but you totally can if you plan it from the start. Elderly people fall on steps all the time, and often hurt themselves. Also convenient for heavy stuff in general. If you plan for it now, you'll have it forever; if you have to rerig it later it will look bad, especially if it's at a time when you yourself are older/less capable.
-
Anywhere water comes into your house will eventually leak. Plan for that now.
-
That's a big house, think about how you're going to use the rooms. A lot of people end up with a big house with four rooms that are all variations on "couch and we watch TV in here;" or they all started as bedrooms and got adapted.
-
Think of the repair guy. Don't put anything in a place where it will be difficult to extract when (not if, when) it needs to be serviced or replaced. Make it easy to reach the air handler, the water heater, the septic system, etc.
-
Take pictures of the inside of all the walls before you close them up. Write notes and measurements. Store them in multiple places, hard copies, in the home, for the future.
lol, whatshisface
Anyway, that's pretty much it; if there was a serious conflict I think it would have been a more immediate split. Actually, the arc of the channel is like that as well- born of match footage, they made a competition gun that nobody was really considering at the time [and single-handedly ended the AR-15 Bad Because Muh Vietnam meme], and then drifted apart.
I think that the ultimate problem with Karl is that he honestly doesn't really do very much on his own (I believe he thinks he's quite a bit smarter/more switched-on than he actually is) and is prone to flying off the handle at times; his channel took a very noticeable drop in quality after the split and hasn't recovered (there was promise, but since none of it delivered after the split I think that's a pretty clear sign the brains of the operation left). The totally-not-sponsored-sponsored-content (half the time it's the KE Arms show) sections are more technically interesting, which I think is an issue.
Karl's views match those that traditionalist gun owners (i.e. Fudds) tend to express- because progressivism is [morally speaking] just traditionalism with the valence switched (which you'd think he'd be able to figure out considering he's a Satanist, but again... what he wants to be and what he is are two different things). Ian is, far as I can tell, clearly not like that- while he can run into too-big-for-britches problems (depending on who you believe) that's relatively normal for those in his position- not like he has time to do that anyway.
To attempt some answers:
It seems obvious now because we know it happened, but you have to put yourself in the position of someone who would have been observing things at the time. For most of the 1850s, things were looking pretty good for the South. There was a string of Northern presidents with Southern sympathies, who weren't about to rock the boat on the slavery question. Dred Scott happened. The Whig party collapsed. Democrats had a 2 to 1 advantage in the Senate and Congress. There were certainly huge problems, but it wasn't until the 1860 election where the Democratic party split along sectional lines and the Republicans swept the North that the writing was on the wall.
Lee is certainly overrated. Jackson is as well; both he and Longstreet are examples of guys who maxed out their own competence. Jackson was good at semi-independent commands but didn't have the political skills to be in charge of an entire army, and didn't do well when fighting directly under Lee. Longstreet was the opposite, in that he was a good general when serving under Lee but not so good independently.
The "rich man's war poor man's fight" thing didn't have so much to do with who was taking casualties in the army but who was fighting in the army itself. The perception arose that thousands of men who would never be able to afford a single slave were fighting to retain an institution whose primary beneficiaries were plantation owners who weren't serving and who had an inordinate amount of political power.
There's a difference between treating your enemy with respect and going out of your way to honor him. I doubt there are any statues of Petain in France commemorating his work in WWII.
The commanding generals in Virginia take up most of the slack for the idea that the South had better generals than the North. In my opinion the opposite is true, with the North's generals being somewhat better on the whole. In Hood's defense, he didn't really have a choice at this point, as the war in the West was already lost and he had to do something. It's like a runner at third trying to score on a sac fly to left field when the team is down 7–2 in the 8th. Bad idea overall, but sometimes you just need to get something going. As for Davis, I think he had the idea that he wasn't going to cave until he absolutely had to. Most of the Deep South and large parts of the Trans-Mississippi never came under Union occupation, and I think the idea was that he'd make them fight for every inch, because the Union couldn't really claim victory unless every state came back.
Yup
It's easily the best single-volume work about the Civil War ever written, and it's required reading for anyone who wants to claim familiarity with the war. It's of "read this before you begin to discuss it" variety. The Great Courses series by Gary W. Gallagher covers similar ground, but in more depth, and he and McPherson seem to be like-minded about most things, so it makes an excellent supplement if you're looking to go further without risking running into a dud or something controversial.
More options
Context Copy link