2lwxxtj

6 ms·

1.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
Their preferences may be innate, but their standards are not. Their standards change depending on their life experience. If men they find very attractive give them attention (but not commitment), they are going to have a harder time settlin
2.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
The men that are ruining her life are not the sort of "weak men" being discussed here. The ones ruining her life, I can just about guarantee, exude the impression that they don't play by other people's rules. To women, t
3.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
>Honestly, you not being able to have partner You can stop right there because as I said above, I'm married.
4.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
It means they don't get children.
5.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
>Yes, that stance is awful. And I suspect that's exactly why he said "Why bother?".
6.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
>So... Oppress women is the solution you are proposing here? If that's what you want to call shaming them for certain behavior, yes. >Why have you gendered it at all? Because women are, on average, different from men, and, on ave
7.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
>Yes, and it's shared by nearly everyone. Not really. If you're talking specifically about whether an unmarried man that fits some particular criteria is owed a wife, most people in the western world at this point in time would
8.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
Yes, there are more now than in the past. https://ifstudies.org/ifs-admin/resources/figure1newlymaninc...
9.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
To be clear, "(almost) everyone needs some amount of physical intimacy to be happy," is a falsifiable statement of fact. You can go out and measure something to find out whether it matches reality. On the other hand, "but it&
10.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
>It becomes toxic when it blames women for its problems. Feminism is all for men talking about their issues. It practically begs them to. Gotcha, it wants them to talk about their issues, as long as they don't say anything unapprove
11.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
>That's one bitter truth about life: (almost) everyone needs some amount of physical intimacy to be happy, but it's not something anyone is entitled to. That's not a truth about life, it's an opinion.
12.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
It's not about not wanting to give money to them, it's about not wanting their products injected in to your body. The vast majority of people that get infected with the coronavirus do not get any pharmaceuticals put in to them wha
13.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
>It's just highly intelligent educated experts giving their best possible estimate based on current data. OK, but can we trust them to completely put out of their mind the interests of the people signing their paychecks? Do the peop
14.
by 2lwxxtj 5y ago
People in the US rightly don't trust the pharmaceutical industry or the government. They may not be able to pinpoint why, but when they look around they see that every year the people around them are more obese and have more chronic he
15.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
As a parent, it is terribly hard to imagine your child not being there. I suppose what I'm curious about is, knowing what it's like to raise a child with Down Syndrome and what it's like to raise a child without, if you hadn&
16.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
People with Down Syndrome are not in any sense a nation or national group. It is not applicable.
17.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
How is it "damning on society"? Raising normal children is already a massive time commitment, and at the end you get a functioning adult that you don't have to take care of, and which can give you grand children. Why would an
18.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
>which is kind of sad, since those with Down Syndrome can live fulfilling lives. So can people that don't have Down Syndrome.
19.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
I said they have a lot of influence over which candidates are viable, not total control. Before becoming president, Trump was a very famous and interesting billionaire, which takes away a lot of the media's tools. The famous and intere
20.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
>The reason the MSM puts out news is to sell advertising I'm pretty skeptical about that. The major media outlets have significant influence over the political ideas that circulate through the electorate. In a democracy, that means
21.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
How exactly are you quantifying the amount of violence for which each side is responsible?
22.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
Anti-racism, which is explicitly non-color-blind, is now accepted ideology among the center right in the US. See for instance Mitt Romney marching in the "Black Lives Matter" protest: https://www.cnn.com/2020/
23.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
How is a democracy in which the elite ultimately control which political ideas circulate through the electorate any different from an oligarchy?
24.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
I get the impression that you are not very happy in life.
25.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
>but it's not the objective truth. I'm genuinely surprised to hear someone claim this. The election centers handed out papers to observers telling them what the restrictions were. There were livestreams from various facilities
26.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
I cited evidence that restrictions were placed on observers that made it difficult or impossible for them to detect fraud. Do you deny that I did so?
27.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
I literally quoted evidence from the link that you provided.
28.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
Your link seems to agree with me. From the facts for GA and PA: "Furthermore, in an election conducted in the midst of a pandemic, each of the 159 counties was required to balance the close presence of poll watchers to election workers
29.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
I was actually talking about Democrat administered election facilities since they have a well documented seething hatred toward Trump and instituted egregious and well documented restrictions on election observers, forcing them to stay far
30.
by 2lwxxtj 6y ago
Not necessarily no evidence left behind, just no "smoking guns" that can be trivially discovered by private citizens without power of subpoena or warrant.

More ›