Tamsyn Muir’s Locked Tomb series would’ve been vastly better if it’d resembled in novel form Lingua Ignota’s “Faithful Servant Friend of Christ.”
Now that I coulda worked with.
Tamsyn Muir’s Locked Tomb series would’ve been vastly better if it’d resembled in novel form Lingua Ignota’s “Faithful Servant Friend of Christ.”
Now that I coulda worked with.
Elon Musk as Speaker of the House?
Reminder: The Speaker of the House does not have to be a member of the House of Representatives.
Just trying to think of nightmare scenarios here. Since it’s more amusing than just stewing.
Here’s my trigger warning: If you read any of the bullshit on here, you’re gonna be triggered.
There ya go.
I did not fill out this survey, but I am in this group. And though I am not actually married I’m as good as. That said, I want my partner to work because I want her to have her own independent life. She’s not some extension of me. If something happens to me, I want her to be ok financially and career-wise.
But it’s also because I want nothing to do with unambitious women. I likely would not date or be with anyone who did not want to work at least most of the time. Even if she’s doing art or something. And I mean really doing it, not futzing around with some turd for two hours she sells on Etsy for $3 once a month.
And selfishly, if I get sick of it all and decide to throw in the towel for a while or forever, it makes it easier on me if my partner works (though I’d still pay my share, I just mean that it’s a lot cheaper to live as two instead of a singleton). Of course, the same goes for her. Unlike most, I actually believe in equality.
Wanting a woman who doesn’t work just mostly means you want a bangmaid (at least for most men). And that is not the life nor the partner for me.
This is another example of the weird and harmful prudishness of the younger millennials and Gen Z. They believe that you shouldn’t do anything at all around a kid that the child cannot also partake of. Which is — and let me stress this as much as I can — FUCKING INSANE.
According to them, you should not consume alcohol around a child, should not have sex in a house that any child is in, should not wear anything at all even slightly revealing around a child of any age (and that definition of “revealing” gets stricter all the time), and should certainly not prepare them in any way for the adult world. I can’t believe people are so catastrophically, damagingly stupid about things like this.
What the fuck happened to younger millennials and Gen Z?
My manager told me I cannot move my water around.
This is primarily a Boomer thing. For some reason, Boomers — especially Boomer women — expect to experience all retail employees in a state of mute obedience, with no observable human needs or limitations. They must not sit. They must not drink. They must accept all abuse with a smile.
Why Boomer women? My guess is that they are in unhappy marriages with uncaring and uncontrollable men and this is the one area that they can exert some measure of power. Sadly, by bullying 17-year-old grocery store checkers.
You hate this video because it's full of women. I hate this video because it's full of Australians. We are not the same. https://t.co/L8xkrd7iWX
— Noah Smith ๐๐บ๐ธ๐บ๐ฆ๐น๐ผ (@Noahpinion) November 10, 2024
And I hate this video because it’s filmed poorly.
I can’t believe because some motherfucker had the marksmanship skills of a donkey, we’ve got to put up with at least four more years of this shit.
Goddammit.
This is slightly misogynistic but also incredibly useful. Or at least, it would’ve been to me when I was 16. I already know 99% of this but unfortunately like most guys I learned it all the hard way.
Even though I have asked half a dozen women friends this, I still have never gotten an actual clear answer: Why must women use so many-difficult-to-parse and opaque signals and obfuscations? Threat reduction? Plausible deniability? Something else?
I really do want to know.
In short, some women decided to declare war against average and undesirable men and then were surprised and shocked when hostility was met with hostility.
Welcome to the real world, sisters! It can be hard but is often a lot of fun. Alas, though, you have to deal with it as it is, not as you wish it were.
That’s right. Also, when Hillary was running if you were anything less than insanely supportive of her you were called a “BernieBro.” I voted for Hillary in 2016, by the way. I still got called a “BernieBro” numerous times because I said she was a widely-disliked candidate the Dems should’ve never run and that no one deserves to win. That they have to earn it. Hillary supporters went absolutely batshit about this.
Despite people’s poor memories, I believe all of this had at least some effect. And that men have certainly been demonized lately in many quarters in general. Too much of feminism has come around to believing that anything bad that happens to a woman, a man somehow caused it no matter the actual cause. Combine this with social media-caused mental illness that many women are burdened with, it’s no wonder there is a backlash to all of that.
It is completely unclear to me that so many in the EU do not understand that if Russia is not defeated in Ukraine, they then will be fighting Russia in their own country soon enough?
Perhaps (most likely) it’s just that they don’t want to understand.
It is a 100% false “fact” that in Vietnam (or anywhere else that has been said about) that 90% of soldiers didn’t fire their weapons to kill. Or as sometimes is heard, at all.
I’ve seen this claim trotted out about WWI, WWII, Vietnam, and other conflicts. But it’s made up. It’s just deceit and delusion. I believe where this faux fact comes from is that it takes a lot of ammo downrange to kill any one hostile. Suppressive fire is most of the fire used in every modern war. By design, by the way. In the Afghanistan war, for instance, there were 250,000 rounds fired for every insurgent killed.
This absurd nonsense gets trotted out about various wars depending on what sort of ideological axe is being ground and it’s just lunacy, for a few reasons but the main one is this: when the enemy is on top of you and you’re in small arms range, you’re often fighting for your life. Even the most pacifist and wilting soldier is going to be tossing whatever they have downrange at any target they can plausibly identify.
How do people believe such goofy crap?