Attraction is still a criteria. Otherwise, sex isn't getting involved since some of us aren't whoring out for farces like "family" or a "relationship" for the sake of saying you've got a "relationship". That's a fuck up situation where you put up with someone you don't want to play house...
We started in bands for thousands of prehistorical years, which broke and merged all the time. Family, beyond a couple possibly with young dependent children, is a relative modern power game not actually bred into us. It's just an early political sham that managed to depower/de"legitimise" any dissenters to retain its power. Religion, of course, got involved making everything worse.
You serious asked how explicitly gynocentrism is discriminatory? How is resource allocation to favor special groups not discriminatory to you? Too much gender studies rotting your brain? Seriously, how the fuck is that not connecting?
Various primates show dimorphism as infants. This isn't just advertising. Besides, this forgets the privileges given to your princesses, which I notice the currently swarming feminists: 1 won't admit and 2 will troll you if you mention. Have cake, eat his too. Here we got again again.
LOL, again, the two reasons explicitly given by females asked: too hard and non-fashionable guys. Why do people keep ignoring what they've said themselves? Makes the females bad, which is just so damn unacceptable?
Considering they either keep acting shocked or downvote anything construed as "Obama-bashing" as trolling or direct counter points as flamebait, I think they'll vote for the next sleaze to say the same shit, if he's Dem sleaze. The fans of the 2 ring circus don't learn. They're here for a show like "pro-wrestling": "It's still real to me, dammit!"
Nope. It's just funny you're that deluded. Perversely so, of course. Women have special privileges where men have obligations. Women claim strength till they want someone else to do it. Veronica Foster AKA "Rosie the Riveter" quit after 2 months to spare her cello playing. Drafted males didn't get to quit...until they'd won too many purple hearts...or a flag. Feminazis just want special options without responsibilities. Responsibilities are for filthy male pig-dogs not "their victims".
That'd require greater than 100% of human wiring and other such nonsense. The differences aren't directly compatible. You can't just overlay them. You certainly can't magically cause all capacities to equally develop simultaneously when they require contradictory neural pursuits over years of focused development.
Yeah, just forget any and all prices paid constantly to this day by men for "society". It's our "privilege" and, if we don't serve, our shame. Registering for selective service is required for a male to get voting "rights". Women get it for being human. Funny implication there. So many things follow an identical pattern, and it's getting worse. The pussy pass is ancient, but, recently, it's gotten massive upgrades.
Honorius: "Tell the court, Bright Eyes -- what is the second Article of Faith?" Taylor: "I admit, I know nothing of your culture." Honorius: "Of course he doesn't know our culture because he cannot think."
Someone needs to lookup anthropocentrism. Feral humans wouldn't know "human" communication either. Theoretical aliens wouldn't either. Your assumptions fail empirically and rationally.
You do realize you're deciding who to you're going inflict pain upon then calling it fair just to handwave your unprovoked attack? Let me guess, it feels good to you thus is "moral", right? Empty self-serving weasel word, that.
Do you think your preferences entitle you to other people resources? You're blatantly loading a question without anything to back you up but an obvious violent threat wrapped in "moral" pretension. Crying altruism isn't a free pass, Dumbass.
It doesn't and CAN'T work that way. Learn basic arithmetic and algebra... Those paying in mustn't take out what they paid in, unless ONLY they take out and ONLY what they paid in.
X-Y=Z , X=in , Y=out (In more usual terms, in=revenue and out=cost.) If you subtract (Y) ONLY what the payers paid in (X), what's left (Z) is 0 since Y=X and X-Y=0. You're assuming a stable growing pyramid scheme? Most people cost (Y) more than they ever pay (X), so you're pyramid scheme already fails (-Z). If they did, they wouldn't need insurance, just the occasional loan. Costs (Y) are rising faster than revenue (X) per person (N). X/N (revenue per person) is shrinking NOT growing. The minority actually banking this shit just pay increasingly more at increasing loss. Like taxes, a shell-game con...
Who dates to search for new music? Spoiled semi-attractive chicks? Otherwise, what fun? It's dating. How many males date for any form of recreation? As in the dating process itself, ignoring "dating" as code for fucking.
If you're male, not rich/hot, and not spamming hundreds(assuming you can find that many to even bother with), it's probably not going to work for ANY purposes. Most aren't going to respond, regardless of what you sent. Of the tiny percent that do, most are just trying to pull temporary entertainment and will randomly quit conversing, whether after 5 minutes or 2 months, without even a bye. That's not even including the majority of the remaining that're leading you on in other ways you're probably quasi-officially not even allowed to question.
Anyone remember that old pre-Match.com-bought OkCupid analysis using Match.com's own #s showing they had a lower marriage rate than the general population? The one that vanished after the buyout... Now, we got a "promote me" button that charges you for visibility, and they hide users from your searches in tiers of some kind, even 99% matches.
Attraction is insufficient. You need compatibility and accessibility. That's where dating sites are useful. Normalization's pretty fucking useless, unless you actually want to be a good little dildo to yet another femidrone.
Yes, but mostly abusive. Of course, most messages I've gotten in that same decade were abusive too. Almost all the rest turned out to be just as mental. I'm male, BTW...
Slashdot Mirror
Attraction is still a criteria. Otherwise, sex isn't getting involved since some of us aren't whoring out for farces like "family" or a "relationship" for the sake of saying you've got a "relationship". That's a fuck up situation where you put up with someone you don't want to play house...
We started in bands for thousands of prehistorical years, which broke and merged all the time. Family, beyond a couple possibly with young dependent children, is a relative modern power game not actually bred into us. It's just an early political sham that managed to depower/de"legitimise" any dissenters to retain its power. Religion, of course, got involved making everything worse.
Yeah, those would be the many rebellions that followed, Dumbass. Where the fuck did you learn history? American public school propaganda?
Uh, and what of the colonies that had to be forced to sign under threat of the retain post-revolutionary army?
You serious asked how explicitly gynocentrism is discriminatory? How is resource allocation to favor special groups not discriminatory to you? Too much gender studies rotting your brain? Seriously, how the fuck is that not connecting?
Various primates show dimorphism as infants. This isn't just advertising. Besides, this forgets the privileges given to your princesses, which I notice the currently swarming feminists: 1 won't admit and 2 will troll you if you mention. Have cake, eat his too. Here we got again again.
LOL, again, the two reasons explicitly given by females asked: too hard and non-fashionable guys. Why do people keep ignoring what they've said themselves? Makes the females bad, which is just so damn unacceptable?
Actually, that was a good pick: cherry flavored.
...whose ass is blacker.
That wasn't trolling, Psycho. You are.
Considering they either keep acting shocked or downvote anything construed as "Obama-bashing" as trolling or direct counter points as flamebait, I think they'll vote for the next sleaze to say the same shit, if he's Dem sleaze. The fans of the 2 ring circus don't learn. They're here for a show like "pro-wrestling": "It's still real to me, dammit!"
"The game" filth like you play is cheating, You petty-politico, norm-pretense-wielding, self-righteous sociopath.
Nope. It's just funny you're that deluded. Perversely so, of course. Women have special privileges where men have obligations. Women claim strength till they want someone else to do it. Veronica Foster AKA "Rosie the Riveter" quit after 2 months to spare her cello playing. Drafted males didn't get to quit...until they'd won too many purple hearts...or a flag. Feminazis just want special options without responsibilities. Responsibilities are for filthy male pig-dogs not "their victims".
That'd require greater than 100% of human wiring and other such nonsense. The differences aren't directly compatible. You can't just overlay them. You certainly can't magically cause all capacities to equally develop simultaneously when they require contradictory neural pursuits over years of focused development.
"Ya, Mule!" *crack*
Yeah, just forget any and all prices paid constantly to this day by men for "society". It's our "privilege" and, if we don't serve, our shame. Registering for selective service is required for a male to get voting "rights". Women get it for being human. Funny implication there. So many things follow an identical pattern, and it's getting worse. The pussy pass is ancient, but, recently, it's gotten massive upgrades.
Honorius: "Tell the court, Bright Eyes -- what is the second Article of Faith?"
Taylor: "I admit, I know nothing of your culture."
Honorius: "Of course he doesn't know our culture because he cannot think."
Someone needs to lookup anthropocentrism. Feral humans wouldn't know "human" communication either. Theoretical aliens wouldn't either. Your assumptions fail empirically and rationally.
You do realize you're deciding who to you're going inflict pain upon then calling it fair just to handwave your unprovoked attack? Let me guess, it feels good to you thus is "moral", right? Empty self-serving weasel word, that.
Do you think your preferences entitle you to other people resources? You're blatantly loading a question without anything to back you up but an obvious violent threat wrapped in "moral" pretension. Crying altruism isn't a free pass, Dumbass.
It doesn't and CAN'T work that way. Learn basic arithmetic and algebra... Those paying in mustn't take out what they paid in, unless ONLY they take out and ONLY what they paid in.
X-Y=Z , X=in , Y=out (In more usual terms, in=revenue and out=cost.)
If you subtract (Y) ONLY what the payers paid in (X), what's left (Z) is 0 since Y=X and X-Y=0. You're assuming a stable growing pyramid scheme? Most people cost (Y) more than they ever pay (X), so you're pyramid scheme already fails (-Z). If they did, they wouldn't need insurance, just the occasional loan. Costs (Y) are rising faster than revenue (X) per person (N). X/N (revenue per person) is shrinking NOT growing. The minority actually banking this shit just pay increasingly more at increasing loss. Like taxes, a shell-game con...
Who dates to search for new music? Spoiled semi-attractive chicks? Otherwise, what fun? It's dating. How many males date for any form of recreation? As in the dating process itself, ignoring "dating" as code for fucking.
If you're male, not rich/hot, and not spamming hundreds(assuming you can find that many to even bother with), it's probably not going to work for ANY purposes. Most aren't going to respond, regardless of what you sent. Of the tiny percent that do, most are just trying to pull temporary entertainment and will randomly quit conversing, whether after 5 minutes or 2 months, without even a bye. That's not even including the majority of the remaining that're leading you on in other ways you're probably quasi-officially not even allowed to question.
Anyone remember that old pre-Match.com-bought OkCupid analysis using Match.com's own #s showing they had a lower marriage rate than the general population? The one that vanished after the buyout... Now, we got a "promote me" button that charges you for visibility, and they hide users from your searches in tiers of some kind, even 99% matches.
Attraction is insufficient. You need compatibility and accessibility. That's where dating sites are useful. Normalization's pretty fucking useless, unless you actually want to be a good little dildo to yet another femidrone.
Yes, but mostly abusive. Of course, most messages I've gotten in that same decade were abusive too. Almost all the rest turned out to be just as mental. I'm male, BTW...