You've proven you're an idiot, and you don't have a clue.
Why? Because you make blanket statements that are not true. Courts do not rubber-stamp divorce agreements when there are children involved, and additionally a woman cannot unilaterally specify no access to the kids and no child support.
So when you say
Most men would sign that. All courts would sanction it and issue a decree of divorce as a result. The power to "jump at that chance" as you put it, is already in women's hands - why don't they do that?
... either provide proof that most men would sign that (custody and access battles in court say otherwise), and that courts would in fact "rubber-stamp" such agreements, or put a condom on it, mkay.
So millions of people stopped working altogether and stopped collecting unemployment? How are they making money? How are they surviving? Why have I not heard about this and how do I stop working and put food on the table?
Yes They're not. Head in the sand? Welfare or a partner who works or early retirement or living in your car or being homeless.
Another guy who whines about having to use a condom and then complains if the woman gets pregnant. BTW, you completely forgot STDs, many of which are becoming drug resistant, and also the silent killer - HIV/AIDS, which now infects more straight people than gay people.
That's completely irrelevant to the fact that sex is much more than penetration and that a condom ceases to be of any use if you perform play involving bodily fluids and/or sexual contact.
If you do that knowingly, you have absolutely no right to whine about the consequences. You did the deed. You chose to take that risk in pursuit of hedonism. Your attitude the the same as a crackhead who complains that it's affecting their health, or someone base jumping and then getting arrested. Actions have predictable consequences.
The fact that you've twice mischaracterised my positions as "guy doesn't want to man up and take all responsibility for accidental pregnancy"
Never said that. I said each party has to be responsible for the stupidity that results in an unwanted pregnancy. You could have avoided the whole question by wearing a condom. The fact that you both want to play around exchanging body fluids is on both of you.
If you really want to go down that route, why not acknowledge that because women have more options and more opportunities to prevent accidental children, they should have more responsibility?
Condoms are still necessary to prevent transmission of STDs, especially when even in "trusted" relationships like marriage, cheating is statistically likely at some point. That's the reality, and a birth control pill, for men OR women, doesn't change that.
A pill that gives men the same ability to prevent accidental children that women currently enjoy (though not all of the same opportunities and options) is something that could change how couples interact.
Never said it wouldn't.
Currently the woman in a relationship has all the power w.r.t. if and when to have children. A pill for men will remove much of that power.
No true. Both parties have various contraceptive options. But I find it interesting that you continually frame this as a "power" issue. Your options:
You can wrap your willie
Protect your boner, silly,
Don't want kids?
Then don't act derpy.
Vasectomy too
Snip snip sterile you
But no, you think
Loss of manhood too.
It's your pick
Unprotected sex is not a "kick"
No accountability?
Then protect your dick!
What you got to lose?
Get your freak on how you choose
But "Caught up in the moment"s
Is really no excuse.
Regardless, the women has the option of saying, after the fact, "I don't want this child therefore I won't have this child." The man has no such option.
What would you think the situation would be if men got pregnant? Wouldn't you be complaining about being forced to carry a kid to term as an infringement on your rights? Realistically, such after-the-fact complaining just shows that you don't want to be held responsible for your part in not taking precautions. You know the old saying, "Trust, but verify." There are men going around claiming to have a vasectomy... the same advice applies to women.
What do you think will happen if men had the option of not paying maintenance in exchange for not seeing the child?
Hey, there are plenty of women who would jump at the opportunity because their ex is an ex for a reason. However, the courts are focused (rightly) first on what's best for the child - and that means that both parents are going to have to contribute time and resources.
It's not like this is powering a tv. And obviously data will be encrypted, same as tank computers share targeting and other info with each other on the field right now.
There's no hypocrisy. If you look through my comments, it applies equally to both sexes. You're stupid enough to have unprotected sex, you BOTH get to deal with the consequences, obviously.
Another guy who whines about having to use a condom and then complains if the woman gets pregnant. BTW, you completely forgot STDs, many of which are becoming drug resistant, and also the silent killer - HIV/AIDS, which now infects more straight people than gay people.
Both sides should cover more than their asses. Right now, the woman can by taking the pill. The man, unfortunately, usually whines about having to use a condom. "It doesn't feel the same." "It's like taking a shower with a rain coat on." "It ruins the spontaneity of the moment."
Sorry. Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter have obviated your argument. War still exists as an incentive for innovation, but it is less prominent. Any programmer today who wants to make money or make an impression has to come up with an app that appeals to ordinary humans.
Does any programmer care about DARPA or their nasty association with surveillance on citizens, with CIA, with spyware... ? Our time is about enabling citizens, privacy, and online freedom. There are still profits to be made in spying on citizens, but who will opt for that?
It's my futile hope that the Evil Empire has less influence on future developments than enthusiastic ideas from commercial and creative programmers in the future. Will you join me in this?
Let me fix that for you:
"Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter... their nasty association with surveillance on citizens, with CIA (you forgot the NSA, btw), with spyware, (invading users) privacy and online freedom. There are still profits to be made in spying on citizens. It's my futile hope that the Evil Empire has less influence on future developments."
We're not in the "software revolution age"
on
The Software Revolution
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
We're in the "war" age. The last 120 years have seen huge advances in the ability to wage war. That is what has driven world economies, and continues to do so. Look where the internet came from - DARPA. Integrated and Large-scale integrated circuits came about from military research. Space travel came from ICBMs, which came after the A4 (aka the V2) proved it was practical.
Without that stimulus, we would not have advanced anywhere near as fast.
It also serves to provide employment for a lot of people.
And worse, that's with a dropping participation rate. If the workforce participation rate were what it was, unemployment and under-employment would look even worse.
IYour "living independently" as a requirement for declaring sovereignty doesn't even hold up here on dirtside.
How many countries are living independently, with no trade of food, energy, cars, consumer goods, medicines, capital, knowldege, etc.? None. Doesn't stop them from being sovereign nations:-)
Prototypes were tested in Afghanistan. They've done a lot of work to make it lighter than existing weaponry. Also, the article is wrong because it come with the 5.56mm rifle, 18mm shotgun, and 40mm grenade launcher at the same time, as you can see from the video. And can your AK-47 share targeting info with other shooters?
Used properly by themselves, they're effective at preventing pregnancy AND preventing the transmission of STDs. Throw in a spermicide and you've got nothing to worry about.
Relying on what the other party says isn't nearly as effective when talking about disease transmission, and kind of silly when it comes to preventing pregnancies.
I'd tell you to look it up, but then I'd be swamped, like always, with [citation needed] from people who still haven't discovered how google works. Here you go
If you look through some of the comments, you'll see that some guys think birth control is "not my problem." Well, this will take away that excuse for behaving irresponsibly.
You entirely miss the point. After all, wasn't there a time when other colonies rebelled for their independence, rather than "obey the law"? There's ample jurisprudence for that. If you can't enforce the law, it's not really a law, just a suggestion.
Look at ISIS, look at Ukraine...
All the treaties are "treaties of convenience", to be obeyed until one party decides it's to their advantage to violate it. I sure don't see ISIS obeying the Geneva Conventions.
Slashdot Mirror
You've proven you're an idiot, and you don't have a clue.
Why? Because you make blanket statements that are not true. Courts do not rubber-stamp divorce agreements when there are children involved, and additionally a woman cannot unilaterally specify no access to the kids and no child support.
So when you say
Most men would sign that. All courts would sanction it and issue a decree of divorce as a result. The power to "jump at that chance" as you put it, is already in women's hands - why don't they do that?
... either provide proof that most men would sign that (custody and access battles in court say otherwise), and that courts would in fact "rubber-stamp" such agreements, or put a condom on it, mkay.
So millions of people stopped working altogether and stopped collecting unemployment? How are they making money? How are they surviving? Why have I not heard about this and how do I stop working and put food on the table?
Yes They're not. Head in the sand? Welfare or a partner who works or early retirement or living in your car or being homeless.
Lowest participation rate in almost 40 years.
Another guy who whines about having to use a condom and then complains if the woman gets pregnant. BTW, you completely forgot STDs, many of which are becoming drug resistant, and also the silent killer - HIV/AIDS, which now infects more straight people than gay people.
That's completely irrelevant to the fact that sex is much more than penetration and that a condom ceases to be of any use if you perform play involving bodily fluids and/or sexual contact.
If you do that knowingly, you have absolutely no right to whine about the consequences. You did the deed. You chose to take that risk in pursuit of hedonism. Your attitude the the same as a crackhead who complains that it's affecting their health, or someone base jumping and then getting arrested. Actions have predictable consequences.
The fact that you've twice mischaracterised my positions as "guy doesn't want to man up and take all responsibility for accidental pregnancy"
Never said that. I said each party has to be responsible for the stupidity that results in an unwanted pregnancy. You could have avoided the whole question by wearing a condom. The fact that you both want to play around exchanging body fluids is on both of you.
If you really want to go down that route, why not acknowledge that because women have more options and more opportunities to prevent accidental children, they should have more responsibility?
Condoms are still necessary to prevent transmission of STDs, especially when even in "trusted" relationships like marriage, cheating is statistically likely at some point. That's the reality, and a birth control pill, for men OR women, doesn't change that.
A pill that gives men the same ability to prevent accidental children that women currently enjoy (though not all of the same opportunities and options) is something that could change how couples interact.
Never said it wouldn't.
Currently the woman in a relationship has all the power w.r.t. if and when to have children. A pill for men will remove much of that power.
No true. Both parties have various contraceptive options. But I find it interesting that you continually frame this as a "power" issue. Your options:
You can wrap your willie
Protect your boner, silly,
Don't want kids?
Then don't act derpy.
Vasectomy too
Snip snip sterile you
But no, you think
Loss of manhood too.
It's your pick
Unprotected sex is not a "kick"
No accountability?
Then protect your dick!
What you got to lose?
Get your freak on how you choose
But "Caught up in the moment"s
Is really no excuse.
Burma Shave
Regardless, the women has the option of saying, after the fact, "I don't want this child therefore I won't have this child." The man has no such option.
What would you think the situation would be if men got pregnant? Wouldn't you be complaining about being forced to carry a kid to term as an infringement on your rights? Realistically, such after-the-fact complaining just shows that you don't want to be held responsible for your part in not taking precautions. You know the old saying, "Trust, but verify." There are men going around claiming to have a vasectomy ... the same advice applies to women.
What do you think will happen if men had the option of not paying maintenance in exchange for not seeing the child?
Hey, there are plenty of women who would jump at the opportunity because their ex is an ex for a reason. However, the courts are focused (rightly) first on what's best for the child - and that means that both parents are going to have to contribute time and resources.
It's not like this is powering a tv. And obviously data will be encrypted, same as tank computers share targeting and other info with each other on the field right now.
There's no hypocrisy. If you look through my comments, it applies equally to both sexes. You're stupid enough to have unprotected sex, you BOTH get to deal with the consequences, obviously.
Another guy who whines about having to use a condom and then complains if the woman gets pregnant. BTW, you completely forgot STDs, many of which are becoming drug resistant, and also the silent killer - HIV/AIDS, which now infects more straight people than gay people.
Both sides should cover more than their asses. Right now, the woman can by taking the pill. The man, unfortunately, usually whines about having to use a condom. "It doesn't feel the same." "It's like taking a shower with a rain coat on." "It ruins the spontaneity of the moment."
most schizophrenics got that way from doing meth.
Then how come schizophrenia existed long before meth?
Sorry. Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter have obviated your argument. War still exists as an incentive for innovation, but it is less prominent. Any programmer today who wants to make money or make an impression has to come up with an app that appeals to ordinary humans.
Does any programmer care about DARPA or their nasty association with surveillance on citizens, with CIA, with spyware ... ? Our time is about enabling citizens, privacy, and online freedom. There are still profits to be made in spying on citizens, but who will opt for that?
It's my futile hope that the Evil Empire has less influence on future developments than enthusiastic ideas from commercial and creative programmers in the future. Will you join me in this?
Let me fix that for you:
"Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter ... their nasty association with surveillance on citizens, with CIA (you forgot the NSA, btw), with spyware, (invading users) privacy and online freedom. There are still profits to be made in spying on citizens. It's my futile hope that the Evil Empire has less influence on future developments."
Still, I want to do this sort of thing in person.
We're in the "war" age. The last 120 years have seen huge advances in the ability to wage war. That is what has driven world economies, and continues to do so. Look where the internet came from - DARPA. Integrated and Large-scale integrated circuits came about from military research. Space travel came from ICBMs, which came after the A4 (aka the V2) proved it was practical.
Without that stimulus, we would not have advanced anywhere near as fast.
It also serves to provide employment for a lot of people.
And worse, that's with a dropping participation rate. If the workforce participation rate were what it was, unemployment and under-employment would look even worse.
I don't know where you live, but here there is equal responsibility.
IYour "living independently" as a requirement for declaring sovereignty doesn't even hold up here on dirtside.
How many countries are living independently, with no trade of food, energy, cars, consumer goods, medicines, capital, knowldege, etc.? None. Doesn't stop them from being sovereign nations :-)
Would explain why they were only visible in the morning, since co2 would vaporize during the day.
Prototypes were tested in Afghanistan. They've done a lot of work to make it lighter than existing weaponry. Also, the article is wrong because it come with the 5.56mm rifle, 18mm shotgun, and 40mm grenade launcher at the same time, as you can see from the video. And can your AK-47 share targeting info with other shooters?
Relying on what the other party says isn't nearly as effective when talking about disease transmission, and kind of silly when it comes to preventing pregnancies.
I guess you'll just have to suck it up then. ;-(
Both of them should be taking precautions, rather than blindly trusting the other party. I get the whole "in the heat of the moment", but still ...
I'd tell you to look it up, but then I'd be swamped, like always, with [citation needed] from people who still haven't discovered how google works. Here you go
Well guess what? Maybe you should have taken a little bit of responsibility by using a condom?
And how do men look at themselves?
With a mirror?
If you look through some of the comments, you'll see that some guys think birth control is "not my problem." Well, this will take away that excuse for behaving irresponsibly.
You entirely miss the point. After all, wasn't there a time when other colonies rebelled for their independence, rather than "obey the law"? There's ample jurisprudence for that. If you can't enforce the law, it's not really a law, just a suggestion.
Look at ISIS, look at Ukraine ...
All the treaties are "treaties of convenience", to be obeyed until one party decides it's to their advantage to violate it. I sure don't see ISIS obeying the Geneva Conventions.
Birth control is a womens issue.
You won't get a judge to agree with you if you accidentally father a child.
I won't be putting any unknown chemicals into my body for HER sake.
And yet you want her to put chemicals into her body for YOUR fun and enjoyment. Nice troll :-(