The patriarchy does harm men, yes. Without the patriarchy, more men would be willing to admit that they'd been beaten, and other men wouldn't ridicule them "for being beat up by a girl." Until it's ok for men to admit that they'd been beaten by a woman and not suffer for it, this won't change. Think about that next time you say or hear someone say "dude, I can't believe that bitch owned you!"
Any man who allows himself to be beaten up by a woman is a coward, a pussy, and deserves to be ridiculed until he finally mans up, grows a pair of balls, and decides to stand up for himself. What's that, he's too weak to fend off her attacks? That's because he spends 20 hours behind a glowing monitor or TV each day. Men have much higher testosterone levels than women and this allows them to build muscle far easier. For this reason even the strongest woman weight lifter (natural, no steroids) is weaker than most average male weight lifters. I too was a skinny computer nerd in high school who never touched a weight and even then I remember being stronger than most women I knew. Do I feel sorry for some pathetic excuse for a man who lets a woman abuse him? LOL.
Cops never have a problem taking a report, it's the actual investigation and doing something about it they always skip out on. It doesn't matter if you've been "abused" or if your house was robbed and car stolen, if you rely on the police to fix your problems then you are bound to be disappointed.
Is this intended as an excuse?
I don't think it was, but I'll go ahead and say it. If you, as as an able bodied man, allow yourself to be beaten by a woman, then you are a pussy. No man or woman will respect you. You deserve to have your ass kicked for being a disgrace to your gender and mankind in general.
A large part of American society still frowns upon the outward expression of intelligence (as many of us here may have experienced)
LOL. Or at least, that's what you tell yourself. Americans don't as a whole or as individuals frown on intelligence, what is frowned on is dweebs with no social skills--who aren't hated for being intelligent, but for being pedantic, insecure, self righteous, weird ass mother fuckers. Whereas the men who are not only intelligent but also look halfway presentable, project themselves with confidence, and are pleasant to be around, are liked and respected by their peers and they have women chatting them up left and right. Let's face it--it's not about anti-intellectualism, it's about your poor attitude, your irritating personality, your poor personal hygiene and shitty clothes, or that extra 150 lbs of fat you haul around, or a combination of the above.
Why deploy an advanced and experimental stealth aircraft in Kandahar against an enemy that doesn't have radar (nor any capability to threaten aircraft)?
For exactly that reason. The aircraft is advanced and experimental, and they want to test it in combat without running the risk of having it shot down then recovered and reverse engineered by the enemy.
Recon and close air support, though, is going to go UAV. Using an F-16 to take out a truck is not only overkill, you don't have enough fighters to do it very often.
Just a nitpick, the role you describe (taking out a truck) is not close air support. I'm guessing you mean like the videos from the Gulf War where they showed a fighter firing a missile to take out a truck in a convoy. Generally those were hits on high value targets, and as you state, unmanned vehicles are perfect for that role. For general convoy wrecking duty, or in an actual close air support role (extended loitering in an area with lots of armor, fuel, and firepower to be intimately and directly involved with combat operations on the ground, vs UAVs which typically fire off one missile from a distance then call it quits) the A-10 or Apache are the weapons of choice and neither one of those aircraft will be replaced by unmanned vehicles any time soon.
Yes, but how many crew members does it have? And how many crew members would fit into this plane at its present size if it were manned? The Air Force is not going to be doing 50 hour missions with a single pilot flying the thing the whole time.
The fact that it was at an international aeroport suggests that the US does not consider it to be one of their secret planes anymore.
Well, keep in mind that Kandahar International Airport also doubles as a large military base, Kandahar Airfield, which is the primary base providing air support for all of southern Afghanistan. This is the area of the country where some of the fiercest fighting is taking place. If a FOB down there comes under attack odds are Kandahar will be providing air support in the form of Apaches, A-10s, etc. It would be logical to use this as a testing ground for this new UAV, although I would be surprised if they were doing so in broad daylight where anyone could see. Doubtless they did all their missions at night when the flight line is blacked out, plus it's behind privacy fences etc and photography is actively forbidden. Doesn't mean that someone couldn't catch a glimpse of it though and I doubt at that point the Air Force was worried about someone seeing it.
NASA is fighting tooth and nail against a FOIA request to release some of its raw data. What are they afraid of?
I don't know. You tell me. What ARE they afraid of, Wonko? Is there really a vast scientific conspiracy here and NASA is afraid if they release their data it will prove the conspiracy's existence?
And that's exactly why I am pro-gun control. Here in Portugal we have a real problem with women being sent to the hospital by drunk husbands. They (the men) are not burglars or kidnappers, they would never get a gun being illegal as it is now, but if they could get it legally, I wonder how many women would survive?
And what makes you think it is difficult to kill someone without a gun? It's just as easy to kill someone (especially a typical woman since they are built lighter) with a strong punch to the temple, or a knife, or by throwing them off a balcony.
If it is supposed to move but doesn't... use WD40.
[pedant]
WD40 is actually terrible for this job. It was originally invented to be sprayed on metal parts to prevent them from rusting, and it works well for that. It's not a good lubricant though nor does it penetrate corrosion very well. On moving parts it attracts and holds in dirt and "dries out" within a relatively short period, leaving the part binding/squeaking worse than before. For a rust penetrant, use something like PB Blaster or Sea Foam. For a lubricant, use oil or something designed specifically for that purpose.
If you want to talk about Afghanistan, no one is interested in conquering Afghanistan. It's a pile of dirt whose only significance is that there used to be some bad guys there.
And yet, despite the general support of the populace, we can't even defeat a rag tag band of ousted religious fundamentalists and cave dwellers. Despite billions of dollars worth of heavy equipment, armor, night vision, weaponry, gunships, vehicles, and the best trained and equipped soldiers money can buy, our guys are dying every day in this country. They're not just taking pot shots as us from behind houses, they are straight up overrunning fortified and defended positions. All it takes is a $100 worth of materials to build a car bomb that will split open an uparmored Humvee like a tin can. Happens every week here, and the people building these bombs often don't even have a primary school education. And you seriously think that if worse came to worst, the US populace (far more educated, equipped, and financed) would do worse? You seriously think our armed forces (who are literally our brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, sons, daughters, etc) could be counted on to do what it took (i.e. kill their friends and family) to quell an uprising? LOL.
On that mood, do you think the privately owned weapons by USA civilians would be of much use against the USA army power, nukes and all included? I don't think so.
The answer is simple, rifles and homemade bombs are useless against the might of the US military. This of course explains why the US military was able to invade Afghanistan (one of the poorest and most backwards countries in the world) and Iraq (not much better) and crush both the Taliban and Iraqi insurgents within a week. It's not like we are to this day spending years and billions of dollars continuing to fight a bunch of cave dwellers who have limited funds and resources. And if US citizens ever decided to rebel against their government, theres no way that our nation's vast numbers of engineers, machinists, and skilled tradesmen of all varieties with their near unlimited riches, resources, and ingenuity could possibly ever challenge the US government. If a city or state decides to rebel, no problem, there are countless folks in the US Air Force who will be happy to nuke their families and friends into oblivion without giving it a second thought.
No one mocks the hockey stars who spent every waking hour at the rink.
That's because hockey stars aren't enormously fat, pale cheeto munchers who spend every waking hour in a basement illuminated by the glow of a CRT screen, or in the case of the guy who sleeps in the next bunk over from me, annoying kids who lay around hammering on their Nintendo DS buttons every waking hour while sucking loudly on a juice box. At least the hockey star is in fantastic physical condition and obviously has excellent coordination, balance, strength, etc. What positive traits does the WoW nerd acquire in his many wasted hours to make women want to fuck him or other guys want to be him?
Some sort of interpreted language was needed for the web, to run untrusted code in a secure way.
And the real question is, why do we need this capability? The answer is simple. We are using Javascript to force HTTP and HTML into uses they were never designed for, and are not even close to being the ideal solution for modern needs. What we need is a new protocol that is designed specifically for implementing a user interface remotely, not a 15 year old standard that was designed to serve up simple text documents and only handle minimum data exchange between client and server. I'm thinking something along the lines of the X11 protocol in concept, but far simplified and built for the purpose at hand.
I feel you man. I went out of business myself last year due to the economy and fell behind on my debt. (I was in too much debt to begin with; a hard lesson learned.) After this fiasco my once excellent credit was trashed. I ended up getting a good job and paying most of that back. Some of my creditors were easy to work with. For example, the local banks were very understanding and helpful. I made sure they got paid back in full as promised.
But as for the two credit card companies who were always a pain in the ass to deal with, who jacked up my interest rates through the roof and refused to lower them so that I could make my payments, and who blew up my phone calling hundreds of times every day and night from random numbers, all this despite my payment record being perfect before I fell on hard times? Fuck those mother fuckers. I didn't pay them back a dime. I don't give a shit about my credit score, they can take it and shove it up their asses sideways. From now on it's a cash and carry policy for me. I save my money now, and if I can't afford it, I don't need it.
Why do people bully and tease other people in the first place? It's because they have their own insecurities and picking on lesser individuals helps them to cope. This is a natural human (and animal) behavior. Ever heard of a pecking order? If someone doesn't like being at the bottom of the pecking order, then he needs to take action to elevate his status. All it takes it takes is one good punch to the face of an aggressor (regardless of your size, gender, or strength) to shut up all of them for good. If someone is too much of a pussy to take such a simple step to improve his life, then hell no I don't feel sorry for him.
And yes, calling people hurtful names IS free speech in the U.S. and should ALWAYS remain so, the only exception being if it reaches the point of harassment of course. Sure, it's nice if a web site takes down bullying posts when people complain or when a moderator sees them. Should they be required to by law? In a free country, NO.
I was heavily depressed until I was in my 20s due to my shitty family situation. I was bullied and terrorized throughout my primary school life and had my ass kicked plenty of times. Having said that, if you find anonymous online comments to be bullying and terrorizing then you have SERIOUS problems. If you do know where the comments are coming from, then just go kick the dude's ass. It'll stop.
I actually busted through a guy's front door, ran upstairs to his room, and slugged it out with him over some shit he said about me and my girlfriend online. I warned him at least twice to quit and he didn't, so I drove over to his place and kicked his ass. It was a stupid mistake because you should never invade someone's house like that unless you have to, and certainly not over something so trivial. That kind of shit can get you shot or convicted of a felony, as I would have if he hadn't dropped the charges.
But even so, I spent a long night in jail, had the best sex of my life the next night, and the dude never bothered me again. If this had happened out in public or in a private setting somewhere the same results would have occurred except I wouldn't have gone to jail. Think about it, guys, before you start advocating complicated and stupid solutions to problems that are really easy to solve. IMO, violence is to be avoided whenever possible, but sometimes it IS the best solution to a given problem.
For weaker people, this might lead to psychological problems and ultimately suicide
So what's your solution? Stifle free speech so that a bunch of pussies will feel better about themselves, and not get their poor feelings hurt? I don't want to see anyone commit suicide over something they read online, but the best solution to this "problem" certainly doesn't involve censorship.
Yes, I was depressed for most of my life up until a few years back when I finally was able to cure myself of it. I know what it's like to be teased and picked on and to hate life. If someone is getting picked on all the time, then the real solution is for him to "man up" and grow a spine and thicker skin, instead of trying to neuter and gag everyone else.
sing this same logic, since we still have murder even though it's against the law, let's just repeal the law against murder. Then all of those hitmen and muggers won't have to hide in seedy back alleys, yay!
Except that your argument is complete bullshit because smoking tobacco and murdering people are nothing alike. If you want a more valid comparison, try comparing tobacco to marijuana. So how well is that "War On Drugs" going, hmm?
Slashdot Mirror
The patriarchy does harm men, yes. Without the patriarchy, more men would be willing to admit that they'd been beaten, and other men wouldn't ridicule them "for being beat up by a girl." Until it's ok for men to admit that they'd been beaten by a woman and not suffer for it, this won't change. Think about that next time you say or hear someone say "dude, I can't believe that bitch owned you!"
Any man who allows himself to be beaten up by a woman is a coward, a pussy, and deserves to be ridiculed until he finally mans up, grows a pair of balls, and decides to stand up for himself. What's that, he's too weak to fend off her attacks? That's because he spends 20 hours behind a glowing monitor or TV each day. Men have much higher testosterone levels than women and this allows them to build muscle far easier. For this reason even the strongest woman weight lifter (natural, no steroids) is weaker than most average male weight lifters. I too was a skinny computer nerd in high school who never touched a weight and even then I remember being stronger than most women I knew. Do I feel sorry for some pathetic excuse for a man who lets a woman abuse him? LOL.
Good luck getting a cop to take a report.
Cops never have a problem taking a report, it's the actual investigation and doing something about it they always skip out on. It doesn't matter if you've been "abused" or if your house was robbed and car stolen, if you rely on the police to fix your problems then you are bound to be disappointed.
Is this intended as an excuse?
I don't think it was, but I'll go ahead and say it. If you, as as an able bodied man, allow yourself to be beaten by a woman, then you are a pussy. No man or woman will respect you. You deserve to have your ass kicked for being a disgrace to your gender and mankind in general.
-1, Apparently Knows Little to Nothing about Dating and Attraction. But This is Slashdot, What Else is New?
A large part of American society still frowns upon the outward expression of intelligence (as many of us here may have experienced)
LOL. Or at least, that's what you tell yourself. Americans don't as a whole or as individuals frown on intelligence, what is frowned on is dweebs with no social skills--who aren't hated for being intelligent, but for being pedantic, insecure, self righteous, weird ass mother fuckers. Whereas the men who are not only intelligent but also look halfway presentable, project themselves with confidence, and are pleasant to be around, are liked and respected by their peers and they have women chatting them up left and right. Let's face it--it's not about anti-intellectualism, it's about your poor attitude, your irritating personality, your poor personal hygiene and shitty clothes, or that extra 150 lbs of fat you haul around, or a combination of the above.
Why deploy an advanced and experimental stealth aircraft in Kandahar against an enemy that doesn't have radar (nor any capability to threaten aircraft)?
For exactly that reason. The aircraft is advanced and experimental, and they want to test it in combat without running the risk of having it shot down then recovered and reverse engineered by the enemy.
Recon and close air support, though, is going to go UAV. Using an F-16 to take out a truck is not only overkill, you don't have enough fighters to do it very often.
Just a nitpick, the role you describe (taking out a truck) is not close air support. I'm guessing you mean like the videos from the Gulf War where they showed a fighter firing a missile to take out a truck in a convoy. Generally those were hits on high value targets, and as you state, unmanned vehicles are perfect for that role. For general convoy wrecking duty, or in an actual close air support role (extended loitering in an area with lots of armor, fuel, and firepower to be intimately and directly involved with combat operations on the ground, vs UAVs which typically fire off one missile from a distance then call it quits) the A-10 or Apache are the weapons of choice and neither one of those aircraft will be replaced by unmanned vehicles any time soon.
Yes, but how many crew members does it have? And how many crew members would fit into this plane at its present size if it were manned? The Air Force is not going to be doing 50 hour missions with a single pilot flying the thing the whole time.
The fact that it was at an international aeroport suggests that the US does not consider it to be one of their secret planes anymore.
Well, keep in mind that Kandahar International Airport also doubles as a large military base, Kandahar Airfield, which is the primary base providing air support for all of southern Afghanistan. This is the area of the country where some of the fiercest fighting is taking place. If a FOB down there comes under attack odds are Kandahar will be providing air support in the form of Apaches, A-10s, etc. It would be logical to use this as a testing ground for this new UAV, although I would be surprised if they were doing so in broad daylight where anyone could see. Doubtless they did all their missions at night when the flight line is blacked out, plus it's behind privacy fences etc and photography is actively forbidden. Doesn't mean that someone couldn't catch a glimpse of it though and I doubt at that point the Air Force was worried about someone seeing it.
NASA is fighting tooth and nail against a FOIA request to release some of its raw data. What are they afraid of?
I don't know. You tell me. What ARE they afraid of, Wonko? Is there really a vast scientific conspiracy here and NASA is afraid if they release their data it will prove the conspiracy's existence?
Seems to me that fines and confiscation would be cheaper
Yes, but just as injust. The real solution is to stop punishing people for doing things that don't harm others.
And that's exactly why I am pro-gun control. Here in Portugal we have a real problem with women being sent to the hospital by drunk husbands. They (the men) are not burglars or kidnappers, they would never get a gun being illegal as it is now, but if they could get it legally, I wonder how many women would survive?
And what makes you think it is difficult to kill someone without a gun? It's just as easy to kill someone (especially a typical woman since they are built lighter) with a strong punch to the temple, or a knife, or by throwing them off a balcony.
Yes it
The only problem I can foresee with bongs in space: no gravity!
If it is supposed to move but doesn't... use WD40.
[pedant]
WD40 is actually terrible for this job. It was originally invented to be sprayed on metal parts to prevent them from rusting, and it works well for that. It's not a good lubricant though nor does it penetrate corrosion very well. On moving parts it attracts and holds in dirt and "dries out" within a relatively short period, leaving the part binding/squeaking worse than before. For a rust penetrant, use something like PB Blaster or Sea Foam. For a lubricant, use oil or something designed specifically for that purpose.
[/pedant]
If you want to talk about Afghanistan, no one is interested in conquering Afghanistan. It's a pile of dirt whose only significance is that there used to be some bad guys there.
And yet, despite the general support of the populace, we can't even defeat a rag tag band of ousted religious fundamentalists and cave dwellers. Despite billions of dollars worth of heavy equipment, armor, night vision, weaponry, gunships, vehicles, and the best trained and equipped soldiers money can buy, our guys are dying every day in this country. They're not just taking pot shots as us from behind houses, they are straight up overrunning fortified and defended positions. All it takes is a $100 worth of materials to build a car bomb that will split open an uparmored Humvee like a tin can. Happens every week here, and the people building these bombs often don't even have a primary school education. And you seriously think that if worse came to worst, the US populace (far more educated, equipped, and financed) would do worse? You seriously think our armed forces (who are literally our brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, sons, daughters, etc) could be counted on to do what it took (i.e. kill their friends and family) to quell an uprising? LOL.
On that mood, do you think the privately owned weapons by USA civilians would be of much use against the USA army power, nukes and all included? I don't think so.
The answer is simple, rifles and homemade bombs are useless against the might of the US military. This of course explains why the US military was able to invade Afghanistan (one of the poorest and most backwards countries in the world) and Iraq (not much better) and crush both the Taliban and Iraqi insurgents within a week. It's not like we are to this day spending years and billions of dollars continuing to fight a bunch of cave dwellers who have limited funds and resources. And if US citizens ever decided to rebel against their government, theres no way that our nation's vast numbers of engineers, machinists, and skilled tradesmen of all varieties with their near unlimited riches, resources, and ingenuity could possibly ever challenge the US government. If a city or state decides to rebel, no problem, there are countless folks in the US Air Force who will be happy to nuke their families and friends into oblivion without giving it a second thought.
No one mocks the hockey stars who spent every waking hour at the rink.
That's because hockey stars aren't enormously fat, pale cheeto munchers who spend every waking hour in a basement illuminated by the glow of a CRT screen, or in the case of the guy who sleeps in the next bunk over from me, annoying kids who lay around hammering on their Nintendo DS buttons every waking hour while sucking loudly on a juice box. At least the hockey star is in fantastic physical condition and obviously has excellent coordination, balance, strength, etc. What positive traits does the WoW nerd acquire in his many wasted hours to make women want to fuck him or other guys want to be him?
Some sort of interpreted language was needed for the web, to run untrusted code in a secure way.
And the real question is, why do we need this capability? The answer is simple. We are using Javascript to force HTTP and HTML into uses they were never designed for, and are not even close to being the ideal solution for modern needs. What we need is a new protocol that is designed specifically for implementing a user interface remotely, not a 15 year old standard that was designed to serve up simple text documents and only handle minimum data exchange between client and server. I'm thinking something along the lines of the X11 protocol in concept, but far simplified and built for the purpose at hand.
Woosh
I feel you man. I went out of business myself last year due to the economy and fell behind on my debt. (I was in too much debt to begin with; a hard lesson learned.) After this fiasco my once excellent credit was trashed. I ended up getting a good job and paying most of that back. Some of my creditors were easy to work with. For example, the local banks were very understanding and helpful. I made sure they got paid back in full as promised.
But as for the two credit card companies who were always a pain in the ass to deal with, who jacked up my interest rates through the roof and refused to lower them so that I could make my payments, and who blew up my phone calling hundreds of times every day and night from random numbers, all this despite my payment record being perfect before I fell on hard times? Fuck those mother fuckers. I didn't pay them back a dime. I don't give a shit about my credit score, they can take it and shove it up their asses sideways. From now on it's a cash and carry policy for me. I save my money now, and if I can't afford it, I don't need it.
Why do people bully and tease other people in the first place? It's because they have their own insecurities and picking on lesser individuals helps them to cope. This is a natural human (and animal) behavior. Ever heard of a pecking order? If someone doesn't like being at the bottom of the pecking order, then he needs to take action to elevate his status. All it takes it takes is one good punch to the face of an aggressor (regardless of your size, gender, or strength) to shut up all of them for good. If someone is too much of a pussy to take such a simple step to improve his life, then hell no I don't feel sorry for him.
And yes, calling people hurtful names IS free speech in the U.S. and should ALWAYS remain so, the only exception being if it reaches the point of harassment of course. Sure, it's nice if a web site takes down bullying posts when people complain or when a moderator sees them. Should they be required to by law? In a free country, NO.
I was heavily depressed until I was in my 20s due to my shitty family situation. I was bullied and terrorized throughout my primary school life and had my ass kicked plenty of times. Having said that, if you find anonymous online comments to be bullying and terrorizing then you have SERIOUS problems. If you do know where the comments are coming from, then just go kick the dude's ass. It'll stop.
I actually busted through a guy's front door, ran upstairs to his room, and slugged it out with him over some shit he said about me and my girlfriend online. I warned him at least twice to quit and he didn't, so I drove over to his place and kicked his ass. It was a stupid mistake because you should never invade someone's house like that unless you have to, and certainly not over something so trivial. That kind of shit can get you shot or convicted of a felony, as I would have if he hadn't dropped the charges.
But even so, I spent a long night in jail, had the best sex of my life the next night, and the dude never bothered me again. If this had happened out in public or in a private setting somewhere the same results would have occurred except I wouldn't have gone to jail. Think about it, guys, before you start advocating complicated and stupid solutions to problems that are really easy to solve. IMO, violence is to be avoided whenever possible, but sometimes it IS the best solution to a given problem.
For weaker people, this might lead to psychological problems and ultimately suicide
So what's your solution? Stifle free speech so that a bunch of pussies will feel better about themselves, and not get their poor feelings hurt? I don't want to see anyone commit suicide over something they read online, but the best solution to this "problem" certainly doesn't involve censorship.
Yes, I was depressed for most of my life up until a few years back when I finally was able to cure myself of it. I know what it's like to be teased and picked on and to hate life. If someone is getting picked on all the time, then the real solution is for him to "man up" and grow a spine and thicker skin, instead of trying to neuter and gag everyone else.
sing this same logic, since we still have murder even though it's against the law, let's just repeal the law against murder. Then all of those hitmen and muggers won't have to hide in seedy back alleys, yay!
Except that your argument is complete bullshit because smoking tobacco and murdering people are nothing alike. If you want a more valid comparison, try comparing tobacco to marijuana. So how well is that "War On Drugs" going, hmm?
Would acetone and a small brush not remove the tar pretty easily?