To truly and deeply participate in the lifestyle, a man would have to find one or more women who want to participate in the lifestyle. As long as the women agree to do that, and can shut down what's going on any time the woman wants to withdraw consent, it's consensual. It can be done safely. Obviously, the participants are going to act as if men are superior to women. As long as the man doesn't try to subjugate unwilling women, and doesn't behave like an asshole to other people, no problem. Sure, the women aren't real slaves, and brutally rough surprise sex isn't really rape when the woman can stop it at any time, and male superiority isn't real male superiority when it exists on the woman's continued consent, but the participants don't have to worry about that.
If he's a Gorean, then he's a misogynistic asshole. It's assholes all the way down.
Sure. Is he a Gorean? He role-plays one among people who share the fantasy. I have my own sexual fantasies, and while they don't include Gor some of them are against the values I hold and practice, and do not show in my daily life. To give one example, I have fantasies involving sex with people other than my wife, but that doesn't mean I hit on other women or would think seriously about going too far with them.
If the guy acts like a misogynist asshole in his daily life, that's one thing. If he acts like a misogynist asshole in a safe environment with people who are cooperating willingly, that's none of my business.
Men are primarily responsible for the world's ills, to be honest, because they generally have more power.
The women I know who call themselves feminists do not believe women are superior to men. They believe that the two sexes are equal. My wife registered for the draft, and was rejected.
I'd say the difference is whether you extend your kink to the rest of the world. If you spend your free time with women who want to be treated like a Gorean slave girl and treat them accordingly, keeping everything fully consensual, that's one thing. If you act like an asshole and misogynist in real life, that's another thing. All I've read of this guy is that he practices certain sexual fantasies that some people would find offensive in real life, and I fail to see what he does in private with people who willingly go along with it is any of my business.
Except that I don't cast them, but rather observe them. Most people who use the term "SJW", in my experience, are bigots and racists. Similarly, people who use the term "political correctness" are, in my experience, asserting their right to be assholes.
The CEO in question resigned. Last I looked, nobody not directly involved knew how voluntary the resignation was. He had donated a large sum of money to preventing the legalization of same-sex marriage. It wasn't clear to me that he could function well as Mozilla CEO under those circumstances.
Dumb and smart bombs both have their uses. Whether we can get 20% of dumb bombs having a blast zone that includes the target depends heavily on the effective blast zone, and that varies by target. North Vietnamese bridges lasted through lots and lots of dumb bomb attacks and succumbed to relatively few smart bombs.
General welfare is effectively the sum of individual welfare. (It may differ in more collectivist societies) Also, helping people in difficult situations can improve everyone's general welfare.
Economically, Germany suffered much more than Britain or France, with a very large amount of industrial capacity and infrastructure destroyed. The economic powerhouse stuff (for both Germany and Japan) came considerably later, and Germany and Japan also never became first-rate powers again.
PDFs are awkward to read except at the original size. I have a large-screen low-end Android tablet for them. ePub and similar formats allow easy reading on an arbitrary screen with arbitrary type size.
Speaking as a leftist who has a personal hatred of Nazis (on top of all the general hatred), I think we need to wait until they violate criminal law before they're brought to justice. I do believe in these formalities.
This is not just sending someone a picture, and the courts are pretty good at distinguishing between real injury and claimed harm. The legal system already gets plugged up by idiots looking for revenge or payday.
I spent a few months with my left cornea messed up so I couldn't see usefully out of that eye. Having two functioning eyes is much better than having one.
"For profit" is significant in that it brings up the possibility of fraud (lying for profit) and a possible conflict of interest (the clinic was doing it for the money, and had a financial interest in finding suckers). If the clinic were non-profit, and didn't accept payment, it couldn't be fraud and there would be less (not zero) possibility of a conflict of interest.
The plaintiff has to file suit on the basis that the defendant did something that the defendant legally should not have, or failed to do something the defendant was legally required to do. In cases of contract violation, for example, the plaintiff tries to show that the defendant broke some aspect of contract law. The plaintiff doesn't have to show that the defendant broke any criminal law, but the law has to be involved somewhere.
Sure, we can do more. However, cutting basic research out of the budget isn't going to free up anywhere near the needed money. For that, we'd need to cut into a reasonably large part of the budget, or raise taxes, or go deeper into debt.
Also, lots of the people hurting aren't going to be helped by throwing money at them. There has been a structural shift in the economy since the 1950s, and a lot of blue-collar jobs are simply not coming back. The US still makes a very large amount of stuff, but with a much smaller number of workers. It will never again be possible to count on earning a good living with a strong work ethic and little skill. To move on, people need to realize this and act accordingly, picking up new skills.
I once had a manager give me a clear description of the Peter Principle as part of company policy. That was the job where I got recurring dreams of being rescued by my US 1943-pattern armored division in 1/285 scale (I'm a miniatures wargamer). I stepped up the new job search and looked for dump trucks for my engineering battalion.
He doesn't seem to understand the idea of detailing a project from start to finish. Like, we're given a project - do {X}. Only it turns out that {X} is only step one of a much longer project, and that if told us that {X} led to {Y} which led to {Z}, we'd code it differently. But he doesn't do that, so we've spent time refactoring to handle the parts he didn't tell us about.
I used to have a user who worked that way. It got me daydreaming about hiring requirements analysts from the Mafia. "Youse gonna tell me what happens if the item isn't in the database, or I break your leg."
and he figured he could do it in 2 days, and he has the ability to do it in 2 days
You seem to be making an unwarranted assumption here. There's also the question of what "do it" means, and one of the chapters of The Mythical Man-Month discusses the difference between a neat new program and a useful software product.
I worked at a place that had "strategic development" and "development". The people in the former would write proofs of concept that sorta worked on a limited range of the real-life domain, and there were expectations that we'd take those and quickly turn them into actual practical working software. What strategic development did was mostly good ideas, but it would have been more efficient to hand good ideas over to us so we could build them right the first time.
Last time I added a page, it was improved before I could turn my laptop around and show it to the person I made it for. (I'm not being sarcastic here, as the change was a clear improvement. I just didn't expect it to happen that fast.)
Slashdot Mirror
To truly and deeply participate in the lifestyle, a man would have to find one or more women who want to participate in the lifestyle. As long as the women agree to do that, and can shut down what's going on any time the woman wants to withdraw consent, it's consensual. It can be done safely. Obviously, the participants are going to act as if men are superior to women. As long as the man doesn't try to subjugate unwilling women, and doesn't behave like an asshole to other people, no problem. Sure, the women aren't real slaves, and brutally rough surprise sex isn't really rape when the woman can stop it at any time, and male superiority isn't real male superiority when it exists on the woman's continued consent, but the participants don't have to worry about that.
Sure. Is he a Gorean? He role-plays one among people who share the fantasy. I have my own sexual fantasies, and while they don't include Gor some of them are against the values I hold and practice, and do not show in my daily life. To give one example, I have fantasies involving sex with people other than my wife, but that doesn't mean I hit on other women or would think seriously about going too far with them.
If the guy acts like a misogynist asshole in his daily life, that's one thing. If he acts like a misogynist asshole in a safe environment with people who are cooperating willingly, that's none of my business.
You're using an extremely narrow definition of "SJW" here.
Men are primarily responsible for the world's ills, to be honest, because they generally have more power.
The women I know who call themselves feminists do not believe women are superior to men. They believe that the two sexes are equal. My wife registered for the draft, and was rejected.
I'd say the difference is whether you extend your kink to the rest of the world. If you spend your free time with women who want to be treated like a Gorean slave girl and treat them accordingly, keeping everything fully consensual, that's one thing. If you act like an asshole and misogynist in real life, that's another thing. All I've read of this guy is that he practices certain sexual fantasies that some people would find offensive in real life, and I fail to see what he does in private with people who willingly go along with it is any of my business.
Except that I don't cast them, but rather observe them. Most people who use the term "SJW", in my experience, are bigots and racists. Similarly, people who use the term "political correctness" are, in my experience, asserting their right to be assholes.
The CEO in question resigned. Last I looked, nobody not directly involved knew how voluntary the resignation was. He had donated a large sum of money to preventing the legalization of same-sex marriage. It wasn't clear to me that he could function well as Mozilla CEO under those circumstances.
Dumb and smart bombs both have their uses. Whether we can get 20% of dumb bombs having a blast zone that includes the target depends heavily on the effective blast zone, and that varies by target. North Vietnamese bridges lasted through lots and lots of dumb bomb attacks and succumbed to relatively few smart bombs.
General welfare is effectively the sum of individual welfare. (It may differ in more collectivist societies) Also, helping people in difficult situations can improve everyone's general welfare.
There's much to be said for having a large warhead explode before hitting the target, to get a larger volume affected.
Economically, Germany suffered much more than Britain or France, with a very large amount of industrial capacity and infrastructure destroyed. The economic powerhouse stuff (for both Germany and Japan) came considerably later, and Germany and Japan also never became first-rate powers again.
PDFs are awkward to read except at the original size. I have a large-screen low-end Android tablet for them. ePub and similar formats allow easy reading on an arbitrary screen with arbitrary type size.
Paper and digital each have their advantages, and we're better off having a choice. I don't mind paying more for the one I want more.
Speaking as a leftist who has a personal hatred of Nazis (on top of all the general hatred), I think we need to wait until they violate criminal law before they're brought to justice. I do believe in these formalities.
There are laws against deliberately causing people physical harm, no matter what the means used.
This is not just sending someone a picture, and the courts are pretty good at distinguishing between real injury and claimed harm. The legal system already gets plugged up by idiots looking for revenge or payday.
I spent a few months with my left cornea messed up so I couldn't see usefully out of that eye. Having two functioning eyes is much better than having one.
"For profit" is significant in that it brings up the possibility of fraud (lying for profit) and a possible conflict of interest (the clinic was doing it for the money, and had a financial interest in finding suckers). If the clinic were non-profit, and didn't accept payment, it couldn't be fraud and there would be less (not zero) possibility of a conflict of interest.
The plaintiff has to file suit on the basis that the defendant did something that the defendant legally should not have, or failed to do something the defendant was legally required to do. In cases of contract violation, for example, the plaintiff tries to show that the defendant broke some aspect of contract law. The plaintiff doesn't have to show that the defendant broke any criminal law, but the law has to be involved somewhere.
Sure, we can do more. However, cutting basic research out of the budget isn't going to free up anywhere near the needed money. For that, we'd need to cut into a reasonably large part of the budget, or raise taxes, or go deeper into debt.
Also, lots of the people hurting aren't going to be helped by throwing money at them. There has been a structural shift in the economy since the 1950s, and a lot of blue-collar jobs are simply not coming back. The US still makes a very large amount of stuff, but with a much smaller number of workers. It will never again be possible to count on earning a good living with a strong work ethic and little skill. To move on, people need to realize this and act accordingly, picking up new skills.
I once had a manager give me a clear description of the Peter Principle as part of company policy. That was the job where I got recurring dreams of being rescued by my US 1943-pattern armored division in 1/285 scale (I'm a miniatures wargamer). I stepped up the new job search and looked for dump trucks for my engineering battalion.
I used to have a user who worked that way. It got me daydreaming about hiring requirements analysts from the Mafia. "Youse gonna tell me what happens if the item isn't in the database, or I break your leg."
You seem to be making an unwarranted assumption here. There's also the question of what "do it" means, and one of the chapters of The Mythical Man-Month discusses the difference between a neat new program and a useful software product.
I worked at a place that had "strategic development" and "development". The people in the former would write proofs of concept that sorta worked on a limited range of the real-life domain, and there were expectations that we'd take those and quickly turn them into actual practical working software. What strategic development did was mostly good ideas, but it would have been more efficient to hand good ideas over to us so we could build them right the first time.
Last time I added a page, it was improved before I could turn my laptop around and show it to the person I made it for. (I'm not being sarcastic here, as the change was a clear improvement. I just didn't expect it to happen that fast.)