And the end result of the people advocating for greater parental involvement by the men are called SJW, and attacked for demanding social change that hurts men. Say anything gender related that anyone doesn't like, and without even touching the argument, you see "shut up SJW" responses. As if "SJW" was a complete response in itself, proving everyone else wrong.
Using the military for police is common outside the US. The US doesn't do it because the military is too high strung and trained to kill everything that moves to use as a police force. But elsewhere, it works out much better.
It is incredibly disingenuous to claim ownership of people's actions in the past.
And it's incredibly disingenuous to claim that I claimed ownership of people's actions in the past.
I just noted that "social justice" was used to describe the abolitionist movement http://english.stackexchange.c... and that those who "fought" for it could be described as "warriors". So abolitionists were SJW.
If you don't like that, stop resetting the term to be a pejorative.
You are transparently trying to say "these people did good things and I say I do good things therefore we are the same and you are bad". You aren't nearly as clever as you think you are.
I never claimed to do anything good. I never said anyone else is bad. That is purely a fabrication by those who hate equality, progress and politeness. When you have to lie to try to make me look bad, you show your argument has no validity.
Nope, they did it first by claiming "social justice" was a bad thing. I didn't assassinate anyone's character. I just defined "social justice". That you find ant-SJW to be so offensive, perhaps you should be complaining about those who dismiss and belittle the people trying to help others. The Underground Railroad was run by SJW. Anti-feminist activists shouldn't co-opt a "nice" term as a pejorative. It pisses off all the SJW anonymous cowards when people point out what "social justice" is.
I thought the point is "SJW is the proper term for 'fucking liberal' when I want to insult someone with different beliefs than mine., while still claiming the high moral ground."
It was SJW's in the '60s that helped end that. Today it's a pejorative to mean "bored white women" which were the SJWs that gave us Prohibition. SJW isn't a bad thing. It's a good and necessary thing that is sometimes misused, not the least of which by those who can't keep from accusing everyone else on the planet of being an SJW.
The submission process heavily favours previously accepted submitters. I've seen a number of times where a "new" person posted something that just happened, but it wasn't until one of the regular posters posted it days later until it was accepted. There are complaints that only the same submitters are on the front page, but only the same submitters are accepted, so the others give up and stop trying.
Use of SJW indicates the speaker is an idiot. People say things, not classes of people you don't dislike, with no severe selection bias for what is heard from it.
They just open the letter. They don't care if you know you are being watched. Everyone is being watched. The "problem" with the scrolls is that opening them destroys them.
Watching someone golf will never tell you that your problem is under (or over) rotation of the wrists (a common problem). As that detail is hard to see in someone else swinging. Watching games seems mostly like that for me. I see you are spinning around and jumping in a physics-defying move. But I don't see that your fingers work together to adjust aim when jumping in a second-nature way so as you jump up, you target down to keep the crosshairs on the same target.
I only use wireless mice for that reason. Even in the early days, there was always a "fight" with the mouse. Move the mouse to the right, let go, and it'd try to re-center itself from the cord memory. Going to a thick, heavy HDMI cable coming from it, and it'd be even worse. Perhaps usable if there was a thin, light cable of 10 cm or so before the HDMI adapter. But even then, I doubt it.
I have an auto policy that meets the legal minimums, and a large personal umbrella policy for $5M. This was much cheaper than more expensive car insurance, and with much greater coverage. The umbrella explicitly covers any auto liability above the car insurance coverage. I never looked to see if it mattered whether you were self-insured for auto.
You forget that much of the cost of insurance is fraud prevention. You have to get your car inspected by the insurance company, or an agent thereof, or you can't get the damage covered. They launch investigations into every claim. The laws in some places (like Texas) cap profits, so the more you spend, the more you make in profit, so they have no motive to keep costs down, so far as their prices remain competitive. (Insurance payouts)/(insurance premiums) would be a better measure of insurance "efficiency". 100% efficient would be "best" for the consumer, but leave nothing to profit. High overheads would be revealed in a poor result (and profit is an overhead).
It's illegal to sell auto insurance across state lines (in most states), as the rules around it are incompatible. They'll have to have individual policies for each state, and will "sell" it in the state you buy it from, even if they sell it all from a central server. I moved states, and State Farm (Texas) canceled my policy, and State Farm (Alaska) wrote me a new and unrelated policy, from my perspective it was relatively seamless, as they shared information about me, but legally, you can't even take a policy with you when you move.
I've never had that work for me. What did they do to make it do that was always my issue. I know what to do, but do it poorly. Watching someone play golf well won't make you an expert, unless *they* watch you and tell you what you did wrong.
I found out by accident (when the kids tried to stream a game on my computer while I was doing something else), that if you log in multiple locations at the same time, you can remote control the other by streaming a game from it, then on the computer to be controlled, alt-tab to the application you want to share.
My son took over my game from me (trying to play a kids game on steam, only the appropriate ones are loaded, and if you are logged on multiple times, the most recent is "primary" and the rest secondary, and you can stream a game from the primary, but not run it locally, unless you go offline.
After figuring that out, I've played with it some as a remote-control program. Steam RDP.
Slashdot Mirror
And the end result of the people advocating for greater parental involvement by the men are called SJW, and attacked for demanding social change that hurts men. Say anything gender related that anyone doesn't like, and without even touching the argument, you see "shut up SJW" responses. As if "SJW" was a complete response in itself, proving everyone else wrong.
Using the military for police is common outside the US. The US doesn't do it because the military is too high strung and trained to kill everything that moves to use as a police force. But elsewhere, it works out much better.
You know exactly what people mean when they say "social justice warrior".
And everyone else knows they are wrong. "Social justice warrior" as a pejorative is insulting to those that fought for actual social justice.
No one hates equality you imbecile.
You are a lying sack of shit that edits quotes to change reality to match your Nazi utopia. Keep on hating equality and lying about it.
It is incredibly disingenuous to claim ownership of people's actions in the past.
And it's incredibly disingenuous to claim that I claimed ownership of people's actions in the past.
I just noted that "social justice" was used to describe the abolitionist movement http://english.stackexchange.c... and that those who "fought" for it could be described as "warriors". So abolitionists were SJW.
If you don't like that, stop resetting the term to be a pejorative.
You are transparently trying to say "these people did good things and I say I do good things therefore we are the same and you are bad". You aren't nearly as clever as you think you are.
I never claimed to do anything good. I never said anyone else is bad. That is purely a fabrication by those who hate equality, progress and politeness. When you have to lie to try to make me look bad, you show your argument has no validity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S... "Social Justice Warrior, an internet pejorative for someone who discusses social justice issues"
I'd never heard SJW to be used to describe the situations you describe. I generally see it as a pejorative against feminists.
That's the comment I was responding to.
Social justice IS bad,
gets a +5. Apparently people hate "social justice", not just SJW.
Nope, they did it first by claiming "social justice" was a bad thing. I didn't assassinate anyone's character. I just defined "social justice". That you find ant-SJW to be so offensive, perhaps you should be complaining about those who dismiss and belittle the people trying to help others. The Underground Railroad was run by SJW. Anti-feminist activists shouldn't co-opt a "nice" term as a pejorative. It pisses off all the SJW anonymous cowards when people point out what "social justice" is.
I thought the point is "SJW is the proper term for 'fucking liberal' when I want to insult someone with different beliefs than mine., while still claiming the high moral ground."
It was SJW's in the '60s that helped end that. Today it's a pejorative to mean "bored white women" which were the SJWs that gave us Prohibition. SJW isn't a bad thing. It's a good and necessary thing that is sometimes misused, not the least of which by those who can't keep from accusing everyone else on the planet of being an SJW.
The agenda is "page views" and you are actively pushing the agenda you claim you are against by reading it and posting.
Yeah, the site is 75% SJW, and 75% Libertarians. The remaining 50% are bad at math.
Social justice is demanding that you serve Blacks at the same tables as Whites, not out in the alley. It's a shame that you think that's a bad thing.
The submission process heavily favours previously accepted submitters. I've seen a number of times where a "new" person posted something that just happened, but it wasn't until one of the regular posters posted it days later until it was accepted. There are complaints that only the same submitters are on the front page, but only the same submitters are accepted, so the others give up and stop trying.
Use of SJW indicates the speaker is an idiot. People say things, not classes of people you don't dislike, with no severe selection bias for what is heard from it.
They just open the letter. They don't care if you know you are being watched. Everyone is being watched. The "problem" with the scrolls is that opening them destroys them.
Aristophanes wrote 36 comedies, of which 11 exist today. No idea how many are originals, or copies of copies, or translations of translations.
Watching someone golf will never tell you that your problem is under (or over) rotation of the wrists (a common problem). As that detail is hard to see in someone else swinging. Watching games seems mostly like that for me. I see you are spinning around and jumping in a physics-defying move. But I don't see that your fingers work together to adjust aim when jumping in a second-nature way so as you jump up, you target down to keep the crosshairs on the same target.
I only use wireless mice for that reason. Even in the early days, there was always a "fight" with the mouse. Move the mouse to the right, let go, and it'd try to re-center itself from the cord memory. Going to a thick, heavy HDMI cable coming from it, and it'd be even worse. Perhaps usable if there was a thin, light cable of 10 cm or so before the HDMI adapter. But even then, I doubt it.
I have an auto policy that meets the legal minimums, and a large personal umbrella policy for $5M. This was much cheaper than more expensive car insurance, and with much greater coverage. The umbrella explicitly covers any auto liability above the car insurance coverage. I never looked to see if it mattered whether you were self-insured for auto.
You forget that much of the cost of insurance is fraud prevention. You have to get your car inspected by the insurance company, or an agent thereof, or you can't get the damage covered. They launch investigations into every claim. The laws in some places (like Texas) cap profits, so the more you spend, the more you make in profit, so they have no motive to keep costs down, so far as their prices remain competitive. (Insurance payouts)/(insurance premiums) would be a better measure of insurance "efficiency". 100% efficient would be "best" for the consumer, but leave nothing to profit. High overheads would be revealed in a poor result (and profit is an overhead).
It's illegal to sell auto insurance across state lines (in most states), as the rules around it are incompatible. They'll have to have individual policies for each state, and will "sell" it in the state you buy it from, even if they sell it all from a central server. I moved states, and State Farm (Texas) canceled my policy, and State Farm (Alaska) wrote me a new and unrelated policy, from my perspective it was relatively seamless, as they shared information about me, but legally, you can't even take a policy with you when you move.
Why do you hate choice?
I've never had that work for me. What did they do to make it do that was always my issue. I know what to do, but do it poorly. Watching someone play golf well won't make you an expert, unless *they* watch you and tell you what you did wrong.
I found out by accident (when the kids tried to stream a game on my computer while I was doing something else), that if you log in multiple locations at the same time, you can remote control the other by streaming a game from it, then on the computer to be controlled, alt-tab to the application you want to share.
My son took over my game from me (trying to play a kids game on steam, only the appropriate ones are loaded, and if you are logged on multiple times, the most recent is "primary" and the rest secondary, and you can stream a game from the primary, but not run it locally, unless you go offline.
After figuring that out, I've played with it some as a remote-control program. Steam RDP.
I seem to think it because it is reality. There were TLRs without a mirror. It was *never* a requirement for TLR, just like it isn't for SLR.
100+ years ago when TLRs were around, there were still shutterless cameras. The TLR meant it was shuttered, and in no way required a mirror.