Page #33
Pages: #1... #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 ...#46
New Comment Rating: -4 Similar topics: 1.American men? 2.nude 3.Donald Trump 45th President of United States 4.🎆 🇺🇸 HaPpY BiRtHdAy America!! 🇺🇸 🎆 5.The Nobel Peace Prize 🏅 Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
Just let people be.
The whole point you are missing is this,
When you are a male,and you put on some lipstick,tape your dick between your ass crack and put on a dress, then go out in public, You still look like a damn man,just in a dress.
Then when I walk up to the cash register where you are standing and say "thank you sir" when you hand me my change,you get offended. Why? Because I am not into playing your little game of guess my gender. I see a male with a adams apple and a deep male voice,in a dress. I am not playing the little game, and that is what offends these people, thats why we don't "let them be" because they won't "LET US BE".
You are describing a fantasy scenario, so you can keep misgendering fully transitioned people, just to be an asshole.
You're ridiculous for thinking people have a brutal operation at great costs,
just to 'play a game'. They are having a hard life and a bit of acceptance goes a long way to make it easier.
They just exist and you want to deny them existence.
It's exactly what you did with gay and lesbian people.
But you're right, we won't just let you be. People who like freedom are done with racism and bigotry, and that side will win eventually, because freedom eventually always wins.
A trans male took my order, handed me my change and when i said "thank you sir", he got all huffy and the manager had to calm him down.
A blatant male,in female clothes.He wears a large black mask now while he is working so you can't see his adams apple.And he seldom speaks so you can't hear his voice.
You didn't GUESS wrong, you knew exactly who you had in front of you.
You don't HAVE TO say 'SIR' or 'Ma'am', you could just say 'thank you',
like you have probably done thousands of times before.
You just added 'sir' to be an asshole, and it was perceived as such.
Maybe read this?
only registered users can see external links
When you call an ugly woman, with short hair and a low smoker's voice 'Sir',
is that showing respect?
Outside of school, this is not part of Dutch etiquette.
We are not as hierarchical of a society as yours.
However, my language has different pronouns associated with etiquette.
The personal pronouns for 'you' are 'je', 'jij' and 'jullie' and the courtesy pronouns for 'you' is 'U'. In the past, children used 'U' towards their parents, but that has almost disappeared now, except for mostly some Christian families.
'U' is still mostly used by young people for older strangers and in some very hierarchical companies or the military. In my company, people get upset if you address them by 'U', even the general manager. And no one ads 'sir' or 'ma'am'. They would think you are mocking them, instead of being courteous.
We show respect in how we approach people, not with specific words.
You are like a flat-earther, telling someone living on the moon that you know better, because you live on that earth and it looks completely flat. However, the truth is often more clearly visible from a distance.
I watch channels that have demonstrated themselves to be principled and objective.
I have dropped channels I agreed with just because they were not honest enough.
I don't watch CNN, because they have shown they are not principled and objective. They are not nearly as bad as Fox'News', because CNN still has some journalistic integrity left, Fox'News' doesn't. Fox'News' are complete partisan liars, they know they are partisan liars and they have admitted they are partisan liars in court. When CNN can be trusted to provide something close to the truth about 50% of the time, Fox'News' doesn't even get to 10%. NewsMax and OAN are even worse. FoxNews used to be somewhat useful for financial news, bit now it's as useful as getting your investment advise from Bernie Madoff. Everything else they are spreading is completely devoid of any fact, reasoning or knowledge. They are a waste of time.
As for that libtard CNN BS channel, now going broke, does not show everything. For instance all the illegals repeatedly committing crimes. Keep hiding your head in the sand Ananas2xLekker. I guess it does not exist if you do not see it. What lunacy and lack of common sense.
As data and knowledge are accumulating for a new discovered virus, sometimes the science is inaccurate, resulting in incorrect decisions. Funny is how you say Trump should have fired Fauci. It should have been the other way around, because Trump was spreading lies that had no reason to fend off a massive pandemic, he made it much worse. First he called it a hoax, making people deny reality, instead of asking them to be careful. Then he proposed all sorts of pharmaceuticals as a cure, while science clearly showed they didn't do anything positive, but had dangerous side effects. Telling ignorant people to inject bleach in their veins probably killed some idiots. He also let all the right-wing media fearmonger about vaccines, while he knew that all the politicians, billionaires and media grifters and himself were all vaccinated before everyone else.
Republicans' excess death rate spiked after COVID-19 vaccines arrived:
only registered users can see external links
The science was all out there for everyone to inform themselves.
You keep believing in stupid right-wing fearmongering, that kills its own believers, even after all the ongoing facts shows that all that fearmongering turned out to be absolute garbage.
Illegals commit crimes at a way lower rate than American citizens, except for illegally working, of course. However that's equally a crime for the Americans who employ those illegals. There are no facts supporting your claim, you are just spouting your 'common sense', which is false.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
I bet I know your answer.
it's just intended to abuse transgenders.
I would only care if 'my daughter' was doing competition at top athlete level.
Then I would want a panel of experts to decide if that 'boy' has any significant advantage related to 'his' biological sex and should therefore be banned from competing against biological women/girls.
Before puberty sets in, there is hardly any difference between boys and girls.
We have mixed soccer teams until the age of 12. If a transgender kid, who identifies as a girl, is taking puberty blockers, they are not developing more strength than any other girl, so I see no reason to ban them from sports with biological girls.
Any level of amateur sports, that is just for fun, should be just that.
Some 13 year old children are way larger than other 13 year old children.
Do we exclude them, because it's so unfair for smaller 13 year old children?
No, we don't. We have some weight classes of course for sports like wrestling.
I would not have a problem with a trans-girl / biological boy undressing with my daughter, but I can see why some parents or some children would have a problem with that. The solution to that is not to ban the trans-girl / biological boy from sporting with girls, they can just change clothes privately or with the boys. When we are talking about adult fully transitioned transgenders, they should just be allowed to change clothes with the sex/gender they identify as.
They also should determine if some biological girls might have way too much testosterone in their body, to compete against other girls, if you want that fair competition. They are not testing all girls to see if they might have XY or XXY chromosomes.
Women are competing with men and their significant advantages related to their biological sex, all of their lives. You don't give a shit about that, you like it like that.
But suddenly, when it concerns a transgender, then it's a issue. Most transgender women and girls DON'T HAVE those 'significant advantages related to their biological sex', because they take hormone suppressors and hormones, that eliminate those 'significant advantages'.
That's why it gives a woman an unfair advantage in women's sports,
when they pump her full of testosterone. That's why that is illegal.
Only when liberals decided to move the goal post was there ever a issue.
The requirements have always been the same until recently, those marked male, as decided by a medical expert at their birth were placed with others of the same sex.
Sure, and in 99% of cases that's easy.
They just see a dick and check 'boy' or 'girl' if they see a 'pussy'.
In some cases it's not that clear and they just pick one.
They don't do genetic tests or brain MRI's.
And then the kid grow up and disagrees, with that ignorant decision.
But, that kid just has to live with that, according to you.
It always was an 'issue', but you lot suppressed it with ignorance and religion.
When it is a tiny baby still wet behind the ears it has not had time to be convinced by a drag queen it is not what it's parts indicate.
If we applied this to cars and trucks, my dodge would wake up in the morning feeling like a toyota prius!. BUT it would NOT get the fuel mileage of 1.
Honestly though, with the lib thinking I bet the possibilities are infinite.
Science just says that there are 2 sexes, male and female, but there are variations where some people do not fit fully in those categories.
Gender is a social identity structure related to sex. Everything that is not determined by sex organs, chromosomes and body characteristics is gender. Gender is cultural. You consider long hair, dresses and the color pink feminine and short hair, pants and the color blue masculine. That is cultural, just like lipstick, lang nails, painting nails and high heels. This differs all over the world and in history. The word gender has always been associated with things like that, it's just conservatives who try to claim otherwise.
There is no one who thinks there is a specific number of genders, that's just your stupid straw-manning. There are people who feel that they were born as the wrong sex and that can be confirmed with a brain MRI. They do not think there are more than 2 genders, they just think there are 2 and theirs doesn't match their sex.
What you are referring to, with all those genders, is people who don't agree with you cultural ideas of genders, like everything associated hair length, clothes, colors, make-up, nail length, heel length, facial hair, etc. Since there are an unlimited number of combinations and possibilities there, saying that there are 10, or 100, or 1000, is all bullshit. No one is claiming a number. That's you trying to put them in boxes and count the boxes again. Their whole idea is to destroy the boxes. They don't like your repressive, sexist conformism and just want to be free to explore their identity and sexuality. If that threatens you, than you are a very insecure person.
It's comparable to the punk movement, which primarily was made up of beliefs such as non-conformity, anti-authoritarianism, anti-corporatism, a do-it-yourself ethic, anti-consumerist, anti-corporate greed, direct action, and not "selling out".
Any time a doctor just determines the sex of a baby, from just seeing a penis or a vagina, there are many chromosomal, internal and hormonal variations that can get ignored. That should not be a problem, but you are turning it into a problem, by making that the final decision the kid has to live with for the rest of their life.
You are such complete loons to think that anyone can convince a person that they are another gender or have another sexual orientation. You must be very insecure about your own sexual identity.
According to a huge study in 2021, about 1% of transgenders come to regret their decision. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries. Even those people admit that it was a very careful process and they were convinced at the time. But it's also a very lucrative business to be an ex-transgender who speaks out against transgenders. The right-wing will cover you with money. They love ex-liberals, black-white supremacists, gay-conservatives and all other grifters for their causes.
There is also a group that regrets transitioning out of money concerns.
The continuous hormone treatment, that is required, is expensive.
Then, it's the choice between the biological sex that you don't want to be
or an imperfect version of the gender that you want to be.
Because then you call them a 'man with lipstick'. Do you think someone working at Taco Bell has the money to transition well?
There is only a handful of regretters that say otherwise. Compare this with the records of any other medical procedure and those are extraordinary positive results.
How strong is that woke indoctrination, that it can keep a person living happily in the body they were lied into?
You love proving crap with your little links. I wonder how many infants in America each year are born as hermaphrodites. Good luck with that number be significant. I realize it is a problem for the parents and the child, but why burden all with this? We all encounter problems. Now attack and spin this as usual.
That still leaves out all the transgender people, who are being born with all the VISIBLE characteristics of just one biological sex.
So what about the medical staff leaving it up to the parents?
Phart just said that doctors make the decision, and now you claim that some ignorant hicks from Alabama can decide this correctly for their kid?
Who says they must take the genetics test? That just comes from your ass.
It's a very good idea to leave it to the child later in life, because no doctor and certainly not any parents should decide something so important for the rest of someone's life.
Do you agree with boys, who are diagnosed with gynecomastia, to have their breasts removed or should they wait until they are 18, while they get bullied in the dressing room, by other pubescent boys, over having breasts?
TECSAN WHY ARE YOU NOT CONCERNED AT ALL ABOUT YOUR BOYS HAVING TO STRIP IN FRONT OF A GIRL THAT IS TRANSGENDERING INTO A GUY?
I WOULD THINK THAT IF A TRANSGENDER BOY STRIPPED IN FRONT OF MY DAUGHTER AND HER FELLOW GIRLS IN A GYM, THEY WOULD HAVE A GOOD LAUGH. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOUR DAUGHTER, BUT, BY THE TIME GIRLS REACH SECONDARY SCHOOL PHYSICAL ED, THEY KNOW MORE ABOUT THE ANATOMY OF A MALE BETTER THAN ME. GROW UP, RIGHTWINGERS.
And do you cat really think the girls laughing at the boy that thinks he is a girl is really a good thing for that boy to have to experience? The suicide rate among that mentally ill portion of the population is high enough without people laughing in their faces. That laughter is far less humane than trying to get the person to understand they are the 1's with a issue.
I was just in the local hospital yesterday and saw a big sign that said "0 Harm", and now I am trying to wrap my head around people thinking it is a great idea to block puberty in a 10 year old with a pill because they are a bit confused about what sex they are.
Or people thinking it is fine to even think about mutilating teens bodies.
Fucking sick world when you have people advocating for mutilation with pills and knives of our young
Here is Nikki Haley, talking about those 'entitlements':
only registered users can see external links
She thinks 65 is way to low of a retirement age. That is actually 1.8 years lower than in my country, but Americans die 4 years younger.
If she gets it her way, you'll be waiting for your Medicare indefinitely.
She says those programs will be bankrupt in 10 years or so, unless she cuts the crap out of it. OR, you take back the tax-cuts from the super-rich.
work is what give a person a sense of self worth,and of value to his family or community.
But don't blame the working class, blame the owner class that is exploiting and destroying the working class. A society needs a solidarity structure to stay afloat. It needs to provide a safety net to keep people from falling through the cracks and public support, like education to help people grow to their maximum potential.
Selfishness from the elites, who don't need a safety net, nor public support, creates a society where more and more people are drowning. You can blame those drowning people for their own demise, but that's no solution. Or don't you want a solution, but only blame people you don't like, for your country falling apart at the seams?
Taking away profits ,takes away the motivation to employe people. it is a hamster wheel, and nothing can really change it and work effectively.
The working class doesn't need investments of an owner class,
we can arrange the same with publicly owned, tax funded banks.
Then the profits go back into the public capital.
Now the working class is in that hamster wheel.
How about having everyone profit from their labor?
Doesn't then everyone have that motivation?
How the hell people expect this country,or this world for that matter to continue without WORK is beyond me.
You don't have to "build" a cave but hell, there are to many of us to go back to living in caves,we need houses of some sort if the human race is to continue.and etc
“How the hell people expect this country to continue without WORK is beyond me.” First, it’s a fallacy to believe that people believe that. I’m not sure if you meant employment positions or the verb “to work”, but, either way, most of us believe that this country will continue to be a successful country despite some hiccups.
Second, unemployment is 3.4+/-%. That means that 96+% of the employable people are working, so why the gloom and doom?
You are always preaching that too many young people are going to college seeking a degree in some field of study and not enough young people are going for a trade. I don’t see anything wrong with that. A college education can prevent having to work in a mediocre job with long hours of work, finite top pay, and possibly losing a lot of sweat. Less than 40% of all people have a college degree and less than 13% in 2021/22 have an Associate’s degree. That leaves a huge amount of people to work at any other job.
As for the world owing us something, help a fellow out here, where is this written? who enforces it? Who wrote it?
I have yet to ever see anything anywhere in stone that food should be laid before me for simply being alive.
Or any other resource I may need.
Yes,I do expect my employer to take care of me since their negligence cause me to damn near get killed, and I do get a small check,but thanks to your hero obama for messing up social security disablity,it gets cut big time.
15 more months though I will be where I was salary wise in 05! Whohoo! just think of all the raises I coulda earned on the job and where I would be today? Well I would have been retired 3 weeks if things went right.
What would you even consider 'absurd earmarks'?
And why would only the Democrats be responsible for them,
if you haven't even looked?
Tell me how many sexes there are and how many genders you think exist.
People who look like men can go to the men's,
people who look like women can go to the women's,
how easy is that.
There are TWO sexes, but there are also VARIATIONS on those.
There is no specific number of genders. There are so many
characteristics determining gender, varying enormously per culture
and per time in history, that the possible gradations between men and women are unlimited. I don't make those boxes and I don't put people in them. They can be whatever they want, as I'm concerned. If you want to be a muscular, long haired blonde, with heavy make-up, DD tits and a beard, have at it. It makes walking around the city more amusing.
I won't be laughing and pointing, like you lot, I would just enjoy
the obvious signs of freedom to be an individual.
Wasn't he also concerned with the most vulnerable members of society?
Mahatma Gandhi — 'I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.
Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.'
'Woke' means: 'alert to injustice and discrimination'.
Why is that one step above communism?
Why is that not supporting freedom?
Do you think injustice results in freedom?
Do you think discrimination results in freedom?
In communism, the country is controlled by wealthy elites in the government.
In capitalism, the country is controlled by wealthy elites period.
That's communism and capitalism controlling the rest of the people.
What my party proposes, is controlling the country fully democratically.
That's the socialism that I support and it's the OPPOSITE of communism.
I don't want the government making decisions for the people,
but the people making decisions for the government.
When you work for an employer, you are controlled by a dictatorship.
The socialism that my party is fighting for, is democratizing jobs and capital.
Your employer will no longer be a full dictator, but more democratic.
And it will allow for more independent employment structures.
My Socialist Party is fully grassroots democratically organized. It is the most democratically organized party in The Netherlands, by far. Every single member with even the least amount of responsibility is voted in by the members or by member representation. Even our party chairwoman Lilian Marijnissen (chair since 2017) was voted in again (over other candidates) for the next election.
All the party members were involved in updating the core principle program
'The whole human being'. Everyone had a chance to suggest text removals, replacements, improvements and additions and to vote on them.
The updated text is now being used to effectuate that core vision into the party program for the next election, which will clearly state our goals and plans.
In many party meetings, members will participate in that process.
How much are you participating in the Republican party core vision and program?
How much is it decided by lobbyists and wealthy donors?
Who provided your three supreme court candidates?
My party also always presents an alternative government budget plan, that has been validated by the by the national Central Planning Bureau (CPB). The budget plan proposes billions extra for tackling the housing crisis, higher salaries in healthcare and education, and lowering taxes for low and middle incomes.
It is paid for by eliminating tax-loopholes supporting tax evasion, and raising taxes on large companies and people with high incomes.
Yes, our socialism does provide more freedom, because they provide more participation, reduces the dictatorship of employers over employees, increases the ability to get educated, protects woman's control over their own womb, provides everyone a social safety net for if they loose their work temporarily or are unable to work, provides everyone healthcare to protect people's bodily ability to work, and protects freedom of speech and privacy against censorship and spying from big tech and the government.
I define freedom as the ability to make choices, that affect my life.
The wealthy have almost unlimited choices. You and I are both not wealthy.
What choices do poor people have in your country?
Our socialism will reduce the freedom of the wealthy to exploit people.
That's one less choice for them, but it leaves them all their other choices.
However, that will improve freedom (the ability to choose) for everyone else.
Read that statement, then, read this 1.
"Our socialism will reduce the freedom of the wealthy to invest".
Our socialism will reduce the freedom of the wealthy to hold people accountable for retail theft".
Where will the lines be drawn on what freedoms you take away from this group you like to single out? the "wealthy".
Just "Who" defines wealth? And what is to stop "them" from moving the goal post?.
Maybe Jon Stewart can explain it to you:
only registered users can see external links
This 'group' has taken away your freedom, of your vote to count for anything.
They have bought the government, so they can rule over them and thereby you.
Do you want them to have the freedom to take your freedom?
No one of us has the credentials to say, "this person deserves what they have and this person does not".
that would require God like powers
are 'freedoms' that you don't have but they do have.
That's the 'freedom' to cheat at their taxes,
the freedom to steal without getting punished,
the freedom to bribe politicians to do their bidding,
the freedom to gamble away other people's money,
the people to destroy a company and get bailed out,
the freedom to get massive bonuses for a bad job,
the freedom to take away other people's freedom.
I don't need to wage a war to get this implemented,
I need people like you to wake the fuck up!
Democracy is completely wasted on people like you.
You just want to hand everything over to the elites.
Just move to Russia or Qatar and be happy.
only registered users can see external links
These women are members of a group that is supposed to only be women! BUt no, they have this fat guy peeking on them. Scaring them,they don't feel safe, but the judge sides with the weirdo,.
Please pretend for a moment you were sitting at the dinner table with these young women and it was your job to explain to them why they should tolerate this? Why is a womans space being violated by a male? And why is it ok? Don't explain it as if you and I are talking, explain as if you were trying to actually help these poor women understand it.
I am curious as to what this would read like.
It's not a fucking dressing room, it's a sorority.
For competing in sports, you sometimes have an argument,
but what advantage does a trans-woman have in a sorority?
In any case, you show clearly now that it's not about the privacy idea
of dressing rooms and toilets, or any unfair advantage in female's sports,
it's just about not accepting them.
Anyway, I don't think she would feel very much welcome there,
so it was just a case to prove a point.
If those 'poor women' don't understand which side of history they are supporting
with their ideas, then I cannot help them understand.
But let me mansplain it for them:
First conservatives fought against freeing slaves. You gave up on that.
Then conservatives fought against freeing black people. You still do.
Then conservatives fought against freeing women. You still do.
Then conservatives fought against freeing gay people. You still do.
Now conservatives fight against freeing trans people. You still do.
Freedom will always win eventually.
When the asylums were closed, and the crazy's were put out on the streets they multiplied.
and now here we are.
When the system stopped requiring blo0d test before marriage, the problems got worse because cousins could marry and mutate, publicly ,not like in the mountains.
So many bad decisions got us here, and it will require a fight ,alot of pain and possibly civil war to get things back to a sensible state.
There are still many institutions for the criminally insane and those that are mentally challenged. Specialized doctors can determine if a person overcame his deficiency enough to be released into the general public. Problems of the mind are sicknesses.
only registered users can see external links
Now considering what that baby became, who is to say interbreeding is not causing some of the issues our modern world is dealing with??
Hitler is a poor choice for an example. Intermarriage results in inbred children after several intermarriages in the same family.
It's not a fucking dressing room, it's a sorority.
so if it was YOUR daughter in there, and she said "dad, there is this freaky guy that acts like a girl peeking at me all the time weirding me out ,what do I do dad? You would just tell her she is the 1 with the issue and to suck it up? Yea right, I doubt it.
and why she's 'weirded out' from that person being there.
And if I see that it's all based on prejudices, like your ideas,
than she gets a scolding that she will never forget.
And why only hear out the gals in the KKG sorority?
That's very one-sided, don't you agree?
You and phart are making horrid accusations towards that transgender person.
What are those accusations based on? Did you talk with that person?
Besides, the judge has heard both sides, and you just dismiss that,
because the verdict wasn't what you liked. So any court-case that you
don't agree with, is now not justice and a corruption of the law?
When I claim there is a corruption of the law going on, I have arguments.
Then I present legal arguments, like precedent, or how supreme court judges lied under oath, or how they are just completely unqualified political activists placed by religious extremists and the wealthy, or that they are corrupt for taking presents from wealthy 'friends'.
You might agree with that, but only blame the Democrats and refuse to believe all the evidence that Republicans do it too and in more extreme ways.
And you only point to that corruption every time the law doesn't agree with you, without out justification on that specific case, and you never accept the corruption, when the law does agree with you (on e.g. abortion).
Women should not have to feel unsafe regardless if it is a male, lesbian or trans, something should be done to help the women feel secure.
Frankly I would tell my daughter to punch his fucking lights out if he-she-it made her feel uncomfortable.
Why the hell should anyone be ask to tolerate a walking freak show?You can look at that thing and tell it is not a woman and is not a normal male either,
This wasn't about a straight male, but about a transgender.
If she is transitioned, she belongs in a women's sorority,
not in a men's sorority.
Feeling secure and being secure are different things.
I'm sure the judge included that in the verdict.
Well a little googling will find a case of a transgender being in a womans prison and gettting several inmates pregnant.
Basically he was still a man just ACTING like a woman enough to get himself with some easy pussy.
And besides, no one has said if this big fat fellow trying to be in a sorority is fully cut off or not.
I think in this case the women should keep suing until they get this in the supreme court.
What the hell do you think is going on there?
it has always been space for women.
That's called an 'argumentum ad antiquitatem' fallacy.
(appeal to tradition).
It's just as useless of an argument as 'change for the sake of change',
which is called an 'argumentum ad novitatem' fallacy.
I only care about equity, justice, well-being and freedom; humanism,
for which we need to condemn intolerance and increase acceptance.
a….holes
Women here,men there,period.
No change needed.
Allowing a president to ignore the Emoluments Clause is a change.
Banning abortion rights after 50 years is a change.
Those tax-cuts from Trump were changes.
Allowing people to have AR-15's is a change.
Supporting a president who's breaking the law repeatedly is a change.
Women where, men where? What you want is not stopping changes or a reversal of changes, it's a change to a fantasy of something that was never reality. You yearn for a simple world which you can understand,
but the world never was that simple.
Does it work out for you?
Perhaps a million dollars to a hospital for a childs care wing like a race car driver did in our area years back?
Or like another that donated a ball field?
Or like this organization that directly affects the state I live in
only registered users can see external links
Just a couple local examples, but here,let's look at the ultra rich for a moment,
only registered users can see external links
as far as I am concerned,i would much rather see the rich man that takes the risk to earn his fortune place some of it where HE or she sees fit instead of being forced to chunk it all into a government coffer and it be divied out to people that don't deserve it.Like illegal aliens.
When we stop allowing people to claw billions for themselves,
there is more than enough money for 'worthy causes'.
You are talking about a few million to some children hospital?
That's not even 0.01% of their wealth.
Instead of waiting for their benevolence, just tax them, so they
don't have billions and society can just pay for children hospitals,
from the common capital.
But the wealthy cucked you and now you are their bitch.
I'm not saying to do this overnight and on your own, I'm proposing to make a shift an slowly but surely make capitalism work for workers again too.
The wealthy are already allowed to shift their money where ever they pay the least taxes. They bribed the politicians to create laws to allow them to do that. Those laws can be reversed.
My country is very guilty in helping the wealthy avoid taxes. Our government promised to do something against that, but they are not doing that because not all other countries in the EU do it first. Sometimes you just have to take a big step first, as an example. Then the politicians of other countries will do it too, forced by their voters.
Being inspired to work hard has no effect if you can work as hard as you can and you get nothing for it, and only the people your work for benefit from it.
Do you think it mattered how hard you worked in communist Russia?
There one small group of rich powerful elites controlled everything too.
You think socialism is working towards communism, but it's actually capitalism.
When Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos own everything and control the government,
and all the people are just working for them, for a very low wage,
how is that different from communism?
Do you think it mattered how hard you worked for a peasant serf,
working for his king master? Instead of taxing him 20 sheep and r@ping his daughter, they would just tax him 30 sheep and r@pe his daughter.
What I propose is a system where hard work actually gets rewarded.
Not with billions, just for scamming the medical research industry, taxpayers and medical research charities, like Ramasmarmy, but actually contributing to society and getting a good income to live in luxury in return. Not the ridiculous wealth that allows a few people to buy a country, but at maximum normal riches. And not a minimum where people have to live in their car, while they work 60 hours per week in shifts, but basic living, food and comfort, even if you are not able to work.
And what will prevent the goal post from being moved?
What will help is voting only for politicians who actually want to make that bribery illegal, but I have never heard of any Republican supporting that. They all love bribes.
I didn't like it, but it happened., And there is a reason for it. Who saddles up and starts building war machines if we go to war? GM and other company's.
You let Gm go tits up, a overseas company will buy it and guess what? You have a national security risk.
Same with other large companys.
because a friend lived there. They had communal bathrooms.
They just lock the door when they are using it.
The running joke from all the ladies ,"Where I don't see 1".
It's just a body, everyone's got one, get over it.
You cover what stimulates peoples instincts to prevent rampant mating, spreading of disease and pregnancy's. It is a public safety and health issue.
rampant mating and (teen) pregnancy's.
only registered users can see external links
Go find me any data that supports your claim.
a half naked woman makes a man horny in 70%+ cases I would be willing to bet on.
BUT here are a couple things to read
only registered users can see external links
"As we develop new public and policy responses to sexual discrimination, harassment and assault, we need to re-examine some underlying psychological and biological processes. Integrating these findings and identifying triggers for sexual violence may help develop effective remedial measures. "
IN simple terms ,asking your secretary not to come to work braless shouldn't be a issue to prevent unwanted attention.
only registered users can see external links
I have three arguments for you, Mohammed:
1) Whatever women are wearing or not wearing, and no matter how horny you might become, you are not allowed to tough them, without permission. A real man can control his urges under all circumstances.
2) In that prudish society, there is no relief. You are not allowed to have sex before marriage, you are not allowed to look at women or porn, you are not allowed to masturbate, women are not allowed to enjoy sex. Besides giving men testicular cancer and prostate cancer, if they obey this lunacy, they are also turning into frustrated hormone cum-bombs, making them horny if they see a bare ankle. It's one big r@pe-fest in every country that does that, like it turned into a r@pe-fest when Catholics though celibacy was a good idea.
3) If everyone can enjoy sex freely, openly and satisfactory, you won't get blue balls, just from seeing your secretary wearing a bit less today, because it's 120 degrees outside. And instead of groping her, for a quick wank in the bathroom, and making her hate you and you risking your job and hers, if she likes you, she might give you the blowjob of your dreams, just for the fun of seeing her boss beg, "Please let me cum! Please, please, please, you little devil!".
Explain to me why that prudish world is better.
Besides, there are plenty of rumors and such about what men do in the middle east that is considered very wrong even to people like you,I won't mention it here because it is not allowed but it's Baaaaadddd,I seriously doubt there are any blue balls.
But it WAS CHANGED, for the better,
but you want to turn back the clock.
How has it ever worked? What good comes from prudishness?
People make belief that they are pure, sitting in church
with a holy face or standing in front of it, and secretly
they are abusing their wife, maid or children or visiting
prostitutes, may it be women or men. I hate that hypocrisy.
The more they are preaching against homosexuals, the more
sure you can be that they suck cocks in the weekend, or they
have a big black guy fucking their wife, or they dream about it.
What you are saying about the middle east only proves my point.
They are all so frustrated, even women in burkas are constantly groped. But you keep blaming women.
With that stupid prudishness also comes banning of contraceptives, lack of knowledge and the inability
to have safe sex. Religious prudishness results in teen pregnancies, Aids and other STDs. This is especially rampant anywhere religion has banned condoms.
Prudishness only lowers sexual activity a bit, but it turns all the sexual activity that remains, to unsafe, stupid, horrible, perverse, violent, unsatisfying acts. AND shame and punishment.
New Comment Go to top