RagingNerdoholic

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

OH SHIT OH FUCK

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not even, though. Practically all the YouTube "creators" these days have [this part of the video is brought to you by scandanavian interwebz to keep out teh hax0rs] sponsored segments that are [Have you shaved your fuckin' nutsack lately bro? Check out this ball hair trimmer from clipyerjunk dot com] littered throughout [zzzzzzzzzip ... ^reecrootah ] their videos.

That being said, some of them at least put effort into finding and vetting content-relevant sponsors that can actually be helpful. I can kinda just barely tolerate those.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I'm 36 and if you want to call me, then fine? Who cares? I don't get why it's such a big deal.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Are zoomers really like this?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

I still can't wrap my head around why 0^0 = 1

If 0x0=0, and 0^0 is functionally identical to 0x0, why is it 1??

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right. It's a question of where the threshold is before we consider something dangerous enough to warrant a warning.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

In fairness, cigarettes contain known carcinogens. You are ripping apart your DNA with every dart. Can the same be said for having a few drinks a week?

I say this as someone who's never taken a single drag or had even a drop of alcohol (cooking notwithstanding).

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

They can both be problems simultaneously, and it's disingenuous to argue that there aren't militant feminists pushing to keep all of the advantages from earlier eras.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I literally pointed out several factors that are objectively institutionally unequal. Pithy quotes won't change that.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Gender balance in government and business is not a proxy for equality.

Woman are not institutionally prevented from campaigning for office. If they're not voted in, that's just democracy.

Women are not institutionally prevented from climbing the corporate ladder. They largely prefer to have a more comfortable work/life balance.

But they are accepted into college 2:1 compared to men.

They do receive scholarships, educational, and career opportunities just for being women.

They do receive an egregiously unfair advantage in family and divorce courts.

Those are institutional.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

A story all too common. Someone I know mine got divorced a number of years ago. He's a fun, charming, kind, decent looking fellow in good shape for his age, and I can't imagine he did anything to deserve what happened. I don't know all the details of their divorce, but I know all but one of his children was poisoned against him by his (now ex) wife, and it's only because the one happened to be away long term at the time.

His ex has several advanced degrees and is more than capable of earning six figures. And yet, he was still ordered to pay her spousal support and a sizable chunk of his pension. The divorce and family court system is absolutely fucked for men and it's a small wonder so many of them contemplate drastic measures when their lives are ripped away from them.

Feminism gave women all of the same rights and privileges as men and then conveniently "forgot" to balance out all of the exclusive rights women get just for being women.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And here I thought pansexual meant you really like cookware.

view more: next ›