I didn't express disapproval of the demand for sex work.

I am creeped out by men who bring sex into the workplace.

I am a huge fan of Dan Savage. He is a deeply moral man who is helping people become more fully themselves. That includes sexual expression in the privacy of the home or other agreed upon public spaces, while respecting the agreements made consensually between adults.

I also didn't say anything about the women being forced to look the way they do. It is their free choice to sell barter themselves on their sexual attributes in an arena that has nothing to do with sex -- a shooting range.

And I think it is creepy that men want this. To bring sex out of the dating world. Out of strip clubs. Out of sex clubs. And into a mundane world of a shooting range. It has implications about the treatment of women, the objectification of women, that creep me out. The blindness of it creeps me out.

Anyway.

Glad to know you weren't talking about me. Because I don't recognize myself in the way you talk about the conversation I have been engaged in. Sooo many times I say -- I didn't say this. I didn't say that.

It does get frustrating having a conversation on the Sift (not just you) where my words get twisted and embroidered.

And I love it when someone says something that shows I am incorrect or have stated something that doesn't clearly communicate my point of view. It helps me understand the world a little bit more, helps me see my own bias, and teaches me to communicate better. (Like blaming Keanu -- that was a huge mistake.)

Thanks for engaging with me. I appreciate you taking the time.

Is this directed at my point of view, asmo?

If it is, I don't recognize myself in it.

My criticisms were all pointed at men choosing ONLY facade.

I never said the women shouldn't wear makeup. I didn't talk about their intelligence or their skills with guns -- I have no idea how intelligent or skilled these women are.

My being creeped out was related to whoever assembled a statistically impossible collection of beautiful women, and then using a camera to give them prominence in a video purported about Keanu's shooting skills.

I admitted my error at assuming that Keanu was the person who gathered these women in one spot.

Certainly, I am guilty of being unhappy that women allow themselves to be used this way. But I didn't say that out loud. They are responding to the market, and there is indeed a market for beautiful facades.

I have no problem with sex workers (if they are protected from human trafficking and enslavement.) These women, whatever their other skills, are sex workers.

I do have a problem with men who surround themselves with ONLY sex workers.

@ChaosEngine

I forgot to acknowledge your comments about judging people by their looks.

I didn't mean to say that these women are dumb or unqualified. I have no idea.

I know really good looking people who struggle because they are typecast a certain way or are treated differently in uncomfortable ways because of their beauty.

It can warp you, extreme beauty, the way you can be dismissed as facade only, or lionized when you haven't actually done anything.

I really admire people who find a way to navigate their looks and are able to come fully into themselves.

That is a true statement for any challenge in life -- beauty, ugliness, shortness, alopecia, baldness, dwarfism. I'm looking at you, Peter Dinklage. You are a rock star.

It defies logic to think that this group of women is just a random sample. I didn't need to do any research to know this company ignores competent, talented women with gun skills and normal looks for women who are glossy. Are the beautiful women also talented with gun skills? Doesn't matter. Because I am already creeped out.

Creeped out isn't the best word. I am really enjoying saying it though. Gitaigo: Onomatopoeia that describes states of being, not sounds

I won't remember it, but what a great word.

Holy crap. WTF is that?
Attractive women can't go out in public because you're creeped out by them?!? (Super attractive? Well, 'eye of the beholder'.)
And just being near them makes men creeps?!? And Pee?!?
Why do you hate attractive and or young women?
Why do you hate men based on a nearby women's appearance?
Why would you say that, even if they had come with him?

What you're doing is 100% body/appearance shaming. Shaming them for being young, fit, and not unpleasant to look at. It sounds like jealousy, and it sounds incredibly inappropriate considering what you said afterwards. Shaming women for being attractive and fit is not supporting women in any way. Calling this a hooters is pretty insulting and dismissive to those professional, skilled, likely intelligent women, some of whom were customers.
PS: look at 3:02 for your "real women"
Where's the anger at the at least two fit, attractive men in that video?

-"I brought the common sense and facts, too. Just not eloquently or accurately"-
When you're facts and 'common sense' are inaccurate and nonsensical, you didn't really bring them.

Edit: do you have the same reaction every time you see George Clooney or DiCaprio? What disgusting creeps they must be in your eyes, since they're often accompanied by attractive women....who I guess are all Hooters bimbos, right?...and what disgusting creeps those women are, hanging out with attractive mimbos Must every red carpet be Thunder down Under? It's creepy how they manipulate women like that. You do realize they're manipulating you, right, because it's creepier if you don't.

Sorry. You're right. I shouldn't have laid it all on Keanu.

It is just creepy.

They are employees of a business. Who hired them? Where are the normal looking women?

This is Hooters, only with guns and not hamburgers and beer. Or whatever they sell there.

Would there be any normal looking women, when the intent is obviously to draw male eyes to this business?

Do you realize that you are being pandered to, you folks who are making fun of my "outrage"? Do you know you are being manipulated? Do you understand that it is super creepy if you don't know you are being manipulated?

There is a great new movement right now of women speaking up and making clear that they are intelligent and have loads to offer other than beauty. It was super thrilling to watch the Golden Globes and hear all these amazing and brilliant women talk so eloquently about something other than who made their dress.

To go from that to this parade of nubile flesh as a backdrop to gun skills .... creeped me out. It isn't real. It isn't what the world looks like. It is manufactured and disturbing when I personally am hungry for images of women DOING and being, instead of being looked at.

There are women out there who love guns and are knowledgeable about guns. And they don't all look like this.

You know I adore you completely, Chaos. And I wasn't accurate in my original post. Thank you for calling that to my attention.

But it isn't true that only you brought "common sense and facts" into this. I brought the common sense and facts, too. Just not eloquently or accurately. Being talked about like that, being reduced to "outrage" instead of being accorded some respect for noticing the unnatural assemblage of super attractive women obviously being used to as eye bait... well, that is common. Very common. And uncool.

You, though, dear friend, are super cool.

All the super attractive women creeped me out. Too many of them. Keanu doesn't know any normal looking women? Creep. Pee. (I'm a cis woman, by the way, for those who don't know.)

You do understand, do you not, that the terrors of Mathew and Timothy (Jesus and Paul) were all things they saw happening at the time, right? You do grasp, I hope, that these issues are the normal human condition, and have been issues since civilization started, eons before anyone ever heard the name Yahweh, and a constant since men have built stationary houses.

Pretty hilariously hypocritical for him to warn against "this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts," when, from an outside viewpoint, religion is what does that far more often and effectively with a supporting community to enforce the subjugation.

Even if no one served the Lord, it doesn't change the fact that the Lord loves you and wants you to turn back to Him. You're speaking of others conviction; I am here doing the Lord's will and telling you that He is calling you; do you have any conviction about that? I pray that you do.

Jesus spoke about these times:

Matthew 24:10-12

And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another. Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold

Paul also spoke about these times:

2 Timothy 3

But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! For of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, disapproved concerning the faith; but they will progress no further, for their folly will be manifest to all, as theirs also was

So what you're seeing and what you're angry about are the signs which confirm we are in the last days. Our reaction to that should be humility, not anger. These are the last days and the Lord is coming back to judge the Earth. The Lord will cleanse His church like He cleansed the temple; judgment begins at the house of the Lord. Our response to these things should be personal repentance and a determination to take on the responsibility of carrying the message of redemption to all people.

You must take your eyes off of men and put them back on the Lord, because that is the only place you will find clarity. God is calling you back to Himself.

Either way, he brought plenty more than needed.


Sidenote :
Everyone who shoots regularly (sport, not hunting) has thousands of rounds.
A 1k brick of 223 is ~28c per shot.
If you buy boxes of 20 each at the range, you're gonna pay closer to ~50c per shot.
If you go to the range 2x per month, firing 200 rounds per trip (6 or 7 mags worth), that's 2.5 months to empty a 1k brick.
~110 bucks/month if you buy 1k at a time.
~200 bucks/month if you buy individual boxes at the range.
The choice is simple. 1k bricks to save money.
So if you have 5 different caliber rifles, you have 5 1k bricks.
This is one of those "out of touch" sort of things with TV coverage. They make it sound like thousands of rounds is a lot to have.

Granted, I know hunters that have 40 rounds to their name, and it will take them 10 years to shoot all 40. One shot at season start to check zero. Then 1 or 2 more to take 1 or 2 deer. But they don't like to shoot, they like to hunt.



I googled 'rapid fire triggers'.

Geissele, Timney, Hypertouch, these are all normal triggers.
They are premium offerings. Smooth, low grit, low creep, clean crisp break.
They don't actually have any function that artificially increases rate of fire.
The marketing can fool you if you don't know what they are.
(It's like buying a "no name mouse" vs a "gamer mouse". One feels better, but you still click just as fast.)

Tac Con 3MR does have its own gimmick. It does a partial reset on every fire. Your finger still has to move forward and back to fire again, so you're still limited by your reaction time. In reviews it's no different than a normal trigger rate of fire wise.



4473 just asks if you've ever been convicted of a felony that could (not did) have had a 1 year sentence. That's a pretty broad set.

AFAIK, they all screw your right to vote. I could be wrong.


Note :
Sorry about edits mid your reply.
I have a habit of "word processing" in place - out of fear that I'll click back or something and lose my text.

-scheherazade

Dunno if I'd call that cheating. I noticed in the showmatch it seemed to adjust its creep block without any vision of Dendi's, but I think they said since that the bot doesn't know what it doesn't have vision of. I mean, I agree it has a massive advantage due to a sort of almost latency free interface with the game while us humans have to do all sorts of shit before we can even begin to make a decision, but then nothing about this competition is equal. You might just as well say it is cheating because it was able to play more Dota 2 in two weeks than any human could in their lifetime...

*quality creep factor

@newtboy

i think what bcglorf is suggesting,and correct me if i am wrong bc,is that the ideological intolerance that is permeating the far left,and creeping into the current media narrative...is turning people away from the left and driving them further right.

that how the ultra-left deals with criticism by labeling ALL criticism as an attack,and not a functioning dynamic of dialogue,is counter-productive and again..drives people further right.

so what is a moderate to do?

on the alt-right they have a choice of a grotesque and vulgar racist political philosophy akin to the "aryan supremacy" of the 30's dressed up as nationalism and patriotism.

and on the alt-left they have an equally grotesque group who subvert freedoms and liberties all in the name of "equality" and "tolerance".while single-handedly being the most intolerant of them all.

fascists to the left of me..
fascists to the right..
and here i am..
stuck in the middle...

Sadly pathetic that he is getting blowback on this. THIS is the new norm?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/2/jimmy-kimmel-elitist-creep-who-needs-shut-up/

No one should let this shit creep into its society.

I don't mind Rex's appearance, and I can say I usually agree -- and intrigued when I don't -- with his views, but what irk me most about watching his shows lately (that is, about the past 4~5 years) is his creeping smug delivery. It isn't showing in this particular segment though. But man... when he does it, I always goes "Is this at all necessary?"

Back to the topic at hand. Progressives really needs to get its act together. Juvenile crap like these zerg rushes are not serving anyone or any worthy causes. Just more ammunition for the Right to dismiss your argument.

You think Peterson's a wacko? Then let him talk all he wants to let others form their opinion that he's a wacko. I'd rather listen to him and try to figure out what the hell made him act/talk that way then give him the opportunity to say he's a PC "victim."