Yes, I am, thank you.

I don't think many R's are truly interested in a rational debate. So I wont engage. And that doesn't mean you're right.

It also doesn't mean that the current problems aren't the result of actions and inactions of the R side of politics as well. They need their talking points and blame games. We know where the problems are. It's not Democrat. The R's had a way to fix this but they won't allow any wins. It's childish. We all suffer as a result.

I don't blame Capt. Orange solely. I blame the entire GOP.

We will remember.

Actually come to think of it, yes, I am definitely the insecure infant and she is 5 feet 2 inches of thug. Never thought about it that way.

What on earth are you talking about?
Do you believe the government dictates your vows? What "rules"? You just cannot grasp the concept of no fault divorce or prenuptial, can you?

I guess you never planned on kids or shared assets. If you do, not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives, and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first. Uncle Sam is in your relationship, married or not....without a marriage contract, he makes ALL the rules and you have no say.

My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas that in my state would have cost under $10K and you congratulate him? You are one strange person.

Again, your perception, not based in fact since the 60's. You assume women take off time to raise the kids and take care of parents and assume fathers don't take paternity leave or have obligations outside work. How 50's. You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. It certainly hasn't been my experience, I've seen women in the workplace working harder and longer for less pay, sacrificing just like their male counterparts if not more, putting off having families until it's too late while men can have kids long after normal retirement age, putting themselves in dangerous situations where those with power over them have opportunities to abuse that power and abuse those women in ways that rarely happen to men. These aren't exceptions, they're the norm.

Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that, meaning soon women in most catagories will out earn men and have more to lose, you admit you're wrong in your position now, right? Of course not, I expect you will still start from a point that hasn't been correct since the era and sexual revolution, early 70's at latest.

No, many of the studies I've seen compared people in the same exact positions in the same industries, even same companies, and women consistently get paid less for the exact same job and hours, and women rarely work less today, and just as often out work their male counterparts knowing they are often token hires not valued by the bosses so have less job security. If I recall correctly, 80% of job losses due to Covid were women, and the men are getting rehired faster. I think you are thinking of some studies from the 80's that made those assumptions and accusations. Comparing apples to apples, women still get shortchanged and as often as not overworked.

Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk
Tends to have short relationships? Too much risk
Likes attention? Too much risk
Single mother (non-widow)? Too much risk
Any mental issues (depression, bipolar, narcissist, anxiety, etc)? Too much risk
Older (why you still single...)? Too much risk
Likes to party? Too much risk
Drinks? Too much risk"

And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are? Specify what you expect and agree, and you walk with exactly what you agreed to, no government rules or split involved. Geez. You speak as if you had never heard of them.

Most divorces may be initiated by the woman (if that's true, I expect it's just another assumption) because their husbands are more likely to break their vows first, but are not willing to pay to end the marriage, including penalties for breaking the marriage contract, and we're too dumb to get a prenuptial (or got one that spells out harsh penalties for cheating). Yes, I am assuming men cheat on their spouses more often than the reverse, because men are wired that way.

You are not more likely than not to face a divorce, because it's unlikely any woman meeting your criteria would give you a second thought, and you need to get married to get divorced.

I bet if you show your significant other this thread your 20 year relationship will be in big trouble, or at best enter a long dry dark spell. Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches that take more than they deserve or even could give back and destroy you whenever they think it serves them. It's probably a good thing you aren't married.

Laws and family court aren't as you describe. Maybe when you enter the 21st century you'll recognize that. The rules of your marriage can be whatever you agree to, including the specifics of the split if it ends.

It's a sad thing you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks.....almost always unless one or both of you are total douchebags.

sounds like the ultimate answer.
a final solution.


🦜 bob's bunk would inspire this conversation during his arrest...

bk: "what are you doing"
'better' person (bp)*: "arresting you!"
bk: "why - what for?"
bp: "for being a bad person!"
bk: "no i'm not!"
bp: "are you disagreeing w/me?"
bk: "yes! yes! i am!"
bp: "then you're a fool too!"

*strange that 'bp' could stand for bad person also?

could throw in matthew's 'judge lest thee be judged' routine but the plank in the eye gag doesn't bring in the ha-ha like it use to.
(it's a very old joke)

Straight under the skin. Straight, I say!

1. If you want to borrow MY crayons, then yes, I AM the boss of you. How is that even in question? They're my crayons, so I set the rules. You will not bear down, or I will withdraw my generosity. At the very least. Don't like it? Don't make requests.

2. Do not smash a toilet in a dog's face, just to get attention. The dog could have been blinded or otherwise injured, inconsiderate clumsy fool.

3. Refrain from using a sensationalist iPhone smear/repair video as a soapbox to promote sexist notions. Twice.

4. Don't expect a company to support cases of user error. Especially huge companies. It's just not possible. Devote energy to precaution and research rather than blame-shifting.
(Disclosure: Samsung user)

I got way too far into that still thinking "there are ski slopes in Georgia?!"

Why yes, I am an American idiot.

Yes I am.

*doublepromote Hell yes I am in!

The dates for the original series openings are off. For example, they're listing the 3rd version of the original series opening as from 1984 but it showcases both Unicron and Galvetron, who both made their first appearances in the Transformers feature animated film in 1989.

Similarly, the 2nd version of the original series opening (also dated 1984) showcases Omega Supreme, who doesn't show up until Season 2 (1985-1986) in the U.S.

Also, suggesting the lame Gobots had anything to do with Transformers is fucking NERD HERESY (yes, I am aware Hasbro tried to retcon the Gobots as existing in the Transformers universe)!

/endrant

@bareboards2 Ma'am, I apologize both for the factually untrue statement, which I made without keeping with proper English debate/conversation etiquette, and also for assuming a gender for you title without proper evaluation.

To make clear my position, as I believe many, if not all of you here (@PlayhousePals @newtboy @Januari @bareboards2) mistake my position and/or personal political siding...

Firstly, I DO NOT like Trump, his policies, his manner, his monomaniacal bent towards the topics he figures are worth his time to address, not much of anything, actually.

Secondly, yes, I am conservative, and for a young male in British society, this leaves me at rather an odd way with those of an opposing political bent, particularly those of the Liberal/Progressive variety(Liberal less so, as it is an off-take of Libertarianism). I believe that effectually bending society over backwards to meet the stresses of a brave new world is a brash and undeveloped concept. I believe the perfect society is a logical one, where all that are able are held to an advantageously high level of acumen, education, etiquette, state of public dress, etc. I do not believe in the idea of "Utopia", as basic human psychology(which I have the equivalent of the american bachelors degree in) denies the facet of a cohesive human culture/society.

Thirdly, I arrive in support of Trump not out of a liking for him or his policy, but an awareness of what the enaction of his policies would bring. This awareness is spawned by the awareness of the state of the American Political Establishment, as is governed by people with power beyond reckoning, the face of which happens to be Hillary Clinton. Trump's policies, if allowed to be implemented, would cause such as rift in the political establishment/climate, as well as the hearts and minds of the American people, as to bring about change.

So, in effect, I support Trump for the very reason many of you don't, the Chaos that would almost inevitably ensue. A chaos that would likely go unnoticed, as such shifts occur without common knowledge...

Or... You could vote for a woman who has on more occasions than is accountable, broken Federal Law, covered up her husband's brutalization of women, and God knows what else, and only manages to escape prison because she is one of the sharpest tools the totalitarian American political establishment has...

I'm not so sure this will be popular.

You and me? Yes ma'am!!!

Not a downvote spree, I watch these videos on other sites and come here and see them after already watching them and I vote on them, call it what you want but I have viewed the video and voted accordingly. So if it seems that boneremake downvoted a video and twenty seconds later another, your sure to saint judith's titties I have watched them and I am expressing my voting abilities to their extent.

I apologize when I mean it, people saying sorry over stupid little trivial shit like that is not my style, your feelings are not my concern, they are a your problem not a my problem. Yes I am an asshole and my words are blabbering of a jack ass, totally well aware of that.

You auta try out reddit.com, my account goes from -80 downvotes to +220 in a couple hours. One lil vote down your submission of a video someone else made shouldn't be much of a concern to you, yet it always seems to be.

As I said, assuming reality is real is an assumption we all must make to be sane....it is an ASSUMPTION, but a necessary one without which we live in a fluid fantasy. That is rational enough for me, as the alternative means everything is fantasy and meaningless anyway, so being mistaken about it would mean nothing...to no one, leaving 'belief' in reality the only rational choice.
I see your world view as rigid because it's based in a rigid, unchanging document, while mine is based on examination and re-examination of 'reality'.
No, I don't believe in absolute "truth". I believe in :

RULE#5-"TRUTH" is an idea in the mind of a crazy person. You don't need to know the 'TRUTH" in order to not lie.

I get that it's confusing for me to say -'there are absolutely no absolutes', but there you go, I said it. Kind of like how I'm intolerant of intolerance. ;-)
I take the position...'I don't know, but it seems most likely by far that.....'...about everything. Being a scientist means you never 'know' anything for certain...as that denies you the ability to change your position when you're 'knowledge' is shown to be incorrect. Certitude is for theology, not science.
Only 'he' knows what 'proof' would be, and he has not shown it. I don't know how many times I must repeat that. Beauty is not proof, awe is not proof, mystery is not proof, words are not proof, other people's belief is not proof. Only proof is proof, and I'm waiting, but not holding my breath. Ball's in 'his' invisible court.
Yes, I am open to knowing the 'truth' (if you must put it that way), and I am also open to accepting I have been wrong, but only if I'm convinced, not just because someone said so.
If we are created for good works, something went terribly wrong somewhere. ;-)