houseoftolstoy @[email protected]

@ButtWorldsMan This should be of no surprise to him. Him being far left means he is support of every "decolonization" effort out there. Why should Israel get a pass? And it seems non-whites don't buy the "I'm not white I'm Jewish" excuse. Good.

@deprecated_ii Women on average have a lot more choices than men when it comes to the dating world. They are far more likely to get men who are interested in them. It is just a matter of who they choose and if they choose anyone at all.

If a woman is in a bad relationship, it most often means she has a bad filtering criteria. Since men are far less likely to have options (plural), a man being in a bad relationship is not about how well he filters but whether or not he has any self respect.

Yes, I know Christmas was placed on top of an existing celebration at the same time of the year and all. But who cares? Christmas is more important than any pagan holiday, so Christmas it is!

Boy, a whole lot of "Christmas" songs that have are not actually about Christmas (that is, Jesus), were made by those who are not Christian! What a coincidence! Of course they want to make Christmas all about snow and presents, because they sure do not want it to be about Jesus!

Or whenever there is any mention of it being such a "wonderful time of year" without acknowledging WHY there is any celebration in the first place, you don't have to wonder why they are doing it. They just hate Jesus.

I made my own tier list for Christmas songs. Remember, the only real Christmas songs are those that are about Jesus. Everything else is in a different tier for progressively worse reasons.

@Mongoliaboo @sardonicsmile there would not be an opportunity to accomplish this sort of thing if the conditions were not already ripe for this sort of thing to occur. Perhaps there is no one source to place all the blame, but there are a lot of people who were inactive that could have done more to prevent the decay from happening.

@WashedOutGundamPilot >in the end they don't want to DO the job, they just want to be SEEN as someone who does the job.

That applies to a lot of high status jobs out there. The pro-equality shills will justify this sort of thing because "it will inspire other girls to pursue that career." The only problem is if those girls are only going down that path because of a propaganda campaign, they will quit the moment they realize they did not want the job. And then the cycle repeats back at square 1.

@kaiservenom @Pain66 the same question you ask male incels should be asked to her: whom is she aiming at for relationships? She might not be able to compete to get the top percentage of men to commit to her, but she can certainly find a man who would commit to her (and she could still get a decent quality man).

Actual incels will report that they strike out no matter how low they go in terms of quality of woman.

@MasterSimper This sounds more like a family problem than a woman problem.

With that in mind, the first question you must know the answer to is this: do you want your sister as a part of your life? Is a relationship with your sister worth it?

Yes, some may say "but she is family!" You don't choose who is related to you, but you do choose whether they are worth having a relationship with. And I do not think severing any ties should be done on a whim. It should be done with proper merits.

@FinalDresdonation True, sometimes a competition can be turned around. Though what I am referring to is cases where victory is not considered achievable for one side. The will to fight on, even when you see that most likely you will lose. Having victory come out in spite of those odds is indeed a feat, but I do not see that as the sole reason that men still fight on when they are on the losing side of a competition.

@Zeb Yes. I was just getting to that point, and you are right. Why take the risk to your own life and fight when you can just safely surrender and know that you will not die as a result? The men of course do not have this option, so it makes far more sense for them to fight on against the harshest odds.

I see this as another critical aspect of why men's sports are more popular than women's sports. It is not just men being more capable in their physicality. They are also far more likely to bring out their best abilities for the entire game, even in a one sided match where everyone can see who will win. It is far less enjoyable to watch a match where one side stops even trying in the middle of the event.

Speaking of which, I should also mention that the men in this situation would have nothing to lose by fighting, because they are probably going to die anyways. Better to fight as hard as you can if you have nothing lose. Women who would do the same would have something to lose, so it makes sense for them to shut down even trying.

When applied to less violent competitions such as sports, we are going to see these traits play out even when there is no threat of death. It is just instinct.

My guess to why this happens is due to epigenetics taking place. In the event of a competition, the men need to still fight on against their enemies in order to save as many of their own as possible, and even when losing they can still make a difference in the overall survival of their own side.

Women, on the other hand, would have no need for this response, as they would most likely survive as the spoils of war for the victorious opponents, unlike the men who would not be spared.

We all know the meme of high school boys being able to beat the national women's team in a sports match. Anyone who is not a moron understands that men are faster and stronger than women, so it is no surprise the boys win every time.

But there is another major difference I have observed between boys and girls playing sports. In a one sided match, the boys on the losing side will still square up their best effort until the end. When this happens in a girls' game, the losing side just gives up.

@furgar Link for reference: https://genesiustimes.com/new-chicago-mayor-vows-to-fix-all-the-damage-done-by-the-last-republican-mayor-in-1931/

@furgar Careful for what you see. This is clearly satire, as I just looked it up and found the exact thing on a self described joke news site.

However, it does bring up a good point that Chicago sucks and Democrats have been in charge for so long that Republicans can in no way be the reason for the failures of the city.