houseoftolstoy @[email protected]

This is not to say that the politicians do not deserve to be held accountable for these things. They are politicians after all, and are going to be the worst kind of people because good people do not go into politics nor last long if they do somehow get far enough into politics.

But the thing is, whenever someone brings up bad actions from someone they support, they find a way to dismiss it. Because character never really mattered in the first place.

With another election year coming up (fake and gay as it all will be), there is inevitably going to be the search for skeletons in the closet. It is going to be largely meaningless once again, because it turns out that anyone who brings up these issues as proof of "bad character" is doing so disingenuously. They care not about the bad character, but they are hoping they will shame anyone who supports a particular politician to no longer support them.

Character attacks are just a weapon.

Or think about most competitions, be it sports, gaming, music, or any other activity you can think of. The competition itself is just minutes of time out of the day (when factoring in only the moments where some activity is happening). Yet people prepare a crazy amount of time just for the few minutes of competition.

Once more, we see significance in the quality, not quantity, in that time spent.

And contrary to the impression many people want to give about sex (namely their own performance and how long they can go at it), sex probably does not last all that long for most people. Even the longest outliers, the act itself does not last that long when you consider the grand total of your life. Yet again, many people make a huge deal out of it.

Often, it is not the quantity of time to consider, but the quality.

Some of the moments we consider highly important really do not last that long when you think about it. When going to the gym, if you are doing 3 sets of 5 for 3 different lifts, each set probably lasts about 1 minute each. That makes 9 minutes of time spent going hard. 9 minutes is not a lot of time, in the grand scheme of the day, but those are 9 very important minutes.

Yes, you need to devote time for rest between sets too, but I hope my point makes sense.

Oh no! Men refusing to work with women, which hurts women's productivity! This is terrible!

Wait, why are these women unable to be as productive unless they are collaborating with men? Can't they just collaborate with each other? After all, we are told how smart and capable women are, so they should be just as productive when collaborating with other women.

Or perhaps this "collaboration" is just like what happens in group projects at school when you get paired up with a moron.

One thing I do remember is there was a Myth Busters episode "proving" there was a moon landing based on some equipment that is supposed to be there. There is just one problem with this whole thing: I am just getting fed information from a TV. I cannot verify anything and I am just seeing what the show wants me to see. To just accept this as fact is to be no better than the boomers thinking that Covid was the worst thing ever just because CNN said so.

When it comes to some theories, I see myself as agnostic in whether or not they are true.

Did we actually land on the moon? I would not be shocked if we didn't, but I am not hard set in whether it happened either way. It does make me scratch my head when we see the current effort to "go back to the moon" facing a series of setbacks.

Are they failing because they are a bunch of DEI hires? Or is it because we are trying to something that is not actually possible?

When I was in grade school, the thought of the idea that the US would ever cease to exist or decline was just something that seem like crazy talk. But now, seeing the state of the world and the waning power of the US, I see the latter happening and the former being a very strong possibility. Wouldn't it be something if the United States of America was something you read about in some book rather than an existing country? In 100 or more years, that does not seem so crazy.

So where is this socialization gap? It does not really exist. Rather, it is just a retarded rationalization by feminists stupid enough to think that strength differences are a result of socialization.

But if you only ever went through life where you can be placed in positions you never should have been in due to state backed gender quotas, it is that surprising that they would think this would apply to biological differences?

Anyone who knows anyone with daughters knows that girls have roughly the same amount of opportunities to participate in sports. Sure, not all the same sports, but girls are provided with the same opportunities to engage in physical activities as boys.

And it is not as if most parents care that much if their children are the best athletes ever. Rather, they just want to give them opportunities to exercise, compete and have fun.

So sure, the woman with a job title can be referred to as such. But if she cannot do the job, then is she really an engineer? Obviously not.

So when we apply this same mindset to other areas, many women will think that they can socially assert other things to become reality.

But if you do not realize that social assertions can only create illusions, you can believe idiotic things like women being just as strong as men, but men are socially conditioned to do sports more than women.

I theorize that women believe that the power of social conditioning can alter reality is due to the fact that for them, it is mostly true.

"Women need to be made engineers so that young girls will be inspired to become engineers!"

You may get a few more women "engineers" with social conditioning and government quotas, but that is only an illusion if women are not fit to be engineers. But for the feminist advocates, the title itself means that the woman is an engineer by title alone.