houseoftolstoy @[email protected]

Just saw a billboard ad from Planned Parenthood that said "LGBTQ children deserve proper sex educuation." I am not even sure what that is supposed to mean, but I have my guesses. And my guesses are that that graph on "what will happen if gay marriage is passed" pie graph is wrong and any lefty faggots that claim "the slippery slope is a FALLACY" are either stupid or liars.

Because if they are not teaching gay sex in schools, then why would it make a difference how it is taught?

Overt actions would be the government stepping in directly. But covertly, we see many frivolous lawsuits to go through the courts while the government either sits by or is actively encouraging the people initiating the lawsuits to force companies to waste money on lawyers for cases that never should have gone to court.

My guess is salaries for do-nothing positions are cheaper than lawyers for many employers.

Just think about how much more productive and efficient our economy would be if companies did not have to hire so many dead weight employees that are only there to avoid a lawsuit. A lot of money is wasted because our government will overtly or covertly make life a living hell for companies who do not bend the knee to DIE policies.

I really doubt employers want to throw money down the drain for positions that lead to not only no additional productivity, but often less productivity.

One addendum to make, the "love you" part is not a "will never." She will love you and see you as a proper man. I need to work on my wording sometimes.

Hell, let's make a poll. Men, if you had a woman who earned enough to provide for a family with her work, would you be willing to be a "house husband?"

Added conditions, she will never cheat, divorce you, love you, and still see you as a proper man (fantasy land, I know, but this is all hypothetical).

Another side topic, the amazing cope of "men can just adjust to not being the primary breadwinners by finding other roles such as working part time or being the husband that stays at home."

Great! Let's see how well that works when we try to sell that to women, who still want men to fulfill that provider role/earning more. It is like retards pushing these ideas never see what the landscape looks like. It turns out, the natural order of men earning more is preferred by both men and women.

This thought came to mind when I was watching this video which has quite the bluepilled take about men becoming more right wing. Here, we can see the full display of the pro equality mindset that feminism is good and that those who oppose feminism only do so because they were "unfairly ahead."

What if men are just better at certain things than women? Such as math, science, athletics, and a variety of other things?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54H8ppxnp8I

There is a fundamental issue with the quote "Equality always feels like a loss to people who are previously unfairly ahead" when you assume that those who are opposed to "equality" are doing so because they fit this category.

Sometimes, they are upset because they are being forcefully dragged back when they were getting ahead by their own merits. Many pro-equality/equity people operate under the assumption that inequality is the result of someone rigging things. Some people are just inferior.

I am posting this again. Because I love traditions. Even if they are the ones I made up myself.

I am glad I learned the important lesson of hiding my power level, as recently I was with extended family and the conversation of the rise in cancer in younger people came up. I was tempted to interject that those experimental "vaccines" might have had something to do with it.

But no, that would accomplish nothing. "Better detection methods of finding cancer" was the next part of that conversation, and I am fine leaving it at that. No use in convincing those who would not be receptive.

It is both sad and hilarious that NPR had a segment talking about Trump's "dangerous rhetoric," heavily implying how horrible it would be if he were to be elected.

As if we did not see that already happen from 2017-2021 where Trump had a very underwhelming presidency overall (though no new wars was good). Most of Trump's "terribleness" was only in the heads of faggots on Twitter and Reddit throwing bitchfits. Him saying things that are "mean" is not an actual concern.

Of course this will benefit Israel greatly, so it is an easy issue to attempt to give to the conservative mainstream as a way they can get a "win" by "stopping the terrorists at the border." This hardly serves as a consolation prize when illegal border crossing are going unchecked and being encouraged and enabled by those in power.

Granted, most on the right are against illegal immigration otherwise. I just do not want anyone on the right seeing "stopping Hezbollah" as anything significant.

Listening to the local boomercon radio station talking about "Hezbollah terrorists were found crossing the border" makes me very suspicious. Not because of what the normie conservatives think, but rather that this is just a gayop to get those on the right to continue supporting interventionist policies in the Middle East because "We have to stop them there before they come attack us here! See? There they are crossing the border!"