@Sabin: "Strong, independent girl with her own income, home, friends etc who stays interesting viable & challenging. Wont be obsessed with you. Only $400 an hour."
That's FUNNY!!! Maybe that explains my relationship issues.
Posts by DJS
-
70"Most women would prefer to be stay at home housewives. Women's lib did alot of damage to women!"
by purrpurr inthe above is a quote from a jw female relative.
this was in response to a discussion about the suffragette movement ( and the movie about it that's currently in cinemas).
she seemed to think that it would be so much better if women were just daughters/ wives/ mothers and didn't go out to work and have career's?
-
-
-
70
"Most women would prefer to be stay at home housewives. Women's lib did alot of damage to women!"
by purrpurr inthe above is a quote from a jw female relative.
this was in response to a discussion about the suffragette movement ( and the movie about it that's currently in cinemas).
she seemed to think that it would be so much better if women were just daughters/ wives/ mothers and didn't go out to work and have career's?
-
-
DJS
Sowhatnow,
Obese men equally disgust me, so I'm with you. I don't date men (not that there is anything wrong with that) but whatever I say relative to girls applies to guys.
You seem to be having a problem wrapping your brain around the paradigm I defined. It is about Commitment, just with separate living arrangements.
I love waking up next to girls. It's in my top 10 list of fun things to do with girls. Waking up with multiple girls is no. 7. But sometimes I need a bit of space. And to avoid taping cab fare to her sleeping forehead and going to the gym, it's best I manage this aspect judiciously - 3 times per week or so.
As far as staying fit, I would beat Morpheus' record of Dislikes with the XXers if I said what I believe and know about this topic.
I'm not the least bit concerned about finding a girl. Earth girls are easy.
-
70
"Most women would prefer to be stay at home housewives. Women's lib did alot of damage to women!"
by purrpurr inthe above is a quote from a jw female relative.
this was in response to a discussion about the suffragette movement ( and the movie about it that's currently in cinemas).
she seemed to think that it would be so much better if women were just daughters/ wives/ mothers and didn't go out to work and have career's?
-
-
DJS
An OP I should probably stay out of, but what is life without risks. A woman who wants a man that wants or will allow her to stay home is A ok. There are plenty of both persuasions. Don't be surprised however, if the one with the income has some control issues.
A man who wants a monogamous relationship with one woman but without cohabitation or marriage is equally OK. and certainly not 'sad."
A married woman who stayed at home for years, by law in most W lands, should get equal consideration upon divorce for marital assets. They were partners. A caveat to this:sometimes the woman (or man) stays at home even though this wasn't what was presented during dating, which can create resentment.
A man (or woman) who had that arrangement (marriage) before but now has no desire to see half of his or her stuff go walk about again in future marriage arrangements is completely understandable. It isn't a defect.
Personally I want a strong independent girl with her own income, home, friends, etc who stays interesting, viable and challenging. I don't want someone to own me or be obsessed with me, nor I them. And I'm not ok with the 30 lbs. she wants to put on her ass after the rice is thrown. Or ten. Nesting will do that ya know.
-
24
It seems the 'end' might come by way of humans stupidity, not a plan of a god
by sowhatnow inhttp://www.sciencealert.com/it-s-official-we-re-on-the-brink-of-earth-s-sixth-mass-extinction.
pretty obvious, we've deforested the planet so much it cant clean the air, we've polluted the water so much its not fit to drink, we've poisoned the soil so much it cant grow food, we use so many chemicals, its killing off the insects who pollinate.
so while on post on this site claims the end of freedom for mankind, by way of evil governments, .
-
-
DJS
Rebel,
My last post, in no manner whatsoever, is minimizing actions taken to protect our planet. Recycling is rational; it isn't hysterical. Utilizing our planet's resources in an economic manner is rational; it isn't hysterical.
Protesting against those who are harming the environment is rational, not hysterical. I'm not sure how you gleaned any of this from my comments. I'm pro environment and I believe that we are causing harm with some of our decisions, but some of the climate changers hurt their cause by some of the very wrong predictive models that they presented.
Making irrational, even hysterical, statements about the environment - or anything else for that matter - that are not and cannot be supported by real evidence - is the topic to which I refer.
-
24
It seems the 'end' might come by way of humans stupidity, not a plan of a god
by sowhatnow inhttp://www.sciencealert.com/it-s-official-we-re-on-the-brink-of-earth-s-sixth-mass-extinction.
pretty obvious, we've deforested the planet so much it cant clean the air, we've polluted the water so much its not fit to drink, we've poisoned the soil so much it cant grow food, we use so many chemicals, its killing off the insects who pollinate.
so while on post on this site claims the end of freedom for mankind, by way of evil governments, .
-
-
DJS
The Rebel,
You have my vote for MIP - Most Improved Poster. Thanks for your contributions. If the passion is causing more harm than good then it is neither ethical nor better than reality tv. But you do make a point; sometimes the hysterics are needed to get the attention of those who can make a difference. Sometimes. But not often. Those who make decisions most often listen to the empiricists and empirical data. And when the decision makers think of someone as an hysteric, they typically dismiss everything that person has to say.
And the hysterics typically create a counter-force that results in inertia and a lack of real progress, at least for a while. And they can often discredit the very cause they hold dear. One of the 'arguments' employed by the Rush Limbaugh ditto heads against climate change is that the climate changers have often used faulty 'evidence' and data to support over the top predictions (which they view as hysterics). Which is true. They have. But the overwhelming empirical data from real scientists supports climate change - and the potential for harm to the planet. At least that's what they are telling me on the Marshall Islands.
-
24
It seems the 'end' might come by way of humans stupidity, not a plan of a god
by sowhatnow inhttp://www.sciencealert.com/it-s-official-we-re-on-the-brink-of-earth-s-sixth-mass-extinction.
pretty obvious, we've deforested the planet so much it cant clean the air, we've polluted the water so much its not fit to drink, we've poisoned the soil so much it cant grow food, we use so many chemicals, its killing off the insects who pollinate.
so while on post on this site claims the end of freedom for mankind, by way of evil governments, .
-
-
DJS
This OP illustrates the primary issue with this site. It is divided by those who feel, perceive, believe and then support those feelings, perceptions and beliefs with confirmationally biased information - and those who leave emotions and beliefs far behind and seek evidence, the more empirical the better, for most if not all issues and topics.
It doesn't matter whether the topic is religious or secular, we immediately divide along these lines. Education would help those led and driven by their emotions, based on the statistics. Being smarter would too, and that can also be obtained. But the one thing that would help the irrational hysterics, the feeler perceivers, the believers and the confirmationally biased amongst us is to make up your tiny little minds - and remove your furry little cloved feet from the concrete in which they are embedded - that you will live a life based on evidence. That you will become an empiricist.
That is my only objective for being on this site.
I also wonder if any of the hysterics on this site have ever traveled intra or internationally. If you have, it would be difficult for me to believe that you would still be stuck in hysteria-ville. This is an amazing and beautiful planet. Our cities are being transformed into livable, beautiful, sustainable places. Our communities are getting smarter and more environmentally pleasing. We are addressing most if not all of the problems mentioned by the hysterics amongst us. Some will take time. The current meeting of the world's leaders regarding climate change is an excellent example that we 'get' it as a species (thank you thewonderofyou).
-
24
It seems the 'end' might come by way of humans stupidity, not a plan of a god
by sowhatnow inhttp://www.sciencealert.com/it-s-official-we-re-on-the-brink-of-earth-s-sixth-mass-extinction.
pretty obvious, we've deforested the planet so much it cant clean the air, we've polluted the water so much its not fit to drink, we've poisoned the soil so much it cant grow food, we use so many chemicals, its killing off the insects who pollinate.
so while on post on this site claims the end of freedom for mankind, by way of evil governments, .
-
-
DJS
Dio,
I gave him a LOT of evidence that refutes his hysterics. And an opinion. The water and air are both much, much better than a century ago and since civilization began wherever lots of humans convened together. Do you know what caused the immediate increase in life expectancies in the early part of the 20th Century? Chlorinated water. Do some homework. The water supplies in cities around the globe were killing people for thousands of years.
Our rivers and lakes are also much cleaner due to regulation and treated wastewater. We may opine about pristine water supplies from our misty memory youth, but wherever people lived for thousands of years you didn't want to drink the water. Water supplies were used for bathing, cleaning, laundry, drinking - and sewage disposal Raw sewage. And a convenient place to dispose of animal - and sometimes human - carcasses (you know, the ones that died of the plague or some infection). Geesh people. Get a fukking clue.
Do you know what contributed to the increase in global population occurring in the 20th Century? Longer lifespans (see water above). For 100,000 years the average life expectancy for humans was somewhere in the 24-34 year range. It is now approaching 80 in industrialized nations. The population 'explosion' is due in large part to several generations suddenly living MUCH longer. Google it. There are also many nations where the population is either stable or receding. It's called prosperity and education, the more of which results in lower birth rates. The birth rates of nearly all of the countries on the planet are much lower than ever, and as 3rd world nations gain prosperity and education, experts predict the planet's population will find a very nice equilibrium, sustainability. Google it.
The planet is being reforested at nearly an even rate as it is being deforested. Google it. Plus, all lives matter. I mean, all trees matter - not just the rain forests. Do you know why there are more trees in N American and Europe than there were 100 years ago but why we have very few old growth forests??? We cut them down on our way to building a sustainable economic model. But replanting and re-forestatation continues, and Brazil and others are improving their behavior in these areas.
They paved paradise and they put up a parking lot. We get it Joni.
Cherry picking the worst of the worst in order to support hysterical end of time nonsensical views is what we left behind in a hate filled end of time cult. Employing confirmation bias in order to support such narrow minded views is what we left in a hate filled end of time cult.
At least some of us.
-
24
It seems the 'end' might come by way of humans stupidity, not a plan of a god
by sowhatnow inhttp://www.sciencealert.com/it-s-official-we-re-on-the-brink-of-earth-s-sixth-mass-extinction.
pretty obvious, we've deforested the planet so much it cant clean the air, we've polluted the water so much its not fit to drink, we've poisoned the soil so much it cant grow food, we use so many chemicals, its killing off the insects who pollinate.
so while on post on this site claims the end of freedom for mankind, by way of evil governments, .
-
-
DJS
I don't recall making that claim. Its doubtful i did because i routinely call people what they reveal themselves to be. Unashamedly so. The Op asked for an opinion. I provided one.
If you find any flaw in my data or its evaluation please provide it. If not, WTF did you waste our time bumping this very bad OP.
Confirmation bias is one of the main tools used by the Dark Lords to trap us mentally. We allowed it. We are now free of their control. Well, some of us are. This very bad OP was dripping with confirmation bias and the same End of Time nonsense from which we escaped.
You are welcome.
-
27
Sex and Marriage
by nicolaou inmost religions indoctrinate a standard sexual 'morality' into their followers.
sex before marriage is wrong, gay sex is wrong, same sex marriage is wrong, masturbation is wrong.. let's not turn this into another religion bashing thread (too easy), i was wondering how much of that pre-packaged thinking you still hold to?.
i still value marriage, more than ever.
-
-
DJS
I think that those who think that marriage, abstinence before marriage, monogamy, etc. are wonderful are wonderful. For them. Personally I'm in alignment with the Girl Next Door (I think I'm in love). Whatever two consenting adults wish to do sexually with each other or a few dozen of their closest friends is none of my business (except when I'm one of the closest friends).
The problem I have on this site is with those who think Mike and Mary Married Monogamous Missionary Mating is the only 'moral' way to have sex -or the best way - and seek to judge others based on their code.
Sex, in all of its different iterations, is amazing. Betrayal is the only issue I have between consenting adults; whatever else occurs that doesn't include lying, force/coercion (which doesn't include the occasional restraining devices - that she brings to me), cheating or non-consenting adults is most excellent.
-
24
It seems the 'end' might come by way of humans stupidity, not a plan of a god
by sowhatnow inhttp://www.sciencealert.com/it-s-official-we-re-on-the-brink-of-earth-s-sixth-mass-extinction.
pretty obvious, we've deforested the planet so much it cant clean the air, we've polluted the water so much its not fit to drink, we've poisoned the soil so much it cant grow food, we use so many chemicals, its killing off the insects who pollinate.
so while on post on this site claims the end of freedom for mankind, by way of evil governments, .
-
-
DJS
Sowhatnow,
So you are also an End of Time nutjob, huh? I'm glad no one is paying any attention to this nonsense. Does the planet have issues? Certainly. Are these issues being addressed? Definitely, some of them to an amazingly high degree. But if you keep hysterically focusing on the negative and ignoring the actual data and evidence, you will continue to be trapped in the post-Dub End of Time delusion.
Almost all of the hysterics you reference are due to emerging nations trying to develop a sustainable economic model - just like the US and Europe did over a century ago. This is temporary. It will be reversed.
Like a lot of the hysterics and theorists on this site, you seem capable of surfing websites and articles that support your hysteria and confirm your biases, but you are incapable of finding articles that refute them. Often when you are searching the positive articles are right fukking next to the negative ones. WTF is wrong with you that you and those like you who won't read or consider them?
From a variety of web sources:
Air and water are cleaner than they were 100 years ago in the US, Europe and the industrialized nations. Since the late 1970s, pollutants in the air have plunged. Lead pollution plunged by more than 90 percent, carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide by more than 50 percent, with ozone and nitrogen dioxide declining as well. By nearly every standard measure it is much, much, much cleaner today in the United States and other industrialized nations than 50 and 100 years ago. One hundred years ago, about one in four deaths in America was due to contaminants in drinking water. But from 1971-2002, fewer than three people per year in the United States were documented to have died from water contamination.
Birth rates have fallen by about one-half around the world over the last 50 years. Developed countries are having fewer kidsy. Even with a population of 7.3 billion people, average incomes, especially in poor countries, have surged over the last 40 years. The number of people in abject poverty fell by 1 billion between 1981 and 2011, even as global population increased by more than 1.5 billion.
Global per capita food production is 40 percent higher today than as recently as 1950. In most nations the nutrition problem today is obesity - too many calories consumed - not hunger. The number of famines and related deaths over the last 100 years has fallen in half. More than 12 million lives on average were lost each decade from the 1920s-1960s to famine. Since then, fewer than 4 million lives on average per decade were lost.
Sub-Saharan Africa plans to plant a nine mile width of trees on the Southern Border of the Sahara Desert The Great Green Wall initiative is a pan-African proposal to “green” the continent from west to east in order to battle desertification. It aims at tackling poverty and the degradation of soils in the Sahel-Saharan region, focusing on a strip of land of 15 km (9 mi) wide and 7,500 km (4,750 mi) long from Dakar to Djibouti.
In the US, which contains 8 percent of the world's forests, there are more trees than there were 100 years ago. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), "Forest growth nationally has exceeded harvest since the 1940s. By 1997, forest growth exceeded harvest by 42 percent and the volume of forest growth was 380 percent greater than it had been in 1920." The greatest gains have been seen on the East Coast (with average volumes of wood per acre almost doubling since the '50s) which was the area most heavily logged by European settlers beginning in the 1600s, soon after their arrival.
In Canada, overall forest cover is increasing over the last decades. In China, extensive replanting programs have existed since the 1970s. Programs have had overall success. The forest cover has increased from 12% of China's land area to 16%. The "Green Wall of China", an attempt to limit the expansion of the Gobi Desert is planned to be 2,800 miles (4,500 km) long and to be completed in 2050. China plans to plant 26 billion trees in the next decade that is two trees for every Chinese citizen per year. China requires that students older than 11 years old plant one tree a year until their high school graduation.
Reforestation is required as part of the federal forest law in Germany. 31% of Germany is forested, according to the second forest inventory of 2001–2003. The size of the forest area in Germany increased between the first and the second forest inventory due to forestation of degenerated bogs and agricultural areas. Similar results are occurring throughout most of Europe and the industrialized nations.
Climate change will without a doubt cause some problems, but they will be addressed. In the meantime, the air, water and soil improve, dramatically so. The planet is better fed and poverty continues to be reduced. Birth rates will soon get to the point of leveling out and sustainability. The planet is also being re-forested at an amazing rate. Overall crime is down considerably and people are living much longer and more fulfilling lives than ever before in human history. The few problem areas are in emerging 3rd world nations; these will also be resolved within a generation.
You want an opinion? You are a nutjob.