They want to be able to ban second hand sales of games, require you to buy a licence to be able to play that title whilst also requesting a monthly fee forever more to access your games so they can apply the same modern licensing system to retro games and milk consumers for everything they've got.
At that point, people will pirate.
What is happening now is that they date and sleep with Chad or Tyrone expecting to lock him down and she'll be the one he will make a honest woman of. Problem is, he has options and will exercise them. At which point she is another bed notch, she complains on TikTok about how men won't commit and the articles appear asking "where have all the good men gone".
They are now increasingly abandoning beta bux as due to numerous factors, they are transitioning to a share the high value men or go it alone and be provided for by the state/career/alloparenting strategies that the beta bux male used to fill.
It's what the self-help gurus, life coaches and motivational speakers refuse to accept, that there are differences between people, we are not blank slates and you can't gym your way to be taller or will your way into a career.
Not the case today, at least in my area. Social housing is primarily now restricted to women, those with children, migrants and those who served in the military. If you're single, male and childless, the council will just tell you to not bother to apply because it will take so long, if you're lucky. That wasn't the case a couple or so decades ago.
Worse still, private landlords are starting to refuse renting their property to single people on the basis that a couple provide more financial security (two incomes) and the social stereotyping that singles cause more issues for landlords.
You can't legally claim welfare or be employed if you are not registered at a residential address.
While councils have a statutory duty to provide shelter for the unintentionally homeless, you still have all the problems above. The likelihood is that we're going to see a clampdown on homelessness via the new Criminal Justice Bill that replaces the Vagrancy Act by criminalising it and jailing the homeless!
I was listening to a commentary on the key aspects of what keeps men in long term relationships and one of them was regular access to sex from a partner.
We also know that women have an aversion to men they don't find attractive and that is what leads to dead bedrooms. Women find it easier to forgo sex and have their libido disappear according to the situation they're in compared to men. There is a reality behind the jokes around marriage and sex.
All this article will do is lead to frustrated men. If anything, this could be considered the western sex strike.
a gynocentric, female-ruled order.
Always has been. Even when men were in positions of power. Any feminist who claims we live or have lived in a patriarchy is flat out wrong, by definition, by logic and by evidence.
I'm guessing they must have heard in Japan of the London landlords who unironically did this very thing - put out ads for women only tenants who could live rent free in exchange for sex - and that's what caused the furore.
That's my concern too. That we're seeing a moral panic being crafted against an outgroup whom no-one will come to the defence to. The more reporting I see, the more I am convinced of this.
And now with a second knife attack in Sydney, we await and see what the media makes of the perpetrator because I fear another "lone wolf" attack.
A counter article from his father:
He wanted a girlfriend
Male escort =/= men offering services to men.
Is there any proof he was gay (the male escort thing didn't bring up any hint his target clientele were men from what I could fathom)? All what I could find points to him dating women and failing at it because he was "sweet and kind", as one example:
Elliot Rodger killed just as many men as he did women and yet it was still labelled as him targeting women.
I guess it shows that facts and logic should not get in the way of a narrative and how much the media values men.
The media seem to be focusing on two aspects of him, his neuroatypical mindset (like you'd see with schizophrenia or autism that generally women see as a deal breaker) and his failure to attract a partner without using the term "incel". Namely marking his "sweet and kind" nature as a warning sign.
And with the current state of the dating market, it's likely that we'll see more men disenfranchised from the dating market and society. Their proposed solution of ending "femicide" (the security guards life does not count to the media) will not deal with the underlying root cause but will denigrate all single (unvetted) men as a threat and a danger in a western country intent on implementing safetyism.
Does not fit the narrative the media wants to play out.
Another thing to note, the female officer who shot him has been applauded and praised for her heroism yet the man who held a bollard up to the perpetrator to stop him getting into the kids play area and committing acts of horror to children has remained silent.
Not an incel narrative, they're all careful not to use that word, but they are heavily implying that he is a single male. That targets a broader range of men in any forthcoming legislation or policy by the Australian Government.
Awaiting the inevitable "radicalised by Andrew Tate/Pearl Davis/ Fresh 'n Fit" narrative to begin.
So we now have a judiciary that will excuse the potential blinding of a man, scrub that, will excuse violence on the basis that it is self defence from being offended? Because they seem offence as a form of violence?
Absolute joke of a judiciary.