Someone round here has been pushing the james lindsey stuff recently and I gave it a listen, and I heard him say this just last the other day. It was almost the exact same example about there being a car accident, pedestrian and driver, whose fault is it. We on the sane spectrum would look at who was driving where and when, who had right of way, what the rules are,
The left has a very system view of the world: "yes, the city for pushing cars and our culture for pushing a culture expecting us to work and thus drive is what is at fault, and it must be upended and destroyed, and anyone who supports any of this is complicit"
This is who were are fighting. This answer is typical of the 'systematic' leftist view of things. Now, I do think the responder is satirical in this case, but it's the manner of thinking we're fighting.
Trump had the right take on this issue, stop it hurting kids and then leave it.
Knowles is right, this is an untenable position.
If transgenderism can be true for adults, then it makes no logical sense why it also isn't true for kids. From there it then follows that not transing the kids is incredibly cruel. Forcing them to grow into 6'2 deep-voiced hulking hairy brutes when they are actually women inside before allowing them to add fake tits as adults, when we can give them blockers and hormones to let them grow to actually resemble women? Transing them earlier would be the compassionate policy.
Trump's policy is the losing one that conservatives have adopted for too long, it is always compromising and accepting the newly ratcheted leftist position from 5 years back, but no further!*
*for now, we promise, but when you ratchet it further, we'll compromise again and insist it stop or at least slow down slightly.
It is illogical. Don't just push for the status quo, push the window back the other way. That's how you actually achieve the compromise position as your worstcase scenatio, and achieve what you want to achieve best case.
The same goes for your women focused stuff. The window needs to be pushed by people articulating it well, and you need to advocate for a position closer to your ideal, rather than what you'd settle for, that's negotiating and politics 101. That doesn't mean you always need to reveal your true power, what it means is don't start from whatever the compromise position is.
Start hoarding toilet paper. It's going to be worth more than US dollars.
It occurs to me that there's another solution on offer here... if one is worth less than the other...
I'm not. I took myself of those lists and had good chats with everyone close.
The 'unvaxxed' were denied organs. And so if my organs went anywhere they'd only go to those who supported or were complicit with my oppression and that of my family. So fuck em. We could have all said no, but those people didn't. And I wouldn't want grandma to die from my organs which haven't been given the 'blessed elixer', best they just rot in the ground for everyone's safety really.
Should it be illegal for a tranny...
Yes
You seriously believe none of them are fetishists?
"but here's the thing, I don't give a fuck"
Based.
Well if they're Christian they won't mind missing those other dates then, easy.
It should be one or the other, that's my point.
I actually wouldn't mind the natives (not foreigners) getting their own holidays. You've got some weird holiday on the 5th of june or some shit that you basically need to take off for your religion/culture?
Great go for it, but in turn you're covering for us on the easter holidays which you don't celebrate.
That's not the world we live in though, they're pushing for both, fuck em.
Yeah, our man here needs to do a bit of research into bell curves.
Title Y you mean
It can be a result of multiple things at once.
Is there some depressed and pathetic men thinking they'd do better as the privilaged class that doesn't need to do anything and is promoted without merit to fill quotas? I can believe it. I don't think you're entirely wrong, and it's probebly a motivation or incentive for some of them.
But are there disgusting fetishists who get a thrill out of putting on women's clothes and exposing themselves in women's bathrooms. Also yes.
But let's not focus on those individuals. Look at the system-wide push for it. Why are the elites pushing it, why does it keep recurring? Germany was trying this stuff 100 years ago. Because Gnosticism has the belief that the soul and body are entirely distinct and at odds, and transgenderism 'proves' it. Because they have a preoccupation with being 'critical'(and I used that term very specifically) and tearing down everything about society, the more transgressive the better. There is a reason it is being pushed so broadly, it is in alignment with the ideas and the goals of an ancient and persistent heretical system of belief.
Yeah Craig was good. It's helped by the fact that I only had the highlights fed to me through youtube. But yeah, Craig was actually funny
Couldn't have a gay skeleton nowadays though.
I'd thought similar months ago, and the catholic community that I've seen are slowly coming to the same realisation, drips and mentions. That these aren't just satanic ideas, but gnostics we are fighting. And it's the trans push which really reveals it.
But why though? That's the only thing I haven't figured out yet.
Who controls the purses and has a vendetta against germany and russia?
Is that really a good job though? Like are they paid well and respected?
I know a major complaint that men who go into these kinds of fields have is that they're always assigned violent and unruly patients/clients/whatever.
Obviously the work itself is shit, you're dealing with the kind of people no-one wants to work with all other things being equal. Yeah, that's the point. That's where the males are needed. Same as policing and the army.
Pay is hard to say because of how nurses are graded and all the different quals, it ranges from 'about average for educated' up to 'damn nice but not anesthetist nice', depending on which qual you have, where I am.
E: Oh, I and remembered a 3rd group. Military stuff, better ratios there.
Nursing is a miserable job, and any man who's interested in healthcare should become a PA or a doctor. He'll get paid better and won't have to worry about coming across as a faggot
There are a couple of exceptions.
Mental health nursing, we need large men who are basically security guards with health training, you need to be able to command respect and also tackle and hold people down till the meds kick in. Prison guards for schizophrenics basically.
Anesthetist nurse. High paying, basically just working under the anethetist themselves and administering meds. Reasonably split at around 50/50, and that's only cause so many of the earlier steps are female dominated. If the training that fed into it weren't so biased it would be 98/2. It's very well paying.
And there are others. It's a shame they are called 'nurse' really, because those are jobs that are suited to males, other than the name.
As a general rule sure, don't become a nurse lads. But there are a couple of 'nursing' roles which are male suited and male dominated. Or at least reasonably split, because they require male skills and physique, and which we do need as a society.
Even that is an unfair comparison. You need an age adjusted cases per capita, not just per capita.
This is the trick the msm pulled when looking at per capita stats. Florida is a giant retirement village, when your disease basically only hits old frail people, you need to adjust for how many old people a state like florida has compared to others.
Same as sweden, sweden had avoided the last 2-3 years of flu season, but its neighbours were hit. So their stats look worse because of that. The moment you adjust to consider how many old frail people they had going into it, both florida and sweden come out looking even better. And again, the msm never accounts for that.
Thankfully it's only a text article.
It's a sketch as a part of the I.T crowd.
she reared her head in the early GG days. Was gunna start some 'doxx the haters/fight the trolls' bullshit grift of a kickstarter, then 'swapped sides' after zoe quinn didn't like the competition (nor the doxxing of the actual abusive trolls by all accounts...)
She then gone from grift to grift in conservative circles, now at the daily wire. Not like ian(?) who also swapped but was largely accepted, nobody believes candace.
These are great./
My source is that it was revealed to me in a dream.
This is my bugbear. It's not just that parents are better teachers and can offer a more tailored approach, it's that the 'socialisation' 'benefits' of school are actually detriments. There is no benefit to public education. For thousands of years across all societies, kids socialized with their siblings and neighborhood kids, with the elder daughters looking after the youngest. When you became a man at 13 or so, you left the kid groups and were socialised with adults as an apprentice, you were taught to socialize in a meaningful way with responsible adults, trusted with more and more responsibilities, and earning respect. You learnt to behave responsibly from adult groups. This is how we are made to socialise and organise ourselves
The modern school is an aberration and completely disordered social group. Teenagers are not meant to spend all their time learning social skills from other teenagers who do not know how to behave, because they themselves are learning from other teenagers. GIGO. They are learning to 'socialise' in an artificial and inapplicable environment. Nothing they learn at school is applicable outside of it, it is not useful 'socialisation'. And even if it could be in theory, its public nature and lack of exclusion of negative influences means it is never so in practise
Separating the boys from men as rolemodels and teachers in smaller groups is one of the underappreciated blights on our society, and part of the reason we now have men-children till 30. Because they aren't starting the apprentices and learning under other adults till after 24. And male teachers is not the solution. It would help, but this is not what I mean. 1 man cannot teach 30 children how to behave. I'm talking apprentices with few boys amongst many men or the family group, learning to chat and behave responsible by working along side them and learning a trade, as we've always done, from tribal groups to anything pre 1900 or whatever.
I'm also just wary of anything with 'social' in the word. It has other meanings, far leftist ones. Whenever some leftist says they want your kid to be social...... something, be very afraid, suspicious, and know that it means something entirely different to what they want you to think it means.