2
Zyxl 2 points ago +2 / -0

Totally agree. But it's possible that the encrapification of the internet will drive people away from it. I can hope.

2
Zyxl 2 points ago +2 / -0

Would be better if it was archive.org so we don't have to do these CAPTCHAs all the time. archive.is was using the CAPTCHA page to DDoS another website that discussed the webmaster's identity. It could still be DDoSing for all I know.

1
Zyxl 1 point ago +1 / -0

I suppose you're either statistically challenged, forgot what you said or you know you misrepresented the statistics and are trying to pretend you didn't. A quarter of women who self-reported a history of same-sex sexual contact is very different from a quarter of heterosexual women.

This new link you posted doesn't have any discernible connection to your argument. It's results from a survey about all kinds of things, one of which is that 5% of people identify as bisexual - 15% for Gen Z adults. Nothing about bisexuality among women.

No one said all or most women are bisexual.

That is the propaganda though.

Exhibit A: https://redlib.catsarch.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/106qdcy/all_women_are_bi/

Exhibit B: https://medium.com/heart-affairs/are-women-naturally-bisexual-exploring-female-sexuality-e96aeb941b61

Statistics are usually manipulated, but if you like trusting the experts here's some statistics that show bisexuals are rare: https://worldmetrics.org/bisexuality-statistics/

Approximately 1.3% of U.S. adults identify as bisexual, according to the 2021 General Social Survey (GSS)

60.4% of bisexual identified individuals in the U.S. are women, 35.8% are men, and 3.8% are non-binary, from 2019 Pew Research

Even if you assume all the "non-binaries" are women, that means women identifying as bisexual are 0.83% of the US adult population and thus about 1.7% of the US women. A tiny number.

If we look at sexual activity instead you'll get higher numbers that include lesbians. For example the same GSS found

the percentage of women who have had sex with at least one woman increased from 3.6% [1973] to 8.7% [2014].

https://www.socialworktoday.com/news/dn_060116.shtml

But the NSFG from 2011-2013 found

Among women, 17 percent reported having intimate same-sex contact in their lives, compared to 6 percent of men.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/more-women-report-same-sex-relationships/

But "intimate same sex contact" could include kissing and molestation, not just a consensual act of "lesbian sex".

1
Zyxl 1 point ago +1 / -0

Are you an AI bot? Or just not taking the time to read? The study says the same thing as the article, not what you're saying.

Most women may sleep around a lot, but few of them are attracted to other women so they only sleep around with men. The point is that bisexual women are rare, contrary to propaganda about all or most women being bisexual.

1
Zyxl 1 point ago +1 / -0

25% of women who identify exclusively as heterosexual still experimented in college sleeping with other women

That's not what your link says. It says "One in 4 women whose most recent hookup was with a partner of the same sex identify as straight." That's very different. It's not hard to believe that 1 in 4 lesbian and bisexual women are retarded, but it's much less believable that 1 in 4 women (who are biologically attracted to masculinity, at least without pills) who call themselves straight actually sleep with other women.

3
Zyxl 3 points ago +3 / -0

The main problem with this meme is the idea that voting can fix anything

2
Zyxl 2 points ago +2 / -0

The idea that lots of women are bisexual is propaganda. I don't see any of these bisexual women, unless it means those we normally consider lesbians. But lesbians are still quite rare fortunately and easy to spot anyway.

3
Zyxl 3 points ago +3 / -0

If resisting arrest counts as fighting off an armed mob then sure

2
Zyxl 2 points ago +2 / -0

But anyone who doesn't sleep around has zero reason to worry

2
Zyxl 2 points ago +2 / -0

Straight people don't tend to have sexual relations with bisexuals. It can happen but it's pretty rare.

14
Zyxl 14 points ago +14 / -0

It's possible they had a based writer for the plot but other leftist writers and storyboarders fleshed it out with the specific dialogue, references and so on.

1
Zyxl 1 point ago +1 / -0

His X post is just repeating what he was already saying before. Pretty much everyone reading it will already know the answers to his questions. But now he's encouraging people to put their faith in Grok. AI is going to be much worse for us than any Jews have been.

1
Zyxl 1 point ago +1 / -0

He wasn't a senator, he didn't "names the jew" and what we're talking about is this post, not something he did 3 years ago.

8
Zyxl 8 points ago +8 / -0

Jeff Yass appears to be libertarian, nationalist and pro-Israel. Presumably he donated to Massie because he's libertarian, but potentially he could have influenced him to be more pro-Israel.

According to Wikipedia Jeff Yass is a registered Libertarian and in 2021

the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that Jeff Yass and Arthur Dantchik were behind a large portion of the donations to the Kohelet Policy Forum [in Israel], whose worldview is based on nationalism, low taxes and market freedom

Also according to Haaretz, Yass is a major supporter of Israeli right-wing think tanks.[32] In April 2024, The Guardian reported that Jeff Yass donated $16 million to anti-Muslim and pro-Israel groups.[34]

11
Zyxl 11 points ago +11 / -0

He said it was more than just surveillance. He mentioned social media and dating apps. These replace normal human interaction. Marriage, sex and baby making have all declined because we have less real life interaction with potential partners. Because most interaction with people is now online, which has also made people more socially awkward if they do meet in person and they are likely to be on their phones instead of talking.

2
Zyxl 2 points ago +2 / -0

Oh wow he asked the AI a question! Talk about sticking it to the man.

Instead he should be telling everyone elections aren't verifiable and there is no way voting will solve our problems.

2
Zyxl 2 points ago +2 / -0

I wasn't meaning if AI becomes sentient, just that anybody with a sufficiently smart science AI could kill everyone with cheap weapons of mass destruction. I explain in more detail here.

3
Zyxl 3 points ago +3 / -0

And it's going to be like that for every job. Humans will have no potential to influence society and will just be pets for AI. If somehow we don't die before then or get enslaved instead.

1
Zyxl 1 point ago +1 / -0

I figured pretty much everyone interested would be following the link to the original post and would see the article link

2
Zyxl 2 points ago +2 / -0

Because next AI will solve physics problems to make nuclear weapons much simpler so every country can have them

5
Zyxl 5 points ago +5 / -0

The problem is that digital ID can be implemented behind the scenes and then people will barely notice and it wouldn't affect Reform if they allowed that to happen. It is in fact already the plan to turn existing IDs into digital IDs by forcing employers to digitally verify IDs through the government. Farage having personally suffered from something doesn't mean he will be against it. Look at Trump and FISA.

11
Zyxl 11 points ago +11 / -0

I wish you were right about things changing but I don't think Reform will be much different. They're the usual flip-flopping conservatives who make an appearance of conserving yesterday's progressivism (and failing) instead of doing anything meaningful or undoing all the damage that was done over the previous generations.

3
Zyxl 3 points ago +3 / -0

Even if an employer doesn’t require the new ID, remember the UK government said that all IDs will soon have to be verified digitally. That suggests the employer will send the ID image or data to a government server which will respond with whether the person is allowed to work. So all IDs will essentially be turned into digital IDs and the government can make individuals unemployable if they do something the government doesn’t like.

view more: Next ›