Books, just like other physical media, will be worth their weight in gold one day.
EA is the Disney of video gaming. Everything good they've ever put out was created by an affiliate or subsidiary studio that they bought. As soon as EA itself assumed more direct control over games development, everything went to shit. Dragon Age is just one example: Origins was good because BioWare were already developing it when EA bought them. Then there's the sequels.
That depends on where you are. Here in the "developed world" there is still a core of people who remember what it was like to live in a high-trust society, and the east Asians might put up a fight once their ethnic homogeneity is sufficiently threatened. But Latin Americans have never really lived in functioning societies. They're so used to corruption, violence, crime and dysfunction that they roll over pretty easily.
Every country is turning into a dictatorship, if it wasn't one already.
I don't know if it's more or less insulting that her amputations are clearly the result of untreated diabetes.
How'd they get this past the Woke Pope?
I like tar tar.
Back in the day? This tweet was posted after her cancellation.
She will continue to demand her right to speak at the same time she demands you be denied yours.
She should stand just outside their boundary line for an hour at a time every week or so shouting "HEY! How are ya!" at passersby.
Please sir hab you tried to turn it off and turn it back on again?
Daily Wire is the enemy.
It's a threat to their entire livelihood. The majority of media at this point, just like the DEI industry, only have their jobs for as long as they can keep the grievance gravy train rolling. The suggestion that consumers might organize to prevent their employers from earning any income from their grift is absolutely intolerable.
That was the booze. None of the elites actually got real Covid shots.
░M░Y░ ░P░U░S░S░Y░ ░I░N░ ░B░I░O░
Again, I agree. Some men will choose to take the risk, and an increasing number won't. The point I keep making is that lecturing those who choose not to about their responsibility to society is simply not going to suddenly convince them to change their minds, especially not when the lecture comes from the same generations of men whose own weakness and impotence played a significant role in creating this situation.
Yes, men have mostly always done what they've needed to in order to reproduce and provide for their families in spite of the fact that the contract has never been fair for them. But right now they're not.
The behavior that recent generations of men, or at least large numbers of them, are displaying in reaction to this evolutionary predisposition to disposability is unlike any we've seen before, except in societies on the brink of collapse. All of which did collapse, usually accompanied by extreme demographic decline or extinction.
The idea that young men are going to keep doing what they've always done because biology predisposes them to do it is not borne out by the reality we're seeing. What's happening instead is that, as female privilege grows more and more unassailable, men are simply choosing not to interact with women, or at least not to reproduce with them.
So is this occurring for purely biological reasons due to population pressures, resource availability or environmental factors? I see very little evidence of that. And if you ask that increasing number of young men what their reasons are, most of them will tell you that it's because they're afraid to interact with women, or they don't think it's worth the risk. I don't think it's illogical to at least examine the change in societal circumstances that has led to that change in behavior.
Oh wow. So dank. So edgy. So completely adolescent.
One of us is not living in the real world, and I'm pretty sure it's you.
Well I'm glad we've both established that we don't give a fuck what the other wants.
The young men you're hoping will get married and have children for the sake of continuing the white race also, by and large, don't care what you want. Because white women, especially in their age range, are useless, insufferable and utterly irredeemable, and more and more of them can see it. There is also no mechanism for holding those women accountable for any of their actions or decisions, and our generations are the ones who created that reality.
Those same young men don't perceive the "enemy" as you put it as an enemy, because that would imply they still have the will to fight.
They don't.
It seems you think you can only win this argument by putting words in my mouth.
Nowhere have I said that I want women's rights abolished (except their supposed right to vote).
As for giving up, that is not my situation. However, I fully understand why so many men have done so, and taking out your impotent anger on me is not going to encourage them to do what you want.
You are the one making demands. You and every other so-called conservative who believes it is the responsibility of the next generation of men to clean up a mess that our generations have made by failing to prevent the feminist takeover of our institutions. Whatever you may think of me, I can tell you what many of them will think of you when you put this argument to them:
They will perceive you and your list of demands, accompanied by lectures about how lazy and useless they are if they don't do what you want, as being no different from all of the same insults, lectures and demands they've received from every adult, authority figure and woman in their lives up until now.
And they'll understandably respond by telling you to fuck off.
The risk is too great for as long as the legal and societal framework exists that enables a woman to divorce-rape and destroy a man with absolutely no repercussions for herself. If you want young men to start marrying and having children again, then that framework needs to be dismantled first.
You can lecture young men all you want about their responsibility to have children and prevent societal suicide, but if you could motivate them by haranguing them, they'd be the most motivated demographic in the West by now. Instead, they're the least motivated, and whether it's bitching at them, bribing them or punishing them with a bachelor tax, you are never going to convince the huge number of young men who've checked out of society that it's their job to fix a mess they didn't make. You are only going to do it by showing them that their efforts will yield a positive return, and that means it's on the rest of us to start fixing what's broken first.
No one is demanding an entirely risk-free environment before they start dating again. What any sane man wants is a fair contract that enables both parties to pursue redress if one of them breaks it, and we don't have that. Women broke the social contract. It is not the responsibility of men to fix it.
there is such thing as a woman with her head screwed on straight
Probably, but it still comes down to a basic risk analysis. When a woman has the legal power to upend your life, take your home and half or more of your income, take your kids, take your pets, take your friends, possibly accuse you of things that will land you in prison, and do so with utter impunity and no risk to herself, the question of whether she actually will do that is secondary.
The problem is not that we think every woman would, but that any woman could. And that makes the risk too great.
At least somebody will be making money off of it, because Disney's shareholders fucking won't.
Peltz heads an anti-activist investor fund called Trian, which has a history of taking over board seats in companies that are providing poor shareholder returns and focusing on returning them to profitability. He already managed to improve stockholder dividends at a couple of other companies by forcing out woke executives and advocating an anti-activist agenda. It's not as though he's super based or anything, but he does seem to view corporations pursuing political agendas as a poor business strategy, which puts his group directly at odds with BlackRock and Vanguard.
More than that, and this is his point in the video, it's handing a weapon to the enemy. As soon as Republicans make it clear that they believe the Federal government should have jurisdiction over this issue, they're paving the way for a Democrat majority to pass national abortion legislation, and SCOTUS could very well back them on it.