Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Everyday Unbeliever

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Breeders and Feeders

    Hi,

    I just wanted to hammer another nail into gynocentrism. Not the phenomenon, but the way people think about it.

    The evo psych bottleneck theory has ruled the field for decades now, but can now be chased on the retreat,
    thanks to an argument which was staring us all in the eye since Paglia's dictum on grass huts,
    but which it took - honour where honour's due - our very own simpleman to point out:

    Kids need resources, but they need it in two stages. First inside, later outside the mother.
    The inside story we all know: the egg is larger than the sperm, bringing more resources.
    But men's contribution does not end with fertilization. On the contrary, men's contribution doesn't even begin in earnest until 9 months later.
    Because the kids need another 10 years of feeding, at least, before they can produce their own calories.

    So the bottleneck isn't the access to eggs, it's access to resources.
    If you had an island with 99 women and 1 man, you'd have 200 people after 9 months, but only 20 people after 9 years.
    The bottleneck is really the number of men who can feed the breeders and their brood.

    No matter that "the father ran off" - the food that goes into kids is made by some man, not by the mother left behind.

    This also casts some light on the "centuries of oppression":
    A man has had to provide for himself, unlike others, who are provided for.
    If he has a wife, he has to provide for her too; if he has more than one, he has to provide for them all.
    If they have kids, one, two, three or ten, twelve, he has to provide for all of them, too.
    If he has a master, a boss, a lord - who all have wives and children, too, and may have an overlord behind them, wiht more wives and kids - he has to contribute to feeding them, too - carrying perhaps a dozen, two dozen people on his back.

    Men have always been the feeders, the primary fare givers, working themselves to rack and ruin, risking health, liberty and life for others.
    And rarely by choice.

    So don't come here with any "privilege" bullshit. Unless it's your own, and you've had it thoroughly checked.

    M

    Comment


    • “If men are obsolete, then women will soon be extinct — unless we rush down that ominous Brave New World path where women clone themselves by parthenogenesis, as famously do Komodo dragons, hammerhead sharks and pit vipers.”--Camille Paglia

      Somehow, genetically speaking, I don't think even that solution would work. There's a sort of emotional incest implied in a cloned, single gender society. In contemplating such manipulations, males might get away with splitting off the X chromosome and creating another female from their own genes. Women could never do this. The ancient Annunaki apparently tried creating hybrid humans and had a lot of failures.

      I like most of what Camille has to say about these issues, though at times I think she doesn't know what she is talking about--such as the male identity being fragile. Perhaps that is so in some regions of the US, and a significant portion of the associated populace. Just my opinion, but I can't imagine a lesbian having an inside handle on masculinity. Most of the men I've met in traveling the world did not have identity problems, except among those few who were not mentored enough to know how to handle the emotionally in-grown female.

      Stephanie Coontz had this to say about fathers in her book Marriage, a History:

      “They have established through their research that children who are not exposed to the influence of their mothers for half a day can develop their mental faculties faster and therefore are capable of greater achievements later on. The practical application of this discovery, which women do not consider at all humiliating - after all, they lack man's sense of honor…” p111

      Dr Kyle Pruett in his two books (The Nurturing Father and Fatherneed) chronicling his investigation of father's influence on children, not only confirmed Ms Coontz's report but indicated that children socialize quicker, learn to converse more freely and effectively, have a higher adaptability to changing social situations, and score scholastically in all fundamental areas, EARLIER than children who are "nurtured" only by their mothers. I found his research much more elevating than Warren Farrell's findings. He also reported he found many of the mothers of families he was tracking had considerable difficulty "allowing" their husbands to enter their presumed domain. But when they did, along with these benefits, fathers were far less likely to engage in child abuse in any form.

      So when we speak of fathers providing resources, it goes well beyond giving women and children a fish; he shows them how to fish for themselves and find fulfillment in doing so.
      Last edited by Klokman; 11-22-2017, 12:05 AM.
      Exiting Wally’s World one day I spied a spiffy Harley, just being stood by a tall, full broad. I remarked to my blond bone: Nice Hawg. Whereupon she asked: Which, the woman or the bike?

      “Good Friends are like Diamonds, while False Friends are like Autumn Leaves found every where.” --Unknown

      I once tried to read to my bride from one of the wonderful books in my library. She feel asleep inside of five minutes. But if I snort in my sleep, she is awake like the owl. Then I learned from Ms. Vilar that "...woman does not read the wonderful books with which he has filled his libraries." Then I found not many men do either.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Klokman View Post
        I like most of what Camille has to say about these issues, though at times I think she doesn't know what she is talking about--such as the male identity ..... I can't imagine a lesbian having an inside handle on masculinity.
        Yes, Paglia is interesting.
        But the weakness you mention is IMO one of the fundamental reasons to reject feminism and its theory as invalid:
        They have never, ever asked any man about what it's like to be a man.
        The whole theory is built on their perceptions, i.e. projections, of what being a man is about.
        There is simply no empirical basis for their claims.


        Warren Farrell ... reported he found many of the mothers ... had considerable difficulty "allowing" their husbands to enter their presumed domain.
        Indeed.
        "First we share yours, then I eat mine."

        http://runeberg.org/folkeven/117.html

        MVH,

        M

        Comment


        • The Folktale--WOW. Thank you. Took me a while to plow through as there were several words I had forgotten, some new, and a few not in my dictionary. Reading it brought back several things to mind: How I wished I had been astute enough at the time I was in Norway to locate a collection of folk stories and wealthy enough to bring them home. I always wanted to raise my children on them. The next thing I discovered is compared to American conversational English, Norwegian is much more direct, authentic of meaning, and loaded with imagery. I often noticed the communication difficulties between American men and Norwegian women couples was much more strained, because you folks tend to speak your minds so directly. I did not get the chance to observe to any significant degree how Norwegian men and women get along with each other. But the predominance of female descriptive words suggest a long history of men knowing well what females are like. IT seems to appear in the tales as well.

          Here we say, as you probably have heard, a woman is characterized by "What's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine." I found the movie Yours, Mine, and Ours" repugnant and typical verbal obfuscation and mendacity.

          The last statement I cannot decipher. It is too euphemistic for me. "Det var for han hette Utro, og var Utro, det."

          I am not so immersed in the issues of the feminist movement (more like a salmonella bowel movement if you ask me) as you. I came to the same conclusions as you listed from reflection, observation, and reading Dr Szasz and colleagues. The whole business has struck me as a giant temper tantrum loaded with obfuscation as to their true motives because they are unwilling to accept accountability for the consequences of their own actions--or rather lack of action (because they are so constituted to talk, rather than act). It is the hoot, howl, and screeching of overgrown children, who, when things don't go their way, want to assign blame to everything and everyone else but themselves. My wife behaves in this way when working on the computer, even though she knows more often than not, and rarely admits, that the vast majority of problems she experiences with the machine is due to her own ignorance, laziness in learning how it functions, and unwillingness to apply the analytical capacity of her mind. Then she gets into a drama rage when I chastise her for it. Unbecoming of a grandmother of 69.

          On the matter of never having asked men WTH, my entire life can be described as one episode after another of people, male or female, in positions of authority who never bother to ascertain what context or motives were in a given conflict. As we say here, "Shoot first, ask questions later." The last time I was in court, accused of a misdemeanor, neither the judge, prosecuting attorney, nor my own, were the least bit interested in the events leading up to the presumed offense by the prosecution. To me it made all the difference, as I was trying to protect the house and our property against the depredations of the drug community that my stepdaughter had gotten in to. The case was dismissed by the judge on technicalities: 1) the ruling of the State supreme court on surveillance videos, 2) the prosecuting attorney had lost the original search warrant upon which half her case was built.

          It would be easy to assign cause of such laziness, chastisement, familial and civil retribution without investigation or full disclosure upon a gynocentric culture centered on blame/projection and retribution. But that would imply that humanity has been gynocentric back to earliest times. This is one of the reasons I'm interested in etymology and ancient history. The Sumerian tablets relating the Annunaki travails suggest they suffered the same difficulties.
          Exiting Wally’s World one day I spied a spiffy Harley, just being stood by a tall, full broad. I remarked to my blond bone: Nice Hawg. Whereupon she asked: Which, the woman or the bike?

          “Good Friends are like Diamonds, while False Friends are like Autumn Leaves found every where.” --Unknown

          I once tried to read to my bride from one of the wonderful books in my library. She feel asleep inside of five minutes. But if I snort in my sleep, she is awake like the owl. Then I learned from Ms. Vilar that "...woman does not read the wonderful books with which he has filled his libraries." Then I found not many men do either.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Klokman View Post
            The Folktale--WOW. Thank you.
            Bare hyggelig.

            Took me a while to plow through as there were several words I had forgotten, some new, and a few not in my dictionary.
            Yes, these were collected and published beginning in 1841, so the style is archaic, even to us locals.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Folktales

            Reading it brought back several things to mind: How I wished I had been astute enough at the time I was in Norway to locate a collection of folk stories and wealthy enough to bring them home. I always wanted to raise my children on them.
            Well, did you click the "Table of Contents" link? Here are the major 60: http://runeberg.org/folkeven/
            Some of them are longish, some written in dialect and/or in phonetic style, and can be difficult,
            but if it helps, here's the 1888 English translation: http://www.surlalunefairytales.com/a...rnsen_moe.html

            The next thing I discovered is compared to American conversational English, Norwegian is much more direct, authentic of meaning, and loaded with imagery.
            In this case, it might be less the NO language, and more the genre.
            Folk litterature is often like that, direct yet poetic; you'll find the same in e.g. the German fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm.
            Well, German can be pretty direct, too.
            But yes, it's very rare to come across "high style" here; you'll hear it in church, and in some - but not all - of King Harald's speeches.
            So we usually call a jordforflytningsanretning a shovel, yes.

            you folks tend to speak your minds so directly.
            Yes, but we usually call it "lack of sophistication".

            But the predominance of female descriptive words suggest a long history of men knowing well what females are like. IT seems to appear in the tales as well.

            First and foremost: http://runeberg.org/folkeven/058.html
            But also: http://runeberg.org/folkeven/026.html
            and: http://runeberg.org/folkeven/100.html

            The last statement I cannot decipher. It is too euphemistic for me. "Det var for han hette Utro, og var Utro, det."
            "That was because his name was Faithless, and because faithless he was, you see."
            We have a separate word for "being named (x)", which is "å hete". If someone says "Jeg heter Tom", it means approx. "I'm named Tom".
            "Tro" realy means loyal, faithful, true, and your 'un-' would be 'u-' here. So, True and Untrue, Loyal and Disloyal, Faithful and Faithless.

            The whole business has struck me as a giant temper tantrum loaded with obfuscation as to their true motives because they are unwilling to accept accountability for the consequences of their own actions--or rather lack of action (because they are so constituted to talk, rather than act) (moved up that would imply that humanity has been gynocentric back to earliest times.
            That makes all women individual, psychological headcases. I think that's statistically improbable.
            Unless ....

            Suppose that humanity _has_ been gynocentric back to earliest time ...?
            That could only have one explanation: not because of culture or custom, but because they are women.

            That is the approach of evolutionary psychology.

            I think that EP is sometimes to 'easy', I see much facile verbiage simply backdating fifties picket fence America to prehistoric man, usually by people who have little idea about fifties picket fence America, and none at all about hunter-gatherers; and talk about liking lipstick being "evolved" since .. what, 1920? Evolution takes a bit longer than that to change genes, etc. But still.

            Whatever failings the PUA community may have, they are quite succinct at drawing conclusions from such EvoPsych as there is.
            And they call all the whining women do, one big shit test. Can I get you to do what you do not want to? If I can, you're not worth my time.
            Women do that to men constantly. Feminists are now doing it to whole nations at a time.
            Take any crap stuff women do, and feminism will do it, too; and vice versa.
            Feminism is nothing but ordinary women's power tactics, writ large.

            On the matter of never having asked men WTH, my entire life can be described as one episode after another of people, male or female, in positions of authority who never bother to ascertain what context or motives were in a given conflict.
            But note how obsessed they are with relating, often in excruciating detail, every single item of minutiae of their life, week and day, and their thoughts and their feelings and their thoughts about their feelings and feelings about their thoughts, and also their feelings abouth their feelings, and how _those_ feelings feel ... especially if they are on the defensive. "If only I could tell you ... something that would paint my entire inner landscape, from childhood ... then you'd understand ... that I had no choice ....".


            M
            Last edited by Manalysis; 11-24-2017, 08:40 PM.

            Comment


            • )))
              So Norske kvinner er det same! blah, blah, blah. Found myself tuning out with the bride's trivia today. She didn't even notice the gloss in my eyes... She did not register the following even though it has been less than 48 hours:

              Wed we "celebrated" Thanksgiving with my sister and 2 of her kids. The oldest, female, regards me like a father figure (her father is more gyno and unconscious than my sister) and pumped me about her latest man interest. She's 38.... I likened men to a barrel of crude oil, where the flotsam floats and the sludge sinks. My sister caught on right away from my detailed description that her "friend" was sludge. "I'm reasonably attractive, and blah blah blah. Why is he not interested in me?" Well for starters, she's about 50 kilos over weight. Add to that the rest of typical feline attitudes. I doubt that she grasped in her thoughts that the metaphor applies to women as well, even though we talked about like attracting like, and my sister tried to emphasize that to her daughter.

              The next day I tried to talk to my bride about the matter, pointing out that women who men view as 8,9, or 10s are visually appealing, but lacking considerably in self-esteem and intelligence. She bristled at the suggestion. Oh no, there ARE bright women who are very attractive! To avoid another passion storm, I did not ask; Name one. She rebels at the notion of categorizing people (a Sociology graduate!), insisting people are not all the same. Well, no, all persons are not clones. But men ARE men, and women ARE women, and like the barrel of crude oil we each fit somewhere in there at some level. No exceptions. I don't think my niece grasped that if she is interested in a sludge type personality, then that bespeaks something of her choice being familiar.... I subsequently wrote her about changing who she was to get what she believes she's worth.

              The thing that is so discouraging here is I had these conversations with her ten years previous. She didn't get it then, marrying another sludge-type man, and now in the throws and woes of divorce, and still doesn't appear to get it. A perfect example of Hindmarh's declaration that women do not learn from their experiences. Women truly have a listening deficit. The bride does the same thing. They are all headcases of some degree, some level of the barrel. That's what women are until the hormones driving it subside, or they employ the mental discipline sufficient to override the impetus. Same for men, BTW. But how many actually discipline their passions? The Buddhist masters knew that women have grave difficulty with it.

              In all the places I have lived, visiting most all the countries of Europe, England, Japan, Taiwan, Canada, and Mexico, though I have observed some women who suppress their passions while conversing with men, they still think with their tits as we used to say in puberty. There is a parable about a snake similar to Tro & Utro, wherein the snake promises another animal not to bite it. By and by, the snake bites it. When asked why, the snake said: "Because that is what I do." Zebras hang out in herds because predators have difficulty distinguishing prey in the zebra herd. Individually they have different markings, but the fundamental design is the same. inasmuch as they do not learn to manage their emoting as a tool of enlightenment, rather than a "weapon" of manipulation, they are headcases. And feminists are overgrown children who are headcases on steroids. Maybe I'm just getting old, decrepit and rigid. Like Vilar said, we get so inured to it we are not aware of how pervasive it is, and when we start to see it so prevalent, don't want to believe it is true. Went through that cycle leaving the cult, and it truly smacks of the same type of incredulity. We don't want to believe for various logical arguments what our senses are registering.
              Exiting Wally’s World one day I spied a spiffy Harley, just being stood by a tall, full broad. I remarked to my blond bone: Nice Hawg. Whereupon she asked: Which, the woman or the bike?

              “Good Friends are like Diamonds, while False Friends are like Autumn Leaves found every where.” --Unknown

              I once tried to read to my bride from one of the wonderful books in my library. She feel asleep inside of five minutes. But if I snort in my sleep, she is awake like the owl. Then I learned from Ms. Vilar that "...woman does not read the wonderful books with which he has filled his libraries." Then I found not many men do either.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Klokman View Post
                So Norske kvinner er det same!
                Much alike most places, I guess. I like'm, though, many of them are nice, and some of them are quite nice


                She didn't even notice the gloss in my eyes...
                Yes, and, you know, they say of themselves that women are such great communicators ...?
                If it weren't t o t a l l y unmanly, I'd giggle, sometimes.


                Add to that the rest of typical feline attitudes.
                And 'attitudes' is the very key.
                What you are hearing is not somebody _thinking_.
                What you are hearing, is the squeak of the wheel as the rationalization hamster runs extra laps to power the smoke machine that fogs out the truth so that it doesn't hurt her narcissistic self-image. Do not mistake this for higher-level cognitive activity. Admitted, it _is_ a skill, and they start practicing it as soon as they learn to read Marie Claire et al. Women like that are indeed, as de Beauvoir claims, not born, they are made.
                The Japanese have a saying about clear springs: when it stops running, the muddy water rushes in.
                So there is an attempt at constant overpressure in the self-esteem spout, lest ugly, ugly things should pollute the crystal palace.

                She bristled at the suggestion. Oh no, there ARE bright women who are very attractive!
                Same, same, but different.
                They don't kow the difference between a universal statement (refuted by any single counter-example) and the report of a statistical probability (where any single counter-example merely places you somewhere on the matrix. The probability distribution remains the same, and remains true).
                And again, they take care to decouple the mind before opening the word hopper, which now runs on fumes from glandular emotional hormones:
                "froth or flight"-syndrome.

                The thing that is so discouraging here is I had these conversations with her ten years previous.
                Which should demonstrate to you that your approach is not the right one.

                They are all headcases of some degree
                Nah ... they dance to the beat of the female imperative. You think they're mad because you don't hear the music.
                You're measuring them by your own standards, or with yourself as the yardstick. I doubt that that gives you good data.
                Not to criticize you, though. I agree that it is a fine ideal; the question is, is it attainable by all.

                You kow that when men argue with women, they present how they feel as the final end to all chains of reasoning.
                That she feels this or that is like bedrock, the demiurge himself, unexplicable and unalterable, chiselled in granite, perennial for eternity.
                But when it comes to what youu feel, they have no compunction telling you that you feel wrong and should change what you feel.
                And if you can eavesdrop when to women talk, it's just the same. I'm convinced there is a special truth criterion for women: Nothing is true until you've told someone. They ask each other how they should feel about things, and telling some girlfriend is often enough for them to decide. Perhaps the girlfriend gives off almost imperceptible non-verbal clues. Perhaps she gives advice ("Divorce him, and get the house and kids", usually).

                Spinoza said that you can't argue with emotion, i.e. rationality and emotion are like two different languages, which do not decode each other.
                What you can do, what you in fact _have to_ do, says he, is to fight fire with fire.
                Emotion can only be overcome by another, stronger counter-emotion.

                So ... have fun playing with matches

                M
                Last edited by Manalysis; 11-25-2017, 01:08 AM.

                Comment


                • Well I've always enjoyed pyrotechnics. Just not that kind. Did a lot of "fighting" emotion with emotion in the first marriage. Fruitless. Oldest child like the niece--compromise means giving her what she wants, and you getting what they don't.

                  The niece? Her mother has not had any success with her daughter either. I suppose that means both our approaches are ineffective. Or, just maybe she is one of those women who truly has a listening deficit (very domineering and controlling, but slow to figure people's motives like her deranged father, yet perennially asking for advice) and will never respond to any approach.

                  There was one Norwegian gal I would have liked to investigate years ago. I bumped into her 20 years later. She looked like she had hardly aged even though she had married and had children. Her husband had died not long before I met her again. A lovely spirit in her, even after so much time. I just don't know that the cultural and gender differences could have been surmounted. Part of what I would have liked to find out. It just might have proved the bride's argument!
                  Exiting Wally’s World one day I spied a spiffy Harley, just being stood by a tall, full broad. I remarked to my blond bone: Nice Hawg. Whereupon she asked: Which, the woman or the bike?

                  “Good Friends are like Diamonds, while False Friends are like Autumn Leaves found every where.” --Unknown

                  I once tried to read to my bride from one of the wonderful books in my library. She feel asleep inside of five minutes. But if I snort in my sleep, she is awake like the owl. Then I learned from Ms. Vilar that "...woman does not read the wonderful books with which he has filled his libraries." Then I found not many men do either.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Klokman View Post
                    Found myself tuning out with the bride's trivia today.
                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPPG0UauHDo

                    M

                    Comment


                    • That one is not available here.
                      Exiting Wally’s World one day I spied a spiffy Harley, just being stood by a tall, full broad. I remarked to my blond bone: Nice Hawg. Whereupon she asked: Which, the woman or the bike?

                      “Good Friends are like Diamonds, while False Friends are like Autumn Leaves found every where.” --Unknown

                      I once tried to read to my bride from one of the wonderful books in my library. She feel asleep inside of five minutes. But if I snort in my sleep, she is awake like the owl. Then I learned from Ms. Vilar that "...woman does not read the wonderful books with which he has filled his libraries." Then I found not many men do either.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Klokman View Post
                        That one is not available here.
                        Sry, it was the SNL sketch with John Belushi as Don Corleone in psychotherapy, along with the blond stewardess.
                        The truth was out there, once.

                        M

                        Comment


                        • Probably would have gone overhead anyway. I've tried to find interest in SNL over the years since its inception without success. Blues Brothers is about as Belushi as I've ever gotten.
                          Exiting Wally’s World one day I spied a spiffy Harley, just being stood by a tall, full broad. I remarked to my blond bone: Nice Hawg. Whereupon she asked: Which, the woman or the bike?

                          “Good Friends are like Diamonds, while False Friends are like Autumn Leaves found every where.” --Unknown

                          I once tried to read to my bride from one of the wonderful books in my library. She feel asleep inside of five minutes. But if I snort in my sleep, she is awake like the owl. Then I learned from Ms. Vilar that "...woman does not read the wonderful books with which he has filled his libraries." Then I found not many men do either.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
                            Hi,

                            remember when the F's spoke about reducing the population of men to 10 %?
                            What I think is happening now, is exactly that; however, it's not a physical reduction, androcide, it's a social and sexual reduction.
                            If the #metoo power grab succeeds - look for more money for feminists, more feminist workplace positions and policies, more legislation - soon 90% of men will be swept off the marketplace, no matter how much any man ducks or reducks to avoid the female gaze.

                            M
                            I think those feminists are stupid or blind. I don't think that women compete for the top 10% of men because of the innate traits of those "alpha" men, but rather by nature of them being in the top 10%. You can see that in how quickly they abandon someone who falls down the ladder.

                            No, if those feminists got their wish, they would very quickly be competing over the top 10% of the 10% that remained. Sure some would settle for a 9% guy, but most would resent it. Because it's not about who the guy is, it's about validating their self-worth by getting attached to the highest position man their sexuality will buy them.
                            "...but when she goes off you, she will not just walk away, she will walk away with your fucking skin in a jar." ~~ DoctorRandomercam
                            "The laws of man, they don't apply when blood gets in a woman's eye" - The Black Keys

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Mifune View Post
                              I think those feminists are stupid or blind. I don't think that women compete for the top 10% of men because of the innate traits of those "alpha" men, but rather by nature of them being in the top 10%. You can see that in how quickly they abandon someone who falls down the ladder.
                              Apart from the irony of "alpha" etc. being an erroneous theory and then seeing it being misunderstood by dating coaches ... Yes.
                              Some men have an 'animal magnetism', but it's just that: brute. While some are clever enough to become psychopath bosses, most of them end up poodle rock guitarists or bikers. A completely different set of men makes it to the top in society, and their attraction is of course due to their position. Evidence: Kissinger.
                              And since a position is temporary, being an 'alpha' is a role one gets to play for a while, then it is time for the exit.

                              Robert Mugabe is so old that he'll probably shuffle off this mortal coil ere long, but for that I think we'd see Grace M. leaving him post haste.

                              No, if those feminists got their wish, they would very quickly be competing over the top 10% of the 10% that remained. Sure some would settle for a 9% guy, but most would resent it. Because it's not about who the guy is, it's about validating their self-worth by getting attached to the highest position man their sexuality will buy them.
                              Agreed. Women have one ting to trade, and for that they have to get everything else. Hence their entire waking day is spent in maintaining the cartel, the price, the position, and, of course, if possible to strengthen them. There's little room for any other interests or pursuits, which makes them rather one-dimensional.

                              M

                              Comment


                              • Speech vs Consequences

                                Hi,

                                I find it strange that people can say, with a serious face, that yes, there is and should be freedom of speech, but not freedom from consequences.
                                What is freedom of speech _other than_ freedom from consequences? To speak your mind and not be sanctioned for it?

                                And these people are the same who howl about online harassment, which, obvioulsy, is a consequence of someone speaking freely.
                                So ... there should be freedom from consequences if you have the approved opinion ...?

                                M
                                Last edited by Manalysis; 12-05-2017, 07:06 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X