Freauxzen

quote:

---

This entire tragedy could have been prevented if the rhetoric coming from Democrats wasn't so loaded, to a point that somebody like Good thought it was a good use of her time to take on the endeavor.

---

This is correct.

quote:

---

More people are going to get hurt. Almost a guarantee at this point. I don't think we've seen the worst of it yet from some individuals.

---

Democrats and the Media want BLM 2.0. 100%

They want cities to burn again during Trump's term.

quote:

---

Dana Carvey and Bush senior could always joke about it together.

Newt Gingrich had Chris Farley come do his impression in the House.

There’s a way to be funny and throw jabs without it being pure hate (and not funny).

---

That was a time when people did share a core value system and saw each other just as different takes on it.

We aren't there anymore.

quote:

---

I think more appropriate response might have been to shoot the tires out. I mean if you absolutely have to shoot something.

---

You fail Physics.

The car was less than 5 feet from him and accelerating. The car is not going to immediately stop as soon as the bullet pops the tire. Mass. Speed. It will keep moving.

You are talking about a sub-4 second situation from accceleration to gunshot and expecting miracles, and the cop to know it would be a miracle.

The Left's language and vitriol lead directly to many of the trans mass gun events, the Kirk assassination and even to this week's unfortunate event.

And yet, they continue to do it. And the media gives them the mic and the access to do it.

They want the temperature up. Constantly.

They want mass protests to hurt Trump. Again.

They had their opportunity with George Floyd and they took it. They have it again. They want cities to burn.

quote:

---

not true at all. I have never devalued what women can and ultimately DO in the home.

---

quote:

---

In modern times, marriage benefits men far more than women. Men get a pretty caretaker who will have sex with them. Women get another human to take care of and clean up after while also working outside of the home and doing the lion's share of childrearing.

---

Your words.

quote:

---

I have consistently argued that men devalue this because this labor typically doesn’t earn tangible income.

---

I can tell you want to have an honest conversation about this. But is this men's fault, or feminism and culture's fault?

Look, men will have a tendency to value more, direct competition, superficial signs of power and dominance, etc. etc. To do differently would be to not be men. And some men will give in to not TRULY see the value of things like the home life. But to say that this is what marriage is and it's totally's men's fault is pretty short sighted. Men aren't the ones who assaulted the idea of the traditional family. Not at all.

quote:

---

I’m not going to argue for or against any blanket claims assigned to political factions like “many progressives.”

---

That's fine, but most of these ideas about marriage only come from one side.

quote:

---

according to whom?

---

Most of your points align to what success looks like outside of the home, vs. what happens inside of the home. I'm just bucketing all of that outside the home stuff as achievement. And I use that term loosely, because it's pretty lame. Achievement is the ability to buy a bunch of stuff, woohoo?

quote:

---

This is a very disingenuous and inflammatory interpretation of my claim.

---

Well even looking at the studies you linked, let's take this for instance:

quote:

---

Husbands in so-called egalitarian marriages, where they earn the same as their wives, spend about 3.5 more hours per week on leisure activities than their wives. Meanwhile, the women in those marriages spend a combined 4.5 more hours on caregiving and housework than their husbands.

---

They aren't even looking at hours worked either, men are usually working more overtime.

I'd wonder here if there are some things that are work that men view as leisure. Most men do like working on cars, or fixing things etc., and might only count ACTUAL leisure activities as leisure. Mowing the grass on a riding tractor is a good time.

quote:

---

The type of chores that men and women do also differ, Mangino noted. Women often handle more routine and indoor tasks than their husbands, such as cooking, cleaning and bathing the children — chores that must be done daily or else chaos can erupt.

Husbands, by contrast, typically take on outdoor and intermittent jobs such as mowing the lawn — chores that can be skipped for for a week, if needed. Those outdoor tasks generally require much less time than the indoor chores, she added.

"I have had countess people come back and say, 'What you are saying is wrong: I do the outside jobs, my wife does the inside, and it's 50/50'," she said. "But it's nowhere near 50/50 — it's more like a 75/25 range."

---

This looks like absolute number, and not time spent. While I'm outside trimming trees, cutting wood, raking the yard - my wife can do the laundry, finish the dishes and probably get lunch on the table.

Women will say she did 3 things. I will say "I did Yardwork." Did she "do" more?

And I 100% disagree with much less time. In aggregate maybe, but most heavy tasks taking significantly longer as a single thing than lighter in home tasks.



Look, at the end of the day - do women spending more time cooking, cleaning and doing laundry? Unless you have an OCD husband, probably so. Men just typically aren't wired for those things naturally, nor do they find enjoyment in them, OR in the result. More often than not, even if we all value it to some extent, women are more prone to find enjoyment in a well-composed, neat and tidy home. Many men - really don't care. Many men would live in apartment with a mattress on the floor and maybe a side table and a chair.

But women are wired, not only to care, but to care that others care. So they "want" their husbands to care and to put in effort. Navigating these sexual differences are part of what marriage is about. But you are putting incorrect emotions on men, and not truly valuing the work you might do in the home.

And look, a good husband will contribute, balance that out, etc. But to get down into these kinds of details and say "Marriages fail because women spend more time on chores than men," is just a bad summation. And again, regardless of what you say, it ignores the reality of sex, of the purpose of marriage (which is not to balance measured outputs of time and money), and all of the things we are supposed to do as humans.

quote:

---

Rachel Summers

---

FIFY

And this is not a complaint on Male/Female casting. :lol:

Rachel is a solid character.

quote:

---

What’s the theory?

Rampant mental illness? Wicked side effects of SSRIs?

What is going on with these people?

---

There's no theory needed. Women, and men, as adults aren't meant to be alone. The world isn't ordered that way. The whole point of organizing in families, in monogamous relationships, etc. is that for the 95% of the population- it's the best way to flourish as either sex. Women help men use their natural instincts for protection, survival and grand purpose - channeling all of that into being the head of a family. Dominating in the work-world, to support and expand their family and home. That's where natural competition, leadership, steadfastness - all the things men are good at makes them super valuable. Letting those things get disordered - not really good for society.

On the flip side, men help women build purpose at home. To create a place where they can practice all of their best qualities - tenderness, love, support and caring. Being a mother. The need to save, nurture, what women are good at, can actually be a bad thing when unleashed. Modern liberal politics shows you everything of what that is capable of. Rationality thrown out the door for feelings.

When either sex is left to their own devices, especially outside of that structure, chaos can ensue. Women will bring all of that emotionality outward - Helen Andrews points this out well. Men, when unshackled from greater purpose towards the home, will seek dominance and adventure in a variety of ways that are unproductive at large.

So not only have we spent a couple of decades trying to downplay the very good and natural masculine ideals, creating a culture that directly inhibits men from being men, but elevating women into more outward facing perspectives has thrown all of that emotionality into places it should never be.

Liberal white women are generally just women who have eschewed that purpose, meaning, order - and are letting all of their passions and drives go. No limitations. You can see some of the qualities of what women do, they just have nowhere to direct it meaningfully. And it's just escalated continuously for decades now.

quote:

---

It's absolutely insane, buying votes like this undermines the very foundation of a freely voting public. It feels dramatic to say but it's true.

---

You'd understand why this is possible when you understand that the general Democrat perspective is that all of their held opinions are morally superior, and completely correct with no questions allowed. They are "right," and "good," therefore all ways to get those opinions into law are valid.

Who cares if they have to "import" voters, what they believe is that their opinions are the only "right" and "just" action, therefore, it's worth it.

Without true shared experience, which we dont have anymore, and a blending of large homogenous organized interest groups with odd cultures that often prioritize really bland "tastes," traditional art is suffering pretty heavily.

There's still lots of good music, its just harder to find.

Double