Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
NotCranky
Participant[quote=AN]Totally agree. This is a big hit to Intel and big boon for QCOM.
Photoshop runs pretty well in the demo on just the 820. The animation is pretty smooth too. This should be exciting to see it evolve over the next 2-5 years. I think it’s a game changer. Especially for companies. Why buy your employee a laptop/desktop and a phone when you can just buy them a phone and just have a monitor/keyboard/mouse at every cubicle.[/quote]
That’s amazing. I might not replace my home PC next time I need one if I can do that. Does that make sense ?
ParticipantBlame Trump for not wanting to offend Russian and also for offending China is not consistent with appeasing all super powers. Which way should it be?
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]Not cranky, I didn’t see the post…. what was it all about?
No need to apologize.[/quote]Thanks, I feel better not saying it.
ParticipantI apologize for this last post ,now deleted ,FIH. I shouldn’t have gone that far.
Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=spdrun]If you don’t want a woman who’s a gold-digger, the best answer is to date one that’s roughly your equal and intelligent/successful/competent on her own. You can’t have it both ways: weak/subservient and not needing your money.
First date is important … if she has trouble knowing what she wants (asks you to order for her) and doesn’t at least offer to leave the tip (ideally in cash), run the other way.[/quote]Excellent advice from the “experienced, serial dater,” spdrun![/quote]
I don’t know about the run the other way part? Why not have sex with her but keep her low priority as a mate and don’t spend a bunch of money on her? you would not have been on a date with her if she wasn’t meeting physical appearance criteria. She’s gonna leave anyway and you want that eventuality , but unless you are getting plenty, don’t run away, just build your options with other women. Or maybe she will change due to these positive masculine prompts?
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]ive heard of mgtow…
“romantic entanglements with women fail a cost–benefit analysis and risk–benefit analysis.”
in general, probably true for the majority of men.
it is very risky husiness. life can be good, often much better, without a,woman. i would not advise my kids to join with any woman i thought was not a financial positive. i wouldnt yell at them. but id preach mgtow, at least until they found a deal that looked good.[/quote]
Thats what I meant, men going the other way.
Scaredy , have you read , The Rational Male? Maybe we are too old to fix our Average Frustrated Chumpness , but our kids aren’t.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=NotCranky]
I’d certainly take her for first lady , umm first person, over Bill, Hillary. The types of things that bother me about the Obamas are pimping celebrities, and the Versace dresses and what not, while pretending to be humble. The gardens for example just look like an act. She starts to come across just as contrived and teleprompted as her husband. Michelle is still probably a better person than most of them, not necessarily better than you average person. Melania could easily be her equal as far as first lady performance.
Also , I think they play race too much…as bad as Trump.[/quote]
What about Nancy Reagan? She has to borrow designer dresses because she couldn’t afford them. Michele Obama buys off the rack and buys designer only on special occasions.
What about the veggie garden? It’s hipster cool and old fashioned at the same time.
I guest traditionalist forgot what a kitchen garden is. My grandma, rest her soul, had one. She had chickens and ducks in a pond too. We used to kill them for food.[/quote]
Your Grandma, rest her soul, was authentic. Traditionalist do garden more than hipsters, Hipsters soend a lot of money building the garden , but it doesn’t get used.ParticipantBrian, Before I move on, here is funny counter culture movement to domineering feminist/feminizers and so many women checking out to be Lesbian. It seems men see themselves as trapped between being used by vicious sex depriving women who have the upper hand now, and going their own way. Search MGTOW. I am not saying I agree with it but, there are two sides to every story. Will you celebrate the anti- woman movement as much as the anti-man movement? Maybe you are the one who just wants everything to be bad then you have an excuse to stay nice and safe on the sidelines in your bubble?
No offense meant, just trying to help.
ParticipantCivilization is about a lot of things as much or more than it is about reason. Civilization cracks all the time, it’s thin ice, it’s muddy. But go on with your left good right bad mindset, believe that you have the rational ticket inside your bubble. We will all be lucky not to go extinct !
Participant[quote=spdrun]What I don’t get is the hatred for Michelle Obama among the right. Good looking couple, no evidence of infidelity, two beautiful kids, she plays the (traditional FLOTUS) role of promoting social causes, yet she still got shamelessly mocked. Apparently, women can’t win, unless they’re white.[/quote]
I’d certainly take her for first lady , umm first person, over Bill, Hillary. The types of things that bother me about the Obamas are pimping celebrities, and the Versace dresses and what not, while pretending to be humble. The gardens for example just look like an act. She starts to come across just as contrived and teleprompted as her husband. Michelle is still probably a better person than most of them, not necessarily better than you average person. Melania could easily be her equal as far as first lady performance.
Also , I think they play race too much…as bad as Trump.
Participant[quote=harvey][quote=NotCranky]Nope what Bill did to Monica is heartless pervert stuff. Marrying Melania and having a kid with her is using your reproductive rights in what you feel is a good risk and she is doing the same thing, reproducing with a man who can more than take care of her and her offspring. They are both simply striving to accomplish their biological imperatives and look out for their best interests. It’s a pretty extreme case but it’s not perverted.[/quote]
Ok
Marriage: good
Cheating on wife: badI think we’re all in agreement there.
No mention of Marla Maples in all of those words…[/quote]
Good trolling-NOT.
Cheating on your wife or husband is not perverted. It may be immature ,or possibly a betrayal, or other things , but it is not of itself perverted.Participant[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=NotCranky]
Progressive women are doing more harm to their daughters and especially their sons by driving off and /or demonizing or feminizing the father figure in america than anything that comes from reasonably loving traditional families. The pendulum swung too far and we need it to swing back somewhat. Checks and balances.
Either way , progressives lost , you haven’t shown the way , you have shown that you want to live in a bubble and protect the bubble.[/quote]
You’re not doing it and I’ll give you credit for consistency, but you do realize that some other guys (used as gender neutral term) here are wanting to feminize me for repeating Trump.
Progressive are more fair and objective. The concept of denying power to a woman because of her husband strikes me as going backward. But maybe it fits better with traditional values.
We should move away from gender roles and use reason instead. Let people decide what fits them and indulge in their own inclination. I think the problem is people want equality but still want to hang on to traditional roles. The truth is that if women were equal in pay and power, they would not need men the same. If you call that White men going extinct, so be it.
Gender roles are so anachronistic. Bring something concrete (money, physical appearance, intellect, whatever…) to the table to get what you want.
I just remembered rush Limbaugh warming that Obama is supporting lesbian farmers to kill off white men.[/quote]
If Melania had the money and Ugly and fat DT had the looks, or intellect or whatever, it would be o.k. too. Thing is women are hypergamist and don’t do things that way . Ugly fat and/or anti-opposite sex attitudes don’t make for good baby having potential either. How is that sexist from the point of men or republicans?
There was a poll once of a bunch of medical students they ask the men and women if raising their status with high income earning potential increased or decreased their pool of mates. The 85% of the men said it increased and a roughly equal percentage of women said it decreased, meaning because of their access to wealth less men had access to them. This stuff goes deep. Who is being sexist? Do we ever cry that women are sexist or anachronistic because of this?
Participant[quote=harvey][quote=NotCranky]Trump objectifies women, which is pretty natural , as in natural selection, but with his money he can take it to extremes. Most people realize it isn’t cool , but enough felt he was better than Hillary. He officially marries and reproduces with hotties, wow. Nothing compared to Bill, the heartless pervert, who could have been back in the white house.[/quote]
Absolutely, the distinction between “natural” behavior and being a “heartless pervert” is only in one’s political party.[/quote]
Nope what Bill did to Monica is heartless pervert stuff. Marrying Melania and having a kid with her is using your reproductive rights in what you feel is a good risk and she is doing the same thing, reproducing with a man who can more than take care of her and her offspring. They are both simply striving to accomplish their biological imperatives and look out for their best interests. It’s a pretty extreme case but it’s not perverted.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=NotCranky]
Voting for your husband, who is probably a major financial contributor to the household, makes sense if you are hoping the candidate is going to improve his local job prospects and keep him from committing suicide, right or wrong on that hope.
Also it’s more likely if women voted for male gender reasons, they voted for their sons as much as the fathers. Children matter if you have them. I know my brother did a complete 360 when his daughter came out of the closet. One issue voter now, which I think is pretty nuts but i don’t bother him about it.[/quote]Very traditional family values here. Sounds like the women have resigned themselves to be their husband’s wives.
How about voting for your own aspirations so that your daughters have move choices and don’t have to follow in your footsteps?[/quote]
The breadwinner situation is a fact for a lot of people, even in two income homes a woman wants for her and her husband to be able to find work.
Progressive women are doing more harm to their daughters and especially their sons by driving off and /or demonizing or feminizing the father figure in america than anything that comes from reasonably loving traditional families. The pendulum swung too far and we need it to swing back somewhat. Checks and balances.
Either way , progressives lost , you haven’t shown the way , you have shown that you want to live in a bubble and protect the bubble.
-
AuthorPosts