Cool. But in addition to the ranch and bed, you forgot I also drive a truck that cost more than the loaded BMW I had prior. Please don’t do that again if you’re keeping score across my posts.
Thank you for letting me know your age, it gives context.
No need to apologize. I think much of the political right agrees with you.
The problem is that this country is on a never-ending slow (sometimes less-slow) slide to the left. Each one of us will find a breaking point at our own time, because the government slowly nips and pinches at power that undermine our fundamental rights.
None of these instances, on their own, is enough to warrant an entire revolution - but on a broad scale, we can see these rights are being undermined.
I’m not calling for a revolution, I’m just saying that this exact mentality is why the right will lose. The government knows better than to take large power grabs - we start to fight back when they take big bites; so we get death by a thousand cuts instead.
I’ll make it simple - I’m 24. And thank you for bringing up your cars again - it gives me a clearer idea of the kind of man you are.
1 Like
I agree in general. Again, I don’t care about social issues really. I may not agree with the “left” but I’m not hung up on their bullshit. In fact, I think it’s important to avoid limiting them because legal limitations can become boomerangs. One day you’re telling people what clothes to wear, the next day they’re telling you….
Who is really telling who what they can and can’t be? It can be uncomfortable to think about but the right has done more to erode rights lately if you take an objective look. Not that the left isn’t trying, namely gun rights and religious liberties, but they aren’t succeeding.
Conservative to me means small government in general, and I think the right has forgotten that. The rights own desire to go toe to toe over personal preference will be its downfall.
I lean fiscally conservative for sure, and socially indifferent anyways.
1 Like
I’m primarily indulging your borderline infatuation as you follow me across posts and summarize out of context.
I’ll leave you to imagine what I haven’t discussed.
Eh, there’s not a ton of active posters and I’ve got a good memory.
Being that you’re, what, 60? is there a point where you stop leaving snarky replies to internet strangers or does it just keep going?
I’m about to leave work so we’ll have to continue this later.
This is rich. Almost as rich as my bed.
I was also in the military, as several other posters, and I know how silly people sound when talking about using their guns to fight the government (and thinking they could win).
You’re projecting an assumption military factions wouldn’t join, however, which is likely incorrect.
And at the civilian level, we’ve already seen sheriff’s declare 2a zones, refuse to enforce federal directives and even deputize citizens to grant legal power and discretion. On a small scale, but on the scale none the less.
I realize it feels cool to conjure the power of the military itself as a veteran to sound Uber tough and on top of these conversations, but your service isn’t a trump card to truncate national sentiment or response. It was an individual act of military participation and your continued opinions are nothing more.
I bet he’s the same age as @HoustonGuy
Who dat
1 Like
Some dude from back in the day.
I’m sure he’s gone on to great things.
History says otherwise.
You sound triggered.
Njord. Keyboard warrior? Hardly. You are probably the person who’s irritated me most in recent months, and what have I thrown at you? Did I call you “dude” or maybe “bud”? (Ouch!) Add an “lol” that carried a little sting?
Other than that, I accurately quoted you and let my raised eyebrows come through as I responded. I didn’t hide that I found you foolish and ultimately a little frothy.
Were you intimidated by that? (See, that’s me letting that other side show.)
Of course we also have the oft-reposted @twojarslave’s threat-which-wasn’t-actually-a-threat, which funnily enough has not once come up in reference to him, only as an indication of the violence I’m prepared to…well, that’s not clear, is it? Because of the whole threat/violence approval situation being silly and all.
But yes. Here I am, doing…this. Freely. With reckless abandon, even.
lol
On a very sincere note, women don’t generally organize to overthrow anything, as we are by and large cooperative. If the men all disappeared, what would happen? Interesting to consider, as in this time of weapons men are the thing we most need protection from.
But I digress. We organize to do the many, many things that are needed for safety and comfort. We tend to the sick. Organizations like the visiting nurses and other in-home care organizations are organized and run primarily by women. The children and their many needs societally - women. The first hospitals were organized and run by nuns and nurses. When someone loses a family member, women organize meals. I’ve never had a phone tree call or text from a guy, though most of my friends and neighbors have been in fairly egalitarian relationships.
The men go to war, get hurt, and are tended by women. Women do most of the fundraising for needed school or community projects. It just goes on and on.
So yes, I agree completely, for the most part. There are women best suited to war and men best suited to nurturance, but they’re the exception, not the rule.
But women provide the civilization that men then seek to protect. The home.
2 Likes
I agree with this take and what @Bauber says.
An issue I have with some of these takes is the slippery slope of “women need to obey/serve men” or “women must stay in the home”.
People should get a choice over what they do provided they don’t harm others. So if I, as a woman, don’t want to be a homemaker, I shouldn’t have to be regardless of that “society” or “biology” or “god” wants
I personally know people who do not believe this and it pisses me off
For the record, I am selfish and I don’t care
1 Like
YES. And statements like this:
Make me feel that I have to be wary. Men are not necessarily protectors. Now, maybe Andrew was reacting solely to the SJW thing, but on the other hand SJWs fought for the veterans once upon a time. They fought to get the 6-year-olds out of the sweat shops.
My worry is that women + complain is how a number of men view half the people in the world, and that they would subjugate us completely if they could. Which of course is the antithesis of “protect.”
Which appears to be your worry, too. And which is why, despite being a feminine women who prefers a fairly traditional lifestyle, I feel immense gratitude to the early feminists.
1 Like
Wary of someone commenting (accurately) on how feminism took hold in the first place?
Must be a terrifying world.
We literally could, but we don’t.
1 Like
A happy well adjusted society needs both energies - male and female.
I would argue a society with emasculated feminized males is far more dangerous for everyone and I think we are seeing that play out in real time.
Being a leader and having “control” is about serving and doing the right things even when it is hard or uncomfortable.
Acting like a man should, protecting, calling out bullshit and evil is being attacked as toxic masculinity from 3rd or 4th wave feminism or whatever wave we are on.
Bad / weak men, there is a difference. Sadly, there are a lot of them these days.
1 Like
This is kind of my point definitely. The good men are the only defense against this happening.
1 Like