Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, LanghamP said:

You're mixing up homeless with bums. Homeless people are people through misfortune and slightly questionable choices find themselves without a home (I was one for a very short time three times in my life--terrific motivation to find a job, by the way), and bums are mentally ill assholes who shake you down on the street in order to feed their addiction. Do not give money to bums; there's tons of help for them except all those places require one be not high and not drunk to access them. Reasonable requirements, in my opinion, except these assholes can't even stay sober 24 hours.

@cyberal, I think that lizard mistook you for someone else.

Good distinction, I apologize for insulting the homeless by lumping them in with bums. I had not thought of this distinction before but it does make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

humans suck. if i rode in public, i’d always be packing. in florida, almost crazy not to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out here in California that distinction gets a bit blurred, since the stress of being homeless can get to the best of us and we never really know how we will react. Some are lucky and strong enough to not cross your distinction while suffering the same plight. Others cross over and never return, lashing out at society,  They are quite resourceful and there is community amongst the fringe. Drugs are a sad part of the barter and the most valuable commodity more than sex.

However, not all crazies are Homeless so who else has CRAZY PEOPLE stories? 

I actually had this woman cut me off the other day by driving into a driveway to ask me a question. I was thinking she wanted to chat by the way she chased me up the hill in her Audi. I stopped just before the driveway she careened into. A big smile was on her face and she asked me "What is that thing?" She was clearly excited for me to explain this contraption. "Its an electric unicycle and the most fun I've had since my first bike" I informed her. I gave her an ewheels card and told her to check them out. I helped her back into the street so she could get far away before she thought of another question...:huh:

Edited by Stan Onymous
Syntax
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of our homeless in Maryland just seem to be down on their luck, they don't seem to be aggressive or crazy. In my current city they had a homeless guy who was so loved that they built a statue to him and named a street for his nickname, "The Mayor" https://www.silverspringdowntown.com/go/the-mayor

 

Edited by dmethvin
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out here in L.A. We have all the homeless who have left their towns looking for a different location and life. The good spots in urban neighborhoods are all taken by the chronically homeless, so the Parks and river trails have giant sprawling homeless encampments. The mentally ill are usually popular since they have the best drugs perscribed for their disability. In a weird way they do look out for one another in times of stress. I see the different groups move in and out and drift to the Mission district when I hand out food and clothing for the Church or wandering different neighborhoods collecting recyclables. I wouldnt judge them as bums, more like survivors than anything else. They are all down on their luck. Some more so than others in more drastic ways. I think society has failed the homeless in each and all of their plights, not the other way around. Yes some contribute more to their destruction than others, but I feel that is just a misguided societal coping mechanism on their part to dull the pain. If they had healthier ways to process their lives available to them I believe 90% would live differently. We all process pain of life differently and deal with it with coping mechanisms of varying degrees.

Back to the THREAD...

Someone has got to have some fun CRAZY PEOPLE STORIES though... Good or Bad.  :popcorn:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, novazeus said:

humans suck. if i rode in public, i’d always be packing. in florida, almost crazy not to.

Guns are useful to defend against multiple assailants, sure. However, for the case presented on this thread (homeless bums), a much better option I can recommend is the Taser Pulse.

Would pointing a gun deter a crazy and drugged assailant that has nothing to lose? Unlikely. So you'd have to shoot it, which creates two problems: 1) A bloody mess, and 2) Going to court trial to prove it was done in self-defense.

However, with the concealed Taser, you just point and shoot. Shoot first, ask questions never. No mess, and no court trials. Your week is not ruined. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying you can shoot anyone with a taser whenever you want and you will never end up in court? Because that's fucking awesome and I'm getting one tonight. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kasenutty said:

Are you saying you can shoot anyone with a taser whenever you want and you will never end up in court? Because that's fucking awesome and I'm getting one tonight. 

Just don't electrocute them too long, and don't stomp on people's head while they're convulsing on the floor. ;)

But yes, go on YouTube, there is tons of people shooting each other with tasers. In fact, part of police training (from what I've read) involves getting shot with tasers, so that they know how it feels like and develop trust in its stopping power.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, edwin_rm said:

Guns are useful to defend against multiple assailants, sure. However, for the case presented on this thread (homeless bums), a much better option I can recommend is the Taser Pulse.

Would pointing a gun deter a crazy and drugged assailant that has nothing to lose? Unlikely. So you'd have to shoot it, which creates two problems: 1) A bloody mess, and 2) Going to court trial to prove it was done in self-defense.

However, with the concealed Taser, you just point and shoot. Shoot first, ask questions never. No mess, and no court trials. Your week is not ruined. ;)

never point a gun at anything u aren’t gonna put a hole in. the only way that would happen with me is, i’d have to feel my life or Bob’s life was threatened by whatever. at that point i’m not interested in just shocking something. taser won’t do any good if hoodlums in a rice burner think it’s funny to run over u. the topic is “crazy people” and that would be any people “crazy” enough to fuck with me. i’ve had my cwp since 1993 and i’ve never pointed a gun at a human. not before my cwp and not after. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2018 at 10:24 PM, Stan Onymous said:

Out here in L.A. We have all the homeless who have left their towns looking for a different location and life.

.

.

.

Back to the THREAD...

Someone has got to have some fun CRAZY PEOPLE STORIES though... Good or Bad.  :popcorn:

The common thread running through homeless people, diagnosed mental illnesses, drug addiction, violent offenders, serial and spree killers, low education, poor credit scores, is that these are people, usually men, raised by single mothers.

The correlation between single mothers and problem citizens is so absolutely strong that social and mental health workers look at that datapoint above all else. Especially if there's a non-biological boyfriend living in the household; the chances of children being killed is that household is an astonishing 98 times more likely (some sources say ~50 times, but that is because non-biological boyfriends are now often classified as biological fathers in order to collect child support upon household separation).

Fix single motherhood and you'll go a long way to fixing the homeless problem, among other ills. Single motherhood is well-suited to churning out adults singularly ill-equipped to be, you know, adults, and yet somehow we as a society have elevated trashy single moms and their demon-spawns as either irresponsible or unfortunate (probably a bit of both).

Taking public transportation in a city that has either the first or second rate of single motherhood (a dubious position we swap with Baltimore) and hence murder rate, I've got just a ton of crazy homeless stories.

http://bismarcktribune.com/news/national/the-cities-with-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/collection_5a789407-4d43-5403-ad56-7c47880bda8e.html#1

Like what do you want to hear about?

--The bum that screamed at me because I wouldn't buy his torn up scraps. I dropped my bag for that, he did a u-turn, and then went over to scream at some frightened young white girl. Better her than me, that'll teach her to always carry mace.

--The two ex-cons that were released that very morning, who cornered me on an empty Metro car-cabin. Those two were pros. Again, I dropped my bag; I would have lost but someone was going to lose an eye or a testicle. Comon, bitches.

--Or another felon who also got on an Metro with me, who was also very insistent I make a contribution. He asked me for my cell phone. Who gives a cell phone to a homeless ex-felon? He called me "discrimination" when I wouldn't then managed to snag an iPhone from the businessman next to him simply by asking for it politely. I got off the train the next stop because I knew damn well which way that was going.

--Or the enormous black woman, 350 pounds easily, who got on the train with her 120 pound boyfriend, and then proceeded to shake down the cabin crew. He called on us to contribute to his "queen". I think he said Nubian but I'm not sure.

--The vicious kids under 18 that try to steal my wheel. A few times. Never high-five these brutes.

--The homeless young white chick that tried to get me to take her home. Multiple times. I admit she was surprisingly pretty. Just because I greet you everyday on the same street corner where you're begging doesn't mean you're my main crack-'ho squeeze.

--Every single time, men playing overly loud rap on the train. Once I was so fed up I played The Yellow Star of Texas, but evidently since I'm a dark-skinned Hispanic with a giant hooked nose I get the ethnic pass. Bitches, I'm not playing the song as a complement! Sarcasm! The irony of being appreciated for playing a Confederate song, but of course I was too chickenshit to correct them for my momentary lapse of judgement.

--The extremely bad week we had where the homeless were poisoned by bad drugs, and were running amok downtown. A law firm moved out from downtown specifically citing that, along with crime, as a major reason for them moving elsewhere.

--The two pit bulls that escaped and were roaming free. I wasn't carrying my usual knife, and I'm pretty sure that was the closest I've ever been to severe injury. They chased me blocks, going uphill, completely silent which made it even scarier, and I'm telling you a KS16s can be ridden much much faster than the tiltback would indicate.

--And a ton more homeless stories...

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@cyberal It's cuz you were lane splitting. My dad (who was diagnosed mentally ill) actually got out of his truck, pushed someone off their bike with the truck door and attempted to get in a physical confrontation when in a 1 hour line once, because the bike lane split toward the front. Sad but true. In general, people do not respect motorcycle riders.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LanghamP A single mother raised the last two Democrat Presidents. Single mothers syndrome as you describe it is merely Corallary not causational. Its a little like saying the rooster crows everyday before the sun rises, so the Rooster must make the sun rise. Ironically the framework of your post comes from a Democrat, Patrick Moynihan Sen. from NY. It needs to be taken in context with the other things he said about minority lack of propper housing, opportunity, and justice in the underserved communities. He was laying out the framework for a new grand bargain for inner city minority assistance. He was offering a fair assesment of the deficiencies ,whether necessary evils or not, of the liberal LBJ welfare plan for an updated plan to infuse more opportunity and training into these communities. It has been roundly misquoted by conservatives and libertarians since his death, but read on its own, it says something much different from a dissertation on the ills of single motherhood. He wrote it before the Welfare reform of the early 90's and it was used to justify a lot of the cuts and restructuring of welfare by the GOP.

Sociologically though it does speak to the need for more nurturing than one parent may be able to provide. If all the kid sees are troubles, (i.e. infighting with a spouse or abuse) and troubled ways of coping with these troubles, then yes they will pick up these bad habits or coping mechanisms. Waves create waves. 

I wonder if there has been a study on widowed single parents and the effects of their offspring.

I have been doing some research on the topic because I just produced a movie comedy about the effects of being raised by a single mother. Like most things there are good and bad things about being raised in a single parent family, but it is not necessarily a predictor as you have described above.  ?

Edited by Stan Onymous
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LanghamP said:

 

--The bum that screamed at me because I wouldn't buy his torn up scraps. I dropped my bag for that, he did a u-turn, and then went over to scream at some frightened young white girl. Better her than me, that'll teach her to always carry mace.

--The two ex-cons that were released that very morning, who cornered me on an empty Metro car-cabin. Those two were pros. Again, I dropped my bag; I would have lost but someone was going to lose an eye or a testicle. Comon, bitches.

--Or another felon who also got on an Metro with me, who was also very insistent I make a contribution. He asked me for my cell phone. Who gives a cell phone to a homeless ex-felon? He called me "discrimination" when I wouldn't then managed to snag an iPhone from the businessman next to him simply by asking for it politely. I got off the train the next stop because I knew damn well which way that was going.

--Or the enormous black woman, 350 pounds easily, who got on the train with her 120 pound boyfriend, and then proceeded to shake down the cabin crew. He called on us to contribute to his "queen". I think he said Nubian but I'm not sure.

--The vicious kids under 18 that try to steal my wheel. A few times. Never high-five these brutes.

--The homeless young white chick that tried to get me to take her home. Multiple times. I admit she was surprisingly pretty. Just because I greet you everyday on the same street corner where you're begging doesn't mean you're my main crack-'ho squeeze.

--Every single time, men playing overly loud rap on the train. Once I was so fed up I played The Yellow Star of Texas, but evidently since I'm a dark-skinned Hispanic with a giant hooked nose I get the ethnic pass. Bitches, I'm not playing the song as a complement! Sarcasm! The irony of being appreciated for playing a Confederate song, but of course I was too chickenshit to correct them for my momentary lapse of judgement.

--The extremely bad week we had where the homeless were poisoned by bad drugs, and were running amok downtown. A law firm moved out from downtown specifically citing that, along with crime, as a major reason for them moving elsewhere.

--The two pit bulls that escaped and were roaming free. I wasn't carrying my usual knife, and I'm pretty sure that was the closest I've ever been to severe injury. They chased me blocks, going uphill, completely silent which made it even scarier, and I'm telling you a KS16s can be ridden much much faster than the tiltback would indicate.

--And a ton more homeless stories

Wow!!! Yeah bravo! More like those. Anyone else wanna throw a hat into the ring? Is there a bowing emoji? Amazing.

:blink1:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Stan Onymous said:

@LanghamP A single mother raised the last two Democrat Presidents. Single mothers syndrome as you describe it is merely Corallary not causational.

I'm going to make a few assertations and a few rebuttals, and if they don't sound reasonable then off course say so. By the same token if you reasonably rebuke my assertations then, of course, I'll change my mind.

--I assert that single motherhood is the best predictor of uncivilized behavior.

--Oustanding examples does not invalidate an observation about a specific demographic. It's like saying running a red light is safe because since one or two cars made it across we can extrapolate that for all cars.

--Single motherhood is the direct result of the deregulated sexual marketplace (DSM), and carefully regulating mating practices so that one man has one woman is strangely Socialist, ironic given that most people who favor DSM are against the free-market and vice versa. Socailists and Conservatives have switched places!

Study after study shows single motherhood as the biggest determination to uncivilized behavior. This isn't race or gender specific as the children of slaves and of indentured servants are equally likely to be single mothers. It's their masters that do well. Or were doing well as bastardy has greatly infected all the social classes.

Simply put, generally the more sexual partners a woman has the more likely she is to divorce.

https://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2012/03/promiscuity-data-guest-post.html?m=1

It's the rare female (or male) that gets married (or not) that doesn't have at least a few sexual partners. And so we see the general trend of mothers who often become single.

The question is why? I think a great answer is by looking at Facebook COO Cheryl Sandberg. In one interview she said,

"When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier."

100% of women would agree with this statement. 100% of women would be perfectly satisfied with only the best. The laws of statistics suggests only a few will get the best, and even those will still wonder if they reeaally have the best.

This post shows that 80% of men might as well not exist, and that less than 2% of women are attracted to the bottom 80%. Do you think a woman who has settled for the 80% would be, in any way, satisfied and not prone to single motherhood?

heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/technology-and-female-hypergamy-and-the-inegalitarian-consequences/

To me it is very obvious single motherhood and bastardy is the greatest threat to the well-being of children, and I find it amazing that we as a society encourage it by ennobling single mothers, and giving them cash and prizes when they bravely have a child on their own.

Ted Bundy was the product of a single mother. That means all bastards are really just serial killers waiting to happen.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most serial killers are white. By your logic we should stop white people from having serial killers. Lol not a bad idea, but for different reasons maybe. ;) 

Your argument could also be waged against absent fathers. Why are there no Single Father problems in all of those theories? There are single fathers too.

Also did you know that women, not even widows could have a credit card or a bank account in their own names til 1974? It had to be Mrs. John Smith or have a co signer for young or old maidens.

Are not single mothers really a victim of fewer opportunities in a patriarchal society with little redress for their needs and lower wages?

maybe its the architects of the status quo framework that is punishing these women and their "little bastards" , since it is hard to believe that mothers purposefully act to harm their children and themselves as a block. Lashing out to hurt a scorned love seems like a more plausible motivator. Since men hold the power strings it can be assumed that the women are the victims not the aggressors in this.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LanghamP said:

Amazing what nonsense can be found in the internet... 

1 hour ago, LanghamP said:

...

--Oustanding examples does not invalidate an observation about a specific demographic. It's like saying running a red light is safe because since one or two cars made it across we can extrapolate that for all cars.

...

Ted Bundy was the product of a single mother. That means all bastards are really just serial killers waiting to happen.

?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stan Onymous said:

Most serial killers are white. By your logic we should stop white people from having serial killers. Lol not a bad idea, but for different reasons maybe. ;) 

Your argument could also be waged against absent fathers. Why are there no Single Father problems in all of those theories? There are single fathers too.

Also did you know that women, not even widows could have a credit card or a bank account in their own names til 1974? It had to be Mrs. John Smith or have a co signer for young or old maidens.

Are not single mothers really a victim of fewer opportunities in a patriarchal society with little redress for their needs and lower wages?

maybe its the architects of the status quo framework that is punishing these women and their "little bastards" , since it is hard to believe that mothers purposefully act to harm their children and themselves as a block. Lashing out to hurt a scorned love seems like a more plausible motivator. Since men hold the power strings it can be assumed that the women are the victims not the aggressors in this.

 

Most serial killers are black. Since black serial killers are a minority, it follows blacks are wildly violent compared to whites.

Here's the FBI's own website compiling murder stats, not neccessarily serial killers.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2013.xls

Please note that this is:

--A government website.

--Compiled by the FBI.

--Showing murder by race on race.

I just don't know if this is enough to convince you, though, as I've never had much success in showing this website to people who assert the opposite. It's simply impossible to change a person's mind.

Here's another statistic put out by our own police department.

http://www.slmpd.org/homicide.shtml

205 murders, 137 black suspects, 1 white suspect. A ratio of 137 to 1.

Again, this is put out by the St Louis police department, and verified by two newspapers as to the victim, suspect, location, and time.

If this isn't enough to convince you, then what would? Or is simply dismissing this data your choice?

Personally, I don't think there is any race component in blacks to be violent, as I think all present humans are equally adept at genocide (I'm not genetically white and I feel tremendously violent on occasion towards people who don't think or act like me). Specifically, I know plenty of "oreos", that is, of black people with white culture who aren't violent. It follows, then, that it's black culture that is exceptionally violent and not the DNA you were born with. Now you can say black culture isn't violent but to do so you'd dismiss these two government datapoints on race violence.

Name me one law that discriminates against women in favor of men. If we lived in a patriarchy then we could expect there to be plenty of such laws.

@Stan Onymous

<insert law right here>

Every single mother topic always refers to the "man up" problem. We don't have enough good men. I think white knight men feel good about calling out other men for not being "man enough". It feels good, and is easy to do.

Suppose you have 100 men and 100 women on an island. They are all horny.

What percentage of women will be pregnant by the end of the year?

Suppose you introduce sex education and convince 20% of the men not to have sex. What % of women will be pregnant?

Suppose you convince 20% of the women not to have sex. What % of women will be pregnant?

Let's make the figure more extreme. Convince 80% of the men not to have sex and none of the women. Is there any doubt in your mind that 100% of the women will be pregnant by the end of the year?

I believe woman are usually wildly violent to their own children because the single biggest danger to survival is being aborted. 200,000 children are aborted each year. Now we can ignore that figure, and simply say women are not violent towards their children because they are not children. Personally I think you should be able to take a hit out on your kid at any age below majority, whether it's in body or out of body.

100% of problems Feminist have is caused by the unequal distribution of wealth of men to women.

Therefore, 100% of Feminist problems can be solved by the transfer of wealth from men to irresponsible women. That is, indeed, the argument of 100% of every gynocentric issue you see nowdays; how do we transfer wealth?

To me, the more important question is, how do you ascertain you've met your wealth transfer goals? I'm skeptical of any economic redistribution tool that doesn't specify goals.

 

Edited by LanghamP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a lot to digest, but we will start with the law that allowed for women to have credit in their name as a reversal of a Patriarchal dominated business architecture that slanted the playing field to men only till the mid seventies. Thats just fact. Women have not been able to share in the prosperity without being shackled to a man, whether that man is a clunker or not. Feminist movement is not asking for redistribution, but equality in opportunity. There are other feminist victim groups that are activists for the majority being women who care for the children when the men are absent. Does that get muddled, is it sometimes unfair? Sure it is, but there are ways to redress these, and that is where you get your arguments from. It is important to note that these are the exceptions and outliers for the majority of women

As for blacks being serial killers just because black on black gun murders happen with adolescent and young adult black males - You should also note that those same statistics point to white on white traffic deaths for white males of that same age range. Also you are conflating chronic with serial. Are white youths serial traffic killers because of drunk driving? It does seem to be a question of what are the rituals of entering adulthood, like smoking, drinking, drugging, sexing that each youth demographic puts their risks into.

Many of your examples use a simple trick for click bait- The idea of Linear Logic. If this happens and this other thing mimmicks it it must be connected. EXAMPLE - Bunnies like carrots, I like carrots, I am a bunny. - Are you?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stan Onymous said:

Thats a lot to digest, but we will start with the law that allowed for women to have credit in their name as a reversal of a Patriarchal dominated business architecture that slanted the playing field to men only till the mid seventies. Thats just fact. Feminist movement is not asking for redistribution, but equality in opportunity. There are other feminist victim groups that are activists for the majority being women who care for the children when the men are absent. 

As for blacks being serial killers just because black on black gun murders happen with adolescent and young adult black males

Be advised I cut out some of your quote; if I misquote you by out of context (a pet peeve of mine) I do apologize.

The consumer law that made it illegal for financial institutes to discriminate based on gender has been in effect for 40 to 50 years. To use an anti-discrimination law that has been in effect for almost half a century as an example of present gender discrimination makes no sense.

You reject the own FBI's stats, and the St Louis MO's too. I have no response to that because I don't have better sources, and for that I will concede white people are as, and more, violent than black people. So you win that. Excellent job in your rebuttal.

Single women without children under the age of 32 are far more successful than their male counterparts. By successful, we mean both education and income. By practicing discrimination, the US sends 2 women to higher education than for every man.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/apr/09/genevieve-wood/what-pay-gap-young-women-out-earn-men-cities-gop-p/

Some things to note about this article:

--Women earn less than men do for doing the same job.

--Women as a whole make more, often far more, than men do as a whole.

What we're seeing is sending a whole bunch of women to higher education.

Married men almost always work harder and make more money than their unmarried counterparts, and so when I hear whenever I hear that men make more money than women, I think to myself, "aha, that's when a virtue is turned into a sin." Divorced men, of course, are given quotas that they must meet or else they are thrown in jail, Gulag-style. The Soviets would have been proud.

I think you're right when you say "patriarchy". Which also describes my name, by the way. You have a few good men that almost entirely own the wealth and who (along with rock stars) are considered extremely attractive. Apparently it's these group of men that are firmly in the sights of the #MeToo movement, so perhaps we as a society have declared war on all men, and not just most men (that 80% again).

How would you suggest we give women equal opportunity?

The world according to me would look like this:

--You don't get to choose your neighborhood; we know very well what white middle and upper class Liberals mean when they say "this is a good neighborhood" from their cloistered communities. I'm actually serious about bringing back East Berlin communist era block houses for everyone.

--Health services should be partitioned out until the average life expectancy for both sexes is the same.

--Children's rights (fur Kinder) take precedence over individual rights. Therefore there is no circumstance that allows divorce. Don't like that? Sounds too risky? Don't get married!

--Both parents must sign off on aborting the child OR birthing the child, with DNA testing (illegal in Germany) asserting progeny. Why would you be paying for something not yours? Somehow it seems to me a fundemental human right not be be an indentured servant to something not from you.

--Playgrounds should be imported from Germany. The exceptionally dangerous nature of German playgrounds will serve to weed out imprudent and violent children via the Darwin mechanism. Especially the slides. Terrifying.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, gosh, hot off the press by that Liberal Rag The Atlantic is an article that perfectly encapsulates what happens and why when a Patriarchal society collides with a Matriarchal society.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/02/when-divorce-is-an-opportunity/552230/

That's a lot of single mothers. Fortunately immigrants from war-torn countries are quite peaceful compared to Swedes.

Nearly 60 percent of women from the countries in the Horn of Africa, 53 percent of women from sub-Saharan Africa, and 48 percent of women from Iran had divorced in Sweden within 15 years of getting married.

Edited by LanghamP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×