NewKidOnTheBlock

And leftists are using debate to win people on their side, so what is your point. He's got a few very stupid ideas like that thing with abortion that's been mentioned, but mostly he just had a values different from people like you. And he got fucking shot for it by some degenerate

You can tell bro just chose to resign on life😂 over for him in any case. Idk where some of these dudes find the balls to do shit like that, I could never Jon's with the prostitute fever😂 he's like "Wait... it wasn't you who I hired?"

Speak for yourself. Lmao

Maybe he picked up a lot of corals from the Australian coastline, that would essentially make him stage coral

With no sarcasm this time tho, I'm more and more inclined to think that real self improvement is simply just limited to increasing knowledge/some skills and physical strength and that's about it. Those are the only things you can improve about yourself without needing any luck, genetics or external social manipulations. So you're doing a good thing for yourself by reading that book and I should be doing the same. There really isn't much else to do in this life, especially for us introverts

Just read gymbro Instagram statuses bro, that's where the true stoicism is. What the hell would one of the most famous and battle hardened Roman emperors know about stoicism. No no no, what you need is broicism. Lifting a man made weight up, putting it down, up, down, etc. That's where the true wisdom lies

Sure, he and Trump are fascists from the most deranged leftist's point of view. But that's not saying much. Might as well be apolitical in this day and age

Hypocrisy means claiming a moral highground whilst in reality having none, where do you see an example of me being hypocritical? If you discover one, I will send you 10€ throught Paypall (oh wait... lmfao). As far as I'm concerned, I'm technically correct about everything I've said here so far

She literaly monkey branched right after him passing, so yeah I'd personally call that pretty immoral. I wouldn't be surprised if I was in the minority though, seeing as having any standard for women or criticing them in any way would be deemed rather negative in our simpciety in most cases, imo

Successfully playing the field, whatever that entails, is definitely preferable to whatever this is. And it’s certainly preferable to how a lot of relationships turn out. Not all, or even most, but many. Of course, the people to whom this may concern would never be aware of it, let alone honest about it. And I would say this advice about being chivalrous, work hard, pay for everything, etc., isn’t just traditional anymore. Nowadays it has come full circle, with many feminists propagating it, masking it as "treating women as human beings" or "making up for your privileges" or "paying for the work and effort I’m putting in," to paraphrase. The irony

This guy's case is pretty bad, not the worst that there could be, but definitely up there (or down there, more precisely). I don't have to be adept at game at all to have such a basic level of self respect. But I bet this is generally the kind of dynamic you can expect if you get with a woman who really strongly identifies with feminism, but even then to a much lesser degree than this LOL like I said, this guy's case is pretty bad, definitely some mental issues on both sides on top of her feminism

Russia seems to keep miraculously losing incredible amounts of troops and materiel, its economy keeps sinking deeper into the gutter, and yet somehow, just as miraculously, Ukraine keeps giving up ground, unable to mount any successful offensive or retake its lost territories. So I don’t know how to feel about this narrative anymore. I’m not saying it’s wrong per se, the losses have to be significant, but clearly not significant enough. And if Russia tried its luck with other countries in the rest of Eastern Europe, I have very little faith that Western Europeans would be willing or able to help, let alone the US. A repeat of 1938 in the form of empty promises, only to bitch out in 1939, we already have a historical precedent for that

And I'm the tired expert. Tired of all of yall BS lol

Let me illustrate my point with a simple scenario, starting with a question: Have you ever been a smoker and addicted to it? If not, do you crave nicotine? Now, imagine you become very hungry after not eating anything during a whole night out. You want to go back home, but you see a McDonald's nearby. In this scenario, McDonald's is the most convenient place to get food in the area, given the way the city is structured. Would you have cravings for McDonald's? If you answer honestly, you should see the difference lol

But these are not necessarily junk-food-addicted people. There was a hidden need that existed before fast food came onto the market - a clear need for fast, convenient sustenance. You could even argue it was a need for tasty, fast, convenient sustenance. And so, fast food chains filled that niche. On the other hand, the supposed "need" for cigarettes, crack, and similar things was completely fabricated, just BS brainwashing to make you feel like you were in the cool kid club or something lmao

So using graphically enhanced pictures of food is lying? Then literaly most of marketing is lying. Since I'm guessing that this is your stance anyway lol, then I guess yeah, we can label it as lying

Okay, but like... it’s not the same as selling cigarettes, alcohol, and stuff like that, it’s food. It’s not going to harm you that much if you keep things under control. You can tell the difference, right? Also, it’s not that easy to make healthy food quickly on a mass industrial scale, and even if it were, maybe not enough people would buy it to sustain the business. The food might not be tasty enough, and not enough people are truly health-conscious to reap the benefits, etc. So fast food chains fill that niche, for now at least. Right? Care to engage with any substance? Lmao, if it were disgusting, logically people wouldn’t be eating it. And yeah, those two items are the healthiest options at McDonald’s, and they’re fine to eat as long as they’re not the only things you eat LOL

You can be aware that this food is not the pinnacle of health and still run a business selling it. Also, if it were gross, people wouldn’t eat it. Just like you said about sugar, it’s all about the quantities you eat, not just the quality. And McDonald’s, for example, isn’t all that bad if you mostly stick to salads and breakfast menus

Seems like it is a completely different thing altogether, neutral to the concept of truth. For example, what does running a fast food chain have to do with valuing or not valuing truth? You’d simply be focused on providing a particular value in the form of fast food. Nobody is pretending it’s super healthy, so no lies are being spread. It says nothing about your integrity or your understanding of reality.

If you used Google, I'm sure you'd find many news options with bias-check metrics, even if AI-powered

Maybe we are all just a bunch of bored aristocrats from the year 2150 and these are the lives we chose to live out in the simulation lol

Lucid dream tripping😂 you do seem like the type that could pioneer that

I feel the same as you often. It can make you feel like you're losing your sanity, the more opinions you are exposed to, and counter counter arguments to counter arguments, the more things feel unstable, I can definitely relate if that's of any help lol

Let me guess, you are one of the two categories and therefore not exempt from bias?