At this point, it mostly sucks at the pubic hair. Most dudes have less than that around their butt-holes ...
- Posts
- 2
- Comments
- 974
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
- Posts
- 2
- Comments
- 974
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
You're giving him and his stans too much credit. You gotta force-feed them more cognitave-dissonance that they can't figure out whether they disagree or you just know something they don't, until their crowded little heads POP.
Reasons I would acquire a Tesla: no-one would have shit to say about my mods. The questions would start and end with "why a Tesla?"
"Why do you have these bright-yellow pull-handles connected to cables running-into every door inside?" Bich, don't you know, Elon sold me a space-ship? Only me tho - the rest of you are too nice and it creeps him out.
... and now she's interested. Good for them.
Gets more important as you get older, actually.
Letting a chick mooch off you for too long in a common-law state is a bad-idea. Kids with a poor chick is also a bad idea. All of this is moot if you just plan to give her half your stuff early-on; I won't lie, that's more mature than demanding someone you are better-off than put up with your shit indeffinitely; but try that before the relationship ends, and you're likely to find she has no more use for you.
Friend of mine has three criteria for women, aside from attractive which is just a given in his dating pool:
House (at least somewhere to go where she's welcome and not abused)
Income (ideally a job, but passive-income works)
Vehicle (or willing to use whatever form of transport it takes to get her need$ met without constantly borrowing/demanding rides)
If she's not bringing all three to the table, you're paying for whatever you get out of the relationship, somehow. Me? I don't think that would bother me so much were I to find myself single, but I have other criteria re: emotional and overall maturity, and women who have those figured out tend to have the House, Income, Vehicle thing worked-out as well.
Lastly, it goes without saying that if you're not bringing all that to the table, you don't get to be so picky. These are long-term-relationship criteria, but people would be so much healthier if they knocked these all out before pretending they deserve to be anyone else's one-and-only.
I use closer to a terrabyte a month, and I am well-aware that it is a plan issue. That doesn't change the fact that the only any-number-of-mobile-devices/plan pairing that allows me to do what I want where I want is a smartphone. That includes downloading content for offline-viewing with minimal hassle.
When my kids pay for their own phone service, maybe I'll go all-in on piracy instead, but in the mean-time, I'm exploiting that which I am already paying for, with a device I've had paid-off for years.
I wish you weren't right, and Peru isn't really bucking US influence in any meaningful fashion either. I'm afraid their mega-port may not even get built, or maybe environmentally or socio-economically that would be the better result.
I'm neither an expert nor a local to be telling them how to live. Now if only my country wasn't so certain that "expertise" and violence should rightfully override the sovereignty of others.
Find me one with an unlimited hotspot plan, and I'll switch tomorrow. Literally, that is what my smartphone offers. Not the hotspot, but unlimitted data plan and the means to use it to the fullest on the phone itself?
Close enough that this is my bar to meet, even though I would rather switch to a separate e-Ink tablet, dumb-phone-with-hotspot, and steam-deck-or-similar, for EDC-or-close-to; I would probably carry just the tablet and phone most days, maybe just the phone and deck on others.
They gotta avoid a land-and-sea open-war first. Dock everything domestic and let the buyers' ships come to them. Refuse to sell to countries that don't protect even their own ships.
The US Navy is already interfering, and I never suggest they could stop it, but rendering it in-effective/irrelavent after a certain point seems achievable from where I sit. The US hasn't won a land-war since Korea, and North Korea only really had China's backing.
Venezuela is surrounded by countries which have every reason to help them end-run US interference, and whatever excuse the US brings to the table this time, its not coming with UN, NATO, or any sort of "multi-lateral"-backing. Again, that's what the US had in Iraq and Afghanistan, and those still endeded in failure.
There's no pretending its not about oil and territory this time.
That's why escorting the tankers is a bad idea. Delay the war by whatever means possible until the US Navy's interference, at least, can be rendered irrelavent.
You might want to look-into how first-responders handle leadership. Ideally, everyone who eventually shows-up to help handle the fallout of a crisis-situation is properly trained to co-ordinate things, but you can't know who actually will handle things until someone steps-up. As a result, the first trained-AT-ALL person on-scene gets the role, period, until they defer, delegate, or resign.
This leads to a lot of top-down and peer-pressure in related-fields to always be training. Leadership-training is often one of the cheapest, only-free, or even travel-room-and-board-included options available.
What they've found is that those who step-up lock-in on what needs to be done - all levels from the bottom-up have the idealized overall picture, checlists, exception scenarios hammered-into them, and the importance of keeping-track-of-and-share the details even when you don't have time to write them down or explain them to everyone.
Therefore, a lot of the related Leadership training revolves around how to document what you can, the importance of finding a replacement-for-you candidate who is paying attention and can understand what you would need to pass-on with minimal explanation. Thus, the person who you eventually defer to, who relieves you and takes charge is usually not the highest-authority or most-experienced person on hand.
The higher you get in these authority-chains, and/or the more experience you get, the more the job is literally stepping back and check-boxing all the peripheral tasks. Taking-up slack or identifying those capable of doing so and stearing them towards those roles while avoiding interfering or conflict-with the ... err ... "situational" leader that stepped-up first and hasn't bowed-out yet.
Mind-you, none of this has anything to do with the day-to-day of those involved. People have managed large-disaster-fallout situations for 24-hours-plus only for it to come-out later that all they had on their CV was CPR training and an un-related-job with no prior leadership experience - they may not have even realized that they were in-charge until asked-about it days later. People just kept asking them what to do, and when asked what to do by them, responded, "do you mind handling things a while longer?"; They signed whatever was presented to them and not full of errors, maybe not realizing x document wasn't just a witness statement.
I guess what I'm getting at is, yes, some people have natural leadership talent, and some people you can train in the role five-ways-from-Sunday and they won't be suitable or want to step-up, and yes, so much in life requires "that guy" to be in-charge of x location or x situation for whatever time-frame, but ...
... the inevitability of the need for a leader does not require the same person be in-charge of whatever for years at a time, months, weeks, or even days at a time. Every leadership role has a hand-book of-sorts, a list of known exceptions, exceptions you may not want the wrong-person handling, and essential, bare-minimum tasks...
Here, I think the First-Responder outlook has it right: everyone gets repeatedly trained for leadership and constantly scrutinized for suitability. There are EMT's, Fire-men, and of-course Police Officers who are not allowed to work alone(far from just trainees any-more, but not leaders ... Barney Fife?), and preventing them ending-up de-facto in-charge of something important, at least on-the-clock, is a big part of why.
Venezuela borders Brazil, which has deep-sea ports itself and borders Peru, which is getting its own mega-port. Technically, a line down to the Rio Negro River would be sufficient on the Brazil side; Might require dredging in some spots, but its average depth is more than deep enough for the largest tanker-ships, and its wide-enough to fit more than a dozen-abreast.
The US is playing a stupid, stupid game. Committing acts of terrorism and piracy on the high-seas. I don't want the Amazon contaminated, but should it happen, its not Venezuela or Brazil to blame.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Did I complain that boys were facing-consequences for this or something? Short of the escalation you've mentioned when it comes to light, they don't, so ... Did I condone the behavior? Because it sounds like you are.
One of us here is pretending that its an a-okay scenario, so long as it doesn't lead to rape, assault, or murder, and frankly ignoring that only one-of those is out-of-the-question-from-a-girl-enough to be almost-entirely written-off. That one of us? Its not me.
You want to know where those end-points start? One of the paths is right there in four-panels, it doesn't magically work-out when the roles are reversed, and a double-standard isn't what's going to fix it.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Weird that you assume I'm the one with that problem among all of those here. I've been very clear that I consider this a maturity-issue for both genders, and that its something re-inforced by society. Boys learn from Girls as much as from anyone else. What's your excuse for ignoring all-that to come at me with such an absurdly-shallow take?
I figured you were trying to train it as you went-along. You seem uniquely-motivated to try. I've seen what you mean though. They do no-pubes, sculpted five ways from Sunday, or this, apparently.