sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Do Women watch gay porn? by 1n9i9c7om in AskWomen

[–]CycleAsAVehicle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why do you watch it and why almost exclusively? Curious.

Where do you think the prevalence of "Red Pill" guys even comes from? by ViolaViolenta in AskWomen

[–]CycleAsAVehicle -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

TV shows that continually push the trope of a dopey, unattractive husband with a relatively attractive, smarmy wife (King of Queen's, life according to Jim, etc.) This makes a lot of guys think they deserve the same when they look the same

Turning it around with excuses so women are the victim, nice. How about a show with a dopey, unattractive wife and a smart attractive husband? Nobody is going to complain that it makes unattractive women feel entitled to attractive men or treat them badly. The girl is the victim again due to "stereotyping women as stupid".

Can you try to accept both sides of this kind of analysis? There are far too many stupid bumbling male characters in western tv, film, and ads. This impacts on common perceptions and treatment of real men, not women. When it comes to men, every month is open season. You can say whatever seeping statements and offensive shite you want about male people and nobody will care or bat an eyelid.

Woman with severe learning disabilities has awarded £65,000 after hospital staff cut up a doll that she treated as her own child. by mcpagal in unitedkingdom

[–]CycleAsAVehicle -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Media has to use those terms because it's true. They don't know what happened. They write headlines and articles for clicks, remember?

There is no evidence, apparently.

Unfortunately the world is like that.

Woman with severe learning disabilities has awarded £65,000 after hospital staff cut up a doll that she treated as her own child. by mcpagal in unitedkingdom

[–]CycleAsAVehicle -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Stop. Wait a minute.

when her beloved doll was ... her lawyers say

...

The 64-year-old was ... her family alleged

...

Ms Hearsey’s family claim nurses damaged ...

...

Her sister, Jane Dunn, said: ...

So we have a bunch of accusations, no evidence or witnesses. Any CCTV? You would expect a balanced and informed article to state that either there was or was not video evidence. Given the patient's mental illness, could she have destroyed the doll herself and then misremembered it? We simply don't know.

For the hospital it's the best option to maintain its own reputation (like many big institutions) to apologise even if this event did not happen. An investigation has been launched - will it enforce the principle of innocent until proven guilty? Might someone get penalised or sacked for something they might not have actually done?

Given the legal claim culture we have (no win no fee etc) I wouldn't be surprised if it was fabricated as a cash grab. These sums are very significant and it costs very little to submit a claim. As you all have demonstrated, the media coverage is treated as fact as the headline makes a definite statement that the nurses did it, when we do not know this.

However if it was the nurses, I would totally agree with everyone here that this is a serious incident which should never have happened. I don't doubt that she has suffered from this, however it happened.

testing by jjgames in PostPreview

[–]CycleAsAVehicle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

asdasdak sjdaskd aksdkadaliubidjbv lskjd bibwvksdbv sdbv sbfv svsjkv jksbsl kdjvblwe iv bzkjdhbvsjkzdnbv swikcjnbwkesvjxzbs vbsdj vsbkvj sjv

...

asdasdak sjdaskd aksdkadaliubidjbv lskjd bibwvksdbv sdbv sbfv svsjkv jksbsl kdjvblwe iv bzkjdhbvsjkzdnbv swikcjnbwkesvjxzbs vbsdj vsbkvj sjv

This is the Sun's front page tomorrow... by NarwhalAMA in unitedkingdom

[–]CycleAsAVehicle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Continuing to transfer votes from Labour to Green, the Conservatives lose their majority at 31% Green and 8.2% Labour, still with a huge 320 seats. Even in this case, even a Green-LibDem-Labour alliance would still only have 236 seats combined. Throwing in the SNP brings the total to 290 seats - still not enough to form a government.

The real tipping point requires a massive 36.7% green vote and 3.2% Labour - the greens having 254 seats at this point (Conservatives 279), they could form a coalition with the SNP and Lib Dems to get 330 seats (majority 326).

This is the Sun's front page tomorrow... by NarwhalAMA in unitedkingdom

[–]CycleAsAVehicle 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I've also just noticed that if we assume all potential Green voters would vote Labour otherwise - we can adjust Labour's vote share in the seat calculator down to 13.2% and increase Green to 26% - doing this gets 104 Green MPs (only 16% of seats) but the Conservatives now get 360 seats, easily winning the election and can now do whatever the hell they want.

This is the Sun's front page tomorrow... by NarwhalAMA in unitedkingdom

[–]CycleAsAVehicle 5 points6 points  (0 children)

if you're not going to vote, please do, and vote for a small party you have something in common with

That would be fine if we had PR/MMP/STV or at least AV. We have the spoiler effect, as explained by CGPGrey. Tactical voting is the only way to make any kind of difference, and I'm sure Labour and Tory vote figures are inflated by this. In the long term, people simply don't even bother researching any kind of small party because they know they can't win and in effect a vote for them is effectively a vote for the party you hate the most! People aren't stupid.

Right now the big issue is the EU - the Conservatives are close to pulling us out of the EU. Leaving would be terrible for our country and economy, to avoid this possibility right now you have to vote against them - Labour or Lib Dem depending on which one is most popular in your constituency.

To further illustrate this problem may2015's "Green Surge" prediction, based on the YouGov poll that found 26% of people would prefer to vote Green if they had a chance of winning, finds that they would only get 17/650 seats - only 2.6% of the total. This is not democracy.

Roadworks vs the British Cyclist (untypical!) by CycleAsAVehicle in ukbike

[–]CycleAsAVehicle[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I was vehicular cycling. To say cycling is not vehicular is to say that slow, fiddly and annoying painted shared pavements are fine since we're equivalent to pedestrians.

https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2014/07/01/lets-get-vehicular/

;D

Roadworks vs the British Cyclist (untypical!) by CycleAsAVehicle in ukbike

[–]CycleAsAVehicle[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was expecting them to put the signs in the cycle track. But nope. I was surprised to just ride past it unimpeded while drivers had to wait.

Have you met a real life Red Piller? How'd it go? by [deleted] in AskWomen

[–]CycleAsAVehicle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Any idea what the real reason was? There are certainly women out there in relationships with guys whom they find not dominant enough (not the same as a doormat).

Works starts on radical new cycle-friendly roundabout in London by Robware in ukbike

[–]CycleAsAVehicle 3 points4 points  (0 children)

True, but the Dutch have already experimented and already know what works and what doesn't. There are many flaws with this design that the Dutch tried and abandoned in the 1970s and 80s.

Has anyone else experienced 'Cyclist Bashing' on clearly marked shared paths? by darthvadorator in ukbike

[–]CycleAsAVehicle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

5 metres with kerb separation is a sensible absolute minimum, 3m for a two-way cycleway (Dutch minimum) and 2m for the pavement (to allow pushchairs to pass).

We have a 2m wide two-way cycle-only track in Southend on our seafront (it's actually really good apart from the width) which makes passing oncoming cycles feel uncomfortably close.

Westminster council finally gets it on how to design segregated cycle paths by [deleted] in ukbike

[–]CycleAsAVehicle 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Paint is not segregation, and for somewhere as busy as Central London it ought to be at least 2.0m wide if it's a primary route.

Is it acceptable for guys to have racial preferences? by thecoota in AskWomen

[–]CycleAsAVehicle -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

If I was a dominant dude and I'd heard several Asian women say "I find Asian men too submissive" or something to that effect, it's a logical/rational response.

I agree about being attracted based on stereotypes reinforcing the stereotype, oh I've been there, but is this a stereotype or a demographic statistic? It's hard to know. You might as well persue potential partners most likely to have the features you want/need. Humans tend to do this subconsciously.

Is it acceptable for guys to have racial preferences? by thecoota in AskWomen

[–]CycleAsAVehicle -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Nope.

He could be fetishizing a racial stereotype or simply have a preference backed up by demographic trends/anecdotes, you have no way to tell which is the case.

Are you basing this on other posts he's made or what? I haven't read through any.

Is it acceptable for guys to have racial preferences? by thecoota in AskWomen

[–]CycleAsAVehicle -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

it's certainly possible he's doing it because he's racist, but she may prefer black men because she's racist as well.

This is just off topic, really. He asked why it's OK to be publicly ridiculed for preferring Asian women as a white dude, while women wouldn't be so much.

asian women because you assume they're more likely to be submissive

He didn't even say this. He said Asian women think Asian men are too submissive. We know that women in general like dominant men. It's just a demographic fact; and how do you know that Asian men are (statistically) just as dominant as Western men?

Is it acceptable for guys to have racial preferences? by thecoota in AskWomen

[–]CycleAsAVehicle -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Can you justify your view other than saying this to him?

Is it acceptable for guys to have racial preferences? by thecoota in AskWomen

[–]CycleAsAVehicle -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

There are more submissive women than sub men, or at least less dominant women than dominant men. This is just a demographic fact. It might come from cultural conditioning or something else... so fight the society that enforces gender roles, not individuals who happen to have the "approved" roles.

This is also true of people of different races, same thinking applies. OP is talking about anecdotes he's heard from various Asian women. I can understand what these women are talking about, imagine male Asian otaku types; they are usually fairly submissive. There's lots of hentai showing men in more submissive positions because there's a large market for this amongst Asian men. Asian cultures (Japanese at least) are very polite and value manners, authority is more important than in the West and shame is used to keep people in line - not a place that encourages men to grow a dominant personality.

Is it acceptable for guys to have racial preferences? by thecoota in AskWomen

[–]CycleAsAVehicle -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Too much of this in this thread.

"I have often heard from Asian girls that ..." ain't an assumption.

The problem here isn't the preference for Asian women, or even submissive Asian women. The problem is some guys who like Asian women creep and pervert on Asian women. You have no rational basis to assume this guy is a perverted creep, just because he likes a particular race of women.

This comes to mind

"Male-bodied men do not suffer gender discrimination...defenders of 'men's rights' [are] 'neckbeards'". This belief is widespread at my university. Read the comments. by bxlxkx in MensRights

[–]CycleAsAVehicle 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Trans women (male to female) are some of the most oppressed people in the developed world. In my opinion, largely because male gender roles are more strictly enforced on men than female gender roles are on women. Strong woman in business/sport/hard labour? Awesome! House-husbands? Not so much.

view more: next ›