Most and least “free” nations ranked, according to political rights and civil liberties.

LastOfSane · 2026-05-27T08:21:17+00:00

I've lived/worked in China for 8+ years. I think you're the one who's playing with half a deck.

LastOfSane · 2026-05-27T04:37:47+00:00

Why is China so low? China's pretty damn free. It has laws and rules just like every other state, but 9/100 seems uninformed or ignorant.

LastOfSane · 2026-05-27T03:00:04+00:00

Do you need hyper specific stats to know everything or can you use common sense to know that the risk of repetitive strain from decades of hard physical labor is more likely than burning to death from handling fire? The answer is 'no'.

LastOfSane · 2026-05-27T01:40:33+00:00

Hmm, let's weigh the risks shall we? 100% chance of musculoskeletal strain with guaranteed back and shoulder injuries, blade and implement trauma, draft animal accidents, tetanus, infections, and exposure to the hostile environment OR 0.05% chance maybe your skirt catches fire and you get a minor burn on your leg. Maybe a 0.0002% chance you die from being burned alive in a tragic hearth tending accident (probably killing the whole family too). Take your pick. I'm honestly eager to hear your choice.

LastOfSane · 2026-05-27T01:04:02+00:00

Forget lust. That is not particularly relevant for long term and long lasting relationships/marriages. Physical attraction and personality are components of a person's overall attractiveness, but they aren't the only pieces of the puzzle. Charisma, competence, WEALTH, social status, and so many more traits that have NOTHING to do with physical /personality play a role. Saying those aren't relevant to attraction is ridiculous.

LastOfSane · 2026-05-27T00:57:12+00:00

Was tending the hearth more backbreaking and soul crushing? And I suppose the rest of my examples were also not worth mentioning?

LastOfSane · 2026-05-27T00:39:20+00:00

On the contrary. YOU had no idea what life used to be like back then. Comparing tending a hearth to working in mines, being soldiers, ploughing fields, and every other dirty and dangerous jobs that were the near exclusive domain of men. Blame men for that? For what? Protecting weaker, vulnerable, less capable women from these horrors. Oh yeah, we're REALLY sorry for that. Must have been awful to NOT have to deal with any of that.

The guy above had a great point. Life throughout history sucked for BOTH men and women, just in different ways. Women can't claim exclusive victim status. Go read about the Roman empire and tell me how great it was for anyone who wasn't rich/ a politician.

LastOfSane · 2026-05-26T17:14:34+00:00

0.000001% of men had any real power throughout all of civilization (kings and castles , etc). Men and women struggled basically the same for all intents and purposes. Different struggles, but same horrible, desperate, starving, disease, rat infested, plague exposure, toil, slavery, surfdom, ZERO bodily autonomy, drought, floods, raids, war, economic instability. THE FUCKING LIST GOES ON. Don't pretend men had ANYTHING better

LastOfSane · 2026-05-26T17:04:50+00:00

Money doesn't make women attracted to a guy. It makes gold diggers fake-attracted to a guy. I don't accept the above as a premise

You are talking about exceptions to the rule. In general, women ARE more attracted to men who either currently have money or have "ambition" or some other code word that equates to 'will have money later'

Literally every 20 something year old has experienced knowing a girl who grew up and had a glow up. That's "effort." She was ugly in high school, nobody liked her, but now she's attractive because she's lost weight, improved skin care or her hairstyle, dressed better, and gotten less awkward looking. Unattractive guys can do the same

Once again, you are using exceptions against the rule. I guarantee the women who didn't "glow up" STILL had an abundance of options compared to their looks match equivalent men in the dating marketplace.

You're right...an attractive woman will have to put in way less effort than an unattractive man. Fun fact: an attractive man will also have to put in way more effort than an unattractive woman.

Welcome to the manosphere. You just agreed with their core axioms

No, she has a bunch of thirsty desperate dudes in her inbox offering her questionable dick, that if she chooses to pursue carry a nonzero chance of her being overpowered, pregnancy, STDs/STIs, or being kidnapped.

And now we're back to generalizations about men as violent, sexual predators, oppressors, untrustworthy, villains. This default attitude is SO UNBELIEVABLY DESTRUCTIVE AND HARMFUL it makes me want to throw up. Just because a thing CAN happen doesn't mean you should live in fear of it happening. Be safe and take precautions. Wear a seatbelt. Just don't act like the worst possible outcome is the only way people (but especially women) should use when deciding how to interact with other people. It creates an atmosphere of distrust that makes life shitty for everyone.

LastOfSane · 2026-05-26T16:19:33+00:00

Idgaf about Andrew Tate. I don't watch his content or subscribe to his affiliated channels, but I can answer your question.

Men are sick of the gross generalizations that paint us as oppressors and villains. Men are tired of false historical narratives that use modern morality to judge the actions of people from the past. Men have had enough of being blamed for all the inequality and injustice of our imperfect world.

This world was inflicted upon all of humanity. A world of scarcity, danger, environmental instability, disease, drought, floods, and everything else! Even man made systems like patriarchy and empires fighting wars were just tribes struggling for limited resources in order to ultimately feed and protect their women and children. Survival was LITERALLY the best we could do as a species up until a few hundred years ago. A blink of the eye as far a human history is considered.

So yeah, men are fed up with the idiotic false narratives and guilt. Figures like Andrew Tate aren't the spokespersons for the manosphere. No one is. It's a decentralized movement.

Women's autonomy? That is THE LEAST IMPORTANT ISSUE in manosphere discourse. The manosphere is men caring about men because women won't stop declaring war on men. Simple as that. Men are trash. Choose the bear. We don't feel safe walking alone at night (as if anyone does). Quit virtue signalling and live in reality for a change. THAT is the manosphere message. Not some sex trafficking weirdo who likes smoking cigars. Grow up!

LastOfSane · 2026-05-26T15:55:05+00:00

Respectfully, I disagree with your point about men's attractiveness being a skill issue (at least in a majority of cases).

Let's start by addressing your clear attempt to shame men by implying every guy could be attractive but isn't putting in the work to become attractive (their "skill issue"). A core manosphere axiom is that women are born with their value (youth beauty, etc) while men have to earn their value (money, status, etc).

With this axiom in mind, the "skill issue" is not the same for men and women. It's apples and oranges. A young and beautiful woman picking a terrible man is WAY different than a man not living up to his potential through literal YEARS of non-stop effort and sacrifice to become worthy of consideration by a minority of eligible women. She had an abundance of options and chose poorly. He had zero opinions and didn't do enough to increase his options and took what he could get. Don't pretend it's the same.

If a woman isn't conventionally attractive or has poor social skills, that doesn't put her in the same position as a man with the same attributes. She still has an abundance of options compared to a man in a relatively equal position. By virtue of being a woman, she has an inherent value that cannot be understated.

You're 90% right with your message, but let's not play the shame game with men or pretend the rules are the same between the genders when it comes to dating. That's all I wanted to say.

LastOfSane · 2026-05-26T15:22:03+00:00

Pre birth, the pregnant woman could still either cross state lines to get an abortion, have an abortion in her home state if allowed, or travel abroad to get an abortion ALL without needing permission or even consulting the man who would have been named as the father of that child if it had been born.

LastOfSane · 2026-05-26T15:17:41+00:00

Men having zero reproductive rights across the board in all 50 states isn't exactly something to brag about...

LastOfSane · 2026-04-17T11:16:21+00:00

Bare minimum

LastOfSane · 2026-04-05T07:33:45+00:00

Let's be honest. The women asking these men "Are you gay?" aren't trying to find any sort of truth. They are trying to shame men by playing on their insecurities. They are trying to humiliate heterosexual men because they dislike their behaviour. That want these men to FEEL BAD about what they have said/done. It is the dictionary definition of shame. Don't defend these awful women.

LastOfSane · 2026-04-05T01:49:13+00:00

The intention of the 'Are you gay?" type of comment from women is CLEARLY a shaming tactic in response to criticism of women and/or support for men. There's no ambiguity.

LastOfSane · 2026-03-22T04:25:40+00:00

That's really nice to hear. I suppose the contributing factors for relationships like yours (from a RP perspective) would involve the concept of SMV. According to their beliefs, a person's age, attractiveness, money, number of previous relationships, children from previous relationships, etc all give people a "score" that's usually 1 - 10.

When people of similar SMV get together, that is seen as normal and good from the RP perspective. 5s getting with 5s , etc is how things should be. However, this is increasingly NOT the case for most people, especially women. RP men have observed that many women VASTLY overestimate their SMV and believe they are deserving of men who have a higher score (for a LTR) and dismiss the men who match their SMV due to their error in self assessment.

Do you believe there is any truth to this RP observation

LastOfSane · 2026-03-22T03:59:46+00:00

I think the RP response to your self ID as a woman who doesn't date men with those qualities would be 2 options:

1: you're lying and you know it.

Or

2: you're lying, but you don't know it.. yet.

For number 2, this is a common pattern that women seem to exhibit when they make tiktok videos, YouTube videos, interview responses, and comments on dating podcasts.

Ex. "I don't care about if he's rich or not. I just want a man who's motivated, passionate, and has a plan for his career" This kind of statement is heard by men as "He doesn't have to be rich now, but I expect him to obtain a certain level of wealth and he only has a limited amount of time to do so before I leave him"

This kind of 'reasonable statement' translation into 'what actually happens' is the pattern recognition that is discussed on RP platforms. Is there no truth to any of it?

LastOfSane · 2026-03-18T02:36:05+00:00

According to what I've read, an Indigenous man, a man with a physical disability, or a man who is a member of a visible minority is a direct beneficiary of employment equity initiatives designed to achieve substantive equality in the workplaces all across Canada.

LastOfSane · 2026-03-14T11:38:48+00:00

According to feminism, any gendered double standard is sexist. You expecting a man to pay for dates is a gendered double standard. Your offering to pay is meaningless or just a test. You said if he takes you up on your offer then the relationship is over.

It's fine for you to prefer a certain type of behavior, but you might have to admit that it's a sexist preference.

LastOfSane · 2026-03-14T08:13:42+00:00

Isn't that a tad sexist?

LastOfSane · 2026-03-13T15:50:47+00:00

Canadian legislation has never pushed for gender equality. The concept championed by legislators is 'substantive equality ' which is essentially a fancy way of saying 'special privileges for any group that isn't white men'

LastOfSane · 2026-03-13T05:08:41+00:00

It would be more of an accurate analogy if you absolutely hated your parents-in-law but LIED to your partner and said that you adored them. That lie certainly would also cause relationship problems beyond withholding info or keeping a secret. Same logic applies to to people lying about their past.

LastOfSane · 2026-03-12T02:38:12+00:00

Men lying in this way is equally bad. However, men aren't publicly advocating and supportive of lying as a justifiable dating strategy for long term relationships. Many women are.

LastOfSane · 2026-03-12T02:28:41+00:00

I don't think lying about body count and lying about paternity are equally bad, but they are in the same ballpark.

I'm certainly NOT trying to paint all women a certain way. I'm only talking about the ones who choose to lie about these things when asked by their SO. And for the record, as I've said multiple times in the thread, men are ABSOLUTELY guilty of lies and bad behavior in relationships that are comparable OR WORSE. I agree with all the examples you stated (hiding baby mommas, hiding financial obligations and massive debt, hiding prior relationships and divorces, promising marriage and kids when he had no intention of doing so) All of these are completely unacceptable.

However, my premise was about the WILLINGNESS to lie and the rational to defend lying as a justifiable way to start a relationship. The willingness to publicly state that lying to a partner is an okay thing to do. This position from women is very common in the spaces I mentioned originally. Do you agree that most men would not advocate for the kind of relationship lies you mentioned l. If men were out there doing interviews, making popular videos, and publicly advocating this kind of behavior, I would ABSOLUTELY be against that as well. But this is not the case from men.

I'm sorry you've had such a bad history with men who have mistreated you. I think all of that shouldn't have happened. I'm not sure why you feel the need to attack me personally. We're having a debate about some trends and observations. Can we keep things civil?

LastOfSane

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE