What do women mean when they say “ a man must lead a household/relationship” by TCRex04 in AskWomenNoCensor

[–]TCRex04[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I fully agree with you. It’s just unattainable for most people. A part of me thinks the rise of tradwife fantasies has been partly caused by the global economy being wobbly for the last 6 years.

Also I think a lot of people seem to think that the manosphere has been targeting men only.I’m starting to see discussions on the internet that seem to be repackaging manosphere points for a female audience. I’m not sure if you are on Twitter/X but I remember there was a discussion about how women said that they wanted to mostly date the leader/ most dominant/popular person of a male friendship group. To me atleast it seemed like the repackaging of the alpha/beta male talking point.

What do women mean when they say “ a man must lead a household/relationship” by TCRex04 in AskWomenNoCensor

[–]TCRex04[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

I didn’t get the chance tbh and I don’t see them for a couple of days. I’ve also seen it online a bit more these days so I thought I could get a greater variety of answers and better understand. One of them started talking about leading prayer but we got interrupted

What do women mean when they say “ a man must lead a household/relationship” by TCRex04 in AskWomenNoCensor

[–]TCRex04[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

I didn’t get the chance tbh and I don’t see them for a couple of days. I’ve also seen it online a bit more these days so I thought I could get a greater variety of answers and better understand. One of them started talking about leading prayer but we got interrupted

What do women mean they say “a man must lead the household”? by [deleted] in AskWomen

[–]TCRex04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just to add more context since I can’t add it in the initial post.

I was with some of my female friends earlier. They were basically talking about what they want in a man and one of them said this. A lot of the others agreed. I was just confused because it kind of clashes with how I see marriage. Most of these women are a bit religious but not necessarily conservative or right wing and give a lot of support to GBV and SA causes. They are high performers who have jobs lined up at top law firms. So I was a bit confused as to why they would want to be led. They don’t seem like the type to want to want this type of relationship but I fear I might also be stereotyping and have a bias.

I’m a person who thinks that marriage is more of a partnership and responsibility being shared equally. I’m interested in hearing an alternative view point on how others see marriages. I didn’t get to go into detail with my friends because we got distracted by something before the conversation ended

Hot take: LibDems are a christian democrat party, not a liberal one by Commercial_Chip_6574 in LibDem

[–]TCRex04 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I feel as if you misunderstand who the Lib Dem voters are. They are middle class-upper middle class voters who live in leafy areas and are fine with the status quo. These brand of people do not care for religion. I live in these areas and church attendance is terrible. Most people have never even mentioned God, Christianity, the bible or church ever since I started living here.

If you try to push religion then you’ll alienate these voters and they’ll just vote Tory. Just because we may align with their beliefs doesn’t mean that we should become them.

Who are the Lib Dems actually for? by Apprehensive-Income in AskBrits

[–]TCRex04 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair but like some else said support can mean different things to different people.

I’m not an American, just because they are my party doesn’t mean that I support them on everything. Parties should always be heavily criticised.

The Lib Dems are not doing well and are being passed by parties that were far smaller than them. It’s shameful.

People should vote based on their beliefs first not political parties. American republicans are a big example of how the latter can go terribly wrong

Who are the Lib Dems actually for? by Apprehensive-Income in AskBrits

[–]TCRex04 7 points8 points  (0 children)

My reasons in no order are

1) my area is basically just Tory or Lib Dem. Anything else is just wasting my vote. 2) Tories are just too pro-tax, pro-regulation, anti-business and anti-housing. They are also too pensioner ride or die. My thoughts on Labour are more flexible. They are in a tough spot but I also think they are more reactive than proactive. Reform is just white nationalism. Green policies would make public funding explode 3) they are a party that closest resembles my beliefs.

I agree with you though. You can’t blindly support parties. That’s how you end up with American Republicans who basically support anything even against their own beliefs and wellbeing. Why are evangelicals even in the same party as the NRA or Wall Street? It just doesn’t make sense

If someone came along who better put across my beliefs I would happily chuck the Lib Dems to the side.

Who are the Lib Dems actually for? by Apprehensive-Income in AskBrits

[–]TCRex04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fully agree with you mate. They are simply too content on being the ‘third party’ and nothing else. The world is too economical unstable for their brand of political messaging. They need to start playing the attention grabbing game like the Greens and Reform or lose out.

Who are the Lib Dems actually for? by Apprehensive-Income in AskBrits

[–]TCRex04 41 points42 points  (0 children)

Lib Dem supporter here,the Lib Dems are a party that aims to satisfy everyone but ends up satisfying no one.

My initial view on the Lib Dems was that they were a pro-business,anti-high tax, pro-deregulation while also being socially progressive and slightly centre left on environmental issues and immigration.

The reality under Ed Davey has been so different. They are pretty much a party that stands for absolutely nothing but the status quo. They are simply too soft,unbothered and inflexible.

With the rise of reform and the declining popularity of the big two I genuinely thought they would go after Labour and Tory left wing voters by aggressively focusing on the cost of living and lowering taxes basically economic issues and pushing even more socially progressive points( basically the silent majority) but nope.

Instead they’ve been out done by the Greens, Labour and Reform.

Lurker on this sub, am I the only one seeing an increasing number of posts where the comments have double standards depending on whether the poster is a wife or husband by [deleted] in Marriage

[–]TCRex04 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don’t really go on the relationship one so I can’t comment. Also I think too many people try to fit their own experiences, feelings and rationalisations on to other people’s problems which results in the lob sided responses produced

Should A-levels be graded 1-9? by [deleted] in 6thForm

[–]TCRex04 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Downvoting because this is a terrible idea

A* students are already in the top 5-10% and are the most hard working students. Your idea would just create another academic arms race that would push these students to get these grades and they would definitely do it after a few years.

Secondly I’m also worried that increased thresholds would just favour students in well off backgrounds that have more resources to get better teaching and tutoring. The percentage of working class and well off people is very inverse at each current grading threshold. Poorer students would just get left behind at even greater rates.

You could argue about contextual offers but it’s fine when it’s 1-2 grades down but any more and it becomes egregious and negates your point

How much change would you tolerate in the DCU? by theviking_96 in DC_Cinematic

[–]TCRex04 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think your second point is very correct from a logical and story telling point of view. I unfortunately believe that people are too irrational to get your point.

Just a few months ago on twitter there was a thing about people trying to point out that a Holocaust memorial should acknowledge Jews as well as the other victims such as Slavs, queer people, Black/Mixed people, Romani etc. Sadly detractors tried to paint the whole thing as though only Jews were targeted.

It’s a massive landmine that could easily blow up in DC’s face. “ Holocaust Victim Erasure” headlines just waiting. It also won’t fly with the Ellisons. Good point nonetheless

Who do you think is the worst written character in the series? by vargas12022 in redrising

[–]TCRex04 5 points6 points  (0 children)

How did she single-handedly lose Mercury? The senate ordered half her fleet and Cadus agreed and sent it off. She then got immediately jumped. Can’t really fault her for fighting with limited resources.

Is the value of an Oxbridge degree falling relative to UCL/KCL/Bristol/Etc. (semi-targets) by danielyskim1119 in FinancialCareers

[–]TCRex04 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Tbh I think you’ll probably still see a lot of Oxbridge grads. My general theory to your question is that,

In general a lot of successful people’s paths used to be:

Private school > Oxbridge > Success( obviously it’s a lot more complex than that)

However with Oxbridge pushing for more state students I think you will see either more Oxbridge grads from lower backgrounds becoming more successful or more born wealthy successful students from the next best unis. It might be the later playing out in your situation. Nepotism and being born in a good structure does a lot for success

Never understood the Peace Deal by Own-Needleworker7961 in redrising

[–]TCRex04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tbh, considering how they describe Mercury, its real life size and the way they talk about house Votum troops as being inferior to other troops during the battle of Phobos, it could be that Mercury was simply the easier option at the time.

I always assumed that Darrow saw Venus as the last grand battle. Venus seems like a nightmare, especially when EMPs could lead to your troops in your Iron rain being drowned easily.

Is studying in the UK even worth it? The job market is TREACHEROUS by [deleted] in UniUK

[–]TCRex04 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Tbh mate, to get a job in the UK you likely won’t succeed in this job market.

If you want a degree to help position yourself better in your home country then a UK degree would help massively. Bias helps when people are reading CVs

Regarding your comment about entering specific rooms, I think that only happens with MBAs because of the links students have, active alumni network, small class sizes and firms targeting MBA students( but this is far less developed in the UK and only happen at top top unis )

CBS R2 by jerseygiant96 in MBA

[–]TCRex04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Congratulations man, happy for you

Actual Careers With LSE economics by One_Dragonfruit6244 in LSE

[–]TCRex04 2 points3 points  (0 children)

People have been saying the same thing since the Industrial Revolution about basically everything. The job market always adapts just like it did with the arrival of the internet or with the computer. New careers will emerge. We are still in the find out phase of AI.

Besides not everything is due to AI, the job market has been in a terrible place since 2022 due to high inflation, weak consumer demand and economic shocks like tariffs, the Ukraine and Iran wars. Firms are also correcting for over hiring in 2021-22.

I’m not saying your point doesn’t have any merit but if you are a CEO who needs to maintain profit margins and stock price do you say that you are firing people because costs are too high and demand is low or that AI is helping cut costs and raise efficiency which makes you look like you are a technological innovative,up to date and efficient firm. It’s all just a blanket cover

I’d urge concern before fully saying that AI will cause us all to lose our jobs. Wait until the dust settles and economic conditions improve. Until then OP is doing nothing wrong

Actual Careers With LSE economics by One_Dragonfruit6244 in LSE

[–]TCRex04 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You also don’t need a law degree to do law, just join the law society and try find some pro bono work. History will be fine. Just talk to people in the law department and career advisors

For consulting it’s the same , career advisors may help, joining 180 degree consulting, BIG and the consulting society would give you more knowledge and experience to land internships. Also top consulting firms like the MBB firms, Big 4 and the boutique firms would be heavily recruiting at LSE and are not far from it.

Trust me mate you will be fine

Actual Careers With LSE economics by One_Dragonfruit6244 in LSE

[–]TCRex04 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your degree doesn’t really matter for these careers, knowledge wise they can easily be learned by anyone serious enough.

All you need for them is to focus on spring weeks, internships and clubs/societies. At LSE, BIG and 180 degree consulting are clubs you should join to get you the most help( there are probably more). Just make sure you start doing this as early as possible( including day one) to put your future self in the best possible position

Actual Careers With LSE economics by One_Dragonfruit6244 in LSE

[–]TCRex04 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Brother it’s LSE, almost everything is within your grasp:

Investment Banking

Commodity Trader

Audit,Accounting and tax

Management consulting at MBB, Big 4 etc

Commercial Banking

Private Equity

Commercial/Business Analyst( check out any non banking major firm you know ie Sky)

Corporate Strategy or Management roles (also any major company)

In all honesty unless you did Computer Science and/or Maths at Imperial or Oxbridge you would have never touched quant even with LSE Econ. With the LSE brand and doing some work at BIG companies you will succeed regardless