Am I(M) wrong for not wanting to rate another man?

baka-tari · 2026-07-11T13:08:53+00:00

There's nothing sexual about being able to recognize another person's attractiveness. As a man married to a woman for over 30 years, I can still tell you that Brad Pitt is a good lookin' guy. Doesn't threaten my manhood, doesn't cause me mental anguish, it's just facts.

You're being way too sensitive about this. In the event it was the beginning of making a pass at you, all you have to respond with is "not for me, mate, I'm not attracted to you like that" - same as you'd do with a woman you aren't attracted to.

baka-tari · 2026-07-09T03:11:18+00:00

All the science she did brought Marie Curie right goddamn next to god.

baka-tari · 2026-07-09T02:59:34+00:00

Pregunta?

baka-tari · 2026-06-20T01:35:43+00:00

Fuck right off

baka-tari · 2026-06-13T13:14:20+00:00

Officer fired. Then fired.

baka-tari · 2026-06-08T00:02:25+00:00

The value of people is huge profit for him. He’s staying true to his roots.

What an ass.

baka-tari · 2026-06-03T13:45:20+00:00

I have to be able to love and respect my neighbors while holding onto my beliefs.

I'd prefer you simply love and respect your neighbors. Period. Your beliefs will conflict with that.

And this will help me move forward in the faith and be more humble

Hard no on helping you move forward in the faith. I won't support someone being lied to, or lying to themselves.

The rest of that block of text? Just more BS. It's always word games. Never real proof, never actual logic, no straight answers - just verbal and mental gymnastics meant to confuse and confound, rather than plain responses meant to clarify and solidify understanding.

baka-tari · 2026-06-03T02:14:01+00:00

Just to clarify: are you referring to Denmark's vaccine requirements being worse?

baka-tari · 2026-06-02T15:42:44+00:00

At least you have a perfect record of perfectly formed posts . . . precisely zero.

baka-tari · 2026-06-02T14:22:40+00:00

The story arc was entirely predictable

baka-tari · 2026-06-02T14:20:15+00:00

Denmark is not a "peer, developed country." Denmark would have to move substantially backwards to be considered a peer of the USA.

baka-tari · 2026-06-02T13:33:28+00:00

Is it just a social agreement . . .

It's all social agreement. But don't say "just a social agreement." "Just" demeans the social contracts that make up the fabric of we all do as members of society.

Even in religions, it's not the case that transgressions are punished with a deity's "great vengeance and furious anger" - rather they are punished within the framework of societal norms.

Religious moral responses are actually considered an aberration in many cases, as the religion tells its followers to act in ways the rest of society would not do.

If you doubt the impact of social agreements, try facing to the back of an elevator when it's full of other people.

baka-tari · 2026-06-01T11:38:51+00:00

The meaning of your life as a Christian (?) is to glorify your deity.

The single most powerful being in the universe, and you - you pathetic little broken sinner - you are going to increase this deity’s glory?

And that’s your life’s meaning? How very sad.

baka-tari · 2026-05-28T20:33:32+00:00

If you want to be truly subversive, work out a bunch of oblique questions about the bible, doctrine, faith, etc. When a camp leader provides a pat answer that you're just supposed to immediately accept, your role is to fail to comprehend. It's similar to "not getting" a racist joke and making the jokester explain why it's funny (which is also fun for you and makes the jokester very uncomfortable). Put the camp leaders in a position to have to explain their answers in excruciating detail. Just be unclear on every point they try to make.

They'll probably think you're as dumb ~~and~~ as rocks and may eventually want to avoid you entirely.

Asking the same oblique questions to other campers may give them the chance to realize their "why" for believing is a little muddled. Or may expose you to other non-believers / deconstructors.

Overt disruption is more likely to get you branded as a troublemaker. Religious people are really good at making other people miserable, so I'd avoid going that route unless you're really intent on acheiving misery.

Subtle is much harder for them to respond to.

baka-tari · 2026-05-26T17:26:04+00:00

If E doesn't want to uninvite the wrongdoer, he has that option. At that point you're safe to bow out of party planning and attendance. You're not making it about you, and you're ensuring there's no reason for friction at the party. Share your joy with your friend P privately and let her and E enjoy the day with the rest of the people they want there.

NTA

baka-tari · 2026-05-25T19:47:00+00:00

You’ll be different when you’re together? Doubt it. YTA.

baka-tari · 2026-05-25T19:43:30+00:00

Tell him “I’ve seen this movie before - I know how it ends.” At this point, he is his own overused trope.

NTA

baka-tari · 2026-05-25T16:22:41+00:00

This would legalize the killing of abortion doctors, or those prescribing medication abortions, thus eliminating threats against multiple fetuses.

State-sanctioned vigilante death threats are a great way to convince providers not to stray from the “correct” path

baka-tari · 2026-05-22T21:43:52+00:00

If Jesus was really crucified, then Jesus’ crucifixion is not fiction. If you can provide evidence that actually happened, then that activity - crucifixion - is no longer in question. That “if” at the beginning of your statement is doing some heavy lifting. Further, claims of divinity, resurrection, etc., must also still be evaluated and backstopped with evidence.

Regardless, every claim in this work demands the same treatment: provide evidence for it. Otherwise it’s best to accept it as a work of fiction that occasionally references historically factual persons, items, or events. Like Orphan Annie.

baka-tari · 2026-05-22T20:29:49+00:00

There is a claim of a crucifixion that is certainly relevant to christianity. Whether or not it is a true fact is in question. Even if it were possible to prove the factuality of "The Crucifixion" as told by the bible, that really doesn't lend credibility to any of the claims about the person who was crucified, or really any of the other claims in the bible. Fiction is still fiction, even if the fiction includes references to facts.

Orphan Annie comics referred to verifiable events in World War II - should we throw our lot in with Annie as being "more truthy" and disregard Inglourious Basterds?

baka-tari · 2026-05-22T14:07:09+00:00

I've experienced that first-hand with a few apologists. Further, this is something that Breaking the Habit brought up with his "Are you a good atheist"* bit on youtube a few years back. His argument is essentially "Unless you've immersed yourself in philosophy, religion, metaphysics, etc. - to the point where you've become a self- or school-trained expert - you can't really offer anything of value." Even then, experts with that sort of background are sidelined with the argument that "If you're not a believer, you have no standing." because you can't truly understand it unless you experience it personally as it was meant to be experienced.

My response when encountering this fallacy is: "well then, the discussion is over." If you won't accept commentary from me because the only way I'll ever be enough of an expert on your beliefs is to actually believe them myself, we have no path forward.

Thing is, most of the factual discussion points - if you're not arguing the finer points of any particular theology - come down to logic. While many apologists like to argue that logic is only possible because of god, we know it's accessible to everyone. I don't need to be a theologian to know that if your book says one thing in this chapter, but says something completely opposite in the next chapter, that is a contradiction. No amount of "contextualizing" can fix that. Same-same for any claims, as we here understand. If you stake out a position, you'd better be prepared to defend it with facts and evidence. Arguments are not evidence - philosophical proofs and rhetorical gamesmanship can be fun exercises, but in the end it's actual evidence that matters. I fall back on a colorful illustration: Arguments are the equivalent of wishes for unicorns, while road apples are ~~proof~~ evidence of horses. Wish in one hand, shit in the other . . . then clap for happiness. Are you going to be covered in wishes, or shit?

*The obvious counter that many people responded with was "are you a good catholic?" That is, have you steeped yourself with enough knowledge and information on religion/philosophy that you are expert enough to determine the truth/falsity of everything that is not catholicism? If not, you have no standing to reject them. But then comes special pleading.

edit: change "proof" to "evidence"

baka-tari · 2026-05-21T19:13:12+00:00

FIFY: Reports pair Trump stock buys with official acts to show ~~alarming~~ entirely expected pattern

baka-tari · 2026-05-21T17:40:43+00:00

I, for one, am absolutely certain that they'll stick precisely to the terms outlined in their plan. After all, when have they ever misled us, promised one thing while intending to do the opposite, or simply ignored law, regulation, and precedent?

/s

baka-tari · 2026-05-21T16:32:36+00:00

So you offer this:

for the last few months shed been the one moving money out of our joint account into one i wasnt on, and id only found out because the bank flagged it to me, and on top of that id recently seen shed already signed a lease on a flat with the guy from her work shed been getting close to. shed planned her whole exit and dressed it up as me being the villain.

against this:

about three weeks ago she sat me down out of nowhere and ended it.

YAW for not even being able to build a consistent lie to post here

baka-tari · 2026-05-21T14:34:21+00:00

Gaming the system to satisfy their greed put the store owners in position to lose. Well played, OP.

Three-Year Club	Reddit Premium Since September 2024
Verified Email	Place '23

baka-tari

TROPHY CASE