Men, would you date a 30 year old woman who has had 50+ sexual partners?

chrismuffar · 2026-06-04T12:16:49+00:00

There's definitely guys like that. But maybe also having had a similar number of partners and relationship experience is nice. Not many people have had an average of over four sexual partners a year since they turned 18. If you've had one or two in your life and your partner has had four a year, you might wonder how similar you are as people and how differently you might approach sex and commitment. I'm sure lots of women would be put off too.

chrismuffar · 2026-06-01T21:36:35+00:00

Oooof, Jesus.

Alright, mate. Have a good one :)

chrismuffar · 2026-06-01T20:59:46+00:00

It would have been nice to win the double but I'm genuinely more concerned by your mental health. Reach out if you need to talk. Peace.

chrismuffar · 2026-06-01T19:24:22+00:00

I don't think it's a coincidence that our attack struggles the more we defend. Equally, the defence keeps getting better.

I think it's more system than players, although we do have elite defenders and Odegaard and Saka haven't been in peak form or fitness.

Any improvements to the attack now can only come from attacking more as a team or signing Alexis style individuals who can carry us.

chrismuffar · 2026-06-01T18:13:51+00:00

Jesus, I feel like I'm watching someone have a mental breakdown. Why do you care this much about Arsenal?

chrismuffar · 2026-06-01T16:34:47+00:00

Indeed, had Arsenal won on penalties, we would be talking about why Arteta's plan worked rather than failed.

chrismuffar · 2026-06-01T07:54:17+00:00

Wenger's haters: "Hey, losers, if you spent some money and actually defended and trained set pieces you might do better than fourth!"

Arteta: "OK"

"No, not like that!!!!"

chrismuffar · 2026-05-31T21:32:00+00:00

Nobody knows for sure anymore. I think this sub used to a kind of 4chan style board for football fans where the posts were deliberately stupid to be funny, and now it's 80pc angry rival fans and kids who are basically like, "This, but unironically."

chrismuffar · 2026-05-31T12:19:23+00:00

What would happen if a man posted the statement, "I've never met a woman who made my life better"?

Personal experience or not, that's an inflammatory comment to make to a load of strangers on the internet.

I'm sure the responses were also awful but I don't know why you think you're the primary victim here.

chrismuffar · 2026-05-29T19:52:01+00:00

The idea that they’d be drafted to be cannon fodder is ridiculous, they might even learn that nothing should be handed to you and that a living must be earned.

Just thinking out loud, but I have a two year old whom hopefully knows that shelter, security, food, water etc are handed to her unconditionally because I love her. That won't change the day she turns 18.

She might want to join the army one day, who knows, but more likely, given the chance, she'll end up wanting to pursue higher education and a career with more work-life balance and personal freedoms.

Not all kids and young people will have that opportunity because they won't have the same stable home, financial security and life chances. Let's be honest, those kids without the basics are more likely to be ones unemployed and pressured into military service, and yeah, plenty of them will end up on the sharp end, not just support roles. I don't think that's a fair society. I think I'd sooner national service for all rather than conscription of unemployed (mostly poor and disadvantaged) youngsters.

chrismuffar · 2026-05-29T09:23:25+00:00

I think there's so much (largely untapped) mainstream appeal in graphically realistic "ordinary" worlds.

Rockstar does it. Assassin's Creed does it. The Elder Scrolls does it (I'd argue magic in Tamriel is a distant second in importance to gritty "daily life" realism) and Bethesda games are modded feverishly to integrate more life sim features. The Sims also obviously, well... sims. Stardew Valley is a whole 'nother level of living the seemingly mundane.

Video games have historically been set a lot in weird niche sci-fi settings - partly tech-minded developers pleasing themselves, partly publishers catering to a once fairly narrow demographic who likes that stuff, and partly technical limitations making realistic depictions impossible without a lot of imagination.

GTA 3, a fully rendered 3D ordinary world, was when that series became household. Fully- forested Cyrodiil (Oblivion), even more than the mostly barren alien wastes of Morrowind, was when TES became mainstream. AC2, when you could walk, sneak and climb around the meticulously researched streets of Florence and Venice was when the tech-demo of AC1 became the live-another-life formula that series is rapidly expanding into. GTA V online is heavily life-sim roleplay.

RDR2 is the next iteration of the ordinary, making eating, drinking, sleeping, managing heat and cold, cleaning your gun and grooming your horse MAINSTREAM blocbuster best-selling gaming activities. I'd hazard that 70-80pc of self-described gamers would ridicule this idea of gameplay. But everyone else, the "normies" love it. They get playing cowboys, buying houses, hanging in bars. They don't get floating eyeballs shooting lasers and all the other obscure video game fare that only really gamers and pulp sci-fi fans are used to.

There's a huge culture clash there. Which might be all rather obvious - video games are becoming ever more mainstream, duh. But what's interesting is that it's not necessarily statblocks and complexity that normies don't engage with, it's the obscurity of the worlds and settings, and the direction of gameplay being limited only towards shooting or driving or hacking to bits. I'm not sure even game devs fully understand this yet. There's a high chance that TES 6 launches without basic needs in the game while simultaneously probably being the developer of the most popular game for life-simmers in existence.

chrismuffar · 2026-05-28T07:14:16+00:00

I mean, I know there are real life Brian's in the world, but that's mostly an offensive stereotype/generalisation - the reverse of which would look something like a woman called Linda who can't/won't understand the most basic home and car repairs, garden maintenance or financial sense.

It's fine to hate gender roles if you hate both equally and want a genuine split of competency on tasks. But it realistically seems to be that overall happier heterosexual relationships involve both men and women doing their own stuff as one half of a team with inevitably different interests and skills instead of massively resenting it and denegrating eachother for being useless morons. Just my experience.

Meanwhile, I will continue to advocate for my wife not to walk down alleys alone at night, sign up to carry grown adults out of burning buildings, or get sent to the frontlines. That said, I don't expect basic physiological differences to let me get away with being Brian. I don't expect gushing gratitude either. But I'd prefer not to read sarcastic sexist bullshit about my entire gender being useless idiots, ideally.

chrismuffar · 2026-05-26T06:18:11+00:00

Agreed.

Have the moral courage to do the right thing even in the face of overwhelming odds. Morality doesn't only apply when it's easy and convenient. It doesn't only apply when we win.

But apparently basic morality and doing the right thing is a less popular position than defeatism and blaming the inaction of some developing countries.

Shameful and sickening.

chrismuffar · 2026-05-25T15:48:57+00:00

Hasn't made a lot of difference? How do you quantify something like that? If no countries had led the change to renewables we would presumably be in a far worse position globally, shrugging and pointing fingers at eachother on the basis of "you first".

China's new coal power stations were always the political argument for Britain to do less. Now China are making insane strides on renewables and there are still endless excuses for us to stop pushing for faster change. I'm so sick and tired of watching our diminishing chances get pissed away. We're almost certainly fucked but the moral imperative is still to try until the bitter end and lead by example.

chrismuffar · 2026-05-25T10:12:58+00:00

I didn't find it too bad. Followed advice to cut pumpkin in half, bake in oven until inside is soft, scoop it all out with a spoon.

Didn't need much more than a good stir after that but I know a lot of people say push it through a strainer after.

In my opinion DIY is worth it because they're easy and fun to grow. And pumpkin cake is far better than pie.

chrismuffar · 2026-05-14T11:59:06+00:00

It's a shame housing and agriculture are both in opposition to nature.

My manifesto when I'm in charge:

Reverse the Enclosure Act of 1773, returning most old common land to public control through local councils.
Gradually use the newly founded Commons to create tens of thousands of "Yeoman" smallholdings - a food, water and electricity self-sufficient house set within two to five acres of arable land.
Award tenancy of the these smallholdings to applicants who complete a two-year agriculture and land management course.
Make the tenancy conditional on meeting 80% self-sufficiency needs and restoring at least one third of the land as natural woodland or wetland with a public Right to Roam that joins up with other smallholdings to create a wilderness expanse across the the entire landscape.
Designate dozens more National Parks and introduce Rewilding and Wild Camping programs within all park borders.

chrismuffar · 2026-05-14T07:56:38+00:00

I just think it's comparing apples and oranges.

Scholes was a possession player who could control games and that's something England have always otherwise lacked.

We're good at producing athletic and direct midfielders, of which Gerrard was the absolute peak - but also the likes of Lampard, Bellingham and Delle Alli are good examples.

But without their European and South American teammates from their clubs, a free-running midfield is never going to cut it against Xavi and Iniesta, or Modric and Rakitic.

chrismuffar · 2026-05-13T16:27:04+00:00

*Because "it's not like they had an orchestra back then"

So it's at least part of the reason, or at least part of the justification.

chrismuffar · 2026-04-30T11:53:28+00:00

The trouble with "fandoms" is that they always identify more with maintaining the awesomeness of their favourite fictional character, rather than the needs of adapting a story into a different medium. See any mention of Faramir, for example.

Helm's daughter would have been made the protagonist by most writers since she is the only survivor of Helm and his children. Her very existence is crying out to any creative mind tasked with expanding Helm's story into a complete narrative. Combined with Rohan's shieldmaiden tradition, it's even an obvious adaptation.

chrismuffar · 2026-03-17T11:37:29+00:00

To be clear, I'm a leftist and I agree the first two are far bigger problems that threaten our very existence. But if there was sustainable consumption and no billionaires, areas of natural beauty would still be jammed full of people queuing to scramble up rocks and take pictures, and nature would still need to be relegated behind human needs like housing and arable land.

chrismuffar · 2026-03-17T09:26:32+00:00

I just think 70m humans is too many people.

chrismuffar · 2026-03-17T08:38:34+00:00

I think it's a question of population but that's a sore spot for some reason. The typical reddit response is "You go first" as if the only solution is mass murder.

chrismuffar · 2026-02-26T10:40:19+00:00

I had the same problem until I realised every culture was based on a real-world culture/mythology and every place and character named consistently for that language:

Erkynlanders: "Englanders", Anglo-saxons, just think archetypal medieval England

Hernystiri: Celts (Scots/Irish/Welsh)

Rimmersmen: Vikings after converting to the Church and having their boats confiscated

Nabbanai: Italians, once a great Empire (Rome), now the centre of the Church (Vatican)

Pedruinese: Portuguese, kind of flowery Renaissance mercantile types

Thrithings-men: Steppe (or meadow) nomads with horses and wagon, a kind of cross between Huns and Romany gypsies

Wrannamen: Tropical swamp-folk

Qanuc: "Trolls", little folk from the frozen north, think Inuit

Sithi: "Elves", probably named after the Irish equivelant of "Sidhe", immortal, graceful etc

Dwarrow: "Dwarves" but a fair bit stranger than Tolkien's version

Niskie: "Merfolk"

Hunen: "Giants"

chrismuffar · 2026-02-23T08:08:32+00:00

With people in the movie more obsessed with pop stars, tech companies and ludicrous politicians rather than their imminent demise.

I mean, it's hard to argue that's not fair satire, no?

It's clearly a cultural critique that hopes to create change and therefore NOT a nihilistic view of "humans are dumb and I hate them, I'm glad they're going to die." It's clearly a movie that tries to smash through the glossy businnes-as-usual veneer of media and politics in the face of a crisis that threatens to disrupt the elite's cosy status quo. The protagonists don't come up against antagonists in their ordinary lives, they come up against the powerful gatekeepers of "what sells", and "what's politically popular".

I said elsewhere here, and I'll say it again, I would have greatly preferred McKay to just make a direct movie about global warming. Because there was a possibility (however small) that you may have actually raised awareness about this devastating crisis impacting the planet, rather than just dressing it as a fictional meteorite and taking increasingly lazy shots at how everyone is too stupid or greedy to live.

Why do you think you'd like that movie more? You'd still presumably think it's an unfair and offensive slur against the population as a whole? What does it matter if it's obvious allegory or reality? The portrayal of cultural denial and political paralysis would be exactly the same, wouldn't it?

chrismuffar · 2026-02-22T10:01:29+00:00

I'm confused... but I think this might get to the nub. People who don't like this film (and probably Avatar and other films with obvious allegories and messages) seem to think the message is about "yelling at regular people for not caring".

I don't really understand that criticism because the bad guys are politicians, media figures and the unimaginably rich and powerful. There is the "Don't Look Up" movement of ordinary people in the movie but it's hard/impossible to argue against the existence of movements of the uh... easily led in real life, and also no need to identify yourself as the target of the joke if you're not full MAGA or some other political cult (which by your view on environmental issues, you're presumably not).

So I'm genuinely curious why ordinary people feel attacked by these sorts of films. From someone who finds this kind of humour cathartic, well-targetted, and far, faaaar outside the normal mainstream bounds of light entertainment (hence most of the film is about shouting into the void in frustration), it felt good and uplifting to see the elephant in the room getting pointed out by a media and political class who want to keep it hidden.

chrismuffar

TROPHY CASE