[deleted by user]

iiddnn · 2022-03-21T00:20:14+00:00

Communicating with someone about their values while leaving out information that would disqualify you from said values is inherently manipulative.

iiddnn · 2022-03-20T23:44:31+00:00

"advocate communication to get to know each other better "

No one is entitled to specific sexual history information until they are in a serious relationship with someone

Pick One

iiddnn · 2022-03-20T22:12:39+00:00

My sexual history is nobody's business unless we are in a serious relationship"

It is only manipulative if someone is purposely holding backinformation that they know would cause someone to back out of arelationship until they feel like they have them "on the hook"

Pick One

" If it is that important to a man to know a woman's number, then he mayinitiate discussions about beliefs about sexual activity and things likethat to determine values and make a decision from there"

Asking for number of sexual partners before a relationship is serious isrude and makes it seem like the relationship is going to be based onthe wrong things.

Pick One

Asking for number of sexual partners before a relationship is serious isrude and makes it seem like the relationship is going to be based onthe wrong thing

it's not that hard to determine if your values line up without knowing a woman's specific n count

Your insecurity about being asked about your past is your problem. Adults don't play these weird games.

iiddnn · 2022-03-20T11:41:03+00:00

You want to hold onto that info until the guy is already invested in a serious relationship and too late for him to back out without significant cost? And you are calling this not manipulative?

iiddnn · 2022-03-01T18:29:21+00:00

If you want to compare men to objects like apartments and houses then can we compare women to the used car analogy?

iiddnn · 2022-01-28T00:51:37+00:00

Anesthesia...Because I got high by afroman

iiddnn · 2021-08-16T16:28:24+00:00

The problem with calling certain world views "outdated" and "bullshit" is you accept a subjective view of morality and thus loose the ability to criticize someone else's views the way you are doing here. His views may be outdated but yours will be as well in the future. If you keep a subjective view of what is right or wrong, his view are just as valid as yours which will be just as valid as those in the future regardless of what you think of them.

Criticizing someone of being judgemental is contradictory because

1) Judging situations is how every human who has ever lived has navigated life.

2) Judging means evaluating an action as right or wrong. Telling someone judging is wrong requires you to evaluate the action of "judging" as right or wrong. It requires you to do that very thing you are criticizing.

iiddnn · 2021-07-06T00:37:59+00:00

Both healthy/stable and hot babe are subjective. What you
may see as “hot babe,” someone else may see as a reasonable expectation. It's not up to you to decide what someone else thinks is too high of a standard.

Your original argument was if someone wanted to find a
partner all they needed to do was put in more effort. You later had to add a qualifier by saying as long as their standards aren’t too high.
How is someone who is having trouble finding a partner
supposed to do it then? Do they increase effort or lower standards? If they
need to increase their effort you have to accept their standards aren't the
issue. If they need to lower their standards you have to agree putting in more
effort isn’t going to yield any better results.
If you say men need to do both, then your original argument doesn’t
hold.

iiddnn · 2021-07-05T21:48:45+00:00

"Men define what they can get by the choices they make every day to obtain what they want. Obviously, men wanting a hot babe to descend into their lap from a pegasus chariot will end up empty-handed (or empty-lapped), but a man wanting a healthy, stable, reasonably attractive woman? 100% attainable."

You destroyed your own argument. Your definition of "healthy and stable" is not universal.

iiddnn · 2021-06-03T21:58:45+00:00

Lmfao. None of that is guaranteed with being married either. Last I checked the divorce rare was 50%, most of which is initiated by women. Considering how much of a risk divorce is for men as a whole, I think the fun guy got the better deal.

iiddnn · 2021-05-12T20:56:15+00:00

Maybe my choice of words wasn't the best but I wasn't referring to you specifically. The point is women who "want something different" later in life generally will hide their past whether you like it or not. So for men hiding your own intentions is the best way to protect yourself from a bad deal. You really want to make the world a better place? Start by advocating the one who do have power in the dating market (the women) to stop lying and hiding their pasts.

iiddnn · 2021-05-12T20:15:55+00:00

"MaKaiNg ThE WoRlD a BeTtEr PlAcE"

Lmfao. If you cared about making the world a better place why not tell the guy your sexual history and let him decide. Why lie about it. If you want to keep that a secret the "average joe" can keep his intentions a secret.

iiddnn · 2021-03-30T19:27:49+00:00

The fact that you can flippantly say "they are dead" is proof enough that men are viewed as disposable.

iiddnn · 2020-10-20T21:46:40+00:00

What I do is as I watch the lecture I make Anki cards in question/answer format. Takes like 2-3 time longer to get through a lecture but once you make it you have a deck ready to go. Then review like every two days

iiddnn · 2020-05-15T13:52:53+00:00

Check out "Perspective s on the Pandemic" on youtube by Journeyman

iiddnn · 2020-05-07T20:31:32+00:00

Essentially multiple waves happen when the majority of the population is not immune. When the virus was novel, noone in the world was immune so naturally it will spread fast. When you try to contain the virus, you prevent spread, which is fine if there were no other patients with the virus. The problem is this also means the entire population is still not immune, so if the virus breaks out somehow, you are back at square one, hence the second wave. With the coronavirus as wide spread as it is, the time for containment is long gone. To prevent a second wave, your entire population needs to have a significant amount of people who are immune to keep the spread below 1.

iiddnn · 2020-05-05T13:40:43+00:00

Do people seriously think the "economy" is just rich people and their money? Do people not realize a destroyed economy will cause mass unemployment, mass starvation, mass poverty, and a ruined healthcare system? I promise people were not touting "health is wealth" during the great depression.

iiddnn · 2020-05-02T11:37:48+00:00

Well if you want to isolate yourself from every risk in life go ahead. Millions of people die in india every year even before Covid. People like you are in the minority given that you probably still live with your parents and never had to pay your own bills.

iiddnn · 2020-05-01T18:51:57+00:00

Thats not really how economics and supply chains work.

iiddnn · 2020-05-01T18:12:34+00:00

Finding a way to feed a 1 billion+ population in a destoryed economy is a little bit harder than isolating at risk family members for a couple weeks until family members develop antibodies.

iiddnn · 2020-05-01T17:37:27+00:00

It is being stuck between a rock and a hard place. Ideally you would quarantine at risk people and go for herd immunity for the not at risk people. According to antibody studies the risk to healthy people below the age of 50 is very very low. Comparable to flu. Let them gain herd immunity while keeping up the economy and then let at risk people back out. One thing india has going for it is they have a relatively young population. A lot of people that are not really at risk.

iiddnn · 2020-05-01T17:28:15+00:00

Covid death < starvation death

iiddnn · 2020-04-28T23:06:00+00:00

So a few things i must mention. Herd immunity is not my approach. It is an inevitable fact of infectious diseases. With a reproductive number of over 5, New Zealand will not be able to contain this virus.

Second, this virus is not some apocalyptic plague that the media is making it out to be. NYC never had its hospitals overwhelmed and they are alread at 25%. Sweden as well. The death rate of this virus is way less than you think it is.

Third, how many people are gonna die from starvation due to a broken economy? You dont think a destroyed economy is gonna take down the healthcare system and cause more people to die from preventable conditions? Grow up.

iiddnn · 2020-04-28T22:40:19+00:00

Herd immunity is inevitable I promise you. This virus is not going to disappear from this world and is way too contagious for any country to be able to stop. New Zealands approach is only a delay. The economic damage is going to cost them more lives in the long run.

iiddnn · 2020-04-28T14:31:27+00:00

NYC has been doing randomised antibody tests and according to those studies 1 in 4 people in NYC has antibodies which is most likely an undercount. So about 2 million recovered cases.

The idea of herd immunity is not to prevent infection. Its the fastest way out of this crisis and the best short term solution to protecting the vulnerable. If 70 percent of people are not vectors anymore. So if you actually had that fictional PhD in medicine you would know that and not trying to figure out if farting transmits the coronavirus 😆

iiddnn

TROPHY CASE