Lol this whole thread is so funny to me, as someone who regularly dates millionaires.

Ya’ll are not a cash cow. Don’t worry, real gold diggers go after gold. You’re safe from gold diggers. That of course does not make you immune from financial abuse but that’s different than gold digging.

Second, these dating forums are all roleplay. There’s a pretty big chance those are men role-playing as the greedy women of their stupid nightmares.

Third, I hear men talking about their potential future wives like this all the time, including financially, if they’d date a fat girl, if they’d date a girl who doesn’t do oral, etc etc etc. Even if women are doing this, men do it too (and i bet you never called it out). Marriage is a contract that ties finances together so it matters. Personally, I’m never getting married but for those who do, it can really affect their ability to get housing or other stuff. It’s a sad feature of capitalism.

And yes, capitalists gain a lot from this structure. They fish for sex workers in every industry, including modeling. This causes women to br traded like commodities and so the most valuable women per their standards they can eugenics into their line, will be the one they marry. A lot of men’s attraction for women is just based on how valuable she is as a human commodity. This is why “objectification” gets brought up so much.

https://youtu.be/3n-yU_BpA4M?si=-CwuVC_45nn5vKUD

Last, the above is the attitude of real gold diggers, which is open and frankly discussed with their actual source of gold. It is not financial abuse and to be clear financial abuse is wrong - it is instead a negotiation so that she can live at the same comfort level as him and enjoy her life. No rich man is confused about this. Most would be kinda embarrassed to not take care of her, like going to a fancy restaurant and she orders a small appetizer+water in her budget while he gets a wine tasting and a steak just makes him look bad. That’s how I know none of you are actually near this lifestyle, because you don’t innately understand this.

Again, I am not getting married, I’m never having kids, and I’m poly. I demand these aspects specifically to bypass the interpersonal dynamic of me being treated as a commodity, and instead this forces my partners and myself to love in the moment, to actively choose each other, and to give resources freely and not coerced through a contract.

Being poly doesn’t make relationships less real, how ignorant. She wasn’t a pseudogirlfriend. He was also a real piece of shit.

SpongeBob and Ariana Grande are exhibit A

Well they do kinda “like” each other in that they rely on each other. They make trades with each other and their economies rely on each other. That will affect China. These are the types of reasons we are helping Ukraine, its not like we “liked” them or that geopolitics is ever based on “liking” per se. Anyway, it’s super weird.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Yeah China was staunchly neutral about this war and I suspected was subtly making it worse/prolonging it to keep the west distracted, wasting money, and divided while they put pressure on Taiwan and other interests.

But this is weird. I hope they aren’t doing this to keep funds in the country for their own eminent war.

Running gives taller people an advantage, yet ShaCarri is only like 5’1" and wins. Also, there are plenty of people taller than Michael Phelps who can’t bear him af swimming. There are many people who have bigger feet who can’t beat him. Is height as critical as testosterone in this case?

What? First off, they brought it up first, so it has quite a bit to do with them. Second, I quoted the part that is the core of most genocidal beliefs including the Nazis: Believing people are better off when people are killed off.

Climate change is why this will change. It will disproportionately affect the poor and already has started. I already explained this. Get with the end times.

The reason the rich are doing that is because they believe they will need to repopulate the earth. People like Elon have very odd religious beliefs due to survivor bias.

I take issue specifically with the verbiage the commenter was using regarding the black death and wars. And the idea that more people = bad working conditions; less people = good working conditions when that’s not the case of what was happening (which was more something like an inheritance/windfall).

In the case of babies not being born in modern times, there are a few things to consider.

• One, that speech doesn’t get weird and start advocating for a Handmaid’s Tale Dystopia (forced repopulation for the sake of repopulation).
• Two, that likely poorer people and probably certain groups will be affected disproportionately by this which is the equivalent of a silent genocide or several silent genocides
• Three, that we acknowledge there are many sad factors at play as to why people aren’t having children and those factors will likely get worse
• Four, that we acknowledge that AI could very well bridge the worker shortage gap for some time until climate change kills everyone

The pressure we are feeling is from climate change and the rich. Hoping that there will be less humans to give everyone a break is delusional, especially because the past HAD less humans and workers had shit rights then compared to now. We aren’t getting saved by anything, not even if we die or sacrifice our would-be children to the sun god.

It’s nuts (kinda sounds like Nazi speech to me) and it’s also not really accurate.

Let’s look at a metaphor with money:

My mom and dad work. They give me a little bit of money every day. One day they die and I get a chunk of money from their life insurance, but this amount isn’t as much as if they’d stayed alive and had stayed working. Because they died, in 30 years my family’s total net wealth will go down compared to the potential because my parents weren’t able to contribute.

Now imagine that en masse. There is ABSOLUTELY a loss of money, progress, etc, etc, when people die prematurely. Let alone the human cost itself.

reduction in the amount of humans was beneficial for the vast amount of humans in the long run.

This is literally Nazi speech. This is literally genocide rhetoric. Shame on you.

The Black Death lead to people literally dying. It wasn’t beneficial in the long run at all. It killed millions. That’s a lot of human data both in DNA terms and knowledge that died. That’s a lot of inventions dead.

When workers must work for a capitalist, or a king, or a pharoah, and they lose their bargaining power, their conditions are bad. Not when there’s “lots” of them. That’s just the nature of humans being a social species, we are made for “lots” of us. As long as we are each empowered, then having people alive and thriving is no issue.

Right? Lol wtf was I even reading before

It used to not matter that much to me, as long as they were basically normal intelligence or higher. But I have found that men do not really like dating women who are much smarter than them. And the conversation tends to be more interesting with smarter men. So I hold out for men who are pretty intelligent.

With women, it’s never factored negatively into our relationship so any intelligence level in women would be fine, at approximately normal intelligence or above. And same for nonbinary/agender people too.

Me and the boys with timed challenge modes and raiding in WoW. At least we got realm’s best on Scarlet Monastery :')

I didn’t change it. Aren’t we discussing the arbitrary nature of the gender binary and the intersection of biology, genetic diversity, and ability?

I didn’t force a conversation. You are free to leave. Amd I’m pretty sure you are the one who started the confrontation.

You won’t do research to further your knowledge on this subject because you aren’t competent enough to do so. Idk why you’re even attempting to argue at all here.

Per the source, Ledecky beat Phelps.

Yes, regressive like fascists and every other terrible person who can’t fathom a better world so they make us all miserable with the status quo. Thanks

Okay so you’re just here to be regressive, got it.

You cannot address any of the problems around this situation, you cannot debate a scientific answer, you do not even know what a scientific answer for this might look like, you neglect how this incorporates into a greater discussion about what we define as “ableism” (I didn’t ask ONLY about how it is different than scoliosis, but also about any other difference in biology)… Like not only are you unable to debate the science of it, which you admit, but you are also so sure I’m wrong, even though you don’t know anything about this topic.

So I take it you’re here in bad faith.

Did you read the article I linked? I am aware of these issues with testosterone. But this is the issue people have with men competing against women - testosterone. It’s what they do blood tests for.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20240731-the-sports-where-women-outperform-men

So your solution to this issue is to be regressive and keep the bad gender heuristic which forces an arbitrary gender binary on us and excludes otherwise legitimate athletes from competing because they don’t fit this arbitrary mold? Tell me what’s ideal here. What’s fair?

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20240731-the-sports-where-women-outperform-men

Øyvind Sandbakk, a professor of sports science at UiT The Arctic University of Norway and the director of the Norwegian School of Elite Sports (NTG), has found together with colleagues that the gaps in the average performance between elite female and male athletes have tended to plateau at around 8–12% difference in world-record results in favour of men. The gap can be significantly smaller for ultra-endurance swimming and larger for sports involving substantial upper-body strength, the study found.

There isn’t a clear linear relationship between testosterone levels and performance, says Mertens, a journalist focusing on sports and gender. “In fact, a lot of very elite male athletes have pretty low testosterone levels overall on average.” One endocrinology study found low testosterone concentrations in one-quarter of men competing in 12 of the 15 Olympic sports analysed. And Mertens says even women with hyperandrogenism, who can have testosterone levels that reach typical male ranges, don’t have the same level of performance as men.

There are plenty of sports where being a teenager gives you an advantage over adults. A teen isn’t a 5 year old. Per data, I’m correct.