|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 20 2017 08:55 crms wrote: Conservatives whining about progressive women not dating them is hilarious. It really turned my day around. Why do women care that I vote for people who brag about using celebrity status to grab women's genitalia? What's their problem? Hilarious.
|
who doesn't want to date someone who supports pardoning a guy who rounded up hispanics and put them in self described 'concentration camps'?
This is being interpreted way too much. people will say their looking for something or x is a dealbreaker in the abstract but most of the time once you actually start dating those things change especially if you find someone you like.
|
|
On September 20 2017 08:25 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2017 07:44 Danglars wrote:On September 20 2017 07:06 Nevuk wrote:
Pretty clickbait title, but a thought-provoking story. The Washington Post already filed a story in protest. I will say that part of this may be because women are more likely to be liberal and men are more likely to be conservative. The one word answer to this whole thing is abortion, and probably what makes up a large part of what pushes conservative partners from tolerable to not. You'd see just as many conservative men saying they didn't want to date liberal women if a widely accepted liberal position was that at any time when sex could come into the picture they could force the man to get a vasectomy.
That on top of women being able to be more selective in their partners as a fact of life... it's like stepping on a landmine and then complaining that you can't win a race.
|
|
On September 20 2017 09:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2017 09:09 Mohdoo wrote:On September 20 2017 09:03 Danglars wrote:On September 20 2017 08:56 xDaunt wrote: I dated pretty much anyone (ideologically speaking) back in the day, but there was no way in hell that I'd have put a ring on any chick that espoused SJW-type BS. Raising kids with that person simply wouldn't have worked. Yeah superlib militant feminist SJWs aren't good dating material. They need to find someone equally woke or wait until reality sets in on their viewpoints, if ever. Their political positions are just too much of a core part of their identity. Lol, as if they'd trust you anyway, you god damn male. On that topic, anyone else notice how these women tend to date extremely submissive men? It's pretty common the "other way", meaning chauvinists dating submissive women. Pretty sure there's a stereo-type about white men seeking out Asian women for this specific purpose. Considering where I'm at, I suspect there's others that could speak more to that. But it makes sense that those women would be interested in dating men that would be deemed by society to be submissive. Remember, this country elected a guy who said he grabs women by the pussy. A guy accosting a group to a decision is authoritative and get things done, a girl doing that same thing is a bitch. Gotta check those micro-agressions, bro. Society is funny like that.
|
well it's a good thing the white house has credibility when it comes to things like this
|
|
I wonder what Flynn's has done that he requested for immunity immediately lol...
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 20 2017 11:51 ShoCkeyy wrote: I wonder what Flynn's has done that he requested for immunity immediately lol... I think it's probably petty crimes but he is a man of low moral fiber who would easily just betray his peers for leniency.
|
|
|
I honestly don't understand why high profile politicians so often do this. The little bit of convenience you get is never worth the shitstorm. You're paid handsomely anyway and if you're at least somewhat frugal you get bonus points with your electorate.
|
Didn't Biden take amtrack to work?
but yeah apparently 25k to fly from DC to Philly. seems a bit steep
|
On September 20 2017 07:44 Danglars wrote:Pretty clickbait title, but a thought-provoking story. The Washington Post already filed a story in protest. https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/910232790922342400I've seen his perspective validated in my own observations as well. The media likes talking about filters on news, and here's what should be the "ultimate filter" of sorts. But read the article first if you want to really understand his logic and debate the topic.
What nonsense. And it stems from the male chauvinist way the question is phrased, at least in this tweet. Looking at pro-choice vs pro-life views: a pro-life person is against even discussing whether an abortion is an option if the girl gets pregnant against their will. Whether this is the boy, or the girl who is pro-life.
As a pro-choice guy who doesn't really want kids at all, I'd be careful to not date pro-life girls (or more reasonably: I am super paranoid about properly using contraceptives). So the cookie crumbles both ways. It's not girls refusing to date guys: it's people refusing to date other people, based on their different world views. Which seems entirely reasonable.
|
On September 20 2017 08:29 Belisarius wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2017 08:09 Mohdoo wrote:For a woman who sees abortion and contraceptive as "what I get to do with my own body" the fact that someone disagrees with them is utterly fucked up to that woman. Many women I know feel legitimately shaken by the fact that some men would deny them freedom over their own body. It's not a comparable situation at all. That debate seems kind of side-on to the actual issue. Dating is not the problem. Interaction in general is the problem. It makes plenty of sense for superlibs to avoid dating supercons. It's okay to look at each other at the beginning of a relationship, see features or views that are fundamentally incompatible, and decide to call it off because the differences would be too hard to work through. The problem is that there's a fine line between not dating someone because you're pretty sure you wouldn't be happy with them, and not dating someone because you view them as a monster or an idiot. It's reasonable for libs to not date cons. What's problematic is when libs won't even be friends with cons, and vice-versa. Since when do people use OkCupid or Tinder to find friends?
This was some spin about how conservatives being "discriminated against" in the dating world led to them voting for Trump. Not how they can't make friends, for which I'd say [citation needed], because neither the Federalist article nor the WaPo response mention friendship anywhere.
|
Canada11279 Posts
I suspect where you fall on on the pro-life/choice divide would be a fairly significant issue in a close relationship. Like, it's hard for me to see a very good middle ground between "It's a woman's right" and "It's murdering babies." And if there is a middle ground, one wonders just how dearly they hold either of those positions really. I could see it as a very reasonable deal breaker.
Since when do people use OkCupid or Tinder to find friends? There's this one guy I heard about who put something along the lines of "Just a dope dude, looking to do some dope stuff." ...but I think it was one of the regular dating sites, rather than tinder- it's foggy in my head now. But I respect that dope dude who only wanted to do some dope stuff.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Read both stories and they both seem kinda dumb. The WaPo story is defending... well I dunno what (feels almost as if it was just written to say "nah I disagree"), and the Federalist story looks almost as if it's really just an attack on the modern wave of rent-seeking feminism without ever mentioning that and making a deeper cultural argument out of it all. The feminists of that breed are pretty distasteful people as a whole, but no real need to associate with them. And to be fair, a certain breed of religious conservative is every bit as unpleasant as those feminists so it's not like it's a one-sided phenomenon.
|
Canada11279 Posts
Maybe the common trait is high sensitivity to disgust. Which, if higher than the average population, can make for some rather unpleasant individuals regardless of their political stripe. (Historically, that's tended to be a right-wing indicator, but there may be a branch within the left-wing- a more leftist-authoritarian branch that shares being highly sensitive to disgust.)
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
If anything the common trait is a tendency to categorically exclude people from consideration simply based on having a different background from a different upbringing.
|
|
|
|