26 Jul 2018, 2:30 pm
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Spiderpig wrote:
RainbowUnion wrote:
Spiderpig wrote:
You know, there's a way to exploit that desire without any BS and without making anyone pay for it other than the men enjoying those body parts (or the full body, or even more than that) under the terms agreed to freely with their owner. No parasitism involved. Unfortunately, we like to give that transaction ugly names, to outlaw it, making it unnecessarily dangerous, and to let our blood boil if someone suggests a relative of ours might engage in it.
That's still a form of parasitism IMO, but I agree that it should be legal, and seen as a legit profession.
Why do you think it's parasitism?
sly279 wrote:
She got government to pay for it. Though housing usually only pays 75% of rent. I guessing maybe her daughter is on disability. All such things are fine with women, but for men makes you a worthless unlovable loser.
What do you want to do about that? Force women to date men they dislike, to the point that they prefer to be alone rather than with them? Brainwash them? Everyone has a right to their own standards. If those things are okay in women, but not in men, it's because men don't care about them, but women do. Either be what women want or accept they won't want anything to do with you.
RainbowUnion wrote:
Because the thinking is that she can marry a doctor, lawyer, etc, ie a MAN who will set her up.
If that thinking is commonplace, it's because they often can marry such men, so why would they settle for less?
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
In my country (note: a middle eastern country), unmarried and unemployment daughters have the right to continue recieving the retirement income of their highest earning deceased parents for life *regardless of age and health condition*, unless they get married.
Sons can’t unless: 1) they’re less than 18 but it stops once they’re 18.
2) it’s confirmed by a medical committe of having a disability (note. only very serious conditions like down syndome, advanced cancer or being handicaped; things like AS or HDD aren’t even viewed as disabilities here)
You can imagine how many unmarried daughters would prefer to remain unemployed and receive retirement income later which would be higher than low paid entry jobs.
Sons can’t unless: 1) they’re less than 18 but it stops once they’re 18.
2) it’s confirmed by a medical committe of having a disability (note. only very serious conditions like down syndome, advanced cancer or being handicaped; things like AS or HDD aren’t even viewed as disabilities here)
You can imagine how many unmarried daughters would prefer to remain unemployed and receive retirement income later which would be higher than low paid entry jobs.
I also imagine a lot of men think that's a good thing, because it prevents those women from competing with men for jobs. Am I wrong? Isn't it so cool to perpetuate cycles of dependence, general backwardness and lack of personal freedom?
Not really, when it comes to entry jobs and some fields, women win in the job market.
Employers here have no shame to specify the gender in job ads.
A sample:
Junior Accountants are often females for example and employers specify it in ads - a male accountant or HR graduate would have a very hard time to find his first job.
Most min wage workers in my city are women. Every fast food is 99% women with a male cook. My bank is 100% women as ar the other branches, they just to be male managers and mixed desks people.
It’s simple. Attractive young females sell better to men. Sex sells. Would s middle class male prefer to do business with a sexy attractive 18 old woman or a obese creepy 30 old man?
Though a thought? Why can’t they have a woman as the cook? Why not go 100% women like the banks.
Most stores are 80%-100% women employees. Mine is 70% probably because it’s an outdoors store and more men are into outdoors traditionally so they hire more male experts. Gun stores are usually more male but a lot are hiring hot women to dress up sexy and sell guns, and it works, especially at gun shows, much like car shows have barely dressed women stand near cars. Hot women plus guns equal increased sales. Guys love watch women in bikinis shoot guns and having their boobs or bit bounce. I get sent videos of it a lot from guys
So while the USA may not be able to outright say only women apply they certainly hire mostly women at the lower employment levels.
I’ve watched it change for years. Fast food use to be most guys. I’d prefer guys I get embarrassed and shy around women ,making ordering food hard. Lucky so,emplaces are doing self order so I can avoid thenwomen workers.
26 Jul 2018, 2:32 pm
26 Jul 2018, 2:34 pm
26 Jul 2018, 2:39 pm
26 Jul 2018, 2:40 pm
26 Jul 2018, 2:47 pm
26 Jul 2018, 3:24 pm
26 Jul 2018, 3:51 pm
26 Jul 2018, 3:56 pm
26 Jul 2018, 3:59 pm
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,677
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
26 Jul 2018, 4:05 pm
sly279 wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Spiderpig wrote:
RainbowUnion wrote:
Spiderpig wrote:
You know, there's a way to exploit that desire without any BS and without making anyone pay for it other than the men enjoying those body parts (or the full body, or even more than that) under the terms agreed to freely with their owner. No parasitism involved. Unfortunately, we like to give that transaction ugly names, to outlaw it, making it unnecessarily dangerous, and to let our blood boil if someone suggests a relative of ours might engage in it.
That's still a form of parasitism IMO, but I agree that it should be legal, and seen as a legit profession.
Why do you think it's parasitism?
sly279 wrote:
She got government to pay for it. Though housing usually only pays 75% of rent. I guessing maybe her daughter is on disability. All such things are fine with women, but for men makes you a worthless unlovable loser.
What do you want to do about that? Force women to date men they dislike, to the point that they prefer to be alone rather than with them? Brainwash them? Everyone has a right to their own standards. If those things are okay in women, but not in men, it's because men don't care about them, but women do. Either be what women want or accept they won't want anything to do with you.
RainbowUnion wrote:
Because the thinking is that she can marry a doctor, lawyer, etc, ie a MAN who will set her up.
If that thinking is commonplace, it's because they often can marry such men, so why would they settle for less?
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
In my country (note: a middle eastern country), unmarried and unemployment daughters have the right to continue recieving the retirement income of their highest earning deceased parents for life *regardless of age and health condition*, unless they get married.
Sons can’t unless: 1) they’re less than 18 but it stops once they’re 18.
2) it’s confirmed by a medical committe of having a disability (note. only very serious conditions like down syndome, advanced cancer or being handicaped; things like AS or HDD aren’t even viewed as disabilities here)
You can imagine how many unmarried daughters would prefer to remain unemployed and receive retirement income later which would be higher than low paid entry jobs.
Sons can’t unless: 1) they’re less than 18 but it stops once they’re 18.
2) it’s confirmed by a medical committe of having a disability (note. only very serious conditions like down syndome, advanced cancer or being handicaped; things like AS or HDD aren’t even viewed as disabilities here)
You can imagine how many unmarried daughters would prefer to remain unemployed and receive retirement income later which would be higher than low paid entry jobs.
I also imagine a lot of men think that's a good thing, because it prevents those women from competing with men for jobs. Am I wrong? Isn't it so cool to perpetuate cycles of dependence, general backwardness and lack of personal freedom?
Not really, when it comes to entry jobs and some fields, women win in the job market.
Employers here have no shame to specify the gender in job ads.
A sample:
Junior Accountants are often females for example and employers specify it in ads - a male accountant or HR graduate would have a very hard time to find his first job.
Most min wage workers in my city are women. Every fast food is 99% women with a male cook. My bank is 100% women as ar the other branches, they just to be male managers and mixed desks people.
It’s simple. Attractive young females sell better to men. Sex sells. Would s middle class male prefer to do business with a sexy attractive 18 old woman or a obese creepy 30 old man?
Though a thought? Why can’t they have a woman as the cook? Why not go 100% women like the banks.
Most stores are 80%-100% women employees. Mine is 70% probably because it’s an outdoors store and more men are into outdoors traditionally so they hire more male experts. Gun stores are usually more male but a lot are hiring hot women to dress up sexy and sell guns, and it works, especially at gun shows, much like car shows have barely dressed women stand near cars. Hot women plus guns equal increased sales. Guys love watch women in bikinis shoot guns and having their boobs or bit bounce. I get sent videos of it a lot from guys
So while the USA may not be able to outright say only women apply they certainly hire mostly women at the lower employment levels.
I’ve watched it change for years. Fast food use to be most guys. I’d prefer guys I get embarrassed and shy around women ,making ordering food hard. Lucky so,emplaces are doing self order so I can avoid thenwomen workers.
This means that young guys need to choose carefully their future careers, and to avoid fields which are 'typically female dominated'- because they won't find jobs there. In an ideal world gender shouldn't be a factor in this, but reality is far from it.
Funny, same here in banks, managers can be male but most CSRs and tellers are female.
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
26 Jul 2018, 5:14 pm
sly279 wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
You'd have to look up the statutory rape laws for each province, probably.
Except no, because like I just told you, age of sexual consent laws are federal in Canada.
Can not provinces make stricter laws like thenus states can.
Example age to smoke federally is 18 my state made it 21. Federally you can buy a handgun at 18 most states made it 21.
Age of consent is no different which different states having different laws. Just like min wage is higher in most states then federal min wage
For alcohol and tobacco and gambling etc yes, but age of sexual consent laws are federal in Canada AND also apply to all Canadians worldwide. This is to prevent Canadian citizens from travelling to places like Thailand for sex tourism with underage children. There are no Provincial or Territorial age of sexual consent laws, only one national standard.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.26 Jul 2018, 5:36 pm
RetroGamer87
Veteran
Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,196
Location: Adelaide, Australia
26 Jul 2018, 6:41 pm
26 Jul 2018, 6:44 pm
RetroGamer87
Veteran
Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,196
Location: Adelaide, Australia
26 Jul 2018, 6:49 pm
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| What kind of accent do you have? |
03 Aug 2026, 10:45 pm |
| A song about living in the neurotypical world. |
01 Aug 2026, 2:35 am |
| Do your parents worry about you? |
Today, 9:29 am |
| Being raised without one of your parents or adopted |
10 Aug 2026, 4:28 pm |
