UniformVictor (5942)
Joined 2018-03-28
Submissions: 36 (23 featured)
Creations: 58
Comments: 141

Latest Submissions See All

Latest Comments

And everybody loses their minds
You can't have both, Wiz. And you know what else is competing for federal funding? Those for Universal Healthcare (not to mention, people striving to end poverty). Can we have all three and still have a power of deterrence and power projection to defend our interests and the interests of our allies? It's not that simple anymore now is it? You're all focused on achieving free education while blind to all other concerns.
And everybody loses their minds
That 62 million could be the pivotal difference between victory and defeat. The government should of course be wise in their spending (thus avoiding products that looks ground-breaking theoretically but are merely the same technology with bells and whistles). However, suppose the government did the opposite.. That aforementioned difference matters when facing adversaries that either has a comparative or absolute advantage in factors that win battles. For example, two fighter jets duel to the death but one has a greater ability to climb higher than the other, thanks to a more powerful engine(s). Another example is that you have two opposing armies; one is numerically larger than the other. But while the former's infantry doctrine values quantity at the expense of quality, the latter stresses quality over quantity in terms of individual to unit discipline and training which results in high morale. Now is it better to have free schooling over the best military in the world? In a perfect world where everyone is naturally good, having the best military is un-necessary. However, we will always have, for whatever reason, bad people in this world. So with the best military, we gain the best deterrence against evil men.
Often, you can't have both.
ON PORN There is one activity or entertainment more disrespectful and dishonoring to women and that is to watch Porn. It is bad enough to actively engage in lusting after her as she is made to do things in your mind but it is quite another to watch another woman act in ways that fulfill your imagination. And the problem with porn is that it assures your standard remain as it is; particularly if you're into very thin women. It is like eating chocolate, and once you've tasted it, you will always want more; but with porn, it is a chocolate you must always have and not any other. Pornography can easily become an addiction and has become an addiction to so many men. Worse still, as men are sexually driven, if one indulges regularly in pornography, then darker impulses may soon win out. "Soft Porn" for many will give way to far diabolical imagery I cannot describe here. Let's just say that humans, particularly men in this regard, are totally depraved for a reason. The problem of Pornography is so that there is a strong case that Human Trafficking grew and became the greatest evil of our time. Young boys, girls, and women are kidnapped and trafficked to placed against their will. They are often abused and brutalized in unspeakable ways no one should never experience. And when it comes to relationships, If you have a girlfriend or a wife, they will very soon not measure up to your impossible standards. Just as they change in maturity and character over time, so also their bodies. With time they'll begin to have wrinkles and some women who appear naturally skinny will gain weight. If she's pregnant she must eat and as she ages, she begins to lose her metabolism.
Often, you can't have both.
And the two categories: Beautiful or not.. Do yoiu realize that the standard of beauty changes over time? Today, the standard of physical beauty is one wearing a size 3; but 30 years ago it was different. Women still must look skinny, particularly in most western and eastern cultures, but usually, it was merely centered on the upper body. However, go farther back in time and the skinny standard is still more loosened In my opinion, the reason is simple: the more dressed women are in public the less expectation the men have on their bodies. But as clothing became less, the greater the expectation of their bodies. And since "Charlie's Angels" in the late to early 1980's when women shown are thin and bathing suits no longer featured skirts, the standard if physique instantly changed. Now girls are starving themselves to ill and death in the attempt to meet those expectations. Obviously in our society, whether in the stone age or today, hardly anyone wants 300-pound women; men in the aforementioned cultures still possess the ideal sense of femininity which seemed to center around the notions of gentleness, tenderness, and grace (which to some carried on to physical preferences). Nevertheless, with more clothing a woman wears the less of her outline is exposed to the eyes of men. Am I advertising that women should now wear Burkhas? No, but there is something to be said of clothing as I believe there is a strong correlation between clothing and physical expectation. And neither can you deny the lengths girls go through to meet those unrealistic expectations.
Bad Luck Brian
Lol! Thank you, socrates!
Feedback