If Mort Divine ruled the world

Wait which one are we talking about? If it's the empire one I still think you're wrong and explained why several times but I could see it was getting nowhere.

I conceded on the pro-life one though.

Such a selfish whore, ever consider that's it's not all about you and I'm trying to refine my own way of thinking on here? Cunt.
 
Wait which one are we talking about? If it's the empire one I still think you're wrong and explained why several times but I could see it was getting nowhere.

I conceded on the pro-life one though.

Such a selfish whore, ever consider that's it's not all about you and I'm trying to refine my own way of thinking on here? Cunt.

The empire thing. You said that you were looking into "contiguous empires" and admitted you might be wrong and that you'd look more into it. You didn't respond to any of my points regarding contiguous empires (including: where that term is used, how it's relevant whether a body of water separates land, and how that applied to the British Kingdom which has its "state"-y bit spread between two islands), but instead dropped out of the conversation to post reaction images, upvote people I was arguing with, and then bring up the "contiguous empires" bit once more without actually acknowledging my reply to you. In other words, you became a cheerleader and tried to pretend to take the high-ground of conceding the argument or agreeing to disagree at the same time.
 
As I said the second time I brought up contiguous empires, initially its description gave me pause, then I read further and it didn't really lead to anything, so I reverted back to my position of; no authoritative source called The Ottoman Empire a country.
 
As I said the second time I brought up contiguous empires, initially its description gave me pause, then I read further and it didn't really lead to anything, so I reverted back to my position of; no authoritative source called The Ottoman Empire a country.

Because you backtracked after your definitional approach to trying to prove your argument right failed. And I gave you Wikipedia's hierarchy of countries, which includes empires as a subset of countries, regardless.

I don't even remember what comment it was or why I liked it either. This is pure salt.

The content is irrelevant, the point is that you pretended to concede an argument and then continued participating in the discussion progress while contributing nothing more than "I agree/I disagree". As I've admitted, that does trigger me because it shows a person not committed to the process of honest debate.
 
I read that earlier, fucking hilarious. "I wish he could read my mind" is the insanity of women, AND to get mad at him for not reading his mind!

"oh the emotional labor makes me so exhausted" fucking a wealthy women are ridiculous
 
  • Like
Reactions: CiG and Dak
http://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/features/a12063822/emotional-labor-gender-equality/

An entire article of female navel gazing at its finest. At the degree to which I see pieces like these all over the interwebs, it might be time to gender the term "navel gazing".

As someone that started undergrad as a quasi-sheltered ardent right-wing extremist with the outlook that I'd be swamped with leftist Marxist etc propaganda, the only corner of identity politics that truly seemed batshit insane and incomprehensible was the feminist wing. Race stuff, I may disagree but I understand their argument, LGBT stuff, never had an issue, class struggle stuff, I have a different solution but acknowledge many of their fundamental tenets describing the world as accurate, etc. Academia was disappointingly moderate. But I've never read a third-wave feminist article or paper or anything else that came off as anything other than the rantings of someone mentally ill.

Like holy fucking shit I only read the first three paragraphs of that article and it gets worse and worse. I am so fucking glad I have a penis.

EDIT: Actually, following the link that the author provides further describing "emotional labor", I can actually understand what they're talking about, but she totally failed to convey it by having a mental breakdown over having to life a box of gift wrap onto a shelf.
 
Last edited:
EDIT: Actually, following the link that the author provides further describing "emotional labor", I can actually understand what they're talking about, but she totally failed to convey it by having a mental breakdown over having to life a box of gift wrap onto a shelf.

What I wanted was for him to ask friends on Facebook for a recommendation, call four or five more services, do the emotional labor I would have done if the job had fallen to me. I had wanted to hire out deep cleaning for a while, especially since my freelance work had picked up considerably. The reason I hadn’t done it yet was part guilt over not doing my housework, and an even larger part of not wanting to deal with the work of hiring a service. I knew exactly how exhausting it was going to be.

I noticed the box at least 20 times over the past two days.

random emotional labor duties I carry out—reminding him of his family’s birthdays, carrying in my head the entire school handbook and dietary guidelines for lunches, updating the calendar to include everyone’s schedules, asking his mother to babysit the kids when we go out, keeping track of what food and household items we are running low on, tidying everyone’s strewn about belongings, the unending hell that is laundry

These are her examples of "emotional labor". I keep my calendar updated (birthdays are annual so you only need to mark it once on google calendar and set to repeat annually, notice when the fridge is getting low and make a note on an erase board of what. Not mentioning a box that bugs you over days is passive aggressive behavior. Wanting to someone to jump through a bunch of arbitrary hoops before doing something (hiring a cleaning service) is pettiness. None of these things she listed are examples of time consuming, mentally or emotionally strenuous tasks for an adjusted person.
 
One of my big issues with the concept is that a lot of actual real-life work entails "emotional labor" as well. I mean, many men, particularly those of non-minority ethnicity and privileged social class, don't simply do a repetitious task in the absence of dealing with people. Maybe that's the case for an autistic CPA breadwinner type that grinds away on spreadsheets, but if you marry that then you should know what you're getting. For the most part, people working careers have to manage calendars, set up meetings, write thank-you letters to their customers, etcetc. Does anyone think being a doctor or a lawyer or even a programmer on a project team is devoid of emotional labor? The thing is, my own mentally ill socially anxious personality can make me empathize with them to an extent. In most cases I would much rather do hours of "physical labor" than ten minutes of "emotional labor". Asking for help or favors, unless explicitly offered to me, literally throws me into a depression and I've had weeks of suicidal thoughts as a result of spending twenty minutes having to socialize and get something from somebody. But I can admit I'm a fucking nutcase, and to assume that everyone knows your daily emotional labor limit without telling them is silly. Almost none of these women seem to consider the possibility that men offer to do physical labor not because they think women are necessarily superior at emotional labor (though studies do show they're more empathetic than; this of course could be socially conditioned), but because men know they are physically superior and it would be both less efficient and inconsiderate to expect equal amounts of heavy lifting from both partners. The biggest problem with these kinds of feminist writers is that not only do they not describe a solution to a problem, they can't even articulate what the problem is to begin with. They equate the result of a problem, emotional pain, stress, whatever else, with the problem itself.