Wuzzums

Wage equality means equal pay for equal work. I never said anything about effort. Effort is not rewarded as much as skill. If an accountant has a higher output then his work is not equal to another even if it's within the same timeframe. Men train harder than women because we have the body built for it. What is considered hard training for a woman is light for a man which is why there will never be mixed sports. I'm not hating on RR. I'm pointing out that she's getting paid more because we value her work more BECAUSE she's a woman. Men fighting in a ring is nothing new. Women fighting in a ring is quite alluring. It's a clear example of sexism.

In a normal oven the way X is heated is by the oven heating itself (somehow) and then that heat is transferred to item X. Thus the more items in an oven, the more heat (or heat exposure) is required to reach state Z for each item. Thus 2X will require 2Y time to reach state Z. In a microwave oven, microwaves are generated that interact with the item's molecules (the water molecules to be more precise) thus generating heat within the item itself. There's the same quantity of microwaves generated each time in a microwave oven. You can have any number of X items in a microwave oven, in order to reach state Z it will still only take Y time.

Yes. Except it is. Some jobs are more suited for males, others for women, and others for either gender. RR is a fighter. She is a far less skilled/stronger fighter than a low tier male fighter. RR earns a lot more for the same work, if not for less work because she's a woman. If I snap my fingers and turn RR into a man will he then be earning the same amount of money? If accountant A is a male and works X amount of hours, will he suffer a lowering in the paycheck if he's suddenly turned into a woman and still working X amount of hours?

Yes, because R. Roussey still gets paid less than any other MMA male fighter.

Do you have any theories as to what happened? Seems to have come straight out of nowhere. I couldn't see any red flags in what you told us in the facebook post.

I don't understand what you're trying to say exactly. Wage equality means equal pay for equal work. If person A is more suited for a job than person B then it's only fair person A should be paid more IF they're providing better/more work. Gender doesn't matter. Some men are a lot more physically stronger than others, does this mean there's a pay gap within the male population?

So can I kill a man in a coma? My goal is to kill, he has no goals whatsoever, therefore murder is moral.

I don't decide anything, they must decide for themselves. If they didn't come to an agreement regarding this scenario before entering the deal then I guess they're shit out of luck. A stateless society doesn't tackle anything. In a stateless society I get rewarded for making good decisions and punished for making bad decissions, that's it. It's not some sort of utopia where everybody is happy, it's a place full of unhappy people because it's fair. To put it more bluntly, their problems are not my problems so I don't care.

It was an experiment originally done on monkeys. A group of monkeys were all hosed down each time one of them climbed a ladder to get to a treat. The newcomer monkey would of course attempt to get the treat but he would get attacked by the monkeys that knew what would happen if it did. Eventually they replaced the monkeys one by one to the point when in the new group there were no monkeys that were ever hosed down yet they still attacked any monkey that attempted to climb the ladder. It's an experiment that shows the passing down of traditions if nothing else. The behavior is passed down through the new generation even if the motive behind it is not. Interesting how odd behavior today, like Easter eggs, might have once had a life-saving motive behind it. Another modern day example is this savage tribe that has the custom of removing one's front teeth. When asked why they replied something like "because it's sexy". Closer investigation uncovered that once in its past the tribe had went through a lockjaw epidemic, forcing people to remove their front teeth so as to receive nurishment. Social conformity is a survival mechanism, especially in a new environment.

That music, though.

All psychiatrists that talk about it seem to use the same mantra, that it's a disease with no discernable cause and it strikes families out of nowhere. Patients are fully cognizant of their state in periods of lucidity, which become rarer and rarer till the moment of their violent suicides.

Even if for the sake of argument we assume spanking has very little if any long term effects, it still remains an immoral act.

Is it bad to break someone's leg? Simple question if we use the NAP. If I'm initiating force then it's bad, if it's self defence then it's good.

People are getting more and more divided into groups based sometimes on the most trivial things. We used to consider friends those in close proximity to us because we didn't have much choice but with the advent of the internet we're now into a free market of tribes. We're becoming more and more conflictual with people, even blood relations, because we are now fully aware that somewhere out there's a tribe that fully rises to our own standards. Compromise is slowly becoming a thing of the past. I think it's only fitting how a man from the business world would be elected as president of the free world in such a moment in history.

And the question comes: does a higher IQ make you happier? Let's replace IQ with height seeing how they are so similar in regards to what role genetics play, and how it can have similar effects on economic outcome. Do the same feelings pop up when you hear the phrase "black people are a lot shorter on average"? How do you think Asians people feel about penis size when relating to blacks? Do you think that giving Asians larger genitals and making them more tall and muscular will make them happier? If yes, don't you think it comes from a feeling of superiority rather than inner peace? We spend most of our lives alone, and it doesn't matter how tall or smart we are when there's no one there to witness us.

Seeing how universities have become a cesspool of idiocy, I refuse to acknowledge any work they do until they get their act together.

Ok, glad you agree with me she is likely to be very pretty, the average stripper being very pretty and all. Personally I never met a stripper, but please tell me about your experience with them. You seem to know so many that you are able to put their characters on some sort virtuosity spectrum, of which none of them are up par with your values. Yes, I am being facetious. You're discouraging some guy's friendship based on the logic that "on average, strippers are..." when truth be told neither of you have ever talked to one. Am I wrong in making this assumption? But let's assume the average stripper is indeed a waste of time and energy because statistically they have "serious issues" thus it would be pointless to try to befriend any of them. Statistically most people on the planet have "serious issues" so why should anyone bother to get friends altogether? This is the point you're making. You cannot extrapolate population statistics to a single individual. Furthermore, let's assume this one particular stripper has indeed serious issues and is not worthy of being friends with. How is getting to know such a person a bad thing? You learn a very valuable life lesson, how can that be considered a waste of time?

C'mon, man, you can't call me out on me assuming she's attractive while you're assuming she's unvirtuous. She's of course not an immoral person because taking your clothes off for money is not the initiation of force. I repeat myself, there's nothing to lose in being friends with such a person, there's only gain. I mean friendship is the chance of knowing someone for who they really are with no strings attached, why wouldn't you take the time to do that instead of dismissing them right off the bad as having "some serious issues".

Being in a friendship relationship with an attractive woman that you're not trying to bed at some subconscious level can be quite liberating. Speaking from experience, even if the relationship goes sour you still have nothing but to gain from the whole matter. If you're able to look at that stripper like she's Rob Schneider in very convincing drag then go for it. However, do you think she's up to it too?

We can't override biology. Like Dsayers said, until birth she should get the definitive vote on what happens to the fetus. If the society makes the father fully responsible for the child after birth then it is indeed an immoral situation. In such a case I don't see why a father shouldn't have a definitive say in what happens to the child during pregnancy also. A man is responsible for his property, and if he's made (unequally) responsible for the child then that implies the child is his property. If the child is his property then it means the fetus is also his property. If the mother denies the father his right to end the abortion then it's a breach of contract basically. She denies the fact that it's his property thus the right of ownership is bestowed upon her fully, thus the father has no more responsibility for the child before and after the birth.

George Lucas said it himself that he intended to make the prequels mirror the originals. However he's more of a businessman than a director which is why the original trilogy far exceeds the prequels in quality of storytelling. Like all movies, the prequels were a unified effort of many people with different ideas all coming together to make a coherent story. This is in contrast with the prequel story which is just Lucas' vision of how the story should be. To understand how much help Star Wars got from sources other than Lucas you should check out the Dune series (or more particularly Jodorowsky's Dune) and the original draft of the story called "The Star Wars". I find it fascinating how these long arching stories evolve over time and how the audience has an active hand in it too. Like for instance how Jar Jar was supposed to mirror Yoda's role in the prequels, an idea that what was scraped because of all the hate the character got.

If a person exhibits K traits it does not necessarily make them your friend. Just remember that K's are predatory species and if you're not part of their tribe then you're not food but the enemy.

Trump is a businessman therefore he is an advocate of the free market. No matter how stupid his ideas are, no matter how violent his foreign policy is, no matter how ignorant he is of certain aspects of society, the free market will regulate his plans according to the will of the people. If he's gonna follow the free market principles, or the anarcho-capitalism principles, everything is going to be fine. I don't think there has ever been a head of state anywhere that had his roots so strongly implanted in capitalism. Still, history has always taught us never to trust politicians. I have hope but it's unfounded.

His parents plotted out his entire life before he was born. He had no choice in being abandoned by his parents, he had no choice in being raised and forcefully trained by his uncle, and he had no choice in whether or not to become a jedi. Of course he would rebel by going to the dark side, that side of the Force that gives you complete control over your life and the lives of others. His fear of not becoming as strong as his ther is the fear of losing control of his life again. This mirrors Anakin's fall to the dark side, all his life people told him he was the chosen one that will bring balance to the Force. The message is that choosing a different path than what others have planned will only lead to evil. Actually the only other option is evil itself. It's either follow your "destiny" or become a murderer.