regevdl

background: I make art and jewelry, sell it locally and online all over the world. I also do workshops for adults and children for various art and craft projects. I am getting my son into making things to sell and it also teaches them money, supply demand, budgeting, etc. A parent approached me and was excited about the idea and is trying to get his daughter excited but it having trouble and was asking me advice. He is into computers and not as 'creative' in the crafty sense so I am sure that's where most of the troubles are coming from. He has the business idea but lacks helping her spark some crafty/girly projects. Plus I have more connections overseas especially in the US. I offered to teach her a craft, have her make several and sell them via my business and connections overseas. I will give her her profits minus the materials (since I provide the materials). He will talk to her about it to see if she's interested. From this, I am already thinking, if it succeeds and others are interested I could do this for other children. Teach them entrepenurial skills and crafting skills and if they find they are into other hand-made projects, I can help them hone in on those skills. I teach them economics in business budgeting, pricing, etc. The only thing is that I can't decide how I want to make money from this. Meaning...do the parents pay me a monthly fee for my workshops and then when the child makes money on their creations, I deduct the material costs and give them the rest? Example: $50/month- includes workshop and business tips Child sells their items, I give them their profits minus the material cost. Should I take a portion of their profits on top of the cost of materials and a fee per class? Nothing is paid upfront Child sells $100, I take material cost plus x% or whatever.... A mix of both? $50/month - workshops, etc Child sells items, I take material cost plus X%? The thing too is that either way....they make the items now but I won't put them on market for a few more months (waiting to accumulate inventory and sell during the Christmas holiday) I really don't know which is the best way to approach this or if there is another approach I haven't considered. I guess too that there is no guarantee their items will sell. So if they don't pay anythig up front....how will I cover my investments such as time/material during the workshops? I mean the kids aren't expecting to get rich, it's just a way to teach them valuable life lessons and of course be rewarded with financial profit. I too am not looking to get rich off of the labor of KIDS! lol Just cover my cost and my time. Since this is a side-project to my main business, I can keep my rates low but having trouble valuating it. I appreciate any feedback!

I don't think it's necessarily an issue to criticze their efforts. You have people working on the prevention of child abuse and those who deal with the aftermath. They are focusing on the after math. Aren't we all guilty of being pre-occupied with one side of an issue? If I deal with prevention of a disease.... should I also be chastised for not simultaneously not working on curing the disease. Even in a UPB world, abuse will exist...hopefully at far lesser rates but I don't underestimate that even as these children are victims to see there are people outside of their parents/familiar individuals in their lives (of whom might be abusers) that strangers will step in and defend and help them through troubled times. I am not what evidence that these bikers are a gang of violence or could be compared with the government. I know several people in biker communities and many have stable and productive jobs and are actually the most decent people I have ever met and have travelled around the world. I am sure there are those who fit the 'violent gang' stereotype and probably...just like with any group, would be a bunch of trauma, badly raised children as grown adults finding comrodory with other unresolved trauma. Possibly this is the same but opposite. This 'gang' in particular might be well raised cliquing with other well raised bikers or a bunch of abused bikers who properly handled their trauma and are cliquing with others who did the same. "parental rights for spanking'. Well....let's just say, if it reaches court then it's beyond spanking because to date, the social consensus (not always based on moral principle) is very much in favor of legalizing spanking. So you are jumping from the least extreme and matching it with the most extreme. The article and I made arguments as to why it is beneficial for the children. You either ignored it or disagree but have not made any arguments as to why it provides zero benefit to the children. you have only made baseless assumptions that neither I or you can prove about the background of these bikers.

I would caution to think raping our way to higher IQ is so straighfoward and simple. Remember, trauma and abuse can either lower IQ or squelch the IQ potential. A rape victim...if they carry the baby to term may not stay with her rapist to raise the baby.... enter...single mother hood...welfare...etc...not ideal to raise the IQ of the human race. A rape victim..if they carry the baby to term...may STAY with her rapist to raise the baby. Having a rapey father will more likely bring on other abuse against the mother and/or the child....not idea in raising the IQ of the human race. If that were true, and Europe can be a real-time petri dish social experiment, then the Euro-women would already be voluntarily having sex with the migrants rather than the migrants raping them... when rape is used it means the other person does NOT want to have sex....therefore you cannot even suggest hypergamy. Now, even though Europe is femenized to a self-destructive degree...the women are either abstaining from any pair bonding or ultimately will still pick the femenized Euro male over the 'alpha' middle eastern. Alpha is more than violent male display as we see in these Middle Eastern men. It's also about sticking around, gaining resources for the woman'/child. The migrants in europe are sucking up resources and violent and aggressive and provide no or little ability to be a proper suitor for the woman looking to 'upgrade'. She makes the calculation it's either better to abstain alltogether or resort to the beta euro male with a job, with the same culture and language and who doesn't believe in polygamy and will stick around. And remember, the average Euro-female still has a higher IQ than the average M.E. migrant male.... so she can make a better calculation on which will serve her needs the best for the long term. So for the average Euro female who sees these alpha M.E. males (and actually...they are not true alphas...they overcompensate in their assertion and aggression to appear alpha)...consider an alpha lion... they don't use up their energy actively going around harrassing other lions...the opposite. they use clear but calm postulation and choose their battles wisely and don't run around roaring all of the time. They just exude the essence of alpha rather than an 'in your face' beta appearing to be strong and scary. So anyway, these Euro females see these pseudo-alpha M.E. males and are in no way thinking....wow....I'd go for that. Because even after their 'aggressive' display, they don't bring resources, they are polygymist which still doesn't jive with your average western woman. she wants the male resources for her baby and only hers. Beyond that....if the M.E. culture/patriarchy is your example of success and proof of hypergamy then my argument would be....then why do they arrange marriage and force marriages on women? If even the M.E. women tend towards hypergamy, then they too would upgrade to the highest quality male.... but they are totally dominated which removes their ability to hypergamy. They are subjected to polygamy... etc. so when the M.E. culture tries to expand other cultures they do so by force and aggression...not by the new culture's women willingness to accept the M.E. males as better suited for them. The males will rape and control them because that's how they get their current woman. Hypergamy by the woman is not even an option or doesn't even enter the equation since force is always used. You are looking at the symptom. The symptom is that if a man and woman feels they need to stay togehter to spare the child...then it's a shit marriage and was from the get go and was endorsed by people who were too afraid to teach or stand firm or ostracize them if they didn't choose a better match in the beginning before things went too far . So now....because the education is all about sparing feelings until they can't be spared anymore...the ostracization that should come BEFORE as a prevention is now used as the punishment....went it's too late to change anything and after the damage is done. Back in the day....the shaming was done to prevent and of course if someone didn't listen to the prevention....then they would be ostracized which is not sparing someone of the consequence of the bad behavior. If you have some evidence based, life saving information and you work hard to protect and share and educate it and people dismiss it AND do the opposite and they do the opposite while preaching that YOU are stifling them and your way is old fashioned and primitive and bad, etc.... and their method provides only negative outcomes.... you would shame them and ostracise them and you should! They forwent evidence they actively taught non-evidence to discredit you and they won't accept responsibily for their negative outcome....so the only way to get them to viscerally feel the consequences is to ostracize them and that serves as a warning to others who also forgo evidence based philosophies. Presently, bad decisions are subsidized especially in marriage and single parenthood. The cultural norm is to say...well...I didn't know he/she was a bad husband. and typically the spouse won't leave even if the children are miserable, they wait until they are affected or until the kids are old enough to leave the house and then the spouse gets the brunt of the shitting behavior and then decides it's time to leave. And no one is allowed to cry out the hypocracy of this. Instead they are awared with nobility that they 'stuck it out as longa s they could'. lol it's ridiculous. No. they stuck it out as long as the kids took the brunt of it. it's cultural blasphamy to say....we need to do a better screening process before people get married and have kids to stop this cycle of being married for 5, 10, 15 years and suddenly the spouse 'didn't realize their parnter was like that'. or whatever. It means the art of pair selection has been lost and needs to be revived in culture because the only ostracism I see is that knowledge and conversation to hold people accountable for their poor selection.

Many religions share the same moral foundations and 'rules'. so just following these rules doesn't make you a Christian. Your acceptance of Jesus as the Savior and God and all of that jazz is what defines Christianity. Jews also have the 10 commandments...their Torah IS the Old Testiment to the Christians, so they share that foundation.... so why can't it be said he's objectively Jewish? In any case I get the point. When I read UPB, I too thought...wow...this sounds very Christian. I was raised strict Roman Catholic and wish our virtue training was this simple and straighforward! lol But many religions could claim that UPB matches the moral principles of their religion and they wouldn't be wrong or inaccurate. I think it's simply the basic breakdown of the moral foundations with a practical approach that can and should be applied by anyone, even people of religious persuasion but especially for atheists because some...not all...are more nihalistic and apathetic to evil.

Wait...so the modern dating world is X and Stefan is a male who successfully pair bonded and bred. The modern dating world is a symptom. So the idea is to not function well in a sick world, right? The idea is to give the medicine to the sick world. The more sick people there are, of course the harder it will be to find a healthy individual. But just because it's more difficult doesn't mean compy to the sick world to make more people sick. Stick to virtue so you will find virtue and breed more virtue...that's the medicine. I hear a lot of these calls from the coast states. I came from the midwest and even though you find more religious people in the heart of the US....it's not like what you see on movies or the stereotypes. There are a lot of down to earth, attractive, nice, non-femenist women in more centralized parts of the US...from more rural areas. If it's that important to find a virtuous mate...consider moving out of the toxic soup of Coastal states and cities.

If you haven't already, go to FB page of Nigel Farage .....he's a Brit politican...sort of the British Ron Paul and is fighting this tooth and nail. He has a LOT of great content on his page of his activity to get out of the EU.... spread his content to inform others.

I love this. These are children already in a 'legal' battle because of the abuse against them. So the bikers serve as a visual comfort for the child. The child might fear his/her attacker/abuser can still get in the house and the bikers stand guard outside. They show up to court when the abused child has to testify, which can be quite traumatic and frightening for the child but she has a row of grizzly bikers on her side...so it's mental/psychological comfort for the child which is absolutely fantastic. I heard about this a long time ago and just can't get enough of it. It's such an awesome idea and very child-focused. did you read the article? It has nothing to do with abortion and such.... they live up to their name....read what they do...

I get that, especially in this instant-recording/social media world we live in, however keep in mind...there is crime-solving protocol. I'm not saying I put trust that the police always follow logical protocol however I am sure there are cases where phones are being used for investigation and won't be revealed to the public and the security cameras in the nightclub confiscated by investigators. I would HOPE that is why there isn't video evidence. But I get it...we should be skeptical but also keep in mind there are a lot of tweets during the event. I am trying to put myself into a possibly drunken state and startled into a panic confusion, scared shitless with no way to defend myself..I don't think I would be cowering but holding my glowing phone up to take photos or video....I think it's reasonable that most were cowering and texting loved ones. There is one video found online claimed to be within the club and you can hear the shots fired and the patrons don't notice but then take a 'pause'....which coincides with the testimonies that many thought it was part of the music..until they realized it wasn't. AGain...I won't go down this road too much on this specific incident because I also focus on day to day solutions rather than dive deep into single events a million miles away but even without evidence, we are able to make arguments for a better future even with the beliefs (whether based on non-evidence events or otherwise). This has spurred the gun debate or the immigration/Islam debate. Even if people fully believe it occured with no evidence, I can use their arguments against them without needing to prove whether or not the event actually happened.

For years I have been posting my own commentary on current events on my personal FB wall. I used to share memes and links and videos and spam my own damn page. lol I stopped posting articles and links a few years ago and noticed something interesting. I would go to source pages like the FBI criminal stats and such and instead of linking the page, I would simply type out the data on my wall and add my own commentary my own words. Some of my posts are long or I post them as 'notes'. There are times I will even quote Stefan directly, especially if I know the person doesn't like him or think FDR is a cult. Then many times (it's amazing this has happened quite often), people will say, 'wow...that was well stated...where did you get that?" Then I will reveal that it's from FDR, Stefan, etc. They usually make some grieveance as to why they don't like FDR or whatever and then within a week or sometimes a month after I earned credibility with them I see them sharing Stefan's podcasts and Youtube videos! lol On my wall posts I sort of break the ice by titling my posts with things such as Warning: hug room not included or Popcorn Time... another long-winded rant by ***** (my name), etc. I noticed after I stopped posting links and articles (unless it's REALLY REALLY worthy and even then I add my own commentary), that people would start to engage...but not much. However I would get MUCH more response offline in private messages. People 'following' me who aren't necessarily my FB friends. people who are my friends but still afraid to go public with what they support etc. I can't tell you how many people thank me offline for simply providing additional information they otherwise would not have gotten through conventional sources. This past year I added another approach.... even though I get private messages of encouragement, it's not like a HUGE following so I sort of make myself appear bigger than I am (and mind you, this is my personal FB page...not a special interests page or politlical page). So, when a huge current event occurs (France attack, Orlando attack, etc) I typically wait a few days to respond....I do this anyway because I do get emotional about these things and I like to have facts before I post ANYTHING. Then, after the buzz online dies down and I have gathered my thoughts I write something like: "my heart goes out to...... I have a lot to say about this but need some time to get my emotions out of the way to share my logical assessment of the situation..." after a few days I will write something like: "Thanks for all the private messages from friends/family and followers who have been asking me my take on xyz event...." ".....I always like to take my time before posting my thoughts and usually do so in doses over the course of new information coming out...." "...so for now my thought is......xyz" etc I do this even if NO ONE private messaged me to ask for my thoughts. lol I tell you what, since I've been doing this I get FAR more engagement on my wall AND a ton more people are even sharing my posts of my 'long rants'., I don't curse or use hyperbole on my posts. I just make argument and list facts and site the source such as 'fbi crime stats' rather than link it. If it's politcally or current event related, I will set the post to 'public'. If it's my personal life and photos, I keep that only for friends, of course. That way it reaches more people who aren't your friends without revealing your entire personal life. This has also increased 'shares' and likes and that's the name of the game to get our arguments out there. I like the element that I'm just a regular gal...i'ts not a political or 'official' page of any special interest. It has provided many fruitful conversations than before when my page was simply tumbleweed and crickets but filled with links and media and memes! lol I like the 'notes' approach since they are archived and easily. I'm just sick of people being too damn scared to say things outloud and engage online for goodness sakes and I realized that if they feel like there are more people as afraid as them but at least admitting it offline (whether true in a given particular moment or not)....it brings them forward to engage, which is quite incredible and interesting. I rarely get people who attack me...even if they disagree I have had only one person in like 4 years get hostile and I simply wrote on the wall 'Can you tell me how many people you have convinced to your viewpoint by calling them a Nazi?" and after that they left my wall and deleted their comments. lol SATISFACTION!! BWHAA!! Occassionally I post my wall is a Freedom-of Speech friendly wall. I will never censor or delete comments or people. If you do not want to see my posts, either hide or select me off of your feed or block me. I ask that everyone keep it clean and civil but if you do not, your posts will only show as an example of your method and whether or not it's effective as I am not here to spend time deleting offensive material on my wall unless it's gory/bloody or pornographic. Make your arguments in words...not photos. This seems to disarm the trolls before they even consider engaging on my page, which saves time and frustration. If anyone tries this approach, do you mind reporting back to let us know if it works for you or not or share your experience? I hope it works for you!!

THanks for your feedback. yes....I typically don't use the term conspiracy theory. In this instance I simply used it for context effect in that, the mainstream would deem it as such. I entertain their theories but I realize that she pulls me down these wells and I lose sight of the day to day dots to connect of what's really creeping up on us in our society. I guess too, I become frustrated because even if I accept their theories and facts to provide efficacy, they have absolutely no solutions. It's like the leftist atheist approach....knock the foundation from under you and leave you with nothing over your head. let's say tomorrow all the proof necessary is revealed that the US gvt was 100% behind 9/11 or the JFK assassination... ok..then what? Do people actually think anyone will stand trial...the system is rigged, right? Does anyone think that if there is a trial, the persons responsible will see a punishment or will it fall to a scapegoat as it always has in lesser crimes where evidence is clear? I do like Stefan's take on some of the issue ( I used 9/11 as a prime example) in that do we really need to prove the gvt was or wasn't behind 9/11 to turn people off the concept of being ruled over by ruthless overlords? I know another example Stefan used was that to really convince the brainwashed Germans how bad Hitler was, let's dig up all his unpaid parking tickets and that will wake them up. lol I try to reveal this to her that it's ok to be skepctical but in her mind EVERYTHING is a false flag, EVERYTHING is Israel, EVERYTHING is a rigged election (which I agree but I see the rigging from a totally different angle), EVERYTHING is puppetry, etc yet she is currently fighting her local gvt on some issue that I asked her....if it's rigged, then why are you wasting your time fighting against a determined outcome....couldn't you instead use the time, energy and resource to educate people on taxation is theft and peaceful parenting than beating up a rigged system? It baffles me. lol

I'm not a Brit, however, it plays nicely into the discussion around Mexicans which is a nationality, not a race, yet the SJW scream RACISM when you mention people's nationality or religion in debates.

To preface, I am taking a complete Devil's Advocate position. Although no liberal in my encounters has made this argument and not sure if they would even connect this dot, it came to my mind and wanted to be well prepared in advanced in case this argument comes up and figure out how to rebut it with strong, consistent arguments. I imagine one day a liberal to come and argue....hey... you want to lift bans on guns, which can be used dangerously, so why not lift bans on immigration since only some immigrants are dangerous. Is there a equivilency to argue here? How would one counter?

Nice to meet you and thank you for your trust in sharing your innermost feelings and possibly insecurities. I hope my woman's perspective might guide you in some positive direction. I've been happily married for almost 14 years. That still seems crazy to me! lol Often new couples or singles 'admire' my and my hubby's relationship even though it hasnn't been perfect and is always a work in progress. I was going to say...make her laugh and then you stated that you have a great sense of humor. Don't be afraid to bring up important topics and serious topics...it will weed out the bubble-gum girls. lol But since you are starting from a fresh slate from my understanding is sort of have a draft 'checklist' of what you are looking for. being open that you can add and delete from the list but from a virtue standpoint...stay disciplined in your standards and the other stuff can fluctuate. I found my hubby after too many FAILED relationships when I had had enough and started re-evaluating my standards and learning something that i DIDN'T want from each. lol process of elimination is a slow and painful way to find your mate! rofl. but...on the same note, practice makes perfect. So just ...fake it to make it. I know.... mingle, hone in, don't use pick up lines...quality girls will pick up on that and it will repel them. But mingle and you will get better. If it's with work companions or hobby companions, just mingle. Remember that EVERYONE is just as insecure as you and running their own hurdles so keep that in the back of your mind to hopefully calm your anxieties. The more you mingle without expectation of meeting 'the hole in one'...ok that didn't come off well. lol of...meeting the woman of your dreams on the first try.. better... Just get some practice in. You will have to step outside of your comfort zone and be honest with the people around you. I always am aware of my weaknesses and sort of humorously and/or seriously let those around me know that is what I am experiencing. I fake it to make it. Meaning.... I DON'T want them to know my insecurities but sort of pre-emptively exposing them on MY terms is wht empowers me and then earns their trust/respect and often motivates them to open up to me. I have had people tell me 'oh...you can do anything...you are so talented, bla bla bla" I firmly tell them...but I care enough about the quality I produce to tell you when I don't feel confident in completing x task.... so trust me on that. And they do. now that is an example in a work or community situtation but it serves in romantic relationships too. My best advice is be the BEST you can be (honest, open, exposed, true to yourself) from the beginning and the MOMENT someone shows you they will exploit that....drop them. I don't care HOW hot or horny they are....drop them and DON'T turn back....don't make it a long goodbye.....just drop them. best of luck and practice!

Some of Stefan's podcasts talk about how Conspirists actually serve the Establishment better than the cause they claim to serve. It struck me but the more I pondered it, themore it really rings true. The 9/11 Truthers really busy themselves trying to prove something that even with the best evidence....does nothing because all the players already ensconsed themselves in 'legal loopholes' that the average citizen would spend a lifetime and fortune unravelling with no progress. Anyway, my friend came from the left and still has some residual habits leftover. Her hubby is Russian and I think still traumatized by the Communist regime and what I perceived as healthy skepticism is not, instead it's complete redundant, OCD conspiracy. they are a bit older (in their mid/late 50s) and only converted to Libertarianism in the last decade or so, so I wouldn't expect her to be (or anyone to be) a purist of sorts but still...I guess I expected the wisdom of self-awareness at that age. EVERY election her 'assessment' of the candidates are the same. Now, Trump is the Establishment's chosen man to deal with the economic crash. Now it's funny because she only stated that after he is the clear projected nominee. I threw some of Stefan's predictions at her early on and she brushed me off as if she was too busy with more important things. But now that 'retrospect' gives us all perfect vision, she is SURE he is part of the establishment. ugh. Like there is no wiggle room. No room to contemplate the vantages he brings. My healthy skepticism is like...ok...he totally could be but it's not like there aren't other factors to consider that he might be the real deal (albeit now a politician) but moreso than the rest. It's just a bit frustrating and more accurately disappointing, since she is a dear friend of mine who has shared many philosophical disussions and I still continue but ...you know how it is. But seriously.... the guy gives up his already busy lifestyle in making millions/billions to do shit work of 'serving the public' and ok.... so he hooks up some of his buddies..... what will he get out of it. MORE fame? MORE money? This ''he's a narcissist' can only carry on so far. I think the dude knows he has more money than god...not more than the Rothchilds but more than enough to make him feel large and in charge... now Hillary has ONLY used politics to make herself more money and more fame and when people put them in the same categor I get so annoyed...like pissed! So this wasn't a question, more of a rant/sharing so if anyone has more to add, please feel free.

I dropped my guard on this one. I posted an article on my FB of where his name came from...a politician who was feverishly anti-slavery and thought...ok....but then I stopped my research and dropped my guard thinking...FINALLY!! A good famous Muslim-convert who won't fit the stereoty.....oh shit. I've since removed it and posted this instead. Thank you FDR community for once again...keeping my eyes WIDE open all of the time. !!! I think I'm extra pissed today and touchy since I saw these videos of gang members cornering Trump supporters and the media claiming the supporters must have deserved it! One guy told me, "Trump encourages violence and the left needs to do a better job..I'm disgusted by the violence I saw in the video". At first I was like...ok...the dude comdemns the violence then I was like....wait a minute.... Trump allegedly encourages violence and the left...LISTENS and OBEYS!? ROFL. These people will NEVER take responsibility for ANYTHING.

I have a personal page and a business page and of course a lot of my friends from personal page are also on my business page. I know many of them do not follow me on my personal page (or interact) but I need their likes and shares for my busienss page. So I try to find a good balance. I have tried various tactics. I get straight to the point on topics or write 'notes'..sometimes lengthy that way they are logged and easier to find in archives. What I hate about FB is that friends can see what you write on a completely different wall. I tend to be more brutally honest (but civil) away from my all than the content I post on my wall....but the odd thing is that my friends engage with my comments on oher walls morethan my own. So I am not sure what to make of that. lol I have a lot of 'closet' followers and they periodically send me PM telling me they enjoy my posts . So it's a challenge to find the right balance where I don't feel stressed about it. lol I do like more forums like this where it's anomynous and people can be as frank as they see fit. I've noticed that in private anomynous forums, people are far more civil than on FB where you have your entire profile exposed. It speaks to human behavior that people are nicer to strangers than people they might even know a litle bit.

Yes and no. I have realized over the years that I come off to other women as an alpha female. I am not loud or bossy or boistrious however the way women respond to me in their behavior or discussion is as if I am an alpha. Like I don't go on unsolicitied advocacies. If I hear or see something I will say something in the moment...that, to me...has been the most effective. But again, I will never stop the unsolicited awareness pieces out there. Which I think people often misidentify certain behaviors as alpha when they are really lower ranks masquing as alphas. Like a woman is always raises her voice and is demanding or asserting herself with terrible male bashing and such might be misaken as alpha but is not because an alpha doesn't need to exert so much energy to prove his/her alphaness. .As a result, The women tend to defer to me, tend to be submissive in that my tone tends to resonate the conversation. I am quiet most of the time around women and I think this puts them at dis-ease because it makes them aware that I am actually listening to what they say as they squawk to each other not really hearing what the other is saying...like chickens clucking. lol An example woud be if I am in a group of women that tend to male bash and be loud and catty, when I arrive and engage in the group, naturally the group tones down the male bashing or stops completely or you can tell they are on egg shells or, when I do not laugh, they get all sorts of uneasy but won't dare challenge me on my lack of participation. So many times I don't need to say a word...my silent resistance tells them everything. (they won't dare mock me like...oh c'mon..it's just a joke...lighten up...etc). like they do to theother women who might not follow the crowd on this behavior. If they do push back, I make a strong, calm case against it and the same outcome insues...uneasiness among them and awkward silence (for them)...I don't have a problem with thoughtful silence among people. I someimes retell the joke but in the context of woman bashing so they can hear themselves or I just tell them how offenseive that is to men and hope they learn to find better quality men so they won't be so comfortable making jokes about men as a whole in such destructive and toxic ways. So I think women who push back need to also learn to have alpha elements in order keep those catty bitches in check without much effort....just mere presence. And I say all of this to encourage women to not always expect a negative response when they speak out becaus that can be self defeating going in. If they can work on how to be an observant alpha female, you can get your message across with minimal negative blowback. now, when I'm not there do these women return to bitching about males or do they then use the time to bitch about me..... probably both or either. lol But over time it makes their insecurity more intense and reduces their joy in bashing men. since women are more 'tribal' if they see a women go against it they get bitchy at first, then sort of curious and envious and from that envy it splits to either total retailation (mocking, etc) or ostracization (they avoid you) or they come and join you.

I think start by always defining terms. They gave you a description of what morality isn't but they need to give their definition of morality. Are they actually saying that morality is defined as 'no fixed poles or right or wrong..." etc? or is that to suggest they don't see morality existing at all? If they admit morality exists then they must give their clear definition of morality and you can go forward more easily from there. Sometimes taking a step back helps move the conversation forward so you can make your rational arguments rather than stepping into people's hardened mid-thought, if that makes sense. If you can get their definition of morality, share it here and maybe we can help you from that point with the case you want to make against it.

wait...fraternities are anyway not recognized by the university but can be banned. So they can ban people who are voluntarily joining groups that suit their preferences? I hate how these gender and race issues WATER things down to just race and gender as if the prime motive of these institutions/frats etc are soley about gender or race. Fraternities and Sororities are more than just chicks living together or dudes living together. I lived in a dorm... all female...odd they wouldn't ban that? lol Another year I lived in a co-ed Dorm but, the men were on one wing and women on the other and after curfew you couldn't enter the opposite sex's wing without permission. and it made perfect sense to everyone. Many are selected through common studies. I remember on our campus we had the frats that were known for the 'engineers' or one that is famous for the 'business degree's and such. Which is quite an effecient living arrangment. They do a lot of things from philanthropic to fun, bonding experiences (except for hazing....simply terrible tradition) but they also have other opportunities and perks in these living arrangments. I was never in one but my boyfriend of moons past was and it was a great and positive experience for him. My niece was in one and also....some really great things came out of it for her. I would think the drinking culture would be more of a reason for a univeristy to ban them over gender. I think they need to address the drinking culture among these groups but that's a discussion for another day.

you know sometimes there is a lot of the more subtle abuse against men. Dare I say microagressions. I see a lot of 'satire' videos shared or jokes shared among women that bash men. They can easily use the out of 'oh...get a sense of humor if you are offended by this'. But I always push back and tell them if it was a joke against a women I wouldn't laugh either. That usually gets people to take a closer look on non-emotional hot-button issues to get them to look at just HOW much we say, do, tolerate that is against men. Women do need to do a better job for being publicly vocal in support of men and the abuses against them. I'm doing what I can dudes! Kudos to this woman doing the same.

call it what you want (government, centralized planned gvt??) but it would be a voluntarist society in any case Those who want to engage in your voluntarily funded centralized planned system (aka voluntary gvt) will do so and congregate and those who do not want to engage won't be forced to do so and will be doing their own voluntarily designed and funded social planned system. If you haven't done so I recommend reading/listening to the free-ebook Practical Anarchy.

I do the 'high and low' at the dinner table. We love it. Another thing I noticed I did and realized it came from imprinting on my parents and adults around me growing up is drilling the child with questions and thinking that is a conversation. How was your day? Who did you play with? What did you do? etc. I catch myself doing it from time to time so I have to be diligent with myself. instead I may ask, 'how was your day' and listen to their response. If they don't elaborate beyond 'good' or 'ok' or 'i don't know'. lol Then I say, " would you like to hear about my day?" And then if they agree I share a story about somethign that happened or a thought that I had just to get the ball rolling. I found this is a more natural way to talk to any human being, oif course but for some reason, most adults (and I was guilty of it) we tend to not speak with way with kids but rather pepper them with questions trying to elicit a conversation that way and it usually shuts kids down which frustrates the parents. Also, when we do the 'high and low' at dinner, sometimes the kids don't have much to say...but at least it gets them thinking. Then, my hubby and I will lay down with them before bed. No TV, no electronics, etc and either talk, sing or tell stories or just sit quietly. Many times, this is when their memories of the day will come up and they will share. So, also keep reasonable expectations when using these games and tools.

I think one can comment about the Holocaust without being a supporter for it. And same goes for Trump. The media hasn't done a good job keeping it balanced. I don't mind hearing people's complaints but people are like allergic to have ANYTHING positive to say about him. That is equally as bad as the 'staunch loyalists' to him. To overly support him or to overly rail against him is equally toxic. I think not only does it bring people into Philosophical debates and to this channel because Trump is a ratings magnet. Europe is suffering from the migrant crisis and have no safe outlet to speak about it and from what I've heard in the call in shows, many of the Europeans calling in to discuss their experience of the migrants have been BECAUSE Stefan is bringing up Trump in the discussion. So sometimes, don't read too much into it. Just clever content advertising and using current events to attract new listeners to the conversation.

Wait...so animals are moral actors and fetuses are not? a fetus is an incomplete moral actor... ending it's life before it reaches maturity to become a moral actor is not removing the moral component because the one ending the life of the incomplete moral actor is....a moral actor. Children aren't fully developed mentally even after birth so you are creating a subjective 'even horizon'. Becauase in the womb and for many years out of the womb...the child has no moral agency for their actions. But we are aware that in order to reach full moral agency and maturity, the child but be alive. Animals will never have a capacity, even at full maturity, to have moral agency of their actions. I'm not waiting for my dog to really feel guilty and understand NAP when she reaches full maturity. My children...yes. So in that case....a moral actor is acting in a non-defensive aggression against something that poses no threat has no moral agency, and that was a creation of the moral actor's regrettable choices. So shouldn't the punishment fit the crime.... kill or punish the moral actor who made the error, not the result of that error? I mean in actual rape cases, we don't imprsion the victim, rather the aggressor of the sex crime.

I tihnk it's a bit of a stretch to say voting itself is coercive. There is no direct punishment/negative repurcussion if you don't do it. Unlike if I don't pay my taxes....there will be strong negative repurcussions to the degree that almost guarantees my compulsion to pay my taxes without resistance. It's a false equivilancy to put voting in that category of coercive behavior. Voting to change the conditions of a coercive entity, the state, in a rigged system has no more or less influence on the existance of that system than not voting. They don't count how many people abstained from voting and say..well gee... more people DIDN'T vote so we will interpret that as them not wanting a state at all and therefore we will give up our salaries that are paid through force and violence. And even if no one voted, the state would still remain intact...why...because if we vote or not....they take our money to fund themselves. so voting is the lowest on the list of coercive action.... and why dealing with the taxation is theft argument is far more useful in breaking down the blood-sucking government entity. So if an immoral, coercive entity exists that gives people the tiniest of opportunity to voice their preferences (as long as the preference of 'state go bye bye' doesn't exist) then the vote can be useful but not sufficient and will never be sufficient to total human liberty. But...it HAS greatly improved lives up to this point if you look back in history with the sociological structors of class systems and monarchies and such to a voting democracy, etc.... I think we have more refining to do and still make the case for a free society of course.