Everyone should drive stickshift unless a documented disability prevents them from doing so.
[QUOTE=Sgt. Nikolai;52495882]I like the smell of gasoline.[/QUOTE]
Mmmm, nothin' like it. And that's a pretty reliable tell for a gearhead, too, you fond of tinkerin' with cars?
[QUOTE=Sgt. Nikolai;52495882]I like the smell of gasoline.[/QUOTE]
I generally enjoy the smell of an active garage. It's not that I [I]like[/I]-like the smell, but it fills me with a sense of comfort for some reason. Maybe I was destined to be a mechanic or something.
Valve should actually re-launch the Steam Machine initiative as if the first wave of Steam Machines never happened. IMHO, i think the right way to make those boxes sell would be to approach Rockstar Games, Bandai Namco Studios, and... Come to think about it, the only western developers not supporting the PC platform are Rockstar and Harmonix. Most of the devs that Valve would end up bribing if they took SteamOS seriously would be Japanese.
Still, i feel like most of the faults with SteamOS are more along the lines of "If Valve isn't willing to spend money on the Steam Machine, then why should we"? Which actually kind of sucks, because MiniPCs for gamers are... fucking badass (It's pretty much buying a $1600 laptop for $800, and it's just as heavy as one too), except the only ones willing to dip into the console form factor are Dell.
The harm principle, which is the idea that if an action doesn't hurt anyone but yourself, the government should have no say about it, is honestly a pretty bad and flimsy counterargument to government tyranny.
It can be very easily worked around since most actions, in the end, affect other people.
For example, doing drugs and being fat strains your countries healthcare budget, or at least raises other people's premiums. Even doing nothing and being a NEET economically will reduce the quality of life of other people via lost economic growth.
Traps are neither gay, nor "not gay", they are bi.
[QUOTE=LegoGuy;52498085]Traps are neither gay, nor "not gay", they are bi.[/QUOTE]
[URL]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26498424[/URL]
[QUOTE=LegoGuy;52498085]Traps are neither gay, nor "not gay", they are bi.[/QUOTE]
"Traps" themselves ain't gay nor even bi in this case because by default we can't know ones sexual orientation from looking at the person, but if you are a male and you find another male attractive you are gay.
But gay is okay.
Remember way back when Facepunch had that Austin Powers meme? That wasn't funny in the slightest. That was forced and dumb.
Power needs to lie with the employees rather than the employer. This is in part because everyone has a right to work, as otherwise one can not survive, let alone grow and flourish.
[QUOTE=bdd458;52500219]Power needs to lie with the employees rather than the employer. This is in part because everyone has a right to work, as otherwise one can not survive, let alone grow and flourish.[/QUOTE]
I do think that the employer can have too much power, but what exactly would stop the employees from abusing the system by making their own rules or something?
Traps themselves may or may not be gay, it depends on the person. They could still be heterosexual or bisexual regardless of their own gender/identity status.
Liking traps isn't gay because homosexual implies strictly the opposite sex. If you like traps, but not men, gay is an inaccurate label because the point is that they look female but have a penis (or I guess vice versa idk I don't use the word "trap"). Bi is probably the closest label out of heterosexual, bisexual, and homosexual, but it's still inaccurate because the point of affixing the "bi-" prefix to "sexual" was to have a word that meant attracted to "both" sexes, as in "two." Say, for example, that someone was attracted to men, women, and traps alike. That's not bi, that's tri, and the word for it is "pansexual" because that means "attracted to people of any gender, gender identity, or biological sex" so unless gender-wise there's more than men, women, and the in-betweens, which isn't something I believe, that person would be pansexual. Following this logic, people who only like traps aren't bisexual, because bi still means two, and one attraction is mono.
So tl;dr, traps themselves [I]can[/I] be gay but aren't always, liking traps isn't really bi or gay (or straight but that was never a debate) and unless they're a pansexual I don't actually know what word to use to describe them.
[QUOTE=PsycheClops;52500289]I do think that the employer can have too much power, but what exactly would stop the employees from abusing the system by making their own rules or something?[/QUOTE]
By having a better balance. I don't think that employers should be abolished, but its more that I feel they have too much control. There needs to be some structure, but atm it favors the employer over the worker.
So to answer your question, by not entirely getting rid of employers, but making it easier for people to secure and hold jobs, and alllowing them more say over their workplace and lives.
[QUOTE=Clovis;52498575]people seem to ignore the fact that people can have a sexual.interest in a penis and not be gay. sure penises are synonymous with male as theyre the male sex organ, but homosexuality is sexual interest in the male, not sexual interest in a penis. if you like 'traps' you can be straight, gay, bi, whatever, but one thing is for sure, you are promiscuous as fuck[/QUOTE]
gay and bi i can see yeah, but honestly if you like dicks you aren't straight at all i really honestly dont see why it would be otherwise
[QUOTE=bdd458;52500219]Power needs to lie with the employees rather than the employer. This is in part because everyone has a right to work, as otherwise one can not survive, let alone grow and flourish.[/QUOTE]
Welcome aboard, tovarisch
[editline]24th July 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=PsycheClops;52500289]I do think that the employer can have too much power, but what exactly would stop the employees from abusing the system by making their own rules or something?[/QUOTE]
What stops employers from abusing the current system?
[QUOTE=xZippy;52499951]Remember way back when Facepunch had that Austin Powers meme? That wasn't funny in the slightest. That was forced and dumb.[/QUOTE]
Welcome to 99.999% of the memeshit Facepunch finds hilarious.
Don't like sloppy joes in the slightest.
I dunno. If you're experiencing sexual attraction to a girl with a dong, you're still attracted [I]to the girl[/I]. A gay dude wouldn't get randy from a lady no matter the dong status, and if he does, perhaps it's time for him to consider he's bisexual.
[QUOTE=Arctic-Zone;52501419]I dunno. If you're experiencing sexual attraction to a girl with a dong, you're still attracted [I]to the girl[/I]. A gay dude wouldn't get randy from a lady no matter the dong status, and if he does, perhaps it's time for him to consider he's bisexual.[/QUOTE]
Does that mean that if you're attracted to tomboys you're sorta gay? :disgust:
[QUOTE=Samiam22;52501149]
What stops employers from abusing the current system?[/QUOTE]
Depends who in the line you're talking about but usually not much.
Workers coops do show us that employees don't really do that great of a job either. Usually they greatly underperform compared to traditional enterprises, create some sort of hierarchical system themselves, or they have a very secure niche consumer-base that guarantees survival for awhile at least (small restaurants will often fit this)
So full or even massive direct employee control generally isn't going to exactly be a good idea, but in some cases they should have more and especially in the US we could do with having better unions and labour laws.
[QUOTE=xZippy;52499951]Remember way back when Facepunch had that Austin Powers meme? That wasn't funny in the slightest. That was forced and dumb.[/QUOTE]
If you don't mind me asking, what was the Austin Powers meme?
[QUOTE=Clovis;52501349]what if youre interested in the female appearance so much that you dont care what their sexual organ is? thats not gay, thats open minded[/QUOTE]
penis is part of the male appearance, not the female one
if you don't care about the sexual organ, at the very least that says you aren't interested or care about a complete female appearance
sexual orientation is pointless because nobody finds you attractive anyway
[QUOTE=Clovis;52501841]only if it is visible[/QUOTE]
doesn't this apply to literally any body part
you can cover up pretty much anything with clothing
[editline]24th July 2017[/editline]
2 + 2 = 4
liking traps is gay
if i can know and say this i know that i am free
[url]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26498424[/url]
This study suggests that traps aren't gay
[editline]24th July 2017[/editline]
Unless you have a contrary source traps aren't gay
[QUOTE=Pigbear;52501872][url]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26498424[/url]
This study suggests that traps aren't gay
[editline]24th July 2017[/editline]
Unless you have a contrary source traps aren't gay[/QUOTE]
[url]https://twitter.com/obamamalik/status/809796188782399488?lang=en[/url]
If you are man you find another man attractive you are homosexual, if you are man and you find man which you thought was a woman but afterwards found out is actually man and still find him attractive after learning this you are homosexual.
Also to add to this all beautiful men exist and have existed ages, just because someone is beautiful doesn't mean it somehow makes it not gay, with that logic having sex with ugly woman makes me gay.
Also this is why I've through out this discussions used "traps" with quotation marks, today's weird standards probably Michael Jackson or even David Bowie (using as example because both were popular through out the world) would be considered "traps" for being beautiful men.
Just fuck whatever you like but with respect IMO.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
Unpopular opinions V8 Flat IS NOTHING
