BruceVC

Tell them to leave early because you are suffering from an obscure and reoccurring STD ?? That always works when you want people to leave quickly

No Nonek, your interpretation of what she is saying is lacking...very lacking You can't compare the dead soldier to the grief of surviving family members..the dead soldier is now dead and no longer has feelings, you accept that right? So all that is now left is the residual emotional impact from his death..and only the living will experience that. And everything they are going through is because they loved him. So I'm not sure how you can see this as something "lucky" ..its not a question of luck. There are no lucky people here Nonek...people are grieving There are just different degrees of loss..surly you can empathize with that?

No one likes a smartass TN, you know thats not what the quote means A women at home has to survive knowing her son, husband, father or any other male in her life is now dead...gone for forever, killed on the battlefield. And the dead person doesn't feel any more sorrow..they dead Of course this is true, the grief of family members will always be severe, real and implacable. But I would think this extends to all family members, like dads, who have lost family members

It should be but they were saying on CNN that 40 % of the UK don't know who they will vote for, so you aren't alone. And there must be valid reason for such uncertainty

You assume wrong. By acknowledging that it's a problem of a police force first and foremost serving itself (rather than the people), aided by laws and regulations that give officers far too high of a special status and legal privileges above "normal" citizens, the political left might find themselves faced with inconvenient questions about why they don't rally for (and where they are in power, enact) political change in that regard (which they don't want to, because it would conflict with their long-term dream of an all-powerful government apparatus centrally managing the lives and livelihoods of a submissive citizenry stripped of individual power). On the other hand if they can spin the issue as "systemic racism by white people (except of course themselves)", they can feel all good and heroic about themselves and engage in symbolic action and moral grandstanding ("raising awareness", "addressing issues") without actually having to enact any political and legal change (because there's nothing that laws could change). So that's exactly how they're gonna keep spinning it. Interesting points raised. I do think this seems to be a systemic issue within the police force as you mentioned and not institutionalized racism by the police...and of course I won't deny there are elements of racism or rather racial profiling. But don't you think any Police force does need certain elevated privileges in society in order to do there job when it comes to dealing with violence? So for example when the Police can use deadly force is not the same as a normal citizen?

I'm sure you will vote properly when the time actually comes Also some other UK related good news, Kate has given birth a little girl, nice one http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/02/duchess-of-cambridge-gives-birth-to-baby-girl-prince-william

Yaaaaaaaaay, I finally have my hardcopy of GTAV Okay I'll be installing it today and then I want to spend some serious time on the single player component of the game before I start on the online. So I'll keep you guys updated

You can't be serious? Are you really going to spoil your vote ....I never expected such political disobedience from you Monte, very surprised and disappointed

I am interested in the various inevitable coalitions that are going to happen after the official results as I don't see any single party getting an outright majority that won't require some kind of coalition, like what will the SNP ask for to become kingmakers? Very exciting either way

I do care about the abuse of men, I just don't see the problem as prevalent as what women are subjected to. Its not hard to understand this perspective and I find it hard to believe that you see the abuse of women and men as equally widespread? You can't really think this?

I agree with this on certain levels, the same would apply to children. Is this a bad thing? I don't think so and the main reason I would say this is because in RL women are primarily the victim of horrendous abuse and violence both physically and mentally..so we are much more aware of violence against them and react accordingly. Except actual studies of abuse have shown that men are just as likely to be abused, both physically and emotionally. The difference is that A) men are much more reticent to discuss such abuse and B) Physically they are both more capable of resisting the effects of abuse and stronger so the amount of damage they do is greater. Honestly the idea that women are the fairer sex is a bunch of bull****. when you get right down to it. I question any study that says in society men are victims of the same type of abuse by women that women are subjected to by men. I see this type of perspective as a distraction and a way to diminish the real victims of abuse in society which are women and children. And yes women are still the fairer sex I would say

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/01/us/freddie-gray-baltimore-death/index.html So I see that 3 of the 6 cops being charged are African American, I assume that means that this incident won't be seen in a racial perspective and more a case of pure police brutality?

I agree with this on certain levels, the same would apply to children. Is this a bad thing? I don't think so and the main reason I would say this is because in RL women are primarily the victim of horrendous abuse and violence both physically and mentally..so we are much more aware of violence against them and react accordingly.

I wonder if this will lead to a reduction or increase in the civil unrest we are seeing?

The same is also true if you buy another currency like Euro's. Bitcoin is not like any real currency, you won't have normal currencies losing all there value overnight. They are influenced by certain sentiment and market pressures but ultimately normal currencies have real value based on a range of quantifiable metrics . Also some governments can intervene to prevent the complete crash of there currencies Who intervenes in the crash of Bitcoin? It seems a little preposterous to suggest investing in the Dollar is the same as investing in Bitcoin?

The much anticipated Lusito Land Portuguese food festival is on this week http://www.lusitoland.co.za/ Its a public holiday today so we are planning to go, loads of good Portuguese food and alcohol awaits us

I am picking up my copy of GTAV today or tomorrow, its a public holiday today in South Africa so I may be going to a food festival, but either way I should be playing the game in the next 30 hours

You agree with Fox News because suddenly they are saying something that aligns with your perspective, my advice is don't make a habit of it. You will be disappointed

Ah was wondering when this scolding would show up, heh. Nothing wrong with making a bad pun now and then, surprised it was missed the first time around And I can't pass those up, even though it did come a bit out of left field. Rather surprised that made him flounce off, seeing how he's gotten stuck in in threads before. Moderators aren't our parents in that they serve as role models, they are just people who have to ban people and tidy up posts, so no need to constantly ride Gtfed1's ass about it. Ignore him as well, then. I suppose I just take a less serious view of an internet forum, let alone the OT forum for a game company. Yeah I agree with this general sentiment My advice to everyone would be to spend less being concerned with other peoples posts and more time being concerned with your own posts and ensuring they are constructive and interesting Unless you find something deeply offensive just ignore peoples posts you think are childish or pointless...but I don't see the point of saying " this post is childish" because the debate gets hijacked by a subjective debate around what is acceptable or mature content which defeats the point of discussing the actual topic ?

I am an " Afro-optimist ", this is someone that believes in the future of the continent And its not hard to actually resolve the systemic issues that the continent grapples with but it has to start with the AU doing the job it was created to do. And basically that means ensuring it enforces its own policies around the continent and member states. Yet it fails to do this and I think the main reason for the lack of credibility on the African continent is you have leaders who rule in direct contradiction to what the AU stands for. So for example if a leader, like Robert Mugabe, hasn't had a free and fair election in the last 12 years and the AU does nothing to address this how seriously can you take them to implement other positive change on the continent that is needed to uplift the whole continent economically and socially ?

Being physically able to fight and liberate social structures where cis-het males are over-represented prolongs the suffering of the true minorities that do not adhere to any social norms. That's problematic. I am now being opressed and triggered by your chauvinistic and toxic opinion, please donate to my Patreouuuuaaaaarrrrgh. **** it, i can't keep up with the charade without dying a bit inside. Back to normal. The issue I have with the concept of " Pan-Africanism " is it lacks real substance and therefore I question its real ability to implement change If you look at the African continent and the AU you will see that the AU is basically a useless and impotent organisation that doesn't have the political will to impact change. It doesn't even enforce its own manifesto on member states, so you don't see consistency around ensuring Democratic elections or protecting basic human rights. Like protecting the sexual orientation of Africans, Homophobia is on the rise in several African counties So the idea of "Pan-Africanism" just becomes relevant when people want to attack established institutions. But when it comes to actually adhering to what this really stands for I don't see much evidence of this. Especially on the African continent

But this link doesn't discuss or even suggest the idea of redistribution of wealth? Its about a weighted fine system based on your wealth? Also what do you mean by "redistribute wealth more equitably"..can you go into detail so its clear how this distribution would or could work?

Don't think anyone really has brought her up, though and she hasn't offered anything relevant directly to the threads on feminism, mainly GG stuff, so doesn't seem as obvious as one to know her as say, Sarkeesian. I guess you will take a stab at him for not researching feminism? Don't think anyone really has brought her up, though and she hasn't offered anything relevant directly to the threads on feminism, mainly GG stuff, so doesn't seem as obvious as one to know her as say, Sarkeesian. I guess you will take a stab at him for not researching feminism? Malc lets not be silly, of course Fighter should have known who she was...and I don't mean he should have known automatically who she was. I didn't know but I used Google....we are all very much involved on a daily basis with criticizing or supporting the USA so lets not forget how we can actually use something as quick as a browser to find who certain Americans are and how they are relevant to a debate Fighter is a bright guy and knows this, but he was lazy and got called out. It is normal to get called out for these types of things

I'm not sure if that's valid One of the issues with this discussion around GG is that there are extremists on both sides who effectively prevent meaningful dialogue on both sides For example the views of radical feminists I reject but yet people use the views of radical feminists as a reason to dismiss various SJ movements So when you have a member on these forums saying things like " Vox Day isn't really a bad person and his comments need context " you just would think this would be unequivocally rejected, yet the response seems to be " he is actually quite funny..you should watch him " So I am suggesting more a mindset change around certain people and discussions. Its not letting the side down to criticize something unacceptable. People shouldn't hide behind a label and think they can say what they want, like that women who claims to be a feminist and said " men play games to suppress rape urges " I don't care what she says she is those comments are not acceptable

...and how this cannot be translated into an hilariously entertaining interview is beyond me. Get your popcorn already! Who cares about PR anyway, GG is KKK, ISIS and every other hate group combined in the eyes of mainstream media. Nonetheless it would be great to see you distance yourself from Vox Day, its never to soon to start changing that perception that some in the media has about GG and its supporters ?