mistercwood

I meant more in the sense that it's an OHS nightmare with completely unnecessary avenues for people to take a tumble, and clunky sightlines. But also yes.

I've now bookmarked this thread for future usage, should anyone ever doubt me when I tell them "Confidence can get you much much further than ability alone".

I think someone picked it on purpose, but I don't agree that everyone involved necessarily was in on it, i.e. not everyone involved in CPAC is a WS, but there are absolutely people at CPAC who are WS. It's no different to when Laura Ingraham did her nazi-salute at the 2016 RNC. Is she actually a nazi? No idea. But she absolutely chose to signal to those who are. Even if it was a troll, she made a choice of what group to align with. This stage design is in the same vein. It's also an incredibly shitty design choice if it wasn't done on purpose, lending weight to it being a dog-whistle.

I knew when I clicked "start at first new post" and saw this, I was in for a hell of a treat... PS guys I don't think she's a troll or a grifter at this point - I think she's a genuine true believer in the theories she's made up and you have as much hope as reasoning with her as you would with a flat-earther. Good luck!

I know this thread is titled "White privilege" specifically, but I think that's muddying the waters more than it should be, and I also think you're making a genuine effort to understand better. The core principle of privilege (as I understand it) that addresses what seems to be your main concern, is the phrase "All other things being equal"... All other things being equal, being white (in a Western nation) will give you an advantage over those who aren't. All other things being equal, being male will give you an advantage. All other things being equal, being heterosexual will give you an advantage. All other things being equal, being born into a middle-class family will give you an advantage over those who were born into poor families. Etc, etc. I'm a straight white male, as were all my peer group growing up. But they were largely middle class and above, with both parents around, whereas I grew up fairly poor with a single mother (for most of my childhood). All other things being equal, their economic privilege gave them a measurable leg-up on me. I could have done better than I did with hard work, but I also didn't have the role-models to show me how and why. It doesn't mean you need to feel bad about your successes, or that you didn't earn them. It's just a matter of acknowledging that others didn't always get the same opportunities you may have, based on something they had no control over. Comparing Tiger Woods to an average white Joe in Appalachia is pointless, because of course he enjoys some privileges they don't. If you compared him to a white golfer of similar fame levels though, you might see some divergence. That's all privilege really is.

If this isn't a sock-puppet/troll, then it's just a painfully transparent attempt at boosting SEO by posting links to their own site in new locations and having people engage with it. And hoo boy is it working...

I've changed my mind, this is clearly a RushMC alt-account but it's just taken him several years to remember the password.

It's a hacked account, absolutely no question in my mind. Don't engage, starve it out.

You're all being incredibly tedious.

Very good thing no-one is saying that then. Spend more time understanding what privilege is, and less on the imaginary boogeyman people make up about it so they can rail against it.

Always fascinating to me that the people who often struggle the most with understanding such a simple concept like privilege, somehow always tend to be straight, white, middle-aged dudes who are at least moderately well off. Just can't put my finger on why those things match up. A mystery for the ages?

It's ok, *I* got the joke....

This is a great one. Not only was he released on bond the first time, now he's vanished and they're only talking about raising the bond higher next time he's located.

Guys at what age do I start just operating on the belief that whatever opinion and circumstance I have on a matter is the only one that counts, and get mad at everyone who doesn't immediately agree with me? Asking for a friend.

While there's debate to be had about the loss/impact of the thousand-odd actual current jobs, isn't the 10,000 additional job number a figure that's quite literally entirely hypothetical? Like, a figure that assumes X number of strippers (for example) will migrate to the area to take advantage of the extra workforce in the area? Projections are one thing but the last time I saw figures for KXL the assumptions were just not reality based. Worry about the real jobs.

I'm trying to think of a more boomery way you could have posted this complete non sequitur and I'm honestly coming up blank. I'm genuinely impressed.

Generally I agree with you but the last two just seemed to be picking fights over semantics for the purpose of picking fights. Seemed an incredible waste of energy, but everyone gets to post how they see fit, so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Jakee I don't know if you're aware but there is nothing in the forum rules that says you have to fight literally everyone. I went and looked, just to be sure, and it's definitely not in there.

Averaged out per year (to account for single vs double terms), Trump signed more EO's than any president in more than half a century. Biden would need to keep up one hell of a pace to outdo that, so it's probably a wee bit early to judge.

If it's combined with mandatory, enforced hotel quarantine for returning citizens - like we've been doing for most of the last year - then it's a decent plan to restrict the spread while still letting people come home. If it's not, then it's just as dumb and meaningless as Trump's China travel "ban" was.

Just the one - why are you too lazy to read the EO before trying (and failing miserably) to use it as a distraction? It has literally *nothing* to do with the article you posted.

You'll probably have to provide an example of that happening before we can comment on it. I just read the EO, what part of it do you consider to be men taking opportunities away from women?