Topic: Study: Everyone hates environmentalists and feminists - page 32. (Read 80461 times)

I agree with everything here except the part i marked out. So generally we are in agreement on these points. Humans are damaging the planet very severely and I definitely care about that. I don't think the claims in my comment and the claims in your comment are contradictory though.

You simply need to read the first post and link to understand everyone's position. Loving our blue ball in space is good, not evil obviously.

I don't think this is right.

I think the "chain themselves to trees" types of environmentalists do it as a way of easing their conscience. They have been tricked into being part of a new religion. The environmental impact on the planet of being alive is the new original sin. So this causes them to to feel guilty about consuming resources, something that all living organisms do. Once they feel guilty about consuming resources, products with little green stickers on them can become the new analogue for "confession".

This comes from the fact that religion in general is so prolific because it exploits unmet emotional needs. So when you embrace secularism without addressing the unmet emotional needs behind religion it leaves a void. One thing that can rush in to fill this void is environmentalism because it has all of the same hallmarks as a traditional religion only in a secular context, namely original sin and forgiveness.

Now as for the "real" environmentalists, the scientists and lobbyists. Some of them probably fall into the former category, but others are just rational people who have found ways to capitalize on and profit from what was described in the previous paragraphs.

Not sure if this has been picked up (I'm a bastard for wading into threads without reading more than the first/last posts) but the chief motivation for most serious environmentalists is actually maintaining or improving quality of life for humans, not preserving the environment for its own sake - biodiversity, greenery and waste management have real, tangible benefits to our material wellbeing, not to mention our state of mind.

And by 'serious' I mean the scientists and engineers working on solutions, and the lobbyists and politicians brave enough to implement them, not the people who chain themselves to trees/badgers.

I ve met some environmentalists, and got to know them personally. I really dont know from where all that prejudices come, but they really are cool people, sure there maybe some crazy people involved, but in general those are just people with deep love for what is right.

I made a similar argument about birthday parties before. I was run out of town. Basically everyone was saying, "survival is very worthy of celebration".

In response to this video:
http://youtu.be/Il754DfwVJo

Say hi to the manufactured myth of Wendy Davis.

Every time I hear someone say that feminism is about validating every choice a woman makes I have to fight back vomit.

Do people really think that a stay at home mom is really on equal footing with a woman who works and takes care of herself? There’s no way those two things are the same. It’s hard for me to believe it’s not just verbally placating these people so they don’t get in trouble with the mommy bloggers.

Having kids and getting married are considered life milestones. We have baby showers and wedding parties as if it’s a huge accomplishment and cause for celebration to be able to get knocked up or find someone to walk down the aisle with. These aren’t accomplishments, they are actually super easy tasks, literally anyone can do them. They are the most common thing, ever, in the history of the world. They are, by definition, average. And here’s the thing, why on earth are we settling for average?

If women can do anything, why are we still content with applauding them for doing nothing?

I want to have a shower for a woman when she backpacks on her own through Asia, gets a promotion, or lands a dream job not when she stays inside the box and does the house and kids thing which is the path of least resistance. The dominate cultural voice will tell you these are things you can do with a husband and kids, but as I’ve written before, that’s a lie. It’s just not reality.

You will never have the time, energy, freedom or mobility to be exceptional if you have a husband and kids.

I hear women talk about how “hard” it is to raise kids and manage a household all the time. I never hear men talk about this. It’s because women secretly like to talk about how hard managing a household is so they don’t have to explain their lack of real accomplishments. Men don’t care to “manage a household.” They aren’t conditioned to think stupid things like that are “important.”

Women will be equal with men when we stop demanding that it be considered equally important to do housework and real work. They are not equal. Doing laundry will never be as important as being a doctor or an engineer or building a business. This word play is holding us back.

http://thoughtcatalog.com/amy-glass/2014/01/i-look-down-on-young-women-with-husbands-and-kids-and-im-not-sorry/

Well HELL YAH!

Cuz you know that women suffer with that 'women's suffrage' shit.

Nobody wants people suffering specially women.

And we need to stop putting that dihydrogen monoxide in their drinks too.  They'd be a lot happier then.

i think this illuminati control bain and art fashion
this coz you not be you son or girl

if you be lesbis or homosecsual propoganda parades

be world life only 300 comitete

bilderberg club this masonic
make music industry also and how we grow in our life and how we die

This topic
i make some details about this review

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/illuminati-elite-the-committee-of-300-secrets-of-the-world-government-review-313487

i kill my 50 minute life for build this review what i know and analize 7 or 8 years
maybe some guys be interest this situation in our planet

Yes fusion, thank you for correcting that.
And I'd agree, there is more than enough offensive and area-denial weapons at the command of nations, US and otherwise.
Nuclear is really the only "mass destructive" weapon in the arsenal in the sense of destroying mass to create energy...

Fusion or thorium, right?  Fission is how cooking-grade reactors work.  But there's plenty of research on both, and US has enough weapons-grade stuff to depopulate the planet several times over -- no need to encroach on commercial nuke reactors.

Just for weirdness & curiosity factor, you might like this.

Everyone bored enough to watch a foreign movie with a possibly poor translation should watch this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_I_Ended_This_Summer

There's a "small form factor reactor (well kinda)" playing a big role in the movie. Funny thing about these "reactors (more like batteries)" is how some people, being a precious metal hunters, tried to take those reactors apart, only to find their death. And that is just a human stupidity. Considering a possible malevolent intent, I'd say there's no safety whatsoever in that regard.

Fission or thorium might be even better for those purposes, and safer, and cleaner.  The technology is available for decades but who builds them?
The problem with those is that governments don't like them on account of the fact that you can't make nuclear weapons with the byproducts.

-The fuck is gorilla warfare?

Yeh, i was joking on there, though only kind-a.  Seriously, though, i think nuclear power is the most promising energy source, and even without further development, the accident rate is acceptable.  The reasons you listed were pretty much the reasons those projects were scrapped (both projects were real -- no joke).  On the other hand, i'm sure small-scale reactors could be developed which are safe *enough*.

I say we end women's suffrage and ban dihydrogen monoxide from being put into our water supplies. Bad stuff I say.

I'm up for nuclear power, but nuclear cars? You've got to be crazy.

Atomic planes are a no-no because appropriate shielding for personnel would weigh too much, same goes to the cars, AND with the rate of annual car accidents - imaging tearing that shielding off and giving nearby people a tan . Medical personnel or police approaching the vehicle should be protected too and so on.

There was a fuss about radioactive batteries for consumer electronics, but it ended nowhere, as we are to far from that technology.

EDIT: yeah, and problem of availability to general public, imagine lots of accidental poisonings, and some grease bombs.

Lol, nuclear power is best power!  Safe, clean, sustainable.  Don't believe the hype.

Atomic energy has been hounded by the oil industry and its liberal stooges in politics & the media since day one.  Promising projects such as the revolutionary Ford Nucleon -- stylish car powered by a portable fission reactor -- mysteriously lingered in dusty design studios.  The project was hounded by the press and inexplicably abandoned, its key personnel meeting with eyebrow-raising career impasses.  Resigned to the trash heap of history, this pinnacle of auto engineering was recently unearthed by an intrepid reporter.
Faqu, Liberals, you can't hide the Truth!


Nothing lay outside of Liberal-leaning Oil Industry's greedy grasp -- not even our once-mighty military. This daring NB-36H Atomic Bomber project was scuttled in its nascent stages, along with its Soviet counterpart.