joeclark
Forum Replies Created
-
How about keeping entirely-off-topic discussions that will absolutely positively go nowhere off this gay-athlete discussion forum?
Too easy?
-
I believe you are more than one step ahead of many in analogous circumstances because you recognize that your feelings are caused *by your circumstances*. You’re feeling depressed because your job is depressing, according to what you tell us.
While it seems counterintuitive, doing something each day marginally better than the previous day gives you objective facts to look back on. That could be one more push-up, five more pounds on squat (you *are* going to the gym, I trust?), journalling one more page. It could be as simple as making sure you get through 10 pages of a book you like, or listening to an entire episode of an interesting cultural podcast like the Perfume Nationalist, Red Scare, or What’s Left. (Dull normie podcasts are worse than staring at the boob tube.)
Those objective daily achievements – you’ll be jotting them down so you can look back at them – will buttress you while you look around for a better job, or something else that might alleviate your depressing circumstances.
-
“Anti-LGBTQ” (sic); “religious conservatives” (sic)
-
I actually read this study (actually a preprint), making me the only member here to have done so.
The author goes through all sorts of contortions regarding “masculinity” to explain why gay boys do better in school than straight boys. And he flatly lies about the degree of concern boys’ overall failure to thrive in school has attracted.
Worse, he’s consistently dishonest about the reality here, which reality he experienced growing up: Gay boys just are not interested in duking it out with straight boys, yea unto their adult careers, where they are much happier holding down what are now derisively called “email jobs” instead of pulling in a hundred grand for half a year’s work on the oil ring. (Because gay boys behave like girls, and lesbians behave like boys, grossly stated.)
Having read the entire literature on gay and lesbian incomes and earnings, I can state that all these facts have been known for a decade and a half, if not longer. But *those* researchers are also unwilling to admit that gays do not behave like straights in education and employment.
-
Typical user interface of nouvelle formulation RealJock. But remember: You can manually copy and paste details of these spammers into a special message and surely that will take care of everything.
-
Well, that’s also the wrong way to render the verb phrase “work out” (“workout” is a noun), so let’s start there.
-
> I would say the sheep are those whose idea of “research”
> is cherry-picking “data” from already selective sources
My idea of “research,” which word I would not render in quotation marks, involves reading the entire literature in a discipline, then distilling it for the general public (and for hacks who constantly misrepresent it).
Tangential to the actual topic: You still have unsafe sex, though, right?
-
Which such “nutcases”?
-
This thing’s a week and a half old and it’s already attracting spammers, which there are positively no controls to prevent. (One cannot simply turn off messaging, or block messages from anyone one has not already friended.)
Again: Some of us have been doing this for decades and there are a lot of wheels not to reinvent here.
-
I am not replete with confidence and optimism regarding this new project, or even this subforum.
-
Proposition: What you are calling conservatives are the only dudes here with anything remotely of interest about them.
-
Every other homosexualist discussion forum is a quintessential safe space for “democrats, liberals, and even moderates” (you mean “progressives”), who already run every aspect of the country you live in.
When a progressive sees an environment where non-progressives thrive or are even permitted to exist, he sets out to destroy that environment (and those non-progressives). RoadbikeRob, this means you.
-
I don’t remember anyone from RealJock “classic” who was overly concerned with olyphants.
-
In its very first week back, RealJock is informed its membership includes irredeemable pests. Instead of deleting their accounts for a clean fresh start, RealJock assigns the burden of what used to be called moderation to individual users.
One man’s pest is another man’s contrarian, and we know from the previous incarnation that RealJock operates under the present-day truth régime (don’t question transgenderism, don’t talk about race except to venerate blacks, always capitalize the B in Black because to do otherwise is racist, never capitalize the W in White because to do is is racist – you will all be familiar with these universally imposed diktats). Hence RealJock will immediately ban dissidents but will allow irredeemable pests free rein forever.
After all, we can just block them.
Fun fact: Some of us have been online for decades and indeed have decades of experience with what does and does not work with discussion fora. Try to reinvent the wheel and you’ll end up with Fred Flintstone’s car. And you won’t end up with Bam-Bam’s musculature as part of the bargain.