force

One of the first words Japanese language learning resources teach you is the word for baseball. It's 野球 yakyuu ("field ball") btw

I was gonna disagree, but I couldn't actually think of a functioning stateless ideology which allows private property. Anarchism is inherently for abolishing private property, so that's out already. That mostly just leaves you with "anarcho-"capitalism which is just replacing the government with an ultra-capitalist power structure and decimating social mobility, it's just an undemocratic state but shittier...

I saw your comment and was surprised to learn that the attacker is an illegal immigrant from Canada that overstayed his tourist visa for 20 years. Huh. I guess that technically means his "illegals are a danger to national security" beliefs are based on personal experience?

they don't know that trans men exist

Not gonna be active on Discord tonight. I'm meeting a girl (a real one) in half an hour (wouldn't expect a lot of you to understand anyway) so please don't DM me asking me where I am (im with the girl, ok) you'll most likely get aired because ill be with the girl (again I don't expect you to understand) shes actually really interested in me and its not a situation i can pass up for some meaningless Discord degenerates (because ill be meeting a girl, not that you really are going to understand) this is my life now. Meeting women and not wasting my precious time online, I have to move on from such simple things and branch out (you wouldnt understand) @everyone

Idk man looking up a definition for "average" is like

1. a number expressing the central or typical value in a set of data, in particular the mode, median, or (most commonly) the mean, which is calculated by dividing the sum of the values in the set by their number.

and

2. Any measure of central tendency, especially any mean, the median, or the mode. [from c. 1735]

and

1 a : a single value (such as a mean, mode, or median) that summarizes or represents the general significance of a set of unequal values

doesn't look like that dude's using the word "wrong" to me, a lotta people and mathematicians definitely recall using "average" meaning median

So I take it you're against the government subsidizing science research in general? "The government shouldn't fund new technology" is a stupid and destructive position. We'd be living in the 1800s if it were up to solely the capitalistic market. I mean, the first broadly effective antibiotics that are responsible for saving probably hundreds of millions of lives at least only exist because of people working in government-funded labs, under government-funded universities, for the government. Why should the environment be treated like it doesn't matter to our civilization?

“There is no future without electrification. But just electrification will not get us there,”

Daniel Posen is an associate professor in U of T’s department of civil and mineral engineering, and the Canada Research Chair in system-scale environmental impacts of energy and transport technologies. He agrees electrification is vital. But relying solely on electric vehicles to reduce carbon emissions from transportation may not be enough, especially if we want to do it in time to stop a catastrophic two-degree rise in global temperatures.

The article you link contradicts you, it clearly suggests that adoption of EVs reduce carbon emissions, but we still need to do more (e.g. ACTUALLY HAVE PUBLIC TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE) to prevent a climate catastrophe.

All I mean is that statistic is not relevant here. One in three men commit sexual assault over the course of their lives. That doesn't mean it's a third chance someone's going to do it randomly to a women in the woods.

Would you feel comfortable leaving your kid with someone who raped a child? Or someone who has said they would rape a child if there were no consequences? Or even being around a pedophile as a kid? Why do you think a woman would take their chances with sexually aggressive men? Because rapists are likely to be repeat offenders, on average rapists commit more than 1 rape and have more than 1 victim. "1 in 3 men are rapists or want to rape, but that doesn't mean all of those rapists or aspiring rapists will want to rape you specifically when there's nobody else around and no legal consequences for their actions" is a hard sell to women, just like "pedophiles don't always reoffend" is a hard sell to parents. Obviously pedophiles aren't the same as men willing to rape women, but I feel that analogy makes it a lot easier for men to understand the feeling – a woman doesn't want to be stuck with a stranger who has admitted they would commit rape if there were no consequences, or an actual recent rapist for that matter.

And yet women run into more than 3 men every day and remain unmolested.

All of these crimes happened to someone they planned in their life over time. Not randomly at the gas station.

Lmao this is delusional. I literally gave you the numbers, plenty of women are raped by strangers.

They are crimes of personal hate that hurt the entire family.

Actual delusion

It's not like men are attacking women on sight (1 out of 3 times).

And that means the large amount of men that commit rape and say they'd commit rape given no consequences are just non-existent? Do you have to rape a woman every time you go outside to be a rapist or something?

There are a small percentage of sickos that might attack a women in the woods.

And you base this on..? Are you gonna tell that to the large amount of women in college that get raped by people they barely no because there's very low likelihood of consequences? That rape doesn't happen often because you don't see it? That the women reporting rape are in a conspiracy against you?

You are lying to yourself by actually stating that women only get raped by people they've been close to for years. And you're lying to yourself if you think someone raping an acquaintance somehow makes them less likely to rape a stranger if they can get away with it.

Not 31%. This is all of a course obvious unless you want a frame statistics to spread hate

It's not my fault if you want to ignore science and reality. It doesn't even have to be 31% – even if it were only 10%, which yes over 10% of young men OUTRIGHT ADMIT that they would rape a woman given a situation with no legal consequences.

Men aren't rapists. But an alarmingly high – at least single-digit percentage – of men have already committed sexual assault, and a double-digit amount would if they could. Papers on the matter mostly conclude that the ratio of sexual assault victims to perpetrators is around 3:1, which means the amount of perpetrators is almost certainly double-digit considering the amount of women to be sexually assaulted is well over 1/3. 25% of college-aged men specifically admit to committing sexual assault, while 8% admit to committing rape or attempted rape, according to the NIAAA. That is bad news for a woman.

It is a gamble with a chance of at least 31%. It is a random man, picked from anywhere in our God given country. It is not "very specific to statistical contexts", you likely meet multiple rapists every day without knowing. It's not like all the rapists are huddled up in Mobile, Alabama. In the city, in the suburbs, wherever you meet people, you will meet people who are willing to sexually assault a woman regularly.

That's what you don't understand by not being a woman or by not knowing the experiences of women. You don't know how much you are required to fear the men around you to survive.

"A couple of bad examples" is at minimum 1/3 of men my guy. Most women with life experience are not going to take that gamble. In 2021, 400-500 children in the entire US die annually due to abuse from their mothers. It is not at all comparable.