1 Your ability to draw profound lessons from simple moments is truly remarkable. This post was heartfelt and impactful smm cheap panel

2 Your blog creates a space where readers feel seen and valued. This post was beautifully written and deeply inspiring cheap provider panel

1 The Retroactive Withdrawal of Consent is something every male college student fears these days, and yes, it seems to infantileize women, but fourth wave Feminists are okay with this because it gives them victim power.
I've seen all kinds of shades of the consent discussion in my life, from the Antioch College style of "May I kiss you? May I kiss you again?" to the BDSM community, which makes a fetish over negotiating consent, to the worst and darkest corner of Furry Fandom, where the bestialists tout "Well, the dog didn't bite me when I did that, therefore it consented."
I can almost see where the "Red Pilled, Manosphere" followers of Vox Day get their inspiration to claim "There's no such thing as Marital Rape", which would make things simpler for them, if only they could find a woman stupid enough to marry them.
Where Neil fails is he didn't even bother to marry them first.

2 I think the feminists and left both have places in this story as contributing bad actors. 

Feminism seems to be big on having some elite woman being visibly successful, as a symbol for all women, so that individual women can feel better about their individual lives and life choices.  Many of the men who obtain high positions in politics are driven lunatics.  Which leads to the question of what feminists have to offer in exchange for whatever highly important symbolic acts.  At most, they have half of voters, maybe a lot less.

The deal that seems to have been struck, was that the serial rapists would do the symbolic acts, and that the rapists would get social enforcers suppressing reporting of abusive acts.  The Clinton marriage alone might be plausible as a statistical anomaly, but when you throw in Whedon, or when you throw in Epstein/Maxwell, and the others, patterns start being present. 

And nobody mentions that the true diversity of sexual preferences seems to actually include that some women prefer to be procurers, or social enforcers, on behalf of a powerful deviant man. 

It was not that long ago that feminists were pushing that it was bad for fathers or mothers to tell their daughters that the daughters probably ought not be promiscuous.  "Regulating." 

The left runs a lot on "in public speech, 'consensus' creates reality".  They've been screwing with the minds of everyone when it comes to being able to get their appearance of consensus. 

At the very least, they want dissenters too scared of possible consequence to speak up.  They would prefer people being too afraid to think wrong thoughts, but do not have all of the tools to make everyone that way. 

But, they can suppress a lot of professionals from saying that AGW looks like a nonsense theory, or various things around the Covid-19 disputes, or whatever. 

In the schools, the left pushes heavily a theory of power that claims that 'strength' is effectively 'all', and 'ever lasting', and implies strongly surveillance that can even see wrong thoughts, and not simply careless statements to people who happened to be informants. 

Girls and women may already be prone to thinking that they need to keep other women happy, because of what angry women can have done to them, or to their kids. 

I think it may be a slippery slope from the 'afraid to speak about dissenting thoughts' level of preference falsification, and the 'afraid to misthink' level.  With lying being in between those fear levels. 

For young women of feminist ideology 'it is okay to say no' may be dissent.  I feel it goes without saying that it is unwise to have sex where there is no trust, and also that sex pretty much should only be within a traditional marriage.  Modern sex eds seem to consider this message somewhere between irresponsible and actively harmful.  From a perhaps elementary level sex ed, on, there are definitely people who have had it relentlessly promoted to them that the advice to say 'No' to sex by default is probably an ancient magical conspiracy.  This is probably what the version of critical theory in Women's Studies programs at least strongly implies.  There are definitely some young women and young men who seem to actually believe critical theory, and seem to understand that using their word magic to overcome the ancient super-conspiracy is the most important thing ever. 

The fear of being punished can be worse than the actual things that can be brought into play. 

Does this mean that I am asking ladies out on dates?  No, I am not.  I can't entirely claim that the series of decisions where I have not tried to date has nothing to do with fear of being treated unfairly.  However, from my end that feels like the most minor element.

3 Apologies for the wall of text.  At the time it seemed appropriate, but I've been trying to process some discussions elsewhere. 

4 Why didn't the editor eat Pat's paragraph breaks while it ate mine?

5

Why didn't the editor eat Pat's paragraph breaks while it ate mine?

It did actually. I had to make each paragraph break a separate quote and even then the line beginning with " Except: she doesn't mean it" still didn't format right. I worked on that block quote almost as long as the rest of the post took. 

6 What I've found out commenting on Pixy's mee dot nu blogs:

If I leave javascript off, the comment submission eats my carefully crafted new lines. 

However, if I remember that it does that in time, I can copy the content out somewhere where it will be safe, while I turn javascript back on, and refresh so I can use the comment box that preserves the new lines.

Might just be that my browser choice breaks things in so easily fixable a way.

7 I find that the editor likes to eat newlines and so I usually put an extra one in between paragraphs.  Newlines for the newline god or something.

I put two blank lines between paragraphs here and that usually means one will appear.