What are the odds that dude ends up in jail?
How dare that dude interfere with that girl's reparations?
If a store's policy moving forward is to just let people walk out with unpaid merch, then they might as well just declare 'Free Merchandise Day' on Jan 1st of each year. Limit it to 5 items per freeloader. Just get all the looting out of the way early in the year and be done with it. Maybe the government can offer the store 75% reimbursement, like FEMA does after natural disasters.
(05-03-2023, 02:35 PM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]How dare that dude interfere with that girl's reparations?
If a store's policy moving forward is to just let people walk out with unpaid merch, then they might as well just declare 'Free Merchandise Day' on Jan 1st of each year. Limit it to 5 items per freeloader. Just get all the looting out of the way early in the year and be done with it. Maybe the government can offer the store 75% reimbursement, like FEMA does after natural disasters.
Might as well.. But now they're starting to steal prescription medications, from right behind the pharmacist counter!
Hell, they could be walking off with someone's life saving medication, all because the democrats are too scared to stop their voters from stealing.
(05-03-2023, 02:35 PM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]How dare that dude interfere with that girl's reparations?
If a store's policy moving forward is to just let people walk out with unpaid merch, then they might as well just declare 'Free Merchandise Day' on Jan 1st of each year. Limit it to 5 items per freeloader. Just get all the looting out of the way early in the year and be done with it. Maybe the government can offer the store 75% reimbursement, like FEMA does after natural disasters.
You could supply those animals with their every desire and it would still not be enough. They would continue to act as uncivilized animals at the next supposed injustice.
Who in their right mind would consider opening brick and mortar stores in these neighborhoods?
(05-03-2023, 04:33 PM)Jagwired Wrote: [ -> ] (05-03-2023, 02:35 PM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]How dare that dude interfere with that girl's reparations?
If a store's policy moving forward is to just let people walk out with unpaid merch, then they might as well just declare 'Free Merchandise Day' on Jan 1st of each year. Limit it to 5 items per freeloader. Just get all the looting out of the way early in the year and be done with it. Maybe the government can offer the store 75% reimbursement, like FEMA does after natural disasters.
You could supply those animals with their every desire and it would still not be enough. They would continue to act as uncivilized animals at the next supposed injustice.
Who in their right mind would consider opening brick and mortar stores in these neighborhoods?
Not only the brick and mortar stores, but now even some of the larger businesses are closing up and shipping out.
Walgreens
CVS
Walmarts
Now even Nordstrom is closing both of their San Fran locations.
https://twitter.com/WallStreetSilv/statu...ejztQ&s=19
What the hell are they going to do when everything else starts to close? Grocery stores, pharmacies, big box stores.. They'll all be gone and then the CEO's of those companies will be called racist.
Looks to me like some whistleblower is going to jail.
(05-03-2023, 08:12 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status...JovJg&s=19
So what's going on over here?
(05-03-2023, 11:02 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Looks to me like some whistleblower is going to jail.
What happened was FBI was running an operation and a source supplied proof that Biden was caught in it. The form would have been submitted by the source and was then classified. Congress had the whistleblower's lawyer appointed to be able to review the info (unless this is another person). Laws don't allow the whistleblower to share the info with anyone but Congress because of the financial info. Not sure if these are part of that or separate leaks from somewhere else.
This isn't really anything new and ultimately I don't anything happens. The FBI will just refuse and the courts will not enforce anything when they ultimately say they don't have it. GOP will complain and yell but in the end another strongly worded letter will be written.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
I understand why we have women-only sports. Men are stronger than women, so for women to have a competition, they have to exclude men.
But why would we have a Women's Chess Championship, or women-only poker? Is there any justification for that? Are men naturally smarter than women?
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/florida-m...ing-events
(05-04-2023, 05:49 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I understand why we have women-only sports. Men are stronger than women, so for women to have a competition, they have to exclude men.
But why would we have a Women's Chess Championship, or women-only poker? Is there any justification for that? Are men naturally smarter than women?
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/florida-m...ing-events
The last line of the article is all that needs to be read.
(05-04-2023, 05:49 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I understand why we have women-only sports. Men are stronger than women, so for women to have a competition, they have to exclude men.
But why would we have a Women's Chess Championship, or women-only poker? Is there any justification for that? Are men naturally smarter than women?
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/florida-m...ing-events
The justification I see is, much fewer women are interested in trying those sports, and it can be very discouraging for the women who do try because they have so much less practice. A women's division in poker or chess can give women a space to build up their skills and confidence and then give the next generation some role models. But I agree that, unlike soccer or MMA, women's divisions in poker and chess should be temporary things. Once they meet their goals, if they ever do, they will no longer be needed
(05-04-2023, 06:09 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2023, 05:49 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I understand why we have women-only sports. Men are stronger than women, so for women to have a competition, they have to exclude men.
But why would we have a Women's Chess Championship, or women-only poker? Is there any justification for that? Are men naturally smarter than women?
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/florida-m...ing-events
The justification I see is, much fewer women are interested in trying those sports, and it can be very discouraging for the women who do try because they have so much less practice. A women's division in poker or chess can give women a space to build up their skills and confidence and then give the next generation some role models. But I agree that, unlike soccer or MMA, women's divisions in poker and chess should be temporary things. Once they meet their goals, if they ever do, they will no longer be needed
No, I disagree with the notion that women need a space to build up their confidence and skills in chess or poker. How are they different from any man who also needs to build up his skills and confidence? In the meantime, as they play in their restricted spaces, they look like they're admitting they are inherently inferior. There's a lot of debate in the chess world about whether they should have "women's grandmasters" or a "women's world champion." I've seen a lot of youtube videos of women playing really good to great chess, and they don't seem to lack confidence or skills. There's a famous chess grandmaster, Judit Polgar, who refused to play women-only tournaments. She saw them as demeaning.
(05-04-2023, 01:19 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (05-03-2023, 08:12 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status...JovJg&s=19
So what's going on over here?
(05-03-2023, 11:02 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Looks to me like some whistleblower is going to jail.
What happened was FBI was running an operation and a source supplied proof that Biden was caught in it. The form would have been submitted by the source and was then classified. Congress had the whistleblower's lawyer appointed to be able to review the info (unless this is another person). Laws don't allow the whistleblower to share the info with anyone but Congress because of the financial info. Not sure if these are part of that or separate leaks from somewhere else.
This isn't really anything new and ultimately I don't anything happens. The FBI will just refuse and the courts will not enforce anything when they ultimately say they don't have it. GOP will complain and yell but in the end another strongly worded letter will be written.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
![[Image: 20230504-070616.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/FR4nFzyP/20230504-070616.jpg)
And here's that strongly written letter!
Such a strong letter! That should teach them a lesson!
[BLEEP] GOP..
(05-04-2023, 06:19 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2023, 06:09 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]The justification I see is, much fewer women are interested in trying those sports, and it can be very discouraging for the women who do try because they have so much less practice. A women's division in poker or chess can give women a space to build up their skills and confidence and then give the next generation some role models. But I agree that, unlike soccer or MMA, women's divisions in poker and chess should be temporary things. Once they meet their goals, if they ever do, they will no longer be needed
No, I disagree with the notion that women need a space to build up their confidence and skills in chess or poker. How are they different from any man who also needs to build up his skills and confidence? In the meantime, as they play in their restricted spaces, they look like they're admitting they are inherently inferior. There's a lot of debate in the chess world about whether they should have "women's grandmasters" or a "women's world champion." I've seen a lot of youtube videos of women playing really good to great chess, and they don't seem to lack confidence or skills. There's a famous chess grandmaster, Judit Polgar, who refused to play women-only tournaments. She saw them as demeaning.
Although fiction, I would think that women would follow the lead of the character in 'The Queen Gambit' mini-series. Play whoever, whenever, under equal rules. That is true equality.
(05-04-2023, 10:02 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2023, 06:19 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]No, I disagree with the notion that women need a space to build up their confidence and skills in chess or poker. How are they different from any man who also needs to build up his skills and confidence? In the meantime, as they play in their restricted spaces, they look like they're admitting they are inherently inferior. There's a lot of debate in the chess world about whether they should have "women's grandmasters" or a "women's world champion." I've seen a lot of youtube videos of women playing really good to great chess, and they don't seem to lack confidence or skills. There's a famous chess grandmaster, Judit Polgar, who refused to play women-only tournaments. She saw them as demeaning.
Although fiction, I would think that women would follow the lead of the character in 'The Queen Gambit' mini-series. Play whoever, whenever, under equal rules. That is true equality.
Judit Pulgar is the only woman who has ever been at the top of the world rankings.
She is entitled to her opinions, but she has had a very exceptional life. Her dad deliberately made chess her life. She likely trained and studied for many more hours than the man she replaced at the top of the rankings, and more hours than the men who eventually replaced her at the top.
So even when we include Pulgar in the analysis, we still see women aren't represented in this area, and the only possible explanations are (a) differences in socialization or (b) differences in brain anatomy. If it's (a), giving women spaces where they can work to build up skills and confidence before they compete with men makes a lot of sense. If it's (b), nothing will work. And no one with any kind of rule making authority in Western society today really wants to discuss (b).
(05-04-2023, 10:23 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2023, 10:02 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]Although fiction, I would think that women would follow the lead of the character in 'The Queen Gambit' mini-series. Play whoever, whenever, under equal rules. That is true equality.
Judit Pulgar is the only woman who has ever been at the top of the world rankings.
She is entitled to her opinions, but she has had a very exceptional life. Her dad deliberately made chess her life. She likely trained and studied for many more hours than the man she replaced at the top of the rankings, and more hours than the men who eventually replaced her at the top.
So even when we include Pulgar in the analysis, we still see women aren't represented in this area, and the only possible explanations are (a) differences in socialization or (b) differences in brain anatomy. If it's (a), giving women spaces where they can work to build up skills and confidence before they compete with men makes a lot of sense. If it's (b), nothing will work. And no one with any kind of rule making authority in Western society today really wants to discuss (b).
This sounds like you believe women have to work harder than men to be successful. Do you really think that way or is this another pot stir?
(05-04-2023, 10:26 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2023, 10:23 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Judit Pulgar is the only woman who has ever been at the top of the world rankings.
She is entitled to her opinions, but she has had a very exceptional life. Her dad deliberately made chess her life. She likely trained and studied for many more hours than the man she replaced at the top of the rankings, and more hours than the men who eventually replaced her at the top.
So even when we include Pulgar in the analysis, we still see women aren't represented in this area, and the only possible explanations are (a) differences in socialization or (b) differences in brain anatomy. If it's (a), giving women spaces where they can work to build up skills and confidence before they compete with men makes a lot of sense. If it's (b), nothing will work. And no one with any kind of rule making authority in Western society today really wants to discuss (b).
This sounds like you believe women have to work harder than men to be successful. Do you really think that way or is this another pot stir?
No, it is only a comment on the remarkable amount of time that the Pulgar sisters spent studying chess from an extremely young age.
There are many areas today where women are equal and treated as equals. Chess is not one of them, and may never be one of them.
![[Image: f3c0fabd-1d98-48ac-94f4-d8b35afb8417_text.gif]](https://y.yarn.co/f3c0fabd-1d98-48ac-94f4-d8b35afb8417_text.gif)