Leaderboard

Lol. I have went to bat for you time and time again, asked people personally both in private and in threads not to be dicks to you. Said you were a good dude numerous times in the shout box that can be backed up by most regular members. You are such a pussy. Peace.

There is no good advice in my opinion. Losing anything that meaningful is going to hurt no matter what. One thing I will say is you never regret the moments you spend with something you love. As much time as you can devote to her, do it, it will not be a regret. It may also help to be positively patient with yourself. Realize that it is going to suck and you are going to be hurt, and there is no time table for it. It will take as long as it takes for the grieving process, and there really is no arbitrary measurement for how long it takes to get over it. She truly will be in a better place. Whether that be heaven or not suffering, she will experience peace. She won't be in agony every day. I think we all have a point where suffering is no longer preferable even for those we love. The last thing is remember you were the center of her world. She loved you immensley and love will always stay with you. And do not second guess forgoing chemo. It is not a bad decision. She is going to need you and I have always found that we can learn lessons from death about a life well lived. She will pass with people around who lover and love in her heart. That is something to be revered.

Halloween. It was ass, like complete and total shot. No character development good 15 to 20 minute lapses of nothing going on. A garbage final act, it was just a shit movie. I am disappointed, fans of the original deserved better.

Which sports does it not matter? Not saying they don't exist... but the biological differences in born males and females is pretty apparent across most sports. Average male golfers (not necessarily pro) drive the ball off the tee 70 yards further than women... Average male tennis players serve the ball 20 mph faster than women.Men are faster in sports like running and swimming and hold practically all the fastest times. The absolute hardest female pitchers are just north of 80 mph... Women use smaller balls and shoot from a shorter distance in the WNBA (men still have higher shooting% ). The differences in more physical sports like football or combat sports are obvious. Obviously there are exceptions and outliers.. There are weak men, strong women etc. At the end of the day it's really tough to cross those lines in sports. Females transitioning to males is tough because he is probably taking doses of testosterone -- in most cases he is still going to get his ass kicked by other boys/men because of lower levels but dominate girls/women. The other way around is the same exact thing, just with naturally more testosterone (like Fallon Fox) .. She's gonna kill most women, and does... The injuries she incurs on her opponents is from just brute strength. You ever see those cartoons or movies where you have this super buff, roided out mofo and then these little pipsqueaks run up to them and punch them with everything they've got and the roided out mofo doesn't even feel it or flinch? Ya... that's Fallon Fox in womens MMA. Watching chicks try and hit her would be comical in other settings -- kinda scary in a ring though. Biology and genetics just can't be ignored. The question comes down to... Who is it more important to be fair to -- the transgender athlete or everyone else. Lose - Lose right there.

I'm just gonna say it's irresponsible to throw around labels like that. People do it with Trump all the time, even professionals. The circumstances that lead to certain behaviors can stem from a lot of situations, and something like clinical narcissism is almost always a complex combination of genetics and attachment trauma. There's heightened narcissism all over the place but that's not what NPD (narcissistic personality disorder) is. I don't agree with blots' and his way of handling this situation, but I again think throwing around psychiatric labels in any situation outside of a professional diagnosing a client/patient under their care is irresponsible.

It's an unfortunate reality that one's message needs to be marketable. That's not an option if you want people to genuinely reflect on their behaviors/motives/etc. There's a chef at my work that everyone hates, largely for good reason because he's all high and mighty about noticing things others don't. But a lot of the stuff he says is legitimate, and it's stuff more people need to recognize. But no one wants to listen to him because he's an asshole. I happen to be very patient and I'm a good listener, so I can see past all that and recognize we see eye to eye on many things. But he's an asshole, he doesn't care how people receive his ideas, and as such no one listens. Compare that to one of my mom's friends, who's been defiantly anti-homosexuality her whole life because of faith and shunned her daughter because of it. I had a discussion with her once, validated where she came from despite me disagreeing with it in literally every way, and explained things reasonably to her. "You can think homosexuality is a sin, but that's not your judgement according to your faith, it's God's, and you have no control. She's your daughter and has probably just wanted you to love her despite those differences". My mom said her friend reached out to thank me because she found the courage to speak to her daughter for the first time in years. Low-key feel like I'm just virtue signaling but that's the example I think of. Will it work for everyone? Fuck no, I know first hand there are some dumbasses on both sides of the aisle who just won't listen. But it's absolutely more effective than screaming how shitty someone is because of their ignorance or beliefs.

See that's how circular logic works. Sean says something that has nothing to do with anybody's personal life here. You in turn say something personal to try to deliberately hurt the guy. Then people call you out for being a gigantic piece of shit, and then you say hey why are you so offended. I'm not offended, you can say what you want. That being said so can I, Sean, he may be offended. He may not be, but the thing is what you didn't learn in gender Theory 101 is you don't get to say whatever you want, and then when people react turn around and play victim. You can say whatever you want, that's your right as an American, but so can everybody else. The reason you're getting the reaction you are, is because you always like to talk about morality, and doing the right thing, and you try to be the virtue signaling moral compass of this board, but the thing is is you're the biggest piece of garbage here. To say something like that about somebody personally, who didn't attack you personally tells everybody here exactly what they need to know about you. You are worse than Phil, the funny part is Phil had you pegged, that dude might be a profit. what if somebody made fun of you for being the fat loser ass kid your whole life who got picked last so you grew up with no self-esteem, so you went on the internet to take it out on everyone. You would be throwing up your arms about body positivity and fat shaming, and all other manner of virtue signaling so that way the people on this board who defend you and your shity behavior, would come to your Aid. The funny part is is you proving you'll attack anyone, so you're going to find yourself with no allies left on this board. You'll be all alone, just as I imagine you are in real life. People come on this board and share private things because this has somewhat of a feel of community. OSU tells us important things, Sean tells us important things, I've shared important things about my wife and kids, so has Sarge, and so has everybody else. There has been an unspoken rule that has been respected that you wont attack people for sharing vulnerabilities, and here you are doing exactly that. It's disgusting and Despicable. I'm not going to be offended for Sean, but I will you tell you something, that is what a coward does. Somebody says something in confidence, and you attacked their vulnerability. That is the definition of a coward.

Too bad yours didn't teach you any manners. You just get too emotional and personal for absolutely no reason.

This is fucking hilarious though:

The idea of a religion in today's world where the focus of worship is based on a being or beings that will smite you for what ends up (sometimes) being something pretty arbitrary is so old-fashioned. Religions use punishments like going to hell to scare people to a leaders way of thinking. Confining people to imaginary boundaries by an invisible force and then denying those same people the right to question intentions is nothing more than fear-mongering and a power play where power doesn't really exist. I am not going to make this into a religious debate nor hash over my personal story which I have told a couple times here but... While I think organized religion is ridiculous, I do have a faith in something greater. Call it God or karma or magic feely whats-its, it doesn't matter. I've read most of the bible, I've gone through most of the Catholic sacraments, I've taught children the Bible... But if you want to sit here and tell me that the all powerful.. all knowing.. all gracious.. all forgiving.. and all benevolent God hates gay people... or anal sex (LULZ)... or literally any other dumb ass thing you can name from the Bible... I am gonna call you on some bull shit. That's just fear and a blatant misuse of faith / religion.

The idea that Putin wanted Trump in power and also that Trump does not actually answer to Putin is not two ideas that both cannot be true, as you continue to imply. We have ample evidence that Russia wanted Trump in power. They could also have clearly underestimated how ridiculously narcissistic and stubborn the man is, and he is not playing to their tune. It does not mean that collusion did not happen.

SPOILERS SPOILERS. I WARNED YOU. See, I am in the same boat. I am an Absolute genre nut who love the first one.I thought it was one of the most groundbreaking horror movies ever made, and I absolutely saw this is a chance for it to build on something and make this franchise unequivocally the greatest of the slasher films. The problem was there was Zero plot development. You have him in a mental Asylum, he escapes. That parallels the series, which I thought was a decent start, and then there was a pretty good action sequence after that. Then boom, here's Laurie strode's daughter who has an estranged relationship with her, and the only thing we ever get out of it is that it was because she was trying to prepare her for evil incarnate. And it's a bunch of whining and incessant bitching, and there's a granddaughter who there's absolutely zero development of the character for, and Laurie Strode is played as a loon throughout the entire movie. Come to find out she is correct common he's indeed after her. Then there's the final showdown with her and her family, and the most anti-climactic ending, and final "gotcha" phrase in recent memory. It was almost as bad as Busta Rhymes "Burn Muthafucka" line. then there's the crazed dr. Loomis replacement that has no backstory, place a prominent role for two whole scenes, and then just vanishes. I thought the movie was atrocious, I really was expecting so much better from this film. I got installed you from the very beginning, and the first two or three minutes when he first on the mask, and then 10 minutes and I figured out this was going to be nothing like the great memories from the past.

Ya rly. He a dumb.

Something like a trans league ? That seems like it would turn into people viewing it more like a freak show than legitimate sport. I hope not, but I don't trust people to treat it with any modicum of respect or legitimacy. I don't want trans women fighting dudes either because Odds are they get just as fuckes up in that as their opponents wooden the female sports.

I think it's called narcissism, dawg. Idk, OSU please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong because you're a walking DSM lol

Normally I'd have a big writeup about the QB's on this list, but I want to talk about one who isn't on this list, and only by the grace of Josh Allen can we pray it stays that way. That's right, I'm talking about the Peterman, first name Nate. You might just want to look at his atrocious interception rate and end the discussion there, but it's even worse. Sub 40% adjusted completion percentage, and an adjusted yards per attempt below 3. Below 3! Dude is such straight garbage I am surprised he has a job at the time I'm writing this. Is Paxton Lynch really worse than the Peterman? Derek Anderson? An old and fat Vince Young? I don't think so! And that's the saddest part of it all. Anyway, onto to the QB's themselves. There wasn't a lot of shakeup at the top, but an interesting thing to note is that we have a Bears QB in the top 5. Something I didn't think would ever happen, but Trubisky has had some ridiculously efficent games against Florida teams, and squeaks into the top 5 because of that, just behind fellow 2017 draft pick Patrick Mahomes, who is still putting on clinics in this league. At the bottom we have Josh Allen, who despite being the least efficient QB with qualifying attempts, he's still about 3 times better than his backup. Just ahead of him are a pair of Browns, a QB who got sacked more times last week than he completed passes (Marcus Mariota), and Trevor Siemian who can't run. I mean Case Keenum. Can we retroactively give Stefon Diggs and Adam Thielen a joint MVP for making him legit? Like seriously? Our big risers are Carson Wentz, handing the Giants a quick and efficient dismantling on Thursday. Russell Wilson, who got to spank the Raiders in Oakland, and CJ Beathard, who carried on the strong tradition of 49ers QB's embarassing every single member of the Packers Defense. On the other side, our lone big drop was DeShaun Watson, who just could not hold onto the ball against Buffalo and fell right back into the middle of the pack. Eli Manning and Baker Mayfield took small tumbles as well. We're already a third of the way through the season, and I'm really interested to see which QB wins the competition at the top. Brees, Rivers, Ryan, Mahomes, Goff, and even Trubisky is starting to force his way into that discussion. But you can't ignore Kirk Cousins or Tom Brady either, since one plays with the MVP, and the other seems to beat Father Time like Father Time beats his kids. Week 6 QB Rankings 1. Drew Brees 13 2. Philip Rivers 17 3. Matt Ryan 24 (+2) 4. Patrick Mahomes 27 5. Mitch Trubisky 36 (+3) 6. Ryan Fitzpatrick 37 7. Jared Goff 39 (-4) 8. Tom Brady 48 (+2) 9. Kirk Cousins 49 (-2) 10. Cam Newton 53 (-1) 11. Carson Wentz 58 (+8) 12. Ben Roethlisberger 59 (+4) 13. Matt Stafford 59 (+1) 14. Aaron Rodgers 61 (-1) 15. Andy Dalton 66 (-3) 16. Derek Carr 69 (-1) 17. Russell Wilson 72 (+7) 18. Ryan Tannehill 76 (+3) 19. Alex Smith 76 (-1) 20. C.J. Beathard 79 (+7) 21. DeShaun Watson 81 (-10) 22. Eli Manning 81 (-5) 23. Joe Flacco 82 24. Andrew Luck 82 (-4) 25. Blake Bortles 85 (-3) 26. Dak Prescott 89 (+4) 27. Sam Darnold 90 (+4) 28. Jimmy Garoppolo 100 (-2) 29. Josh Rosen 100 (NR) 30. Case Keenum 106 (+2) 31. Marcus Mariota 112 (-2) 32. Tyrod Taylor 116 (+1) 33. Baker Mayfield 118 (-5) 34. Josh Allen 120 Recently Removed: Nick Foles, Sam Bradford Could/Will be removed next week: Jimmy Garoppolo, Tyrod Taylor Players on the Cusp: Jameis Winston

I'm generally a proponent of considering biological factors because then we can understand where these tendencies come from. However, I didn't mean to address people who are more sexually adventurous in their youth. I mean assholes who see something (not someone) they want and make them uncomfortable when they can't get it, if not worse. That is definitely more common than people tend to think, though I'm also not trying to claim every guy is like that. (Personally, I tend to hate other guys in an abstract way because of my own insecurities and past, and don't see a practical reason to let go of that unless an individual shows me I'm wrong). There's a lot of emotional dysregulation that factors into sexual harassment and assault. Those things will never go away, but I think teaching people how to process emotions effectively and in a healthy manner in their youth could cut down on that behavior. That, and kids not growing up with ideas of what it means to be a man or woman. Let kids sort their identity out for themselves. Unfortunately that last one will never happen, it's too profitable to exploit the population's insecurities to spark consumerism. I also don't necessarily advocate for legislative change. I've made my stance clear before that I think a lot of societal issues are individual behavior problems on a mass scale, and they result from poorly handled emotions and poor development in their youth. I think more education into developmental and childhood attachment trauma could go a long way in helping to shape future generations to not be pieces of shit, regardless of their socioeconomic status, sex, race, etc.

I agree. At least in so far as that it's not a societal epidemic. This Harkens back to what I was saying earlier, but when you really think about it what else can we do? At least on a widespread level? Yes there are definitely entitled assholes out there, I don't think anybody can disagree with you. I am also very aware of how women are treated on a day-to-day basis. My wife is a beautiful lady, and I mean gorgeous, and she can't walk down a city block without somebody throwing her a glance. It used to bother me, but I think there are definitely some biological imperative there for a lot of that behavior, and what am I going to do fight every man that looks at her? That would literally become a full-time job. And it does scare me, my wife is more than capable of taking care of herself, but her a gun just to make sure. That being said I'm raising a daughter, and I know the last kind of guy that I would want my daughter to date is someone like me when I was 16 or 17, I only had one thing on my mind and it sure as hell wasn't good behavior. I think most men are that way in their adolescence, and again I think there are some biological factors at play here, but I also think that as you get older you should develop the self consciousness to know when things are appropriate or they're not. One of the largest issues I see with that statement, is that we're kind of redefining welcome and unwelcome conduct. Rape is always been bad, it always will be bad, and it will never be a good thing. That said there are a lot of other things that are covered under the umbrella of sexual harassment that are changing. Not to sound like an old man here, but it used to be that if a woman put extra effort into making herself look nice, you could compliment her it wasn't a bad thing. For instance, if you have a secretary who's going out on a date, and she's doing everything she can to make herself look nice, and she comes in ready for the day looking like a million bucks, used to be able to be an environment that you could say hey, look very nice today, he's a lucky man. And that was okay. In this day and age, sometimes it isn't, and sometimes it is. The problem is it's hard to know which one that is without actually saying something. I also understand there's a massive Chasm between saying hey you look very nice today, and hey sugar tits that's a sweet ass. so that notwithstanding, it is still getting very hard to know which is which. and then you see stories of women who think men should have to have consent before they say anything to them, and that is just odd to me. I can understand if you say something vulgar, but if you're in line at a coffee shop, and you strike up an innocuous conversation, somebody can literally think you're trying to harass them. Now if somebody says hey leave me alone you make me feel uncomfortable, then by God you should do that. But if they don't say anything, then how do you really know? I just feel that there's a lot of gray area when it comes to sexual harassment in so far as words are concerned. now any sort of physical touching is completely inappropriate, and things that society as a collective would agree or vulgar or definitely inappropriate. However I do believe a guy can say something that is meant with a fairly innocuous intent, and get made into something it isn't. Not granted these are rarely life-changing because I think most people can see the difference, but it just puts men in an odd place when it comes to being able to talk to women. there's also some parallels with racism in those statements. I think from a legislative standpoint, things are about as good as they can get as far as race and sex is concerned. I mean literally what else do you do that you can make it federal law that is fair to make things better for either black people or women? I just don't know that you can. Now that's not to say as a society we don't have things we need to fix, but that's more on the individual level. I definitely agree that racism and sexism still exist, but how do you get that out of society? I think racism will slowly dwindled down, but I'm not sure we'll ever fully go away, and the same thing goes for sexism. Humans have been on this planet for Millennia now, and we came a long way as far as dwindling down idiocy, but it has never gone away, nor do I think it will unfortunately.

I didn't mean that you being a guy makes what sean said ok. I meant that you shouldn't have taken it as a personal shot at your character, because it wasn't. But you responded with one. Look, I get it. It appears that you and Sean are like oil and water. But I can go back through this thread and others and find where you guys have agreed on just as many things as you have dissgreed, if not more. It is a shame that we think everyone has to agree with us 100% on every little thing to be considered an ally. With that attitude, it is of little surprise that we get nothing done, and that we have been met with the failure we so richly deserve. What can we do today to change that? We often disagree on our methods, but not our goals. That is to say, we often want the same things, but we see different ways of getting there. I know TGP is a place full of reasonable people who actually have more in common than not. I'm so tired of fighting against people when I should be fighting beside them. I haven't done my part to avoid that in the past... but I'm ready now.

What the fuck.

That article you just sent explicitly says she isn't claiming tribal membership. "I'm x% Cherokee" is such a cliche. Is it a bit dirty to use it on a college application? Sure. Equating it with legitimate accusations about attempted rape is ridiculous.

Again, with Warren, you are a gigantic hypocrite if you have an issue with Kavanaugh continuing to lie about small minor things that he did in his college years, and you simultaneously do not have an issue with Warren continuing to lie about this. The whole reason people were mad about Kavanaugh drinking as a high school senior is not because he drank, but because he lied and continues to lie about it. How can you not also be mad about Warren continuing to lie by putting forth this ridiculous test to say she was NA and therefore can use that in her application? First off, its legally not allowable, as I said, 1/8 is the lowest, and secondly, again, same as with Kavanaugh, if she just said, "Yes I was an idiot while I was younger and I put that down wrongly" then the whole thing is over and done with. But she just keeps on doubling down on this. Also if the Dems nominate Hillary I will be fully on board with the crazy train sean drives around here. Burn 'em all. That would be absolutely insanely nuts.

The issue with Warren is that she allegedly used her native ancestry to actually check the box that said she was native american during her application to college. I am 1/8 Cherokee, my great grandmother was a full blooded cherokee. I have never once checked the box that says I am a native american. Because I am not. Even though I could absolutely use it, (1/8 is the lowest allowed), I am very clearly a white guy and have no business trying to claim something for a minority. Same thing with Warren, who is absolutely not a Native American. The test says 6-10 generations ago, which means she is, at best, a great-great-great-great-grand-daughter of a native American, or 1/64 Native American, less than 1%. But yes, Warren is absolutely going to run in 2020.

Proof that luck is a huge factor.