Absolutely. I didn’t mean this as a good thing. I meant to respond to

just don’t fall for that shit again in the next fifty years.

with “regrettably, we seem to be heading rapidly for compounding our error”.

Nigel Farage is leading in the polls.

Thanks for posting this and all the other stuff in here that I enjoyed reading.

I tried this on my wife this morning and can confirm it made us both very happy indeed.

you just want me to acknowledge our life is different.

At last.

This is of such marginal importance to my initial point.

Maybe you could have admitted its nonuniversality a couple of days ago, or added an “in my experience” or “I find that” or two, instead of contradicting people trying to explain the world outside your bubble to you.

Maybe you struggle with abstractions and logic

Ad hominem isn’t a strong debating tactic in my view. I never respected people who need to devalue others to try to make themselves look good. In addition, I think that refusing to accept that your experience might be non-universal doesn’t put you in the “observant and insightful” category. Your overgeneralisation was neither abstract nor logical, and in particular, the existence of illegal or extreme methods to obtain something doesn’t indicate its universal availability as strongly as you seem to think.

I just have to accept that my point is invalid because your life isn’t like mine. If that makes you happy, so be it.

Thanks.

But I’m just an example and I’m not unusual, you are.

I truly wish you’d find romantic love

Either your reading comprehension isn’t up to your implied claims to greater intelligence or you’re playing the ad hominem again.

and also get laid.

Slightly higher frequency would be nice, but I shan’t be approaching any druggies for any blowjobs nor raping anyone as you suggested. Instead, watching a romcom together under a blanket whilst playing with my wife’s hair often but not always works to get her in the right mood. It’s not particularly quick nor 100% reliable, nor is it something I’m going to do every night, but it’s very pleasant indeed.

Before you suggest it, I don’t see the existence of rohypnol (however you spell it, I’ll not google that) as evidence that I can increase the frequency!

Hahaha! No! It’s the USA!

Free speech (or at least the American version of “I shouldn’t face any consequences for saying nasty things”, rather than “the government can’t put me in prison for disagreeing with them”) is sacrosanct, or at least it is for wealthy and important people, which in the USA includes multinational megacorps like Google.

So no, don’t expect a US court to hold a US tech giant to account for saying a thing. The courts have been writing exemptions for Google from liability for decades. Why would they stop now?

For you, sex is freely available, wherever and whenever you want, money isn’t a problem, and you can just spend a little time on tinder and get some, but love and affection evades you because you’re unable to trust, worried that it’s your wealth or body rather than you as a person that they want. You are in the top quarter of the sex wealth. You don’t even realise it’s unusual.

For me, love and affection is freely available. My family love me, parents, siblings, wife, children, niblings. My friends and some colleagues freely offer affection and if I want a hug, I can get one, wherever and whenever. I’m rarely more than walking distance from someone who would gladly greet me with a hug. But for me, if I’m away from my bed, or my wife is unwell, or not really feeling like it, sex isn’t happening for me. So with me having a slightly higher libido than my wife, no, I don’t get sex wherever and whenever I want.

You can lecture me all you like about a blowjob on the tube from a junkie or a visit to a theoretical brothel or turning me into a rapist, but they aren’t the sex I want, and certainly aren’t worth jeopardizing my marriage over. If I had the kind of level of interest in sex with me that you get from attractive women, maybe I would be more tempted to give up on the love I share with my wife, so I can’t claim to be virtuous, precisely because the opportunities you passionately believe I have or should have don’t actually exist.

One romantic partner, one sexual partner. That’s my world. Yours is one romantic partner, many sexual partners. You think my world is abnormal and your world is normal, and we disagree about that. We are not the same.

Maybe your life would be more full of love and affection if you spent more time on pouring out love and affection to others and less time getting as much sex as you like, but maybe women find you just as hard to trust that you wouldn’t go off for sex with someone else at any time, in any place, because of all that wealth and sexiness as you find it to trust them that they love you for you and not all that wealth and sexiness.

I really do like my life and love my family, and I wouldn’t trade, despite all the money and sex you appear to have. But it’s hard to feel terribly sorry for you, partly because of all the money and sex you have thrown freely at you, but mainly because you’ve been so unwilling to hear my perspective. Frankly, if you’re this dismissive with your romantic partners, I begin to see why love is so desperately elusive for you that you described the chances as vanishingly small.

If you really do want love and affection, work on the listening skills and the empathy thing, remembering that no one can hear “I love and value you as you are” at the same time as “you are factually incorrect about your life and completely wrong about how the world works”. Also women can’t offer you the love you seem to crave if it’s eating away at them that you seem to never fully trust in them.

Troll.

Love though, probably chances converge to zero.

You are absurdly cynical about the non existence of love. Most of us don’t have to pretend to be “poor enough” to find love, nor do we have the kind of funding to purchase sex “wherever and whenever” we feel like it. You talk like you’re wealthy and handsome like Brad Pitt that you think of women as golddiggers because they’re throwing themselves at you, and you’re so fucking PRIVILEGED that you don’t even believe that the vast majority of the rest of us don’t live like you when we tell you.

Most of us have roughly the same number of sexual partners as we find people who love us, because that’s how it works for ordinary men.

Most of us don’t have to worry about random women “of course she’ll have sex with me, but is she just after me for my looks or my money?”

We are not the same, and most people don’t live like you at all. You’re just wrong.

Phew - good job OOP spotted that, otherwise he might accidentally start taking Estrogen, grow boobs and kiss men, and he knows he would hate loving giving BJs.

Good job you’re so tolerant and level headed, otherwise you’d be SEETHING?!

Sigh.

Some Scottish people made this meme, standing with trans folk.

Some Scottish terfs and English transphobes together overturned the Scottish trans-inclusive legislation.

Scottish Independence would mean that a majority English Parliament and a majority English wouldn’t be able to overturn Scottish legislation, and neither Scotland nor England would be facing trans erasure, trans exclusion and anti-trans discrimination. This is the sense in which particularly Scots trans folks and trans allies who want independence feel that this is another example of Scotland not being allowed to do what it chooses. But Scots who want independence largely dislike English rule rather than dislike English people.

It’s OK to be cross with the English-dominated Supreme Court, including the two Scots on it. It’s OK to be cross with nasty author and Scottish terf hate groups. It’s OK to be cross with the situation that the English-dominated Supreme Court can overrule the Scottish Parliament, (especially when the English-dominated Parliament has Parliamentary Sovereignty as a core principal and can overturn the Supreme Court in a way that the Scottish Parliament cannot, even if the current government is incorrectly treating it as constitutionally binding), and it’s OK to be cross with the situation that the overturning of that law in Scotland has now exploded over the whole of the UK spewing shit over people who are just trying to live their lives in peace.

It’s not OK to be cross with random English trans allies just because they’re English and it’s not OK to be cross with random Scottish allies just because they’re Scottish.

I’m sorry, but if it boils down to you claiming that someone can have sex wherever and wherever they want because technically they could rape someone, and if your argument is that love comes harder because you can’t force anyone to love you, I absolutely come back to the we are NOT the same, and you are WRONG in more than one sense. Ready availability whenever and whenever of sex is for very attractive people and rapists. I’m neither. Stop trying to persuade me otherwise. You’re wrong.

I have a friend who explained how easy it was to get sex, and it didn’t even come close to involving rape, but no, no, that hinged on him being a different person to me physically and mentally. Surely if you were able to change yourself to be a different person physically and mentally it would be just as easy for you to find love.

Again, this is absolutely not about personal experience, and has nothing to do with that.

Well you made a universal claim that anyone can get sex any time any where, and I think that’s true only for a minority of people, and I was just using myself as a counterexample rather than arguing generalities because I absolutely am aware of where I sit in society and roughly how often and exactly where sex is available to me, and rather than admit that your massive overgeneralisation from your stud lifestyle is untrue, you argued with me that I was incorrect. About myself even. I’m not. You are.

why not kill poor people to solve poverty?

From whom would you then extract wealth and labour?

You don’t need to make everyone millionaires. You do need to give everyone secure access to food, housing and healthcare.

Sex, I could go to the next brothel and have it 10 times a day.

Brothels are illegal in my country.

Or go on tinder and let golddiggers have it.

The vast majority of people are absolutely nowhere near rich enough to attract golddiggers.

If you’re a decently attractive woman, you’ll get it for free on tinder in 5 minutes. Or in the next bar or wherever.

I don’t know what proportion of women you believe are decently attractive, but surely you accept it isn’t 100%. Also roughly 49% of us are male, and this absolutely and unequivocally is not the experience of even decently attractive men.

I can also walk around asking anyone until I’m lucky.

This would get me slapped and possibly arrested for sexual harassment. It would definitely, definitely, definitely not work. You have to either be an unusually attractive man or alternatively be seeking sex from men for this to have any chance whatsoever of success.

I keep telling you that your experience is far from typical, and I keep telling you that we live completely different lives. You are confident that you could easily get sex if you wanted it, whenever or wherever you wanted it. I promise you 100% that I am right that your experience is NOT universal. You live in a magical world of sex availability. By contrast I live in a blessed world of readily available affection from my friends (who I chose), surrounded by family that love me, but where sex is available with frequency lower than my preference and with zero realistic chance of me getting it elsewhere.

WE ARE NOT THE SAME. Accept it please, and stop telling me I’m wrong about what my own lived experience is like. You are WRONG.

I guess you deliberately want to misunderstand me.

I don’t want to deliberately misunderstand you, I want you to hear me. Your experience of readily available sex whenever, wherever, whoever, is far from universal.

Scotland has it’s own devolved parliament. But England does not.

Doesn’t stop them from being trampled all over by the English more right-wing parliament.

if it wasnt for a Scottish supreme court judge

You talk like the supreme court is a dictatorship. It is not.

an act passed in Scottish parliament

Are you saying that the Scottish Parliament ought not to have passed pro-trans legislation, or that it was a false flag operation designed to provoke the awful consequences that the English-dominated supreme court inflicted on us all?

My original point, which you seem determined to pick holes in, was that the Scottish people, who are by and large far more left wing than the English, had the most trans-inclusive legislation in the UK. The Scots are aggrieved that yet again something progressive was overruled by an English-dominated power. Whether you agree or not that the Scots don’t like having their left wing ideals messed with by the London Parliament and the London Supreme Court, the meme is from regular trans ally Scots folks expressing Scottish solidarity with LGBT+, and I think it’s a mistake to be getting cross about that because nasty author is also a Scot and the hate group had Scottish in the name.

Nigel Farage waves the England flag; should we hate and blame all English folk for his hatred? Even those who oppose him? It’s right to be very angry and upset about what happened, but to blame all Scottish people for it and to reject anyone from Scotland who expresses sympathy and common cause with you is coming across as a bit of a counterproductive, unfair and overly broad brush.

Much easier to access.

Oh yes. That too.

You’re deliberately misinterpreting me and insulting me at the same time. There’s no need for that.

You said

Sex you can have with everyone and get it everywhere.

And that’s simply not true for most of us.

You characterised love and affection as hard to find, but I get love of various sorts readily from my wife, children and other family, and a great deal of affection from friends and some colleagues. You characterised sex as easy to find, stating I could get it anywhere and any time with anyone, and you argued with people who disagree, but the truth is that I can get sex only in my bedroom, only with my wife, only at night, and only when she is in the mood for it, and anything else is pure fiction, for me. Maybe not for you, but definitely for me.

That fact that you even think to assert that love and affection are hard to find and sex is easy to find is why we live very, very, very different lives. I’m not asking to swap, but we are NOT the same.

Maybe you mean something different than you’re saying, but of you want to get your point across to us ordinary folk for whom a sex life as busy as our libido was a teenage fantasy that never turned up, you’d better start rephrasing and explaining rather than just claiming “technical” truth.

It’s also “technically” true that you can get affection anywhere. Yesterday I gave a homeless guy a lift from his begging pitch outside the bus station to his tent and bought him and his girlfriend a pizza hut on the way, and he cried and hugged me. Today I met up with a bunch of friends and got about four hugs, which is totally normal for that bunch. Most people wouldn’t call it love, but it’s heaps of affection.

We live very different lives for you to claim what you claim.

I’m also troubled that you only said that you can’t enforce love and affection. Enforcing sex is called rape. I’m guessing that you didn’t mean that, but do you not see that you need to back down from some of the words and phrases that you used instead of defending them, and explain what you meant in a less provocative way?

You missed out could. That’s why we are not the same.

Conclusion:

bandwith = maximum volume per second, like width of a water pipe

latency = delay in arrival, how many milliseconds the data takes to make the journey, like how slow or long a pipe is.