Search Results: lowering standards

You are in the parliament of a small wealthy nation, Amazia, with a population of 5 million and a living standard of 10 on a scale of 10, very rich and with high equality. There is a bill up for vote to accept 500,000 immigrants over the next two years from Despondia, a densely populated poor country riven by poverty and internal strife; the living standard there is 2, on the same scale. If you take in the immigrants, the living standard of your existing citizens will drop to 8, due to increased demand on resources, social support of newcomers, and increased crime. But those who are taken into the country will see their living standard go from 2 to 7 (it will be slightly lower than current citizens for a while until they adapt). You are retiring at the end of your term so there is no concern about political retribution. What do you do?

I don't think women are cut out for direct combat roles and I say that as a former US Infantry Marine. The Marine Corps allowed women to join the infantry and specifically went out of their way to select the most badass female Marines to try out for infantry training battalion. Want to know what happened? They pretty much all failed out because the Marine Corps refuses to lower their training standards.

How about biology? You can't deny facts. Do you know how heavy it is to carry a full pack with a rifle and plate carrier for days on out in the field? Do you understand that men have more upper bodystrength and are overall more resilient to strenuous physical stress? How they can control recoil and their weapons more effectively because of this? How testosterone the primary male sex hormone plays a major role in all of this? How women will have issues in the field due to menstrual cycles? How if captured by the enemy, they would be brutally raped again and again and again and again? How this would cause major issues with unit cohesion?

I have a huge issue with this because I have friends who have been killed in combat due to other people's inability to do their job correctly. Women are nothing but a liability in direct combat roles and it's been proven evidently true because of the fact that they couldn't even get through our training.

Feminist can go be crazy in whatever way of their choosing without getting any rise out of me, but when they start getting good men killed in combat just for some political agenda or just overall point... well, that's when I have a huge issue. It's the most selfish thing I've ever heard of. These people who support this need to get their head out of their ass, and stop thinking about themselves and their godamn political agenda or whatever point they're trying to prove... and realize it's not all about them. They're stupitidy is going to result in good men killed in combat because they want to prove a fucking point.

People always talk about quality over quantity (unless you're a hooker of course). When it comes to making the decision about who you want to live for the rest of your life with, or even just who you want to go out for a movie with, everyone wants to be sure about it. However, not everyone goes about it the same way. Some of us have very high standards, where as some people aren't quite as picky. I for one have very high standards, but a lot of my friends don't. Generally speaking, we raise our standards as we date more people, but is there such a thing as too many standards?
Ladies/Gentlemen, what do you think? Would you say you have low standards, or high standards? Why? Is it better to have lower or higher standards? Is there such a thing as too little or too great amount of standards? Please share your thoughts.

If your man likes to cook or is a better cook, understandable. I'm talking about people who think it's degrading to cook for your man.

There's nothing degrading about taking care of your man. Sure, I can cook for myself, but it's nice to have her do it for me sometimes after work, sex, or the gym. I take care of her car and do other things that fit the male gender stereotype. I'd fix anything at her place because I'm good with that stuff. Need some help moving furniture? I got you. I do that and don't bitch about it. All of the girls I've been with have wanted to cook for me. It's not forced.

Women are biologically more nurturing. Gender roles are natural. I'm attracted to women. I like feminine women. Women who aren't feminine and who try and act like men to try and prove a point are by no means attractive. It's not about superiority or inferiority either. Feminine women can be strong. Masculine men can be strong. We're just different. Wtf is wrong with that?

I don't know if men are just lowering their standards, but I'd seriously never consider a relationship if she felt like cooking for me was degrading. A nurturing side is a positive and attractive trait that men look for in women. Men are biologically attracted to this because it means you would make a great mother. Men in general appreciate this stuff.

If you're a man, and disagree with me, and think that it's degrading, then I honestly think you're just a beta bitch who's a product of what third wave feminism has created. If you're a woman who feels this it's degrading, then have fun with your bitch of a boyfriend/husband because that's the only type of man who would put up with that.