正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

Lala says she hates when husbands get involved in their wives’ drama, adding that viewers will see this play out on The Valley. She does not name who she is referring to, but I heard that it could be Danny. That criticism feels misplaced because this is not The...

92,555 次观看 • 6 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

So the discourse around this Dave Ramsey clip is so mixed up that I’ve just decided to upload the whole thing. In the full context of the call, the caller makes it perfectly obvious that: 1. She has been with this man, whom she is now living with, for six years. 2. She is a nurse and can make her own money. 3. She has been out of school for two years, and in that time she has paid off $70,000 of the debt. In the course of the call, Dave never suggests that this man should have to pay for that debt. Indeed, he actively suggests that she leave him, which guarantees he will not pay for the debt. Dave also all but says that, because of her career choice, the caller will be able to pay for the debt on her own, even if she has to take extra hours. All Dave is saying—and this should have been obvious from the original clip—is that the two are not aligned on money and debt at all. It is also clear that Dave thinks the man is stringing her along, which he is. So they simply should not be married at all, because this is a fundamental failure in the relationship. I myself would add that, at this late stage in the relationship, if you do not trust a woman financially, you should simply not be with that woman. And that is perfectly fine. But what you do not do is drag her along for six years when she obviously wants to get married, and then put another two or three years of financial hoops in front of her so that maybe you will propose. It is a waste of everybody’s time.

CTrefugees

135,314 次观看 • 3 个月前

The reason that this extra diverse doctor lawyer equal does not respond as normal to simple explanations has to do with theory of mind. The police officer explains six times that she caused an accident and now has to provide her insurance. The diverse equal knows that she caused the accident. She remembers it from mere moments ago. However, the police officer was not there during the accident. She did not see him there. Therefore, according to diversity mathematics, the police officer could not possibly know that there was an accident at all. How could he? He did not see it. Or rather, she did not see him seeing it. "If I did not see the police officer looking at me as I caused an accident, then he does not know that I caused an accident. I know this because I am unable to know anything that I did not personally witness, and so that is how everybody's mind works." In the vibrant mind of the diversity, everything that does not happen in front of a person's eyes is a confusing mess that is impossible to understand. There simply is no way to ascertain that something happened if you did not see it before your eyes. That is why this extra diverse value contributor believes that the police officer is similarly confused. "It should be easy to get away with lying about this accident," she calculated, diversely. "He ain't see nothin.'" That is why, when he insists that the accident did in fact occur, she has no choice but to perceive this as racism. How could it not be? Every other diverse equal that she has ever lied to in a similar fashion has been easily confused, and let her go after committing similar crimes. So in the mind of the diversity, "black people always let me go when I lie, but white people never do, so white people must just be evil racists." We are truly enriched by the genius of these builders of civilization

hoe_math = PsychoMath

232,770 次观看 • 9 个月前

One thing you’ll notice with complementarians in general and Allie Beth Stuckey in particular is a major focus on utilitarian arguments: “What I’m doing is working. I’m really good at it. How can you say that this is wrong?” Allie Beth concedes that men in general are more suited for the public sphere than women, but that does not mean that all men are cut out for it and that all women are not. It’s very clear that Stuckey sees herself as the exception that proves the rule. She is the unique and special snowflake that can fight the culture war as well or better than any man. As evidence, Allie cites the Jubilee episode where she debated 20 leftists cosplaying as Christians. This event really went to her head. She got near universal praise for her performance (not from me), and it’s clear that she believes that no one could have done a better job. But is that true? I question the wisdom of sending a woman into this arena, especially with so many gay men involved. This was obviously a controlled environment, but the outside world is not. A young lady that attempts to follow Stuckey’s example is putting herself in mortal danger. The chances of an interaction getting violent are insanely high. Allie holding her own (if she even did) on that show doesn’t make it right. Also, in general, I don’t believe debate shows are worthwhile at all. We’ve won the debate. We need to start acting like it. The last thing we should be doing is platforming gay slop perspectives. And finally, the passive aggression comes out. Allie does not like being told that she’s not cut out for this or that a man could do better. Just watch the last 20 seconds. You’ll see what I mean. Should I keep going? Have you been punished enough? Have I been punished enough? 🙃

Defiant Baptist

24,416 次观看 • 9 个月前