Welcome to Thunderdome

GORDON wrote: ↑Mon Oct 10, 2022 12:03 am "Your dependents get X amount of benefits. Have as many spouses as you want, they're splitting it."

But that's discrimination. You have to treat Ken and his five spouses the same as Bob and his wife.

The peeps with multiple spouses better have mad skills because they're going to be unattractive as a hirable candidate next to people with just one. Corporations already try to do away with employees as much as possible. This isn't going to ease that trend.

Isn't it funny how "the civilized world" spent forever vilifying polygamists in Utah and finally got laws there changed to outlaw it only to watch "progress" bring it back?

Those progressives cheering this on are the same people who fought to get it outlawed in Utah.

Decades ago I played The Sims, and it was amazing how much easier life was with 2 wives and 1 husband in the game. I have a feeling it's more complicated in real life, though.

That's how social security works. If you're on it and you have kids, all the kids are given equal shares of a fixed amount.

GORDON wrote: ↑Mon Oct 10, 2022 12:13 pm That's how social security works. If you're on it and you have kids, all the kids are given equal shares of a fixed amount.

I get that. I'm thinking more on the medical insurance front and other benefits/perks that are geared to or cost more for spouses.

Isn't it already set up that you pay more "insurance" for each person on your plan?

GORDON wrote: ↑Mon Oct 10, 2022 1:48 pm Isn't it already set up that you pay more "insurance" for each person on your plan?

Probably depends on the plan. Here at my office there's single, single w/dependents, married w/o kids, and family.

One thing I do know is that the company's rates they pay for you will go up as the number of people go up.

Then there's the perk stuff like company get togethers. How many people are you bringing to the Christmas party? 20? But it's just extended family! That IS your extended family?!

11 years later, and nothing has changed.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Fri Jun 16, 2023 9:15 am 11 years later, and nothing has changed.

For insurance? Correct.

As a general statement? False.

-Polygamists or multi-partner relationships (that aren't marriages) are absolutely normalized. Perhaps not legally accepted yet, and still socially a "wut?", but they are accepted enough to get MSM coverage and mentions by certain politicians. This group is the closest to laws being changed, which as I said many moons ago is hilariously hypocritical. Polygamy is apparently evil and oppressive only when related to religion. If some cucks do it, it's fucking awesome.
-For some reason cuckholding is gaining popularity. I'm sure that has nothing to do with the pussification of men...
-Incest is usually at the top of porn category lists.
-This trans movement didn't exist 11 years ago. They existed, but this current push has falsely exploded their numbers because so many children are being caught up in the extremely profitable fad. It also provides a nice distraction away from the terrible job our two party government is doing.
-People fucking animals didn't speak up, but now are bold enough to campaign to get their own letter in LGBQT2I+.
-People are trying to normalize pedophilia by giving them a "nice" acronym, MAP, and suggesting kids can consent.
-And of course, I hate to bring up this horrible tragedy, but the woman who married the Eifel Tower in 2007, left it for a fence. We should really take the Tower out drinking to help it get over her.

Leisher wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 4:56 pm -This trans movement didn't exist 11 years ago.

This isn't true. It's existed for decades, but it's certainly gained steam.

Leisher wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 4:56 pm -People are trying to normalize pedophilia by giving them a "nice" acronym, MAP, and suggesting kids can consent.

I think you forget how many cultures had pedophilia as a norm, and how low ages of consent used to be.

Let's not pretend that once gay people have the right to marry (and they should), that it's going to stop there because it's not.

Leisher wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 4:56 pm For insurance? Correct.

As a general statement? False.

So, imho, the context was legalized marriage.

Japan just raised the age of consent above 13, to 16.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 6:45 pm This isn't true. It's existed for decades, but it's certainly gained steam.

Trans people have always existed, but LGBQ was just that until recently when the T was added. That's what I meant. This current movement is all brand new. Kids weren't being chemically castrated or having surgeries performed on them until recently.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 6:45 pm I think you forget how many cultures had pedophilia as a norm, and how low ages of consent used to be.

I was sticking to the U.S. If we start including every culture, we might as well just say that everything is banned AND allowed at the same time...

TheCatt wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 6:45 pm So, imho, the context was legalized marriage.

Gotcha. I was going by the context of what society accepts next.

But in your context, does the woman who married the Eifel Tower count?

Leisher wrote: ↑Sun Jun 18, 2023 12:33 pm But in your context, does the woman who married the Eifel Tower count?

I'm going to ignore severe outliers

Well, I found what's next... These are legit brothers. WTF.

They have to do something to stay in the news, I guess?