Do you mean that literally, or do you merely observe that few social conventions actually make any sense? Some of them even seem deliberately designed to inhibit personal growth.

Because in a way, that's a great big joke all by itself. It's just not nearly so funny as it could be.

The way that you say this reminds me of a photograph I saw in a history textbook back in high school. I have searched and (not remembering its name) cannot locate the image or else I'd provide a link, but I believe it comes from the time of the Industrial Revolution.

It's an old black-and-white photograph. It shows a man using a large wrench or spanner on a machine. The man's back is bent into an arc and his body contorted so that he may use the wrench on something not designed with ergonomics in mind. The purpose of the photograph is to show a man bending and yielding to a machine that was nominally supposed to serve men. It's similar to the notion that what you own also owns you.

I realize you were possibly being facetious, yet nonetheless you reminded me of something I haven't seen or heard about in years. I'd be interested if anyone here knows the photo to which I refer.

The people who want modern-day prophets to be wrong so they can ridicule them, call them names, and feel better for a moment about their pitifully desperate and meaningless lives, well, these are not the kind of people who like to admit when they are wrong and try to avoid repeating the same mistake.

Validity was never to be expected from the likes of them. Such people aren't interested in truth. They're interested in feeling superior to someone else. This is fundamentally incompatible with a search for truth.

To me it was also predictable, because I've read history books and noticed again and again that the most ruthless, sociopathic, often bloodthirsty control freaks are the ones who want power so badly that they'll do anything to achieve it. That's the nature of government. Public awareness and understanding is the only real thing holding it back. We have public apathy and ignorance because most people have been softened and made complacent by convenience and pointless indulgences (hundreds of channels of brain-dead horse-shit, news media controlled by 5 corporations all of which are cozy with government, public education for obedient workers and not for self-directed thinkers).

But that the government would want to spy on its people and would use technology in that manner, no that's not remotely surprising to anyone who understands the nature of governments and the people who most want to run them. What we need is a majority of people who comprehend this basic fact that has been repeatedly observed throughout history. The stakes are higher now, and become higher the more our tech advances. Our leaders have noted that bread and circuses works, that's because they actually do learn from history.

When you date people who a) are not childish, and b) have a sense of honor, it protects you from pretty much all of these problems.

The sick part is that so many people think the government could ever be a substitute for cultivating a little wisdom.

That, and no one in authority has the balls anymore to tell these women: this is why you should learn to recognize and value men who have honor and understand why this is important. A man with a sense of honor recognizes your right to exit the relationship anytime you wish and respects that this is your decision. A man with honor does not view the exercising of your rights as something he must avenge in a cowardly manner.

Because politicians love the meme of the innocent maiden victimized by nasty brutish men, so long as the politicians get to be the knights in shining armor.

Or the hard-working black man kept down by mean ol' racist Whitey. Or whatever -- any division will work. So long as it divides people into group identities and requires a savior, it will become a political issue.

It's not a very funny joke, but the joke is that so many people really think the legislators voting for this give a flying fuck about women who demonstrate poor judgment and can't differentiate a man who has honor and a man who does not (and don't think that matters, until something like this happens). Or anyone else. Or anything other than money and power, for that matter.

So was the naive decision (of the photographed person) to trust someone who should not have been trusted. If we agree that private things should remain private, there is no reason why this should be an exception.

Yes but that would eliminate the emotional angle of an implied "poor females victimized by those nasty brutish men". Absent that, the speaker would be left with nothing to fall back on except to make a reasonable argument. Clearly you see the problem.

Good catch.

See, that would require having good judgment and putting a thought or two towards contingency. This was once considered the norm for adults and those adults who failed to do it were seen as failing to achieve what was expected of them, whether involving photography or anything else. Now it's increasingly treated like some terribly unreasonable standard. Folks, this is a movement in the wrong direction.

It's the never-ending governmental quest to protect adult people from the consequences of their own poor judgment. I don't believe many people recognize how dangerous this actually is, how much of a step backwards it represents, and how many similarly-spirited steps we've taken in the last decade or two. All the short-sighted see is what's in front of them, yeah a guy publicized photos he was trusted not to publicize, yeah he's an asshole, sure. We're going to stop being adults now because of excuses like this?

I will never end up in such a situation, but if I somehow did, I'd chalk it up to my own poor decision-making and consider it a lesson learned. Do stupid thing -> suffer stupid consequence, seems like everything's in order to me. I'm not a victim if I actively contributed to the unpleasant situation I'm in that couldn't have happened without my said contribution. So, who finds that offensive (code for "makes my lack of personal responsibility uncomfortable") and thinks I care?

The very best method to kill flies I have found is with a spray bottle of some kind of glass and surface cleaner. Something like Windex will work, or something stronger with chlorine/bleach will kill them faster. It's better to use the kind of bottle that lets you adjust the output from spray to stream. Stream is more effective but the mist will work if you get close enough. Give it a few practice squirts and you can easily refine your aim (if you ever do any target practice, this will be trivial). Nail 'em with a single squirt and they drop, crawl around a bit, and die. A single shot and they don't get back up. A follow-up shot makes them die faster, though I can't help think that this must be a very nasty and unpleasant fluid in which to drown.

It's much easier than trying to squash them with your hand and less unsanitary too, though definitely less sporting.

Does "shut down this agency permanently and don't replace it with anything similar" count as an enhancement?

If we want to fight terrorism we could always stop installing dictators and manipulating the affairs of other nations.

This happened because to become a judge, one must generally be a "believe in the system" type. This is why judges will automatically take the word of a police officer over yours, being impressed by the fact he/she is a "sworn officer", because this type of mentality doesn't consider that cops and other members of government could lie to get what they want. So now it finally bit the judge(s) and made them look bad, feel a little angry? It's been doing that to regular citizens for a long time now.