Crixus

I tried Bumble a couple of years ago when I'd broken up with my bf. I think online dating is definitely skewed toward women: I created an extremely basic, thin profile and had literally 100s of 'requests' or whatever it's called in the first 2 hours. Since women have to initiate contact, I tried sifting through and got in touch with a few. My criteria was pretty much 'I'd like to get to know someone, not interested in a quick shag'. Thing is, a lot of the men prominently featured 'interested in a real relationship' etc. on their profiles but once I connected with them, all but one wanted to immediately meet up or even, lol, come over!!1!

There was one I chatted with for a few days, found him nice enough, and finally mustered the nerve to meet at a bar near my place. The date was pleasant enough, but literally the next day he started messaging me on the lines of 'if you're not interested in meeting at my place this evening, I have another chick who is'. So, yeah, that was it. 

Luckily, my bf and I reconnected a few months later and things have been great since. I cannot imagine doing this again and if I am ever single, I guess I'll just be celibate :P. 

On 2/20/2024 at 12:28 AM, kissdbyfire said:

I'm utterly shocked.   /s

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/17/senior-pakistan-official-admits-election-rigging-as-protests-grip-country

 

A senior official in Pakistan has admitted to election rigging amid protests breaking out across the country over claims that its general election results were unfair.

The confessional statement throws further questions over the legitimacy of the 8 February elections, which were marred by controversies and allegations of rigging in Pakistan.

Commissioner Rawalpindi Liaqat Ali Chatta told reporters that authorities in Rawalpindi, Punjab province, changed the results of independent candidates – referring to candidates backed by the former prime minister Imran Khan’s party – who were leading with a margin of more than 70,000 votes.

Chatta said there was so much “pressure” on him that he contemplated suicide, but that he then decided to make a public confession. “I take responsibility for the wrong in Rawalpindi. I should be punished for my crimes and other people involved in this crime should be punished.”

This shitshow is still going on. The deadline to form a government is next week, and now the cunts who basically lost the election are forming a 'coalition'. Which probably won't last a year. Pathetic, really. I was actually impressed with how people came out and voted peacefully on 8 Feb - it's the best way to make a stand and demonstrate what the nation actually wants. Alas, the military has always been in charge and nothing will change this, barring a bloody uprising or mutiny within the ranks. 

You can criticise Imran Khan a lot, fairly, but the fact is he managed to create unprecedented levels of political awareness, and a desire to claim constitutional rights, among the people. I think this won't change, regardless of the next puppet government. 

Partition should never have happened, imo. It's a controversial view in Pakistan but I really think this was destined to be a disaster from day one. People point to the last 10 years of Modi's government as retroactive proof of how partition was a great idea. In fact, all it did was divide Muslims into 3 separate countries (PK, India and Bangladesh in 1971). Imagine one India, with a massive Muslim minority - you cannot sideline 45% (approx if combined) of the population. Perhaps the entire trajectory of communal issues would have been different if the ugliness of partition had been avoided. Perhaps these communities which had already lived together for centuries (my grandparents had so many anecdotes about being neighbours and close-as-family with Hindus and Sikhs) could have continued to co-exist, and a united India would have been a force to reckon with. India still is, of course, but that would have been an entirely different story. 

Maybe I'm being too naive, but what's happening right now isn't exactly amazing - not just for PK which is decaying massively but even India, with all the extremist shit happening thanks to BJP and co. 

3 hours ago, karaddin said:

I knew the election was about to happen due to seeing this on Reddit last week: 

Struck me as weird to be doing political advertisements in Aus like that, but I guess there are a lot of expats and there's no restrictions on their ability to do so.

 

Yes, there are huge expat PK communities all over and they mostly support Khan. That says, 'avenge persecution with your vote' btw.  

15 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Well, Khan wanted to maintain relations with everyone and the Mighty West can’t have countries getting these weird ideas and going for this “aggressive neutrality”.

Yep, exactly. Still no news on who will form a government - classic bizarre Pakistan! 

On 2/10/2024 at 10:13 PM, Zorral said:

Shocking Opposition Victory Throws Pakistan Into Chaos
The party of Imran Khan, the jailed former prime minister, took the most seats, humiliating the country’s military rulers and creating a political crisis.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/10/world/asia/pakistan-election-imran-kahn.html

 

Yeah, still unresolved. They did everything they possibly could to stop this happening: threw Imran Khan in jail, did farcical trials where he wasn't even represented by his own defence lawyers and not allowed to have witnesses, and then put a ludicrous charge of his marriage being 'unlawful' by apparently arresting his wife's ex-husband and coercing him into charging her with getting married before the 'waiting period' of 3 months post their divorce. This is a Muslim thing that is apparently in place to determine if the woman may be pregnant from her former husband, so that any child's paternity is clear. This last case had the entire country in an uproar because it's long been understood and accepted that such matters are to be settled personally and in private, not court. 

They also took away the party's election symbol (cricket bat, as Imran is an ex-cricketer), significant in a country where 40% are illiterate and rely on symbols to cast their vote. They suspended internet and mobile services on the day, picked up loads of candidates and their families etc. etc. 

And yet, the party's candidates, standing as 'independent' but known to represent the party, won by a majority in most places. This despite massive rigging on the day. I've heard that women and young people turned out in unprecedented numbers and turnout is said to be at least 40%, perhaps up till 48% which is incredible for Pakistan. 

To me it just seals the overwhelming rejection by the people of the 'establishment' aka military. It's a good thing. Another good thing is that the gross taliban affiliated party, TLP, did not win a single seat at the national level, and only a couple at the provincial level (if that). 

I suppose a shitstorm is unfolding though, because these cunts will never give up power. 

8 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

 

@Crixus I didn't intend to be judgemental of you or your family, my intention was to rail against the multiple injustices of the system that winds up with families who will struggle and make sacrifices to get their kids an overpriced education because of the benefits of being at those schools, which have nothing at all to do with educational achievements, i.e. it should not matter where you get your A-levels from. Sadly in many ways it does matter where you get your A-levels from. So I do not judge or criticise people for doing what they think is necessary to get their children the best opportunities. I only criticise the social order that makes such things almost necessary.

And some people still think they can argue that we have equality of opportunity. My arse!

I totally agree, the system is shit, and rigged, and completely unfair. Equal opportunity does not exist, as you say. 

I chose not to have kids and I'm so grateful in many ways for that decision. When I look at the pressure my sis takes on simply because she wants to do what she believes is the best possible for her kids, I feel for her. I can't imagine doing all that myself, and I suppose that is one excellent reason I'm not a mum. 

@BigFatCoward yes, it is morally repugnant. But I can make that judgment more easily because I do not have kids - perhaps if I did, I would rather give them that opportunity and privilege even if I thought it was repugnant, and I suspect it is that way for some parents. 

15 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

I know you want to explain things but I have to say I’m getting annoyed (not with you) because you don’t have to justify your family’s actions. My brother wanted to go to university in the US, not a fancy Ivy league university, but we weren’t rich either and the Canadian dollar was low, so we all made sacrifices for him. I didn’t want to burden my parents with debt so I went to university in the city instead of going out of town and having the away-from-home experience teens want and enjoy. And paid my way with student loans, which my brother was not burdened with. Family.

I totally get that. I was the eldest and I went to a decent uni in Pakistan (decent for Pakistan anyway), whereas my younger sister of 2 (not the one with the kids) went to the UK because by that time, my mum could afford to send her. She worked day and night to get a job after college (McDonald's for quite some time), and is now, 20 years later, working at a great position in a bank. My brother, who is the youngest, went to Canada for college and worked as a security guard for nearly a year (night shifts) until he got an entry level job at LobLaws.  

They both ended up with more opportunities than I did because, let's face it, a Pakistani degree ain't all that in other countries. I did an additional UK qualification (remotely) on my own when I could, and that helped with the career stuff. 

18 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Did they ask the kids what THEY want? 

Yes, absolutely. Many times. If my nephew said he didn't want to go at all, she wouldn't send him. And, they have now opted for Winchester because it's close enough for him to come home every weekend. 

18 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I'm utterly unconvinced that there is educational value for money in private schools, except for the borderline idiots for whom going to a private school might get them across the line. If you have a good home life, parents committed to their children's education, you're inherent EQ and IQ are above average and a decent state school you will go far.

I am convinced that having "X" school alumnus beside your name opens doors, because there are people who care about that kind of thing.

My kids went to state school, one is a civil engineer soon to be chartered the other is doing their PhD in chemistry. Me and my siblings went to state school, I'm a vet, my sister is a lawyer, my brother did a physics PhD, my youngest brother has a successful business (no university degree but he's richer than the rest of us), and one brother is very smart, but lazy as fuck so has mostly been without a job his adult life. Mine was also the first generation on both sides of the family to go to university. We got there because of our ability and effort. It could be I live in a country that is more of a meritocracy than many. There's not much classism here. Perhaps in places where class is more of the thing the name of the school you attended has a bigger influence on your future.

The one thing we're not is "connected", but that's more choice than lack of opportunity.

 

 

A bit of context from my side: 

1. We come from a middle-class family in Pakistan. My dad was an alcoholic who died when we were very young, and my mum was a housewife who'd never worked. From there, she studied, started a job (at a low level) and worked her way up to a place where she could send us all to the best colleges she could afford - whilst living in an extremely conservative society as a widow. Just mentioning this in case people think we're some sort of posh, rich family. We most certainly are not. We are now all doing well in our careers, and that is thanks to all the work she put in. 

2. There is absolutely a lot of classism both in Pakistan and in the UK, and despite working your butt off, the lack of connections does matter. My sister simply wants to give her kids every advantage she can, and I'm certainly not going to judge her or shit on her for that. 

3. It's not simply about 'people caring about that sort of thing' though there is that - it's also that, growing up in an environment where who you know does matter in real, demonstrable ways, my sister wants to do what she can to give her kids every chance she can. It doesn't mean she's cruel or barbaric or doesn't give a fuck about her kids - quite the opposite. Some of the comments here come off as weirdly judgmental. 

@Spockydog , sure, and I've also seen positive anecdotes from people. Also, people can get assaulted in non-boarding schools too. Re 'cruel', my sister is an incredible mum, and I'm getting a bit tired of your insistence on labelling her as 'cruel' when you don't know dick about her. She isn't a millionaire who's casually packing her kids off to boarding school because she can't be bothered - she's working her arse off to do what she thinks is best for them. But I'll be sure to discuss the links you shared (not being sarcastic) because it is of course important to be aware of this. 

@mormont from the amount of studying and intensive prep my nephew did for well over a year to apply to these schools, I was under the impression it isn't easy to get in and that it's not just a function of how much you can pay. I might be wrong, so please correct me. 

2 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

As discussed up thread, a year at Harrow is 50 grand, i'm not sure you can consider yourself 'middle class' if you have 50 grand spare per kid. 

 That is precisely why I said earlier that my sister 'is willing to do without a lot'. She and her family have taken plenty of steps to live frugally and save - her husband inherited a bit of money recently and rather than using it elsewhere, they're using it here. Personally, I'd make other choices, but this is what they want. 

17 hours ago, maarsen said:

I have serious doubt that a private school education is superior to a publicly funded school system. Are private schools repositories of esoteric knowledge that is unavailable to the rest of us? Are the teachers a better class of human beings than the rest of the population and more able to access the esoteric knowledge hidden in their schools. The only difference is better funding at the expense of those of us who have not the ability to send our kids there. As I see it a lot of the reasons for private schools is to keep your kids away from the real world and its issues for as long as possible.

If you really want a good education for your child, surround them with books and other resources so they can explore the world around them and actually learn and grow.

I wouldn't know the details about private vs. public in the UK as I don't live there and I'm not a mum. I studied at a convent run by nuns in Pakistan, which cost next to nothing and was truly excellent, so there is that. I'm sure you make valid points about the nuances, but again, if some parents think such schools can provide kids with tools to help succeed, it's a perfectly valid choice for them. 

My nephew and niece are very much surrounded by books, art and other resources, and they're certainly not kept away from the real world - they're very much a part of it.

20 hours ago, Spockydog said:

As well as a big old dollop of child sexual abuse. And yes, it happens in every single one of these places.

Frankly, any parent who sends their kids to one of these places should be tarred and fucking feathered. 

"Ooooh, I love you, Timmy. Now fuck off to Eton for three months to get buggered by your housemaster."

You know, I'm generally in agreement with your posts, but this is fucking ridiculous and bordering on ad hominem. 

My sister is a Pakistani Brit who works her butt off, and is decidedly middle-class. She wants to give her kids the best possible future and opportunities, and for her a private school education is one of them. She's a great mum, and her kids are amazing and really well brought up. 

So anyone who throws around ludicrous shit like 'tarred and feathered' and 'barbaric' can fuck right off. How offensive and unwarranted, honestly. 

And I'm really sorry about what happened to you, truly. But the idea that all kids going there get sexually abused, or that's the only place where sexual abuse can take place, is bizarre. 

On 2/2/2024 at 7:01 PM, kissdbyfire said:

Right? But as Pebble said, there's no question either would provide him a top notch education. And I think it's not necessarily that these schools turn pupils into entitled toffs who go on to become entitled politicians/CEOs/etc, but that these types always have access to the best there is b/c  silver spoons and all that.

Agree, and that's why my sister has invested so much time and effort into this - she says she'll do without a lot, but her priority is giving her 2 kids (nephew and niece) the best possible education. It's literally the only thing she and her husband can agree on

And luckily, they've both been raised right so hopefully won't transform into unbearable little shits anytime soon. Even now, they go to a posh school which has the likes of one of Jacob Rees-Mogg's *vomit* kids, along with the grandson of an absolutely vile, corrupt Pakistani politician: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nawaz_Sharif 

They're not friends, safe to say. 

1 hour ago, Maltaran said:

Rishi Sunak went to Winchester

Lol!!!! Rock, hard place. 

On 1/30/2024 at 4:56 AM, Fragile Bird said:

I have no idea what happened, but he was a student at the very upper crust school Harrow, when he was expelled a few weeks before taking his A-levels. He couldn’t get into any university due to a report about him from Harrow. There may be something out there on the internet explaining what he did, but I haven’t bothered looking. Presumably it was about cheating, but maybe it was something more, Sex, drugs and cheating?

My nephew currently has to choose between Winchester and Harrow - I think I'll recommend he drop the latter  

Shocker: World’s five richest men double their money as poorest get poorer | Inequality | The Guardian 

This, along with the ongoing wars around us, is the sort of disheartening, depressing shit that makes me feel utterly hopeless and helpless, and relieved beyond measure that I stayed firm on my instinct not to procreate, despite a shit-ton of pressure due to the sort of society I grew up in. 

17 hours ago, Darryk said:

@Crixus I know about Deir Yassin, it was a horrific tragedy. There were many war crimes committed by Zionist groups, but this happens in wars unfortunately, you can't control what all the soldiers do. And it doesn't change the fact that surrounding Arab nations started the war by resolving to destroy the newly created Israel.

Benny Morris revealed a lot of the war crimes committed by the Zionists. There's a good interview with him here: 

 

The founding of Israel was chaotic and everyone will have different narratives on what happened.

The documentary you pasted acts as if 1948 was the beginning of everything though and ignores all the stuff that happened before that. Arabs had attempted to massacre Jews as well, such as the Hebron massacre.

I don't think it's some big mystery why many Jews inflicted horrors on the Palestinians despite having suffered horrors themselves. You see this pattern often in human nature. Abused children often grow up to become abusers.

 

Thanks for sharing this, I'll definitely watch it. I don't think the doc I shared acts like 1948 was 'the beginning', merely that this is the period it covers in detail. And of course, atrocities happened on both sides, just like is usually the case. 

5 minutes ago, straits said:

Just check the link again, maybe it's my browser or app, but it looks like an advertizing channel when I access it.

That's odd. I've replaced it in the earlier post, hope it works now. https://youtu.be/Bwy-Rf15UIs?si=CziPeemDd5VHbTQ0 

3 minutes ago, straits said:

Ilan Pappe made an astute observation on this topic in an interview of his: there is often no smoking gun for ethnic cleansing. The directives are loose and generalizable, but the actors which carry them out know what to do when they arrive at the next city or village, and the rest of the details are written in blood and violence.

Agreed, and I think he is in fact featured in the documentary I linked to above. 

I've been watching documentaries lately to know more about the history around this. @Darryk, https://youtu.be/Bwy-Rf15UIs?si=CziPeemDd5VHbTQ0 this one shows a rather different perspective around Palestinians leaving the area 'voluntarily' in 1948: fleeing an environment of violence, chaos and threats to life isn't 'voluntary'. Some of the accounts are truly heartbreaking. There are also interviews from ex members of Haganah and Irgun (the latter bombed the King David hotel and also were responsible for the Deir Yassin massacre) - some who still feel completely convinced they did the right thing, others who do not. 

The thing that stood out to me the most was how similar these scenes were to those of Jewish people feeling Europe in the 1930s - the same terror, horror, abject unfairness of it all. There's another brilliant doc I watched with real footage of the time, focusing on a few Jewish families living in Germany, Lithuania and Latvia, all of whom had to flee for their lives and did so to Palestine (and I suppose were lucky, compared to those who couldn't). 

It's that similarity that has really struck me - I cannot wrap my mind around how and why people would proceed to inflict the same horrors they've recently experienced on others - trauma and residual fear, perhaps? I can empathise with the desperate desire to have a place no one can expel you from - what I struggle with is how you justify doing the same to others to win your own safety and peace of mind. As others have pointed out, through stuff like Plan Dalet you can clearly see the intent and execution, authorised by those in charge - to pretend the intent back then was not mass expulsion is, I think, disingenuous, when they say so in their own words.

As for what you posted about Herzl (Arabs can benefit from our technology etc.) that sounds remarkably similar to British claims about how they brought India out of darkness (hilarious in itself, given the size of the Indian economy, GDP and trade at the start of it all) through the magic of railways - this sort of 'benevolent saviour' narrative that positions one side as being inherently superior to the other and infringing on territory and rights 'for their own good' is highly offensive, and absolute BS. 

58 minutes ago, Zorral said:

War crimes, babee, war crimes.

During the first six weeks of the war in Gaza, Israel routinely used one of its biggest and most destructive bombs in areas it designated safe for civilians, according to an analysis of visual evidence by The New York Times.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/21/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-bomb-investigation.html

 

You can keep posting such damning stuff from very trusted, credible sources but some on here will carry on with their blanket defence of Israel no matter fucking what, and keep bleating about how the IDF is the most moral, bestest army ever. 
 

As for the death toll numbers, the fucking US State Department thinks they’re quite accurate (along with many other respected organisations) yet some on here think they are experts or have access to some deeply reliable special secret information and thus keep banging on about ‘but Hamas numbers blah’. to which others have asked, what would be an acceptable death toll?? By how much does the number need to drop to make this ok? But no one seems able to answer, strangely enough. 

It would be hilarious if it weren’t so pathetic and infuriating. 

16 hours ago, Kalbear said:

I'll note that that 90% figure comes from looking at some very non-discriminate wars like the Syrian civil war, Nigeria and Somalia. 

I'll also note that I've looked through their documentation and finding a source for that 90% is pretty difficult. I'm willing to believe it, but if Israel's goal is to get the median value of combatants to civilians based on how Syria did I'm not sure that's the winning argument you think it is. 

ETA: here's a good comparison example - the battle of Raqqa in 2017. Massive shelling took place, bombing was quite severe and 'dynamic' - meaning that it was not planned directly but was a call-in from on the ground troops, and therefore was more indiscriminate. It caused anywhere from 1500 to 1900 civilian deaths, 80% of the structures of the city were made uninhabitable - and killed at least 1400 combatants with another 700 captured. Some good lessons and AAR here too. I say this is comparable because ISIS specifically planned on making this as hard as possible, used human shields, and it was one of the worst battles of the ISIS campaign - and they still had a 1-1 ratio of civilian deaths to combatant deaths. 

Thanks for this info. Also, @Ran, you haven't answered my earlier question about the point I cited from the same report re Israel deliberately causing mass civilian casualties to make people 'turn on Hamas'. Curious to hear your thoughts on this, given your steadfast assertions around the level of care Israel is taking to minimise civilian deaths. 

1 hour ago, Ran said:

"Other conflicts" includes extremely different sorts of conflict. If you limit it to urban warfare, 90% of all casualties are civilians. Indeed, the Secretary-General of the UN has cited the same figure, so I think those who believe him to be a straight shooter would admit that this estimate of casualty levels out of Gaza are actually indicative of the IDF taking care and being discriminate in its targetting in a very difficult urban environment.

 

 

Sure. What about the other part of my post that mentions them causing mass civilian casualties to encourage people to ‘turn on Hamas’? That seems to contradict the level of care you say they are taking. Or do you disagree with the report and find the sources not credible? 

55 minutes ago, karaddin said:

If Israel was conducting it's war on Hamas with absolutely no civilian casualties then I wouldn't be saying there needs to be a cease fire and I'm pretty sure everyone else, at least here, would feel the same. The cease fire we want is for Israel to stop bombing the shit out of civilians, not stop pursuing Hamas.

Now 'absolutely zero' civilians might be a fantasy, but the line for 'reasonable response' is a lot closer to that than what we're seeing from the IDF. That's obviously imo not an objective claim.

I'd also love if he IDF could stop doing shit that my initial response to is "well that's some blood libel bullshit right there" and having it actually turn out to be true. That used to be a nice easy line to see, but "leaving babies to die in hospital" is a pretty fucking staggering atrocity.

It would also be nice if they'd stop gleefully destroying Gazan property seemingly for fun, or looting. But failing that I'd recommend they stop letting their fucking troops document their own crimes and post it on social media like it's actually good propaganda. 

According to Haaretz, civilian casualties are estimated at around 61%, significantly higher than the average of about 50% in other conflicts: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/dec/09/labour-steps-up-criticism-of-intolerable-killings-in-gaza

Meanwhile, illegal, abhorrent settler activity continues unabated in the West Bank, and you have government reps like Mark Regev flatly denying this or pretending he isn’t ‘aware’ of this - despicable. 
 

And of course, Biden takes the opportunity to use emergency authority to provide more weapons to Israel: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/09/biden-administration-emergency-authority-tank-shells-israel

Zorral shared a link on the previous page that has a report by Haaretz, corroborated by 2 other Israeli news sites, that says that Israel is deliberately bombing civilian buildings and causing mass casualties to make Gazans ‘turn on Hamas’. 

First, that is some bizarre, repugnant, twisted logic - if one can even call it that. Second, it pretty much proves that Israel isn’t ’doing everything it can to prevent civilian deaths’ - quite the opposite. One would think this information would stop people defending these horrific atrocities and desperately trying to paint Israel as even slightly concerned about killing innocent people. They’re clearly not. Unless of course, all these Israeli news sites and journalists are lying for some unfathomable reason.