Posts by Emily Robinson4

I was watching some training clips earlier and it got me thinking about how much of a gamble the summer months actually are. It feels like every year, right when clubs are trying to balance the books or reshape the roster, someone goes down with something nagging. It’s such a weirdly volatile time of year.

You see these players who are basically halfway out the door already, and then a freak injury happens. It almost feels like it complicates the "exit strategy" for everyone involved. If a player is looking for a fresh start, being sidelined during the window can make them look like a liability instead of an asset, even if it’s just bad luck. It adds this weird layer of tension to transfer talks that shouldn't really be there.

Do you think a bad pre-season injury can actually tank a player's market value, or do big clubs just see it as a temporary setback they can work around?

It’s absolutely shameful—if someone made a statement like this in any other European Union country, they’d be kicked out on their ear immediately.

Alex Jelinić said:I’ll just stick to the ones the media actually obsessed over—since apparently, gay men are untouchable icons these days. And honestly, that religious jab stung... I belong to a community that has never murdered anyone, nor would we ever, and if you’re trying to point fingers at the Catholic Church, let's be real—it's full of gay people too.

Andrew Cunanan, a sadistic cinephile and a favorite among certain social circles, murdered the legendary fashion designer Gianni Versace back in '97. He didn't stop there, though; he took four other men with him.

Jeffrey Dahmer—a necrophiliac, psychopath, and cannibal. He murdered 17 boys and young men, luring them to his apartment only to drug them, kill them, and then commit unspeakable acts with their remains before consuming them.

John Wayne Gacy—the guy who played the "perfect husband and father" while being a sadistic pedophile and psychopath behind closed doors. He butchered 33 boys and men, hiding the remains in his basement while performing as Pogo the Clown to entertain kids right in front of his house.

I could easily dig up plenty of cases where a parent beat their children to death with baseball bats in the US, or instances in Mexico where a woman dismembered her partners and burned the remains... there are endless horrors out there that have absolutely nothing to do with sexual orientation, and everything to do with the twisted mind of the individual.

The mind and a conscience don't care about orientation, skin color, or religious affiliation...

nimblegardener7 said:The point was completely missed. I said more people are becoming tolerant or acting indifferent toward homosexuality because they mimic what they see—watching perversions and becoming perverse themselves. But not everyone becomes gay; it depends on the inclination a person already has. It’s like how not everyone with a genetic predisposition becomes gay (for example, there aren't any among Orthodox Jews).

That still doesn't explain what your actual problem is. Like, specifically with lesbians?
It's just obvious you don't know anyone who isn't heterosexual (though you probably do, maybe you just don't realize they're gay since people usually hide it).

And if it works that way, why don't all gay people become straight when we're surrounded by so much straight material? You'd think it worked both ways, but clearly it doesn't; I guess they're resistant.

I've already laid out my views in detail in previous posts, so I won't repeat myself. And yes, I am quite familiar with the homosexual population, for private reasons.

Oh yeah, you obviously know the global gay scene better than anyone else on this planet.

I guess there aren't any homosexuals in conservative Iran, or Uganda, or anywhere in conservative Africa or the Middle East either...

So why on earth are those people being executed in Iran? Is it just out of boredom? I suppose there are no gays in conservative Iran—where, by the way, abusing a ten-year-old girl is considered perfectly normal—they only exist in the "immoral" West, right?

nimblegardener7 said:That’s like claiming people who are 5'3" are being discriminated against just because they can't dunk a basketball. Who discriminated against those poor gays—nature itself?! 😂 They belong in the Hague!🤣

Look, a man suffering from paranoid psychosis who hides away within his own four walls isn't hurting anyone—yet doctors "discriminate" against him by denying him his "rights" and locking him up in a psychiatric ward. The most severely ill often deny their own condition entirely. Homosexuals are both mentally and physically deformed. To make matters worse—in such an advanced stage of sickness—they now claim they are the healthy ones, while we, the normal and natural people, are labeled as sick, stupid, and regressive...

When you bring a critically ill patient into an asylum, the worst thing for them is if they publicly declare they aren't insane! For people like that, the straightjacket only gets tightened. Connect that to gay people. It's the same thing—metaphorically speaking. Except, instead of tightening the straightjackets, they are released into society to poison children, youth, families, and society at large with their decadent behavior! Not only are they released as "healthy," but society actually INVESTS in their propaganda—promoting decadence, immorality, and inciting homosexuality... Essentially, gays are deemed "normal," and there is an active attempt to infect the rest of this healthy, normal planet!

It is true that their rights are being trampled, but there is one thing—the most important thing—that needs to happen: they need treatment.

Honestly, I don't even know what to say to you—how on earth could a homosexual influence Peter to be attracted to him after 22 years? He couldn't.

Or how could Peter possibly be influenced to be attracted to Pamela? You could cover his entire room in posters of Pamela, and he still wouldn't be interested.

And please, stop writing this nonsense. At first, it was funny; now, it's just pathetic.

nimblegardener7 is absolutely terrifying 🤣

Honestly, whenever I’m reading his posts, I start picturing scenes straight out of a nightmare horror movie—it's wild. He’d be the perfect guy to write a thriller set in the middle of nowhere, maybe somewhere deep in the Scottish Highlands... though honestly, even some remote parts of Montana would work just fine.

Go for it, baby! 🎉

nimblegardener7 said:It seems like you guys follow that same logic, accusing anyone who opposes the promotion of that lifestyle of being closeted...

First of all, we aren't talking about "behavior"—we're talking about orientation, just like we talk about being straight.
We shouldn't call it "behavior"

Because if we did, nobody in America would "behave" that way unless they were some seriously adventurous, masochistic type...😍

nimblegardener7 said:Unless you happen to be that friend herself...🤣😂

It’s always the same—the second someone makes even a mildly "pro-gay" comment, people immediately jump to the conclusion that they must be part of the community themselves... typical logic, right?

Ryan Wood98 said:By the way, I guess you could clarify what exactly you mean by "debauched behavior."😂

Maybe if he kisses his girlfriend on a park bench, or heaven forbid, holds her hand...😲

And don't even get me started on going to bed together.😲

Brrr—way too much immorality for one decent country...

nimblegardener7 said:If you look at how the word fear is used in the English language, it’s often linked to psychological conditions. And I guess that’s where the catch is. Homosexuals want to label anyone who finds their behavior repulsive as being "insane." It feels like a smear campaign to me... an attempt at brainwashing to build a society rooted in evil, where perfectly decent citizens end up being mistreated—or "treated," I suppose—in psychiatric wards because of some fabricated "illness" called "homophobia."

Because when you point out that they have psychological issues, they just want to fight... maybe because there's a certain darkness inside them. So much for their version of "normalcy."

I don't think any normal man or woman could feel fear toward something so unnatural. People claiming to have a phobia seem to need police protection, yet it feels like the police only exist to protect homophobic homosexuals. I mean, what is there to be afraid of? They’re supposedly the pacifists of their group; most can't even land a slap.

This whole idea of "homophobia" seems like a political label to me—just a way to flip values upside down and twist perspectives. It's a tactic to justify their warped views, but I guess not everyone is gullible enough to buy into it.

A natural reaction for any normal man might be a sense of disgust toward a homosexual or contempt for a lesbian. Similarly, a normal woman might find a lesbian repulsive and feel contempt for a homosexual. No matter what laws they pass, I don't think they will ever change that natural human response. They aren't looking for progress; they just want to indulge in their own hedonism.

Well, they can enjoy themselves... just not on our dime.

🤣

how cute

Why on earth would I be disgusted by my friend just because she's a lesbian?
For what reason?
Just because she lives with her girlfriend? I don't see any reason to have any aversion toward her whatsoever
Only bitter people want others to suffer; only miserable people refuse to let others be happy.
I honestly feel sorry for people like that.

Edward Wilson82 said:Of course it will.

Why?

For instance, in Madrid, nobody is going to give you a second look if you kiss your boyfriend—I’ve seen plenty of couples doing exactly that in Madrid, and honestly, nobody gives a damn who is holding hands or kissing whom.

But in Miami, people would turn their heads immediately...

And look, if one football player slaps another guy on the ass, it doesn't cause a scandal—but if Mark x and Peter y decided to hold hands and take a stroll down the Stradun (assuming they were feeling particularly adventurous), it would cause an absolute uproar. It's just various levels of nonsense.🙄

But fine, I guess in America you really have to be some kind of extreme daredevil or an adrenaline junkie just to be seen walking down the street hugging your partner...

steelskipper4 said:Take the case of Edmund Smith, if you will; he serves as living proof that change is indeed possible. For a stretch of eleven years—from the age of thirteen all the way until he hit twenty-four—he lived a homosexual lifestyle. Fast forward to today, where he is now thirty-six and enjoys a perfectly happy marriage (a heterosexual one, just so we aren't misinterpreting things 😁).

The Great Gatsby
The Great Gatsby
The Great Gatsby
The Great Gatsby
The Great Gatsby

Precisely what you just pointed out was the very thing that haunted him. He found himself yearning for genuine love and true contentment, because in the gay lifestyle, in perhaps 99.9% of instances, there is this pervasive sense of promiscuity—a sort of aimless, disoriented chasing from one man to the next, an attempt to somehow fill an emotional void that simply refuses to be filled.

There is a profoundly fascinating statement made in the first video, occurring at the 6 minute and 23 second mark:

It's not so much about sex. It's about looking for love ... BUT from the wrong genre and it doesn't work. You know. It's an irony - we call ourselves "gay" and origin meaning of "gay" is "happy", but I was never happy ... I was never happy. And looking around at ... many, many people I know ... I still have lots of, lots of gay friend who I truly, truly love and have fantastic relationships with ... you know, healthy relationships ... and I've not met one who is gay and happy ... never.

Terrible stereotypes—you find that same pattern of promiscuity in straight relationships as well as gay ones; there are no exceptions there...

The data mostly suggests that in more tolerant, open countries—think Scandinavia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, or Germany—there is actually less promiscuity. Why? Because gay individuals have full rights, the community accepts them, they have places to go out, ways to meet people...

whereas in conservative countries, you see way more instances of these "emotional voids" precisely because of that rejection and lack of acceptance...

The mindset shared by most nations across Western Europe is honestly a mess 🤣 We’ve become far too passive—lazy, even—constantly attacking anything new because we’re essentially terrified of change. We mock liberals, we mock human rights activists... it's constant. And I'm not just being cynical here; this is the prevailing attitude held by about 65-70% of the people in this Beautiful country.

Just consider this scenario: imagine if we took 4.7 million Frenchmen and moved them into America... kicked all the Americans out 😬 and left those 4.7 million French citizens (or anyone else from Western Europe) under this current administration we’re forced to "enjoy" right now. They would be out there protesting every single damn day 🤣

San Francisco 😍

amberfox4 said:Whether we are discussing school uniforms or even just that old concept of a designated corner for students—which, if I am being honest, could certainly be redesigned with much better taste today—I find myself leaning toward a positive view of such measures. It seems to me that having a standardized look prevents those glaring disparities in wealth among students from being so blatantly obvious through their clothing choices.

That sounds absolutely terrible to me. People should be allowed to wear whatever they want—no one should be forced into some arbitrary rules or strict dress codes.👍

Jonathan Morgan said:A little over a century ago, back before labor unions really gained their footing and started fighting for workers' rights, the whole concept of a 40-hour workweek didn't even exist. We didn't have things like the minimum wage, overtime pay, sick leave, maternity leave, or even a legally mandated amount of vacation time... today, all of those things are more or less just taken for granted. And even if they weren't, we collectively assume they *should* be, and people fight tooth and nail through protests and strikes to ensure they stay that way 😉

In short... PROGRESS
So why shouldn't we allow that same kind of evolution in education... or really, in any part of life!
Why wouldn't things be better for me than they were for my parents?
I live with the hope that my future children will have it even better than I do!
As for being "spoiled," that’s just a byproduct of how you're raised... the upbringing of my kids will be entirely on me (and my partner, obviously), and it won't even cross my mind to blame the classroom atmosphere, lighter backpacks, or technological advancements for any mistakes I make in parenting them!

I agree, though I can't help but feel it was "easier" to raise kids twenty years ago compared to now. Twenty years ago, kids didn't have this endless buffet of choices at their fingertips—they were content with what they had. Still, progress, tech development, and the sheer expansion of the market—regardless of whether people want to admit it—definitely plays a role in making kids more entitled.

Jose Mendoza5 said:Nowhere else in the country does the school day kick off this early. It’s honestly heartbreaking that my child is attending a school where even wearing shorts is against the rules, all while there isn't a single air conditioner in sight. They come home absolutely exhausted, looking like they’ve spent the entire day doing manual labor out in the sun. I am certainly not suggesting we coddle children, but surely some basic environmental standards for learning need to be met. If the heat is this intense, installing AC in the classrooms is a necessity. If that proves too costly, then perhaps delaying the start of the school year by a week or two would be more sensible.
Regarding classroom technology, it seems everything remains stagnant. It's just chalk and boards. Though, if I'm being honest, I personally feel that might actually be the most effective method—that direct, interactive engagement between student and teacher. However, if we want to attract high-quality educators who truly care about their vocation, we ought to compensate them with a decent salary.
One can only imagine what those people are enduring right now, stuck in uncooled classrooms while the thermometer hits 104 degrees.
Can such teaching truly be considered high quality? Does it even make sense at this point?
It feels like Primorac is just waiting for someone to suffer a heatstroke before realizing he’s overreached, much like his handling of the state standardized tests, which students managed to completely dismantle in a single day!

More and more schools are switching over to whiteboards and markers these days, but that's not really the point here. 🙂

Nicole Allen10 said:I honestly think it all boils down to how much quality time parents actually carve out for their kids when they’re drowning in work. That’s the heart of the issue right there.

Life is moving at breakneck speed these days—and honestly, it’s leaving a trail of consequences in its wake.

Times have changed, for heaven's sake—we’re living in the 21st century now... technology is moving at breakneck speed, and while society evolves right along with it, it’s also becoming increasingly entitled. It seems kids these days can practically have their hands on anything they want; everything is handed to them on a silver platter. They aren't just content with what they already have—no, they always want more.

What are the actual job prospects here in America? Where can one even find work?