What are the least attractive jobs? Singles reveal the occupations they'd be most turned off by on a date
This report reveals how misleading generalizations can be. It says, for instance, that nurses are not a good partner choice. But I have always got on well with nurses. I had, for instance, a 7 year mariage to one and a 14 year relationship with another -- not to mention more fleeting liasons. So how come?
What attracts me is their down-to-earth nature but how do I deal with the shift-working issue? I don't. In the two relationships I mentionred, neither lady worked shifts. They had normal daytime jobs. Nursing is a quite varied field and that was no oddity. So the shift issue did not arise.
Mind you, I am friends with a nurse who does work shifts so that could be an issue if we ever took our friendship further.
But the basic point is that the category "nurse" is too broad. A lot depends on the particular nurse. I have some very good memories of nurses
Single men and women have revealed how a date's job can impact their attractiveness - and agree shift workers and those with 'huge responsibilities' are the least desirable.
Dating coach Louanne Ward raised the topic on her She Said, He Said Facebook Page and Aussie men and women explained why some occupations are 'a complete turn-off'.
And while many men and women feared they would be judged for low-paying or unglamorous jobs, it was the opposite.
The singletons admitted to steering clear of people with high-powered jobs, or well-paid industries because it can lead to a 'doomed relationship' and 'narcissism'.
Fifo workers, lawyers, doctors, policemen and sex workers were among the most commonly mentioned.
'I avoid shift worker occupations with irregular shift rostering or long shifts like 12 to 14 hour shifts. So people in nursing, or doctors or truckies,' one man said.
According the the men and women in the Facebook group the following professions are the least likely to 'get a date'.
1 - Nurses and doctors who do long shifts
2 - Fifo workers
3 - People in high-powered roles like doctors and lawyers
4 - Truck drivers
5 - Police officers and military men
'I think jobs where people are too much power, makes them lack empathy,' one woman said.
The conversation comes after a divorce lawyer revealed the jobs she would avoid when looking for Mr Right.
Firemen, police officers, military men, surgeons, and pilots all appeared on the list shared by JettieGirl28 on TikTok.
'When I first started practicing family law 13 years ago, a woman attorney gave me a statistic about the top five professions of men that women should avoid marrying,' she said in the video.
'Over the course of my career, I've watched my most difficult cases and, shockingly, many of them involved men in these five professions.'
The men and women in the dating advice group agreed with the lawyer for many of the fields.
One woman said she avoids men in the military and police force because she believes they can become 'callous'. 'I can't deal with the callous nature they very easily and scarily switch into as that's what they need to do at work to survive,' she said.
The divorce lawyer also did a post detailing the occupations people should avoid when looking for Mrs Right.
Many people assumed the same jobs would be on the list but she said that's not the case in her experience.
And while most of her female clients are teachers and nurses these are not the most difficult or dangerous divorces.
'If you have a problem with this scroll along, because I am about to hurt a lot of people,' she said.
She said the most difficult women in divorces are stay at home mums, explaining they are often terrified of their futures financially.
She also said in relationships where the mum stays at home the father often 'feels like an ATM' and the women feel under valued.
*************************************************
Elon Musk’s Twitter takeover: What will it mean for users?
What does Elon Musk intend to do with his new purchase if the deal is approved by shareholders? And will Twitter look different to users?
While Twitter is one of the most talked-about social networks, it has fewer users than many of its peers.
The company known for its bird logo boasts 436 million monthly active users, according to Statista, making it a distant follower to Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, and messaging services like WhatsApp and Telegram.
In Australia, the company boasts 5.8 million active users — a number that has remained steady.
But despite its smaller user base compared to other firms, Twitter is influential and has become a platform for companies, politicians, celebrities and even emergency services to issue public statements.
Musk’s ongoing focus on no-holds-barred free speech may include allowing the most vocal trolls and sources of disinformation to remain on the platform, despite the company’s past efforts to remove them.
In March, for example, after providing Starlink satellite internet services to Ukraine, Musk vowed not to block Russian news sources “unless at gunpoint,” saying he was a “free speech absolutist”.
In response to his deal for Twitter, he said: “free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated”.
His stance could leave the door open for those banned from using Twitter to return to the service, including high-profile users like right-wing troll Milo Yiannopoulos who led harassment of a Ghostbusters star before his permanent suspension, rapper Azealia Banks who issued a slew of transphobic and homophobic tweets about who should access Covid vaccines, “Pharma bro” Martin Shkreli, who publicly harassed a journalist, and former US President Donald Trump who spread misinformation to a wide audience using the platform.
Trump has said he will not return to the service, despite protesting his ban earlier, telling Fox News he will instead begin using his own social network, Truth, in the coming days.
Twitter allows users to report harassment they receive on the service, and “hide” offensive tweets sent in response to their own tweets. It’s not clear how that would continue.
*****************************************************
Another High-tech Titan Falters
You've probably heard of the high-flying Big Tech FAANG stocks -- Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google. Among the five of them, their market cap reached $6 trillion last year, which is more than the GDP of all but a small handful of entire countries. Moreover, their net worth is larger than the entire annual output of India, with more than 1 billion people.
These companies got so big and profitable so fast that politicians on the left, right and center started accusing them of monopolistic behavior. "Break them up!" shouted Democratic Sens. Bernie Sanders and Amy Klobuchar. Some Republicans, such as Josh Hawley, endorsed the same strategy.
But has anyone noticed what has happened to the stock values of these once-invincible powerhouses?
Netflix's stock has gotten crushed of late. Just flattened.
Its share price collapsed by 35% in one day. This was one of the most significant single-day sell-offs in the history of stocks. For now, the rout doesn't seem to be waning. Over the past year, Netflix's market cap has tumbled from $267 billion to close to $96 billion.
Sorry if you own this stock. And most pension funds do own Netflix as part of their portfolios, so it wasn't just millionaires who got hurt.
The Netflix brass blames its demise of late on "fierce competition" for subscribers.
Meanwhile, Facebook has suffered even more considerable losses that exceed one-half a trillion dollars. That's not supposed to happen to monopolies that crush the competition. Instead, the hunters have become the hunted. Facebook is confronting serious competition from other social media platforms such as LinkedIn and China's TikTok, which are elbowing out Facebook's dominance.
What are we to make of all this jostling to be king of the mountain in the digital domain?
I carry no water for Big Tech, and I'm as frustrated with the free speech infringements against conservatives as anyone. But cries of "monopoly" are so early 20th century. Just as no one worries about Standard Oil, Microsoft or General Motors taking over their industries, we see the same cutthroat survival tactics in the hypercompetitive tech sector. This kind of competition is great news for the consumer. It lowers prices and makes a mockery of the "monopoly" rants.
Companies such as Google better look over their shoulders. If you slip up, the marauders are coming to steal away your market share. Sometimes, the raiders aren't even American companies. Globalization and free trade have dramatically lowered the prices of nearly all digital products.
That is as it should be in a free-market capitalist world. One day, you are on top of the world and seemingly in an impenetrable fortress, and the next, you lose half your market cap. We don't need trust-buster regulators in Washington, like the leftist Lina Khan of the Federal Trade Commission, policing our businesses. The market is doing that just fine, thank you.
America has gained tech dominance over our rivals, especially China, Japan and Europe, because we have allowed the digital economy to remain mostly tax- and regulation-free. It's the Wild West in Silicon Valley and Austin, Texas, which created the trillions in wealth in the first place. The high-tech industry has added value and wealth at a blistering pace, and how sad is it that when our American ingenuity and inventiveness succeed, the trust-busters want to tear it down? Then, when these tech giants start to surrender their competitive advantage, the fool politicians want to give them billions of dollars of corporate welfare handouts from taxpayers.
The late and great Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter called the process of inventing new products to challenge the extant corporate power structures in business "creative destruction." The Netflix and Facebook sell-off is a jolting reminder that the market is a better way than government to keep companies honest and on top of their game. It also keeps prices low.
https://townhall.com/columnists/stephenmoore/2022/04/26/another-hightech-titan-falters-n2606328
*********************************************Liberal Corporations Are Confused and Scared Because Conservatives Now Fight Back
It’s always fun when progressive jerks try to leverage their bizarre perceptions of our beliefs to get us to do what they want. It can be some smug Twitter blue check informing us that “Actually Jesus was a socialist who would want us to cancel student debt for spoiled rich kids who got degrees in Transgender Visual Arts” or, more recently, some newly-minted Milton Friedman acolyte goofsplaining that we must submit to the skeevy whims of California corporations and accept the imposition of grooming mandates because, after all, they are private businesses. And sometimes it works, even on alleged conservatives – David French has made whatever passes for his C-list career out of striving to twist conservatism to conform to his lib masters’ version of it.
But this cheesy ploy is not working anymore, at least not on the rest of us.
Ron DeSantis, the Scourge of Odd sitting on his growing throne o’ skulls in Tallahassee, is fresh from laughing off the howls of broken libs enraged that he gerrymandered them in Florida like they gerrymandered us in New York and Illinois. Ron is not one for accepting two sets of rules, one for the ruling caste and another, crappier one for us peasants. He identifies the applicable rule, and applies it good and hard. It’s about time the left learns that norm-breaking has consequences. And one consequence is frequent broken-norm suppositories.
Disney found out the hard way for the same reason as other woke corporations will. These CEOs, who appear to be ruthless robber barons in business, encounter a bunch of their own blue-haired, pierced subordinates who think a penis is irrelevant to determining their gender and suddenly these executives roll-over and give it up so cravenly that even Mitt Romney would look at them and mutter “Get a spine!”
And in the case of Disney, it was so objectively insane that you had to wonder about the thought process, but only for a moment until you realize that this is 2022 and everything is utterly stupid. Disney got welcomed into America’s homes and hearts by purveying safe and wholesome kiddie fare to American families and has decided, to please a pack of mutant employees, to administer a coup de grace to that rep by leaping into the arena to fight against a law that all normal people agree is so manifestly proper that it really should not have to be a law at all – that pervs can’t talk to little kids about sex in schools. But no, Disney had to weigh-in on the side of groomers because the consensus in the rarified circles its leadership circulates in and among the weirdo contingent on its staff is that the world must be made safe for bizarre sexuality.
Oh, and it did not help that a bunch of Disney employees recently got swept up in a child porn sting, and that the strange-os in its bureaucracy decided to brag on leaked Zoom calls about how they were injecting their freak show gender nonsense into its once sacrosanct movies and shows. You know what Buzz Lightyear was missing? Some not-hot girl-on-girl action. We are one revision away from changing the title of “The Lion King” to “The Otherkin Non-Binary Member of the Royalty.” “Hakuna matata” is supposed to mean “No worries,” not “It’s okay to lop off your junk if you’re not feeling like a boy today.”
So DeSantis decided that Disney needed some discipline, and that stepping to him (and, therefore, us) cried out for a response. Some folks worry that this is an attack on the First Amendment, but this was not just because Disney chose to weigh in on an issue (though it’s unclear why you are obligated to continue providing juicy tax breaks to political opponents – the Founders would have tossed you in a madhouse for arguing that). No, Disney has launched a broad offensive against normal people using political, cultural and economic power to change our society without our permission. This is not just about Disney expressing an opinion, though its groomer-tolerant opinion is creepy and gross.
DeSantis’s response was to strip away the special giveaway that Disney got for its overpriced hellscape in Orlando. The left responded by telling Disney it should pick up Disney World and move it to, say, Buffalo. Disney, on the other hand, realized it has stepped in a steaming San Francisco sidewalk sundae and is desperately trying to turn down the temperature.
Disney thought it was going to win, because, you know, Republicans like big companies and defer to them and, well, no. That’s not us anymore. After years of big companies leveraging their power to screw us over, from the NFL to Delta to Coke, now we’re over it. They are free to use their power – a potent cocktail of cultural, economic, and political power – as they see fit. And so are we. We have freed ourselves of the arbitrary rules that formerly prevented us from responding with our own brand of power – which is a little bit economic but mostly political – to fight back.
And a lot of conservatives have mixed feelings. Some part of that is legit – using political power to crush enemies can go too far. Hell, that’s essentially how Chicago works. But our new way of responding to our enemies – who, remember, chose to break the norm of businesses staying out of social issues – is not designed to shake them down but to shake them up. We are not twisting arms for cash tributes. We are trying to keep perverts away from our kids. It’s very clear – you corporations go make money and run your business and we’re not going to hassle you. But if you use your power to pursue the agenda of our enemies, you are now our enemy, and we will gleefully and without apology use all our power to harm you right back.
The fretting conservatives, some in good faith and others because they are worthless and weak, claim to worry that this is some grand violation of our principles. It is certainly not a violation of my principles, starting with this one: If you hit me, I will hit you back twice as hard and then kick your quivering body. One problem with so much of blue check conservative Twitter is that so many of those who would presume to lead us into battle have never been in a fistfight. I have no use for anyone who has never gotten in a brawl and lost – and I prefer ones who have experience winning too.
We’re told that for some reason we are obliged not to use our most effective strength, our primary mode of power, in support of our interests. What we are never told is why that is true. Where we hold the government, we need to use it to deter corporate intervention – when did conservatism drop the concepts of deterrence and righteous retribution? We believe that for criminals who wrong us, and we need to apply them to others who do so as well, including companies. And there’s a track record of not using our power, manifesting in the current crisis. We have seen what not fighting back does, what substituting conservative cliches for conservative ass-kicking has got us. So, what’s the alternative they suggest? We tried doing nothing and that didn’t work. Maybe do nothing twice as hard?
No, we’re way past the phase where our opponents can appeal to our principles to neutralize our ability to resist. Our goal is a freer, more prosperous country where our kids are not the target of weirdos. You don’t get that by holding fire when the California commie contingent comes to make you into second class citizens. And do not think for a moment that making us into serfs is not their desired end state. From running down the idea of free speech to reimagining “democracy” into meaning that they have total control over the levers of cultural and political power to their manifest desire to turn our kids into gender-baffled sex objects for the Democrat pervert constituency, the future our enemies seek is unacceptable.
And we need to follow the principled lead of guys like Ron DeSantis and simply not accept it.
****************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
*****************************************
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See 
No comments:
Post a Comment