@adam-l

Back in the day I thought we should have a Mrs Archwinger appreciation day.

Which one? The original frigid, bitchy dike he ended up divorcing? Or his current good one?

As the alchemists showed, unsolvable problems contributed majorly to the advance of human knowledge.

Ah. lol. I think you mean the original Mrs. Archwinger. She was definitely an unsolvable problem!

Men need love but can't find it, because women are incapable of it

They're capable of love, but it's not the idealistic love we feel for them. Theirs is far more conditional. Though to be fair, all love is conditional, except maybe from parents to kids.

Now, capitalism has found that it can squeeze more surplus out of the family

Capitalism itself isn't a conscious entity. But the powers-that-be certainly have done that, and they've also done it in socialist countries. It's not just employers, but also governments. More income earners = more tax revenue.

Typo, you've read Esther Vilar's second book, The polygamous sex, right?

No, but I'll certainly add it to the list of books I need to read eventually.

I wonder if it's on Audible? I have unused credits, and I can listen to books while I do essential tasks far easier and far more frequently than I can actually sit still and read.

The sad fact is that a relationship that is not supposed to last "till death do us part" necessarily turns into an antagonism of who can extract the most out of it.

That's our animalistic nature. As humans, we're capable of overcoming that. Christianity used to be an excellent guide for that, and it still can be if you stay away from any of the institutional churches, as they're all compromised and serve the idol of the Unholy Vagina instead of God.

And women, having a more integrated psychopathic mode, are more equipped for that.

True.

@MentORPHEUS

Rush did NOT, I mean not fucking once EVER, clarify, caveat, offer exceptional or outlier cases, that could in any way get even perceived as "diluting/softening" his hard-line positions on issues, particularly that of drugs.

That sort of shit is supposed to go without saying. Don't be an autist.

The dude trusted his doctor, and his doctor made him an addict.

The drug abusers he spoke about being harsh on were the ones who chose to use drugs which they knew to be illegal. A heroin junky has no one to blame but himself.

That's a big fucking difference.

[the rest]

I admire your passion to a degree, but it's clouding your judgement a bit. Just because a guy, whose primary purposes were first to entertain and second to provide an alternative to the DNC party line propaganda put out by the mainstream, didn't caveat every possible exception to his hard-line stance doesn't mean exceptions didn't exist.

Straight up: you're just a hater, and your hatred for a good but flawed human is keeping you from seeing him as a human, who can also be a victim of a fucked up system.