Pirate Party Gets Second Seat in European Parliament

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Everyone laughed at the idea of a “Pirate Party.” That is until they secured a seat in the European Parliament. And now, just a few months later, they have a second seat, occupied by a 22 year old girl.

With the Lisbon Treaty being signed by all European Union member states, the Pirate Party has gained another seat in the European Parliament. The second Pirate Party seat will be occupied by the 22 year old Amelia Andersdotter, who will become the youngest Member of the European Parliament.
 
2 seats out of 736...

While it certainly beats the 2-party system we have here, I can't help but think that they'll end up effectively being a member of one of the bigger parties and have very little real influence.

/obvious
 
2 seats out of 736...

While it certainly beats the 2-party system we have here, I can't help but think that they'll end up effectively being a member of one of the bigger parties and have very little real influence.

/obvious

That's what they will do - align with another party that most closely share their view. Some of the established parties in Sweden to have a similar, liberal view on copyright, such as the left party and the green party.
 
o.0 icelandic family o.0
the girls there isnt halfbad, you can see it on the last name, it comes from the viking age, with "anders" dad or granpa w/e and dotter/dottir doughter. easy enough.
the EU is gonna be a big pirateship! at this rate :D
 
Holy shit, what the fuck is the matter with you? Is the first thing you think of when you see a female a judgment upon the way she looks? How is her appearance even relevant to this story to begin with?

Dunno but I think she's ugly.
 
Dunno but I think she's ugly.


bag it and tag it......doggy style was invented for a reason ya know.... ;)

well that and lots of alcohol.

in all seriousness 2 out of 700+ seats isnt gonna make a whole hell of a lot of difference, but it does prove the democratic process can work as long as the people that care enough to get off their ass and vote does so.......our country on the other hand........................
 
Holy shit, what the fuck is the matter with you? Is the first thing you think of when you see a female a judgment upon the way she looks? How is her appearance even relevant to this story to begin with?

It was... just an offhand comment. I think your reaction is a bit extreme, to be totally honest.
 
Great job, Jackal & Guitarrasdeamor.

[Tripod]MajorPayne;1034860205 said:
It was... just an offhand comment.

Nah, not really. It was remarkably stupid.

I can't help but think that they'll end up effectively being a member of one of the bigger parties and have very little real influence.

That's real BS.

Also, congrats to Amelia & PPSE. Getting another MEP seat is possibly the only good thing to come out of the Lisbon treaty. :/
 
Holy shit, what the fuck is the matter with you? Is the first thing you think of when you see a female a judgment upon the way she looks? How is her appearance even relevant to this story to begin with?

He's a man. You could learn form him.
 
Holy shit, what the fuck is the matter with you? Is the first thing you think of when you see a female a judgment upon the way she looks? How is her appearance even relevant to this story to begin with?

Are you new to the internet?

Fine if you want me to be serious I will. Shes effing 22 years old. More than likely the myelination of her prefrontal cortex isn't yet complete or just finished. She either isn't yet or is still in the transitional period of becoming an adult and settling in to the personality she will have for the rest of her life, but by gosh she has tons of experience in politics and is fit to represent her people!
Can I go back to being an immature testosterone laden anonymous male commenter now?
 
"When I see a pretty girl walking down the street, I think two things. One part wants me to take her out, talk to her, be real nice and sweet and treat her right."

"And what did the other part think?"

"What her head would look like on a stick..."

/American psycho'd
 
Holy shit, what the fuck is the matter with you? Is the first thing you think of when you see a female a judgment upon the way she looks? How is her appearance even relevant to this story to begin with?

Because that's how the male brain works. No amount of feminist propaganda will change that.
 
She is a little cutey isn't she. Mmmm If she plays her under table cards right I'm sure she'll have more power soon.
 
She is a little cutey isn't she. Mmmm If she plays her under table cards right I'm sure she'll have more power soon.

Am I the only one that wonders why things like that ever work?

If someone's smart enough to get themselves into a position of power at that scale, aren't they smart enough to understand the female brain to the point that they're able to get themselves a wife that looks good enough they won't need anyone else?
 
Holy shit, what the fuck is the matter with you? Is the first thing you think of when you see a female a judgment upon the way she looks?

As much as we like to think we are robots, we are put on earth mainly to breed as far as our brains our concerned. So we won't ever get too far from thinking about it, often. When a man sees another man all we are thinking about is how much women does he have and how to get his women.....unless you're in the 10 percenters club, in which case you are probably thinking other things.


You need to stop with the whole Germaine Greer thing though, guys don't find it attractive.

Amelia_andersdotter.jpg
 
Am I the only one that wonders why things like that ever work?

If someone's smart enough to get themselves into a position of power at that scale, aren't they smart enough to understand the female brain to the point that they're able to get themselves a wife that looks good enough they won't need anyone else?

They should be smart enough to be polyamorous/polygamous and have partners that want that. Monogamy is over rated and pretty much no one does real monogamy, they do something like serial-monogamy, new partners whenever they "fall out of puppy love".

'Course that doesn't stop the media machine with its monogamy aspirations and the "one true love" thing. For everyone who believes they are in the "one true love" thing they just haven't met me yet.
 
Holy shit, what the fuck is the matter with you? Is the first thing you think of when you see a female a judgment upon the way she looks? How is her appearance even relevant to this story to begin with?

Too much sand in your vagina.
 
They should be smart enough to be polyamorous/polygamous and have partners that want that. Monogamy is over rated and pretty much no one does real monogamy, they do something like serial-monogamy, new partners whenever they "fall out of puppy love".

'Course that doesn't stop the media machine with its monogamy aspirations and the "one true love" thing. For everyone who believes they are in the "one true love" thing they just haven't met me yet.

Whoa, 100% genuine serious response - I did not expect that on this subject, most people don't even think about it to begin with. Anyway, here's my opinion, you probably won't agree with it but FWIW:

I agree that the media's portrayal is flat-out wrong. However, I don't agree that polyamorous is the correct view. To me, considering oneself polyamorous is akin to avoiding the question rather than answering it, because, for most people, it represents a lack of belief in monogamy rather than a strength of belief in itself. Monogamy itself fails, in almost all cases, for one of the below reasons:

1) Decreased attractiveness. Usually caused by either decreased looks associated with age, or by an effect that causes us to lose interest in what we know we can have.
- Avoidable - both of them. The former is avoided completely as long as "chance of other women putting out" (part of what makes a woman attractive) goes down at the same speed as attractiveness does. The latter can be avoided by maintaining interest and variety within life, and by never allowing oneself to believe that the other person is a given.

2) Lack of compatibility. Self-explanatory.
- Avoidable. If the answer to "how long can I be around this person without wanting to hit their forehead with a hammer" is less than "I'd never want to do that" then even considering a monogamous relationship with them makes no sense.

3) Finding a person that's both more attractive and either more or equally compatible.
- Not avoidable, but can be minimized to the point that there's almost no possibility.

In the end it comes down to finding the right person. Finding an ideal person is virtually impossible, but you can come pretty damn close.
 
If people are calling her attractive, then you must hang around some pretty ugly people.
 
Couple of internet white knights runnin wild in this here thread hyuk hyuk :D
 
If people are calling her attractive, then you must hang around some pretty ugly people.

Different standards.

Found out, [h]ere, that most people hate dreadlocks.

I don't.

They're hot.


Some people hate the nordic facial structure.

Some people hate east asian facial structure.

It's just a matter of opinion, though on [H], there are a lot of sheep herders, and much more s[h]eep.

Though... why is this conversation even happening?
 
sear must be a fat chick IRL or something.

I LOL'd.

On topic- Hey, at least shes doing something that may benefit society... I've gotta wake my ass up at 6 AM every day this week.Yeah, I'm doing the dry wall at the new McDonalds.
 
Whoa, 100% genuine serious response - I did not expect that on this subject, most people don't even think about it to begin with. Anyway, here's my opinion, you probably won't agree with it but FWIW:

In the end it comes down to finding the right person. Finding an ideal person is virtually impossible, but you can come pretty damn close.

You are working within the monogamous framework such that "how can I make this work the best it can". Sure monogamy can be pretty good in optimal situations, however I don't care how much people love each other, 10, 15 years in if there were no consequences for having another girlfriend/boyfriend most people would.

There are consequences though if you lie to people you love though. People have relationships with others all the time, some of them are very intensive (so called best friends). There is very little difference between having a best friend and a girlfriend in regards to your time. In fact if you sit the situation up correct in the first place, having more than one partner can reduce chores in your life and make it more fun. You have more power as a group the bigger the group is.

<tinfoil>I believe there is some reason "governments" prefer people in this 2parents+3kids situation with grandparents in retirement homes. It forces people to be much more reliant on the government for services.</tinfoil>

Imagine if there was a relationship where there were 1 man and 4 women how much stronger that family would be if it *worked*. It has a higher chance of not working than other relationship types but if it did... that's a lot more power than usual. More money, less chores more sexual partners. Most people just fascinate themselves with negatives of things like this instead of working out ways to actually do them. And that's fine, not every man or woman can have multiple partners, so all those single people out there actually help people like me if that's what I want to do.
 
You are working within the monogamous framework such that "how can I make this work the best it can". Sure monogamy can be pretty good in optimal situations, however I don't care how much people love each other, 10, 15 years in if there were no consequences for having another girlfriend/boyfriend most people would.

Putting everything outside the context of the monogamous framework, there's another problem with being polyamorous: one person will always be "better" than the other so why waste time with the other one?

On a side note, the above's actually an ideal test as to whether entering into a monogamous relationship is a good idea or not. If you'd want to have another girlfriend/boyfriend because there even exists a possibility of finding someone better, the answer is no, don't marry.

But you're right, most people would, mostly because they can't make an informed, intelligent, and non-emotional judgment as to when marriage is a good idea and when it isn't. However, you can't dismiss monogamy entirely because of this.
 
Putting everything outside the context of the monogamous framework, there's another problem with being polyamorous: one person will always be "better" than the other so why waste time with the other one?

I'm not sure what you mean by better. I think for any relationship to work long term there needs to be some kind of balance. It's rare for very intelligent people to find an equal person in intelligence, especially if you also value attractiveness in someone. There is a tradeoff on hotness to intelligence as most know, the more hot you are the less intelligent you usually are because you don't have to be to have influence. Just because I may be more intelligent than someone and hence better at some things doesn't mean I'm better at all things. Current society values way too much of a few things and has neglected other important things.

On a side note, the above's actually an ideal test as to whether entering into a monogamous relationship is a good idea or not. If you'd want to have another girlfriend/boyfriend because there even exists a possibility of finding someone better, the answer is no, don't marry.

So how many people would get married? :D Celebrants would go out of business, marriage is mostly about a business and control in my opinion.

The other thing is puppy love does crazy things to people, it's supposed to. It's supposed to make you breed. So when people make decisions under that influence it's worse than trying to pass a math test on ecstacy - I just love you so much number 7. So of course people who are in puppy love will think they will last till the end of time, just like people on ecstacy believe their blood looks like rainbows.

I'm not necessarily saying monogamy isn't the way for some people either. I believe some people it's the perfect fit. However if your goal in life is to get the most out of it monogamy isn't the way to do it in my opinion. There is actual evidence behind "the larger the group" the more successful it is, up till a point anyhow. As can be seen in cities of today when something is too large it begins to fail. If your group is under 50 then it should be fine.

Larger families typically have more "success" in the world too as they have more support. Yet families are getting smaller and smaller as time goes on, at least in the western world.
 
They should be smart enough to be polyamorous/polygamous and have partners that want that. Monogamy is over rated and pretty much no one does real monogamy, they do something like serial-monogamy, new partners whenever they "fall out of puppy love".

'Course that doesn't stop the media machine with its monogamy aspirations and the "one true love" thing. For everyone who believes they are in the "one true love" thing they just haven't met me yet.

Whoa, 100% genuine serious response - I did not expect that on this subject, most people don't even think about it to begin with. Anyway, here's my opinion, you probably won't agree with it but FWIW:

I agree that the media's portrayal is flat-out wrong. However, I don't agree that polyamorous is the correct view. To me, considering oneself polyamorous is akin to avoiding the question rather than answering it, because, for most people, it represents a lack of belief in monogamy rather than a strength of belief in itself. Monogamy itself fails, in almost all cases, for one of the below reasons:

1) Decreased attractiveness. Usually caused by either decreased looks associated with age, or by an effect that causes us to lose interest in what we know we can have.
- Avoidable - both of them. The former is avoided completely as long as "chance of other women putting out" (part of what makes a woman attractive) goes down at the same speed as attractiveness does. The latter can be avoided by maintaining interest and variety within life, and by never allowing oneself to believe that the other person is a given.

2) Lack of compatibility. Self-explanatory.
- Avoidable. If the answer to "how long can I be around this person without wanting to hit their forehead with a hammer" is less than "I'd never want to do that" then even considering a monogamous relationship with them makes no sense.

3) Finding a person that's both more attractive and either more or equally compatible.
- Not avoidable, but can be minimized to the point that there's almost no possibility.

In the end it comes down to finding the right person. Finding an ideal person is virtually impossible, but you can come pretty damn close.

You are working within the monogamous framework such that "how can I make this work the best it can". Sure monogamy can be pretty good in optimal situations, however I don't care how much people love each other, 10, 15 years in if there were no consequences for having another girlfriend/boyfriend most people would.

There are consequences though if you lie to people you love though. People have relationships with others all the time, some of them are very intensive (so called best friends). There is very little difference between having a best friend and a girlfriend in regards to your time. In fact if you sit the situation up correct in the first place, having more than one partner can reduce chores in your life and make it more fun. You have more power as a group the bigger the group is.

<tinfoil>I believe there is some reason "governments" prefer people in this 2parents+3kids situation with grandparents in retirement homes. It forces people to be much more reliant on the government for services.</tinfoil>

Imagine if there was a relationship where there were 1 man and 4 women how much stronger that family would be if it *worked*. It has a higher chance of not working than other relationship types but if it did... that's a lot more power than usual. More money, less chores more sexual partners. Most people just fascinate themselves with negatives of things like this instead of working out ways to actually do them. And that's fine, not every man or woman can have multiple partners, so all those single people out there actually help people like me if that's what I want to do.

I'm not sure what you mean by better. I think for any relationship to work long term there needs to be some kind of balance. It's rare for very intelligent people to find an equal person in intelligence, especially if you also value attractiveness in someone. There is a tradeoff on hotness to intelligence as most know, the more hot you are the less intelligent you usually are because you don't have to be to have influence. Just because I may be more intelligent than someone and hence better at some things doesn't mean I'm better at all things. Current society values way too much of a few things and has neglected other important things.



So how many people would get married? :D Celebrants would go out of business, marriage is mostly about a business and control in my opinion.

The other thing is puppy love does crazy things to people, it's supposed to. It's supposed to make you breed. So when people make decisions under that influence it's worse than trying to pass a math test on ecstacy - I just love you so much number 7. So of course people who are in puppy love will think they will last till the end of time, just like people on ecstacy believe their blood looks like rainbows.

I'm not necessarily saying monogamy isn't the way for some people either. I believe some people it's the perfect fit. However if your goal in life is to get the most out of it monogamy isn't the way to do it in my opinion. There is actual evidence behind "the larger the group" the more successful it is, up till a point anyhow. As can be seen in cities of today when something is too large it begins to fail. If your group is under 50 then it should be fine.

Larger families typically have more "success" in the world too as they have more support. Yet families are getting smaller and smaller as time goes on, at least in the western world.

Wow...:eek:

Not sure if you've ever felt it, but there's this thing called love. And it's not the same thing as sex. It's not the same thing as greed, either.

You ever read Brave New World by any chance?
 
I'm not sure what you mean by better. I think for any relationship to work long term there needs to be some kind of balance. It's rare for very intelligent people to find an equal person in intelligence, especially if you also value attractiveness in someone. There is a tradeoff on hotness to intelligence as most know, the more hot you are the less intelligent you usually are because you don't have to be to have influence. Just because I may be more intelligent than someone and hence better at some things doesn't mean I'm better at all things. Current society values way too much of a few things and has neglected other important things.

I am going to disagree with you there. More intelligent people are more likely to reproduce with more attractive people as well, thereby eventually placing the two characteristics into the same group of people, at least to some extent. Whether this or what you mention is more prevalent, I do not know, but they are both there.

However, you are correct that there are multiple factors that determine the "quality" of a person. Gauging how these factors translate into "quality" is part of the process in making a judgment regarding who to stay with and who to leave.

So how many people would get married? :D Celebrants would go out of business, marriage is mostly about a business and control in my opinion.

The other thing is puppy love does crazy things to people, it's supposed to. It's supposed to make you breed. So when people make decisions under that influence it's worse than trying to pass a math test on ecstacy - I just love you so much number 7. So of course people who are in puppy love will think they will last till the end of time, just like people on ecstacy believe their blood looks like rainbows.

I'm not necessarily saying monogamy isn't the way for some people either. I believe some people it's the perfect fit. However if your goal in life is to get the most out of it monogamy isn't the way to do it in my opinion. There is actual evidence behind "the larger the group" the more successful it is, up till a point anyhow. As can be seen in cities of today when something is too large it begins to fail. If your group is under 50 then it should be fine.

Larger families typically have more "success" in the world too as they have more support. Yet families are getting smaller and smaller as time goes on, at least in the western world.

Agreed - this is why what I stated above happens.

Wow...:eek:

Not sure if you've ever felt it, but there's this thing called love. And it's not the same thing as sex. It's not the same thing as greed, either.

You ever read Brave New World by any chance?

Correct; I am discussing scientific approaches to understanding and, by proxy, obtaining it. I prefer taking aim and firing once rather than spraying bullets in every direction hoping to hit the right target, metaphorically speaking.
 
Wow...:eek:

Not sure if you've ever felt it, but there's this thing called love. And it's not the same thing as sex. It's not the same thing as greed, either.

You ever read Brave New World by any chance?

I'm probably in a longer relationship than 90% of people on this forum (11 years), so yes, I know what love is. And no I don't read many fiction books, why do you ask? Does it have some character in it which reminds you of me , the me you think you know from 5 paragraphs? ;)

There are certain subjects upon which a lot of people react very emotionally over when reading others thoughts on them, I believe this is one of them. It's like religion or other taboo subjects. Too many people rooted in their own reality with closed minds. The fact that something may be more logical only further annoys/upsets these people I have found.
 
Holy shit, what the fuck is the matter with you? Is the first thing you think of when you see a female a judgment upon the way she looks? How is her appearance even relevant to this story to begin with?

I hate to break it to you but that is how it is with most men. When a woman accomplishes something or invents something new, the majority of men wonder if she is hot.
 
Imagine if there was a relationship where there were 1 man and 4 women how much stronger that family would be if it *worked*. It has a higher chance of not working than other relationship types but if it did... that's a lot more power than usual. More money, less chores more sexual partners. Most people just fascinate themselves with negatives of things like this instead of working out ways to actually do them. And that's fine, not every man or woman can have multiple partners, so all those single people out there actually help people like me if that's what I want to do.

By your own logic the appropriate example to make would have been "Imagine if there was a relationship where there were 2 men and 3 women.", since that is clearly a more powerful group of 5 than 1 man and 4 women. There would be more money. There would be a more even split of chores since the two men could split the chores that men tend to do. There would be the same number of sexual partners, and the ability to enjoy many sexual acts that just couldn't be done with only one man, and there would still be the procreative benefits of having more women than men in the relationship.

So why didn't you use the far better example? I would hazard a guess that you didn't because you don't really care about the greater "power" of a larger group. That is probably just something you use to allow you to justify your fantasy of having 4 women at once.
 
So why didn't you use the far better example? I would hazard a guess that you didn't because you don't really care about the greater "power" of a larger group. That is probably just something you use to allow you to justify your fantasy of having 4 women at once.

To each their own example. If I meet a man that could work with me on that level you never know, I'm not against it. I do believe it's harder for it to work in that manner with more than one man simply because men are generally very jealous creatures in the "bad way", not saying women aren't but it's a bit different. That's just my opinion though. But it is a fantasy until you are living it (though I have for a little while), I don't really need justification as I'm not religious and think it's fine though It disgusts many people such things, I understand that, but I'm fine with that too.

People can think what they want of polygamous/polyamorous people but if it's done right they certainly have more "power" (in pretty much any way you want to define "power") over monogamous people all other things being equal. That isn't an argument people who are against such things want to enter though because they cannot win it, instead they'll turn to more subjective things of which there are no definitive answers.
 
On off topic monogamy:
It makes sense from a purely biological point of view.
In large populations (as the ones we live in) close unstructurized contact to multiple partners (excluding "fixed" polygamous relationships) increases the chance of distribution of diseases. Creating a potential health treat for the whole group.

On Pirate Party:
It's kinda nice that they get some seats, but I can't help to have a "pig in a poke" feeling when it comes to the party. As their views on other issues is not clearly defined yet.
(at least that's how it seemed prior to the last election over here, might have changed..)
 
Back
Top