hitmyspot

I agree. It's not, but if I was choosing which country to boycott, it wouldn't be the one that regulates technology, it would be the ones enabling genocide.

I think calling for compete boycotts of countries that work with non European companies is the complete opposite of the purpose of this community. It's meant to be supporting Europeans, lifting each other up, not trying to be divisive.

Ireland is risking their economic benefits on their ideological stance, with no benefit to them personally, yet you think their economic decisions to support their economy on other ways is offensive? How about Germany not wanting to tariff the USA as they are scared of recession. I don't think we should be boycotting Germany.

The point is that in a union, each member follows the rules to benefit themselves which on the whole is mutually beneficial. If you think data laws should be strnegthened, Europe wide, campaign for that, not seek to undermine an EU member in a buy European community.

Hmm, odd that Ireland recognizes Palestine and puts pressure without being pushy on other states to end a literal genocide, but following their laws on privacy correctly is a problem? Not the support for genocide from Germany? Or Hungary protecting Russia. Or Poland persecuting LGBTQ+I people. Or France interrupting international travel? Or Austrian banks operating in sanctioned Russia?

I do think having an EU data commission that is the governing body for all EU countries would be a good thing. Most data we need to worry about these days is trans national. Ireland has fined the likes of Facebook etc. Howeverz the best legislation to protect data, the gdpr is available for all countries. So if you think it's been breached, make a complaint.

Misguided comments to put countries against each other will always find some countries on either side and is divisive rather than constructive.

Realities nonetheless.

Laws exist because we say they do. Society and people follow patterns because of these laws. Abolishing these laws and borders would lead to societal breakdown without an alternative system to replace them.

Families are also constructs, borne of genetic reproduction. however we now understand them to include marriage and adoption and blended families. All constructs. All legalized also.

Yes, of course. However, look at even ancient Greece, and legends of war for troy about love. The concept is older than the concept of countries. War is always about resource allocation, of you include people as a resource, which they are on a societal level. The designation of borders and countries is also partly about resource allocation.

Non tangible things are still real. Families are real.

The creation of complex systems is uniquely human and is what allows development and progress.

Without these systems, laws and things including incorporatng non human entities has pros and cons. Development of healthcare and increasing longevity and increased food production, sanitation and reduction in hunger are a benefit. War and genocide are a problem. However, wars still happened before the introduction of borders. See Norse vikings, Roman empire creation etc.

And our legal system.

Ending borders is a noble ideal but it's not currently practical. People need many of the services their country provides, like healthcare, elderly care, pensions, unemployment assistance etc.

With no national boundaries, and no alternative system in place, society as we know it collapses.

Unfortunately, an anomaly that is used to physically harm gay men. Gay men are assumed to be trans women and so are forcefully given gender reassignment surgeries (note, for trans people, it's gender confirmation surgery).

Gender identity and sex preference are conflated. Whereas in the west, being gay is generally more accepted than being trans, it's the opposite there. Still, it's a sign for humanity that no matter where in the world, or how culture is, there are trans people and gay people living their lives. And some societies have adapted to welcome them, even when they haven't fully. It gives hope for the future, even if it's scary now.

Most 20 year olds are less mature than a 30 yo. What I mean is that some 20 yo are less mature than a typical 20 yo. Some are more mature.

Op could be predatory, but it's not predatory by virtue of age alone. there is also a big difference with, say, an 18yo. Or conversely a 23 yo. After 20, a 10 year gap is no big deal.

There are predatory relationships at all ages. From OPs description, this is not the relationship type they are looking for, as they themselves feel less mature. I'd say 25 to 18 is worse than 30 to 20. It's not the age gap that matters but the maturity difference and power imbalance.

Nationwide

Not to mention, check their genitals to play sport.

The traitors. It’s reality tv but it is also a glimpse into the human psychology of lying, of guilt and group dynamics. I’m sure it will get repetitive, but for now, it’s amazing. The uk version is best, from what I’ve seen.