> these jobs aren't worth having
Are you making that decision for yourself, or for others? Offer the job, and see if there's takers. If there aren't, then you'll actually know that the job isn't worth having.
Are you making that decision for yourself, or for others? Offer the job, and see if there's takers. If there aren't, then you'll actually know that the job isn't worth having.
Wait, what's that!?!? Are you saying it's acceptable for society to make decisions for those who don't have the leverage to protect themselves?!?! WHAT?!?!? Say it aint so Mr Magoo, say it aint so...
Cause I hurd if you ever make a decision for another human being you're immoral, making all parents immoral. That's just how this shit wurks my brutha!
Are you suggesting that "someone, somewhere" chose to do something that intentionally made them worse off than they were before?
https://www.britannica.com/science/Stockholm-syndrome
The better question. Are you implying this doesn't exist and therefore the woman in question is guilty?
I mean, not that this has anything to do with the overarching point, but.... you're so wrong that you're wrong even when you're wrong.
enter: BUT I'M GOING TO DEFINE FREEWILL SO IT DOESN'T INCLUDE STOCKHOLME SYNDROME...
yeah ok.... That certainly makes you ... biased.
To top it off, your grammar is atrocious.
EDIT: I'll ask my question again, with better wording, just for good measure. Are you suggesting that when people look for work, they accept jobs that leave them worse off than they were before?