ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
No bio...
User ID: 822
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
2hr ago
That is kind of what I'm thinking about when I say 'superstimulus' but that does less than nothing for me.
(I'm more of a Rainbow Dash guy myself. The way she's usually drawn is not like that; figure suggests collaboration, not domination.)
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
19hr ago
I would concede that there is probably a big-boob fetish among many Japanese dudes.
Ironically it's kind of something I think does prove the pattern: even though the average Japanese dude might be somewhat compromised in how large they can actually find in nature, they still also seem to prefer representations of women that portray something very different.
It's something I think I understand, but only in the abstract.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
19hr ago
My cluster of prioritized traits looks more like "short, thin, neotenous, healthy, happy, vulnerable, innocent".
That's kind of why I was surprised. When I looked up your examples there really wasn't much of a difference in how she looked between 14 and 25; she looked more or less the same, like most adult women do.
Were you actually as you claimed to be (and not just self-assigning the label because reasons), I believe you would only have considered the version of Emma Watson at 11 as maximally attractive and at the same time failed to consider any other examples.
You know, because she still actually looks like a kid.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
21hr ago
As I understand it, they describe different types of snow, different conditions and modifiers.
It's all the same substance being talked about. The substance of "racism" and "sexism"- that being "blasphemy"- is the same.
Now sure, you might say that snow is real and blasphemy is all made up. But like all religions, it's real to the people handing out the money, just as nature provides food (provided you can navigate to it, which is what the snow words are for).
and the remaining people that must position themselves as superior to other for self definition can do some neosport for the same sensation of superiority
This neosport has already been invented. It's called "politics".
Unfortunately for you, politics is a blood sport, and it's extremely popular. Men fight, women cheerlead.
The US did a case study 6 years ago about how long a population-wide UBI could buy peace in the face of mass unemployment.
The answer was about 3 months. After that, citizens started playing the aformentioned blood sport in city streets nationwide, and those games would continue even after the UBI ended.
You can tell yourself that it was only 0.01% of the population that was responsible for that, but I think 0.01% is closer to the number of how many city-dwellers didn't start chimping out.
Progressives have as many words for "blasphemy" as Eskimo have for "snow".
It's kind of understandable considering their environments. Both groups have so many words that describe the same thing, because if they didn't, it would be much harder for them to extract resources from their respective environments and thus stay alive.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
22hr ago
Perhaps, but I suspect the kinds of men who would move to Japan and (correct me if I'm wrong) marry women local to that area may be outliers in that regard.
And those people kind of invented the anime titty, so...
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
1d ago
not supposed
That heavily depends on who's doing the supposing, and why.
For instance, I lend zero credence to people who "not suppose" me when they're under conditions of extreme moral hazard, like how I'm "not supposed" to defend myself if the criminal attacking me is a particular color.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
1d ago
Which is, ironically, the steelman of "company towns".
Of course, the problem with that is that (stereotype of these places aside) unlike towns of old built around resource extraction using significant amounts of unskilled labor, data centers require minimal amounts of skilled labor.
It wouldn't occur to them to build or rebuild the town in which they locate the data center. They wouldn't even know what to do with one.
you've seen all those studies where men list what age of women they're attracted to and the graph mysteriously starts at 18 and immediately plummets?
Most guys want tits and ass, big as can be, and appear to be attracted to symbols of social dominance[0]. Young women right at the point of sexual availability (biologically, 13ish, which is why men have the evolutionary response for this) dominate all others in the desirability game[1]; after that, that they will make themselves up to evoke this as well. If you ever noticed that most women look angry, that's why.
As a mirror image, most women are attracted to symbols of physical dominance[0]- most commonly the rewards that dominance brings.
[0] Note that they expect this dominance to be used against competition- against others of the same gender- not against them directly in a relationship. They also tend to be much less attracted to people who exhibit cross-dominance; normal men don't generally select tomboys (physical dominant), normal women don't generally select effeminate men (social dominant).
I suspect this also has implications for why certain homosexuals and bisexuals have the attraction patterns they do.
[1] Which is why feminists push for higher and higher ages; restricting supply of the most desirable goods increases demand and price for the middling ones is Econ 101.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
1d ago
They think everyone is a Chernobyl waiting to happen.
Remember: the average Western citizen is so bad at risk management that they'll gladly support a currency devaluation of 30% to avoid the worst of a bad flu season.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
2d ago
I do find it funny that the one biggest problem with libertarianism is the paradox (though admittedly it's true for all of them) that yes, people like that are more suited to leadership (in the sense that they know better than anyone else that they need to make sure there's enough room and tolerance of risk to keep future options open, rather than other systems/leaders that are openly proud of the fact they eat their seed corn) than basically anyone else... except for the fact they don't want to (either it's not lucrative enough, since being better than everyone else usually means you get paid better too), and/or are just as worried about the inevitable revolution of the not-so-worthy as anyone else when it comes to building systems and organizations that would making space for those like them in the future.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
2d ago
But we're discussing rape as a "public security" issue in peacetime.
Which would be fine if it was peacetime.
But here, one section of the populace is running cover for their very literal footsoldiers, which serves to encourage them to use the local(s as) comfort women.
That doesn't sound like peacetime to me.
This sort of thing is only rape if you think the locals have the right to their own bodies, but judging by how they have reacted to being raped, I think the upper class's view (the people running that cover and the people voting for it[1]) that they do not is completely justified. Americans justified slavery pre-1860 with this observation as well.
By contrast, if you think they do own themselves, the excuses the upper class gave for that were literally "we don't want to give the local populace an excuse to start fighting our migrants occupation force". Though in defense of inaction, rapes are basically just the equivalent to the random rocket-bombings of 1984, where it would be more expensive to fight the Party to have them stop than accepting it's just the cost of doing business[2].
[1] Which can either simply be a power thing (these people generally don't have daughters, so that's OK), or they're so morality-porn-brained that they think it's good that the migrants are permitted this kind of salary.
[2] Orwell thinks it's important enough to say they haven't realized, but would it even matter day-to-day if they did? Just as the average Afghani thinks, there is no Britain for them. There is simply 'where can food/water be obtained from, where the lodging is'.
Nationalism is not natural.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
3d ago
That's not the point.
The assertion being made in these statement is that "why don't you just drive with passive moderate autistic men" is, from an core emotional standpoint, exactly equivalent to "it's your failure that you, being a man attracted to women, can't find other men sexually attractive".
The modal man is not a gay femboy so we're ignoring their occasional existence.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
4d ago
And here I thought it was at minimum 3 parenthesis. It must be real bad if even their critics are Jewing us out of the third one.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
4d ago
Assume you're a normal straight man. Then consider the following statement:
If you can't find any women to date, just date men instead.
Your emotional reaction/repulsion to that is what normal women feel when they're told to do this. That's why they can't/won't. (The ones who can tend not to be normal.)
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
4d ago
Most women can't overcome the ick on dealing with passive moderate autists enough even when there's massive upside in taking charge.
In other words, the autist is breaking the rules of gender: he is assuming the woman's gender role by being passive and not taking charge.
Women generally aren't attracted to lesbians those in the female gender role, least of all [transgender] men such as these.
I think this is all that is.
When has a 13 year old white "incel" ever stabbed a female classmate to death because she turned him down?
As with every other similar crime, the supply of killer 13 year olds is not enough to satisfy demand, so they have to be invented for the big screen. Seeing them worn down and ultimately punished by Big Mother Righteous Authority is also extremely attractive to a certain type of child molester.
Come to think of it, Law and Order: SVU does this too and some of its cases always felt kind of molest-y in hindsight, but not "Righteous Authority sexually humiliates the main character every time he appears on screen" molest-y.
But even in this case her fantasy is perverted into some kind of obsession with the cool aesthetic of shooting up the place, obviously pushed by
evil bloodthirsty gun marketing execs and the nraEmmanuel Goldstein
If this was indeed the movie's intention I assert the above applies.
That said, I'm not going to pretend "obsession with the cool aesthetic of shooting up the place" isn't a thing. There are a non-zero number of young men who have that kind of relationship with the TEC-9 for this reason (the people who like it because it's in rap are different than these guys) to the point they sometimes end up as copycats.
It sure is fortunate for everyone else in the case of most real school shooters that they tend to be so consumed by aesthetics that the plan looks like it goes out the window once they decide they must start shooting. The aesthetics and symbology got them there and, beyond any specific target they pick, it's opportunistic beyond that. The penalty for just walking in the door with the guns is death, what more can the authorities do beyond that? (Beyond that which won't immediately be abused for garden-variety religious crimes, like movie directors fantasizing about 17 year old women; so those killed in these crimes unambiguously died for [your] freedom, as the propaganda says.)
Though when it comes to real life, everyone should know that there are some dark secrets that you just don't tell other people no matter what. You just don't.
You're absolutely right— those, you only tell your offline LLM.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
5d ago
Why is it an invalid opinion that Epstein didn't know the girl was under 18?
Mens rea doesn't matter in religious crimes.
(The religion in question is functionally just "sex is bad and women have no agency", exactly as evolution dictates. 18 is just the compromise number; the religious wanted it at infinity but it was unworkable.)
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
5d ago
Whereas casual sex is like a takeaway kebab or burger, where you are absolutely loving the experience in the moment, but then feel disgusted and ashamed of yourself immediately afterwards.
Off-topic: do people actually feel disgusted and ashamed after eating take-out?
I get that people say this so it must somehow be true (even if a meme, it's too popular to just be made up) but of the thousands of burgers I've consumed over my lifetime so far I have yet to identify one I was disgusted with myself for eating.
Is it just that it's a product of an industrial kitchen system, and industrial kitchens are bad because reasons?
Do people really order two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s (one with cheese) and a large soda, then consume it all themselves in one sitting?
Have I missed the mythical past, or never having visited the southernmost US states, never knew a world where fast food meals were more than 1000-1300 calories on the regular?
Or is it something else I can't see?
One of the interesting tensions in Islam, it seems to me, especially as compared to Christianity, is that Islam tends to emphasise firstly that everything is absolutely foreknown and determined by God, and secondly that also human free choice is absolutely vital.
Funny; that's actually how I understand Christianity itself to be, including the concept that "God does not torment people by requiring of them more than they can do". (Which I always found a bit of a fortune cookie when used that way; if you assume this is true, then whatever happens to a man on Earth is by definition what he could bear.)
The Fall happened and so we are either unable to independently choose good, or our ability to choose good is in some way constrained. As such the believer is wholly dependent on the grace of God.
The latter is kind of Christianity 3:16 101. I agree that lots of Christians never really make it past that part, which is why doing things like writing the law on one's heart is a meaningless statement, for the answer it gives would always be wrong. Why even tell us to put on the armor of God when no man could even begin to don it? Why imply that one might even expect to understand what the Lord's will is? How could we even have been created to do good works, and how could they have been prepared in advance for us to do them?
Islam, however, is much more positive about the Law, and in fact tends to see Christianity as a retrogression, a kind of civilisational backwards step in abandoning the rigour of divine Law.
In your opinion, what is Islam's relationship with that law?
Paul spends a long time agonising over the fact (as he sees it) that the Law failed to produce righteousness
I'm honestly not even sure how surprised anyone should actually be about that (unless this is in the context that it sucks that you can't just follow the law if you're already doing what, in spirit, it requires). How could a law be expected to produce the behavior of judging one's own heart in its observers? Stereotypically, Judaism is kind of the epitome of tricking God doing everything that the law requires while ignoring its meaning perfectly, which if the Bible is to be believed was as true in Jesus' day as it is today (like that eruv wire strung around the Promised Land of... Manhattan). I don't think Islam is nearly as famous for that.
Then again, of course, maybe the huge list of "tricks" generated is part of the point, since an observer ultimately has to make a judgement call about what thing falls within what category, and it is perhaps the act of continually doing that which imparts life/generates the righteousness. Which is perhaps why those laws could ever be condensed down into 2 sentences in the first place.
Throughout the gospels Jesus is constantly asking people to do the unreasonable or the extreme, like sell all their possessions, or die with him.
I always find it odd that, provided we assume Jesus is God, that these things are considered unreasonable or extreme. It would certainly be extreme for any non-God individuals, but 'the entity that is in charge of life even after death is standing in front of you asking a question that involve having to do that' seems to me to be a bit of an extreme circumstance itself.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
8d ago
The way to write CRT is to assume ACAB- Assigned Cain At Birth.
You now imagine yourself on trial for the murder of Abel. CRT writings are the evidence of mitigating factors your team of defense attorneys brings to defend you in a modern court of law.
Not guilty because of mental deficiency or undiagnosed psych condition relative to Abel, especially one you can blame Abel or his father for intentionally causing (PTSD being the most popular; you have a right to never be under any stress whatsoever, just as Abel is never under stress). Not guilty because mens rea isn't there- why would you go and kill him, you can make sacrifices just as pleasing in your own alternate way relative to your own cultural and racial circumstances, no reason to kill him over this one. (And you do have conventional achievements, but they were not recognized as a scheme of Abel- even if you had killed him, he would have deserved it. Basically, his entire existence is an expression that reality itself hates you, and why should you ever accept that?)
It doesn't matter whether the arguments presented are even coherent, or if they're just filibusters- the judge is bound by his own laws to consider every single thing you say. You're playing to the gallery; if you are found guilty, they too will be convicted. Better to act now assuming you're right before case law can be established, right or wrong.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
8d ago
Personally I think it's because my train of thought gets derailed several times a minute by catchy lyrics, taking me out of the moment and forcing me to reorient myself each time.
I find that I, should I want to do serious creative work and listen to music at the same time, must listen to a piece of music I've entirely memorized. Which is why I tend to prefer simple songs; chiptune tends to do this due to the lack of complex instrumentation, lyrics, and the simplicity of the music brought on by pretending to be limited to only X number of voices at a time. You can do a lot with only 5 voices, but the other way to do it is to listen to something that only really has a few patterns but has a depressing effect.
In that way, the [fact that listening to the music is pleasurable] is decoupled from the distraction of ultimately being distracted by trying to digest its patterns; if the pattern is not digestible, or the instrumentation (generally lyrics but percussion as well) is distracting, it won't work.
Doctors have responded by shying away from the procedures which are most offensive to lawmakers. This is an obvious chilling effect!
Indeed, you've changed my mind about it. If doctors are soldiers, we can note that indeed, soldiers have a harder time dealing with the enemy when overly-restrictive ROE are imposed. Friendlies get hurt, even killed, if you can't deal with cases where it's obvious to the soldier on the ground who the enemy is, but not to the politicians back home.
But then, what is to be done? Establishing a military-style court in the form of review with primacy over the criminal justice system won't fix the problem (soldiers get railroaded all the time there too), doctors (and more importantly, the organizations paying them) don't want to take that risk, and you have a major fraction of the population doing the Queers for Palestine thing about babies (perhaps even literally albeit unintentionally; Jews do tend to become doctors). Maybe a Red state should only employ Red tribe soldiers/doctors so that the kind of cultural clash presented here is minimized, but even that's no guarantee, for the US was Red from 2000-2008 and [as I understand it] the shift to Blue coincided with more restricted ROE simply because the average soldier was Red.
Maybe the best choice, or the only choice, is simply to accept that living in Texas has certain occupational hazards; to accept that the optimal number of doctors prosecuted for questionable abortions is not, and will not, be zero; and to make sure there's still some semblance of a West to run off to when there's no mind left in the nation to be changed about it.
Thanks for posting that; it's what I'm trying to evoke/working off of, just couldn't find the article.
More options
Context Copy link