ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
No bio...
User ID: 822
There’s probably a leftist out there who would endorse the racist paternalism you describe, but that person is not an “average person.”
True, prosecutors and judges tend not to be average people. In that case, you have 2 possibilities: either the true belief is limited to them, or it's politically advantageous for them to act in a way indistinguishable from believing it [in which case we need to ask why that is, and we can assume that, because some of these are elected positions, that the charge of racist paternalism can be said to extend to a significant portion of the population, or at the very least it doesn't bother them].
they're just the most insanely racist people on Earth.
I think most of the moral sentiment that caused racism in the first place is absolutely alive and well (in that some people have a psychological need for an enemy outgroup categorized by simple observable markers like skin color and gender, and furthermore that people who do this are inferior themselves), and I even believe Progressives when they claim it's [relatively] uniquely a problem with whites. Perhaps ironically, I think this is an HBD thing.
Naturally, I am highly suspect of a race of people who then seem to exempt themselves because they say "look we're maximally discriminatory against ourselves on the basis of race", because the intent is the crime, not the fact it was ever done (which is also the problem with other X-supremacy groups, most notably feminists/gynosupremacists). The correct lesson, and one the classical-liberals tried to teach in the '70s, is that the correct way to not be discriminatory on the basis of race is to not be discriminatory on the basis of race; their folly is that this discriminatory behavior is, in fact, innate to white people (and cannot be trained out of them), and they were just laying the grounds for the (overwhelmingly white) daughters of the Confederacy to roll right back over them with their new racism after classical-liberalism reached its high water mark that decade.
Which also explains the related phenomenon where a non-trivial number of [assuming/acting in the progressive framing] "white supremacists" are black or hispanic (or married to one). That inconsistency is resolved if you assume Progressives are more guilty of the discriminatory-intent-mind-crime (which is what non-progressives actually mean by "racism") than those who they accuse of it.
It doesn't need to be if you accept the progressive framing that "white supremacy" means "being of a mental state that opposes the progressive power structure", but at that point "white supremacy" is not the actual crime.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
3d ago
phone autocorrect often inserts directional quotation marks
Unicode was a mistake.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
3d ago
It means he's pretending to be bad at computers, perhaps for stylometry reasons.
Much as how the key to type an em-dash is not present on your keyboard, the keys that type ‘ and ’ do not exist, so that had to have been pasted in from somewhere else. (Ah, the joys of Unicode.)
It's genuinely weird that the position of some conservatives is that we've moved backwards in division of labor since the 1920s, and that this is a good thing
Why is it weird? The only conservative answer for men is "fuck you, get good" [tacit: in return, the division and realities of labor are how you acquire social power/over women- hasn't been true since 1920, but with a temporary break from 1950-1970], which is why feminism was a natural outgrowth of it.
I've noticed in the discourse online about this is the conspicuous absence of right-wingers pointing out that cooking for oneself isn't a man's job but a woman's one.
Who's doing the talking? Is it the young men, who simply don't have this frame of reference, or is it the old men, who do (and are intentionally undermining it because their view of gender interaction never progressed beyond the 1970s)?
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
5d ago
If your dress and behavior sends a particular signal, its not really fair to get mad at guys who respond to what the signal usually means.
Which also applies to women when dealing with men in dresses and fake tits (and the signal that usually means).
"Clothing is not consent" is absolutely true
"Consent" (when it means as it is meant here, not the definition you'd expect from a plain dictionary reading) is the root of the problem, and the specific tool that is used to legitimize the excess here.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
5d ago
The "feminist-as-in-liberal" you recall had as much to do with classical liberalism
While I admit it's in the same vein of "show me one righteous man and I won't destroy the city" I do assert that some of them indeed exist.
(They also tend to be on the tomboy-ish end of things; I suspect that has something to do with it. The younger examples tend not to call themselves feminists, though.)
Perhaps this is more why I'm worried about destroying the entire edifice (and going back to androsupremacy as so many reactionaries do); limiting the worthy caught in the crossfire is important. I don't think that would happen even if we put them in charge, since if they did manage it they'd basically be the equivalent of a modern "racist" that doesn't even know what racism was outside of overusing the word "nigger" (and most of what their heuristics of racism are now simply happen to be objectively correct things; limiting immigration is simply correct), but it is frustrating that specific framing dominates.
Funny how it's never the attractive ones that are into the exhibitionism-style nudity, isn't it.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
5d ago
A computer, especially a handheld one, is a convenient portal to the sum of human knowledge. Some of my friends live in there. Like, do something useful with it.
But hey, if programmers can't figure out the benefits of async/await communication patterns, and they're supposed to be smart, what hope does anyone else have? (Technically books and TV are like that too, they're just one-way.)
Don't optimise children's screen minutes. Optimise what they're doing, what they're not doing because of it, and whether they can disengage from it.
Yes, but if you're not smarter than the tool (which tends to be co-morbid with not being smarter than your kid) you won't be able to think like that, and many people are not smarter than their tools. The simplest way to do that- the one any idiot can understand- is to flatly reject those tools and to urge others (perhaps at gunpoint) to do the same. You can even claim you're helping keep the underclass from vice when you do it (re: test scores and child molesters), which is the standard prohibitionist playbook, and as such opposing these things will require an approach focused on human dignity.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
5d ago
I'm old enough to remember feminist-as-in-liberal, but today feminist-as-gynosupremacist is the rule of the day.
It's all very confusing, like how parties that call themselves "conservative" are far more reform-minded than parties that are not, how self-proclaimed "liberals" have nothing to do with classical liberalism, etc.
I'm actually somewhat sympathetic but this ultimately creates a method for one gender to remove evidence of their past behavior from easy access, and not the other
Yeah, that's why I'm not sympathetic. This is a highly-mechanized world, and man and woman should have equal political privilege. This just removes it from men without any benefit.
Throughout all of human history the world has been indifferent to male struggles.
And outside of the last hundred years, that came with other privileges.
Now that equality is here, this must change, or we can't have equality any more (currently, the way this is happening is because women inevitably abuse the moral hazard this creates to replace the culture of equality with one that has more correct views about them, but it can happen in other ways as well; gender equality perception currently trends down among men born under this system, as is correct).
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
6d ago
The distinction is erased once you consider that establishment means old/legacy more or less by definition.
(This also describes how the progressive -> conservative pipeline functions, though they don't call themselves that for reasons that have a lot to do with the 1960s 'establishment should never call itself establishment' paradigm than anything else.)
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
7d ago
whereas the stereotypical female reaction to a female physique in popular media superior to her own is to perceive it as a threat to her Wonderfulness.
If only there was some popular story that served to make this common knowledge.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
9d ago
That's just "man hating feminist" with extra steps, though.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
11d ago
Zero argument there (the current government campaigned on intentionally being that nuisance), but you really wouldn't need much of a military to deal with that outside of that which is required to occupy Quebec as to shut down any possible French/European intervention (the French have their own Falklands off the coast of Newfoundland), for a land border with a semi-hostile EU nation on the North American continent would be real bad news for the US.
One could point at the eventual submarines to address the threat of getting 1812'd, but Canadian industry is trivially in range of US artillery where the reverse isn't true, and the parts that would be getting shelled aren't particularly friendly to the Canadian government at the moment anyway.
No racial dimension, either, outside of maybe the immigrants.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
12d ago
The Motte is a relatively pro-tech space. I expect people here to be more sympathetic to LLMs than the median person.
Because the reason the Motte is pro-tech has a lot to do with the average occupation of its users, and that occupation is what the average LLM company has been actively targeting for replacement.
It's not that much more complex than that.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
14d ago
Otherwise Palestine was conquered 80 years ago and at some point they just need to accept that and quit fighting under traditional western doctrine.
They were, and they did; that's why they co-locate military installations with schools and hospitals and cry crocodile tears when they get exploded. Western doctrine post-1970 or so really doesn't have an effective answer to "I guess I'll just kill myself, lol" (and the inability to shut down "what is a woman" is heavily related to this), mainly because Western populations are unwilling to permit/enforce that a belligerent that intentionally disregards Western laws of fighting gets to suffer the wages of disregarding Western laws of fighting (and 'we'll step in if you're about to get genocided' is very high on the list of protections those laws claim to offer).
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
22d ago
Just beware: when a skeleton dies, it turns into even bonier bones.
Can you get more specific about what you see as "casual blasphemy"
Sure. In the most recent chapter, we have "only women can give birth [to slam dunks]", the antagonist casually misgendering-as-insult (the fandom is too stupid to realize this, though), and your gender identity owes me 5 dollars.
The closest thing that you could consider a trans allegory is... a lot more complicated than that. Her Undertale counterpart is kind of like that as well (she is yet another reference to this game). Most of that conflict is resolved in a way not comprehensible to LGBTesus-followers; it's a lot more prosocial 'coming to terms with oneself' than the 'fuck everyone else, I'm an X now'. It's actually something common to Japanese media covering this trope (basically, they don't make it your problem). Kodaka in particular has done it a couple times.
Otherwise, though, the main romance is a lesbian one, but this isn't treated as noteworthy in basically any way. (It's possible to read it that way, but I don't think that's what he means.) There's also a male character that gets catfished; the drama there is, well, that he got catfished, not that it's a guy on the other end.
My apologies for the vagueposting; I don't intend to be some sort of vagueposting king, running over anthropomorphic deer with my truck after consuming the 7 ice-cold beers.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
23d ago
I don't think the baseline normie would openly admit, even pseudonymonously, that they would trade vaccines, central air and the internet for the power to rape chambermaids.
They quite literally did this, openly, in 2020-2021. As you recall, it was seen as acceptable to the baseline normie that the group that invented the vaccine be given it last because Muh Social Justice.
"Don't be hideously evil to your fellow citizen" only works in times of positive-sum growth. Once the reality of degrowth sets in (including that which is permitted to be imposed by said hideously evil fellow citizens since the rest are too busy making money to notice it) the knives come out and the spiral begins.
Or in other words, you want an actual romance that makes sense, not a religious screed about how much the author loves LGBTesus.
Christian media has the same problem; ironically, by writing something competent it also tends to cease being explicitly Christian media ("Lord of the Rings is evil because it has witchcraft") even if it was written with that exact intent (again, LoTR being a blatant example of that).
The most prominent Homestuck alumni has arguably done exactly this in his games; as despite what the LGBTesus-worshippers will claim "LGBT themes" in the game are completely-to-almost-completely absent (so no "I'm So Oppressed" scenes for the fandom to get off on, though this reaction is baited a couple of times) despite the fact one such relationship is prominent in the story and the main character is of indeterminate sex (it makes thematic sense for them to be a 'they'). One does notice that it may arguably be creeping into certain areas, but you have to go digging for it, it's played for laughs (and remembering that ghost writers carry their religion with them in a way this author does not), and there's a roughly equal amount of casual blasphemy if you're paying attention.
I understand why they’d push for more and more representation
That's just called being selfish, though. I get that an explicit pillar of that religion is that these people get to be that way because Muh Oppression, but as always it remains the case that they're not making representation better, they're just enshittifying making fiction worse.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
1mo ago
A name like that isn't doing any heavy lifting trying to force pronouns, be they deserved or not.
Being [able to be] at the mercy of external actors evaluating what gender they believe you are is kind of the point; forcing the issue is the root hostile action.
yielding to
As opposed to actively imposing the belief that he isn't, which is the same problem from the other direction.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
1mo ago
A fleshy ugly cockroach-like thing sticking out of my body that I would cut off at the first opportunity if I could find and afford a doctor willing to do it
But statistically, everyone has to deal with this. It's called "having excess adipose tissue". You feel your stomach bunch up around you when you're sitting down. It's not particularly comfortable. I'd slam a knife into it and remove the offending tissue myself if it wasn't going to kill me or leave an absurd scar.
Now yes, sensory considerations mean I'm reminded of this fact more than other people, and is probably why the autism-trans pipeline exists considering sensory body-can't-forget-itself issues and autism are comorbid. (Actually, I bet the same is true of eating disorders. If I felt that happen to my body, yes, I'd absolutely try to eat as little as possible and/or throw up.)
It's kind of like the "gayness is evil, but some are tempted more than others" question, complete with the modern response of "well, it's everyone else's problem if they don't like it, just do whatever you want all the time". You can't just decide to keep the productive parts for whatever reason.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
1mo ago
Most of it just comes down to basic self-awareness/self-control, so stuff like:
- Dressing appropriately for the occasion, skipping clothes that just don't fit (stuff beyond your garden-variety 'has no fashion sense'), being clean-shaven
- If already in possession of an androgynous name, retaining that name; if not, selecting an androgynous name for compatibility
But having basic self-awareness/self-control is negatively correlated with being visibly trans (and accusations of porn-brainedness are derivatives of that), so even if there is a dark mass of ex-men/ex-women who are doing this, it's significantly harder to observe attributes of someone who doesn't want you to see them. (I suspect this is far less common for ex-women simply because the male uniform is unisex.) At least the more self-aware types tend to wear masks as an anti-jawline measure.
Then again, "being an obnoxious attention whore" is a stereotypically feminine trait. So maybe I do indeed err by failing to take them at their word that they're a walking minstrel show and a loudly-ticking social time bomb. I'm not sure which is better.
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
1mo ago
so he should be elected anyway
Like I said before, I don't actually like his politics. But I need politicians to be able to lose on the basis of bad policy, not on the basis that one angry woman with accusations of sacrilege is enough to render any random politician un-electable, and if takes accepting bad policy to establish that precedent then so be it.
That said, it's the knuckling under here that disqualifies him, because that's what cuckservatives do, and he was running as an anti-cuckservative (though in the conservative/D party, so I'm not sure how shocked I should actually be that he believes himself beholden to Believing Women; it's kind of their thing).
ThisIsSin
If you can understand the advice, you didn't need the advice
1mo ago
Oh no, "alter" isn't really the right word here.
You can't alter how the electorate responds (re: Boomers), you can just out-vote the concerns of that sector, doesn't matter what they think after that. Altering how the electorate responds is much like how the scientific community alters its consensus- one funeral at a time.
because you want someone to survive a sexual assault scandal regardless of how abominable or real it is
You misunderstand: this is the reform I support, because right now they're all false, and I want the people who are too stupid to realize that (and/or think it's good that sex assault scandals are valid heckler's vetoes) to lose.
So I guess that means I think those people are... literally worse than Hitler.
Once you control for class filter bubbles (i.e. if you believe the only people who exist are middle or upper class, and in that case/context, what you have stated is literally true) this is exactly how progressives behave (the pigments they hate are white and yellow). It's not ludicrous, it's personally advantageous- those classes are shrinking, so as any
good whorerational actor would do they sell their dignity and do stupid things like "be racist against themselves" (the upper class that pays them loves a good self-hating worker who tells their fellow workers they deserve lower wages because of their pigment). That is how they defect against everyone else, by signalling that a lower [sociofinancial] salary will be acceptable to them, and the other workers who won't do the same thing should be fired (or killed).It's the exact equivalent to a scab working behind a picket line, just using an expanded sociofinancial sense of salary, not just the financial one most are used to. Rational, yes; but the union response to that sends goons to their homes to extract a little rent of their own, and so far that clearly hasn't been happening for a bunch of reasons that are out of scope of this response.
More options
Context Copy link