@hydroacetylene's banner p

hydroacetylene


				

				

				
8 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 04 20:00:27 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 128

hydroacetylene


				
				
				

				
8 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 04 20:00:27 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 128

Verified Email

I really liked having bigger genitals, chest hair, etc. I thought the first few whiskers were the awesomest thing ever, even though I had to start shaving. I liked the changes in facial structure, too.

I’m willing to admit these weren’t totally equivalent, but secondary sex characteristics were awesome, except for the part where my underwear now fit awkwardly.

Indeed thé crusaders bragged about being unusually non-rapey by the (low)standards of armies at the time. We can probably take this with a grain of salt, but it does indicate sex wasn’t the motive(armies which are motivated by sex slaves tend to brag about how many and how beautiful their captured women are).

Just because you don’t believe in medieval Catholicism doesn’t mean they didn’t.

I would agree that his logic leads there, but he literally didn’t say government issued girlfriends. I suspect this is standard utopian logic.

At the very least thé sentence lengths seem accurate.

I’m reminded of the government crackdowns on anti-nuclear(weapons) protestors. Most of these people had aggravating circumstances just a bit worse than their confreres are willing to admit, but they still got the book thrown at them.

The people going off on aliens were already talking about Atlantis and government witchcraft programs and Bigfoot, that's my point. It’s not converting the antisemites and Epsteiners. It’s converting thé people ranting about Nazi bases in Antarctica and psychic spies.

The maverick is hitting a specific market niche, and despite its low price that niche is not ‘basic car’- it’s got all the same tech as the F-150. It just gets really good mileage.

I dunno, thé why files guy got one shotted into aliens and UFO’s, and he’d been talking about psychic powers before hand- and is the current king of mass market conspiracy theories.

I have never seen a UFO, and kinda agree with you. That being said, there are totally actual scientists making the podcast circuit talking about aliens. Dr Beatriz Villaruel is one of the more prominent examples.

Their actual peer reviewed publications are much more cautious and conservative, but you also presumably don’t have the advanced degrees necessary to understand them.

The delusion is thinking that the hormones and whatever else actually make you a man/woman, rather than the opposite in a costume. It no more entitles he to she transgenders to use the women’s room than a naughty nun costume for a Halloween party does. People on ozempic are actually literally skinny, they can verify this with a scale. People on hormones are actually literally not the other sex.

Now like I said, this doesn’t have anything in particular to do with whether transition should be allowed. I would lean towards ‘no’, but that’s a separate point having to do with attitudes towards gender roles. It’s not some axiomatic conclusion from the point being made.

The Catholic scandals took off in places that did not have popular anti-Christian sentiment. It was actually the proximal cause of anti-Christian sentiment in Ireland, starting when Ireland was still religious(I would argue that Irish collapse in religiosity was overdetermined, but it was still the proximal cause).

The visceral horror of it was that it was happening to kids from good families, who were doing nothing wrong. The public doesn't care very much about homeless prostitutes, never has, never will. Trying to draw attention to their plight(and it is a plight, this is not a fun life), just makes people want to get rid of them. On the other hand the abuse victims came from families that did everything right and were betrayed.

The normal response to defecting from gender roles is, uh, not a polite 'oh. okay.'. Go wear a dress in public(and not in the gay district) with a big bushy beard if you don't believe me.

Not sure who you're talking to, but that isn't the modal "anti-trans" view, and I doubt anyone has that strawman view on this forum.

It applies to me. All transgenders are wrong about a very obvious and easily verifiable fact. That is, literally, the definition of transgender. They confront proof of this wrongness every time they take a shower or use the toilet- hopefully, multiple times a day. They are, in other words, delusional, and playing along for the sake of their mental health is not actually any sort of obligation, except perhaps occasionally for actual mental health professionals, and not for the sake of increasing their comfort with their delusion but only for that of getting at and treating the underlying issues.

Now there are many lumped into the category of transgender who believe themselves to be something other than male and female, who identify as 'queer' or 'nonbinary'. I don't know what these categories are because these categories are not real, and while these people are wrong they're wrong about metaphysics- claiming to be something that isn't real on nonexistent philosophical grounds isn't falsifiable, it can't be delusional. But these people are not transgenders proper.

This stance does not, incidentally, actually determine whether people should be banned from transition. Not least, transition is sufficiently difficult to define as to make that hard.

People believe all sorts of dumb things, and Americans in general believe a lot of dumb things about nutrition in particular. ‘Boys get better nutrition than girls’ is mostly false, but when the two sexes start to choose their eating patterns there is a difference, and a few female specific nutrient deficiencies(mostly iron) do hang on in the modern US(although no one is stopping women from eating steak).

And the literal police facilitating rape isn’t a failure of trust?

On the other hand, if you look at the literal best in the world players- overwhelmingly, the superstars are white or mostly white, Mbappe is the only counterexample I can think of. You just tend to see poor people overrepresented in athletics because for the borderline pro level talent, they have less opportunity cost in gambling on the lottery ticket. Same reason thé NFL is heavily black in the US- but the star players are not.

I mean, from a political perspective are you going to throw up a connected nonentity or someone with a promising career ahead of him to be a company man PM for an unpopular government?

No, a smart big brother would take the fight and then beat little bro himself. You don't leave him out to dry.

The slavs have a conspiracy theory about them doing this in Ukraine. Everyone has a conspiracy theory about the Jews building backup Israel on their land.

I mean, are you sure that pro-palestine opinion wasn't allowed in polite society in the immediate aftermath? Far left views- farther left than actual elected officials- do not effectively exclude individuals from polite society in the same way that merely right of center views sometimes do.

You're correct that the establishment loved Israel for about a month. But virtually no effort was taken to exclude far-left antisemites(yes, many of these people are antisemitic- in the same way they're anti-white) for the same reason virtually no effort was taken to exclude far leftists of many other varieties. We live in a society which has systematically dismantled its memetic immune system for lefty ideas, and 'anti-semitism' is a welcome correction- even if some of these people are nothing of the sort.

??? It's entirely possible to be concerned about your daughter and not the neighbor girl. This is extremely common, even.

Yes, male age at marriage reached a temporary minimum in between the two sexual revolutions. But we actually have male age at marriage data about as well as could ever be expected, and historical male ages at marriage tended to be late twenties or early thirties. Moralists just before the first sexual revolution recommended 25+, Romans talked about 30 as ideal and normative- and what data exists suggest these were, broadly, reflecting general norms.

Marriage rates declined with the second sexual revolution. That's bad. But the norms in between the two sexual revolutions were not durable or sustainable.

The majority of human beings that have ever lived have been peasant farmers, and this has heavily selected human cognition, dietary needs, appearance, etc. And we kinda know how peasant farmers lived- seeing naked members of the opposite sex, except perhaps immediate family, was not normal(the same sex on the other hand...). I would kinda expect moms getting upset at their son's porn use or whatever to be more about 'oh shit is he a threat to his sister' than anything about female solidarity.

Women pride themselves on their kids behaving well. That's what it is. Grandma lives longer and is happier when her kids are well behaved(filial piety very much included). Being a mom also tends to make women more socially conservative, especially about sex.

Cornyn lost hard because he's an old fucker who's been in congress too long and voted for gun control. Not the Trump endorsement(which wasn't offered to Paxton before it was a sure thing).

They're engagement farmers trying to use toxoplasmosis to get elonbucks. I thought that was consensus?