@sun_the_second's banner p

sun_the_second


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2023 October 31 11:26:45 UTC

				

User ID: 2725

sun_the_second


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2023 October 31 11:26:45 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 2725

It's not random. It's a popular phrase being shifted.

You can treat them as if they'd made an overly spicy joke, and they'll wear it as a mark of pride. Or you can put them through the wringer so they'll think better next time. I don't think the second option is more laughable.

  • -13

Calling a specific subsection of women unrapeable is a pretty clear implication that you consider other subsections acceptable to rape. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule#Proving_the_existence_of_the_rule

It's not rocket science. Sure, it would't hold up in a decent court, but "acktchyually I said I wouldn't even rape her, why are you upset" isn't fooling anyone.

  • -11

By that logic the serfs were the most prestigious caste of medieval society, because food, unlike swords and castles, is actually necessary for society.

That was not so and isn't so still. Neither was motherhood.

Grandpas typically don't live as long. That's a larger factor towards why grandmas represent the covid-endangered family member than increased respect towards grandmas, I think.

Yes.

This makes zero sense.

What do you honestly think is the "function" of Mohammad pictures? I say it's "antagonizing Muslims and rallying anti-Islamists". There's no such thing as "technically isn't a picture of Mohammad" that magically makes a Muslim think it's okay.

In contrast, sticking it to the vegans is clearly not the only, or even the primary function of eating real meat.

I don't believe you don't see the difference, so spill the real point you're trying to make.

"Sin is bad" is clearly not sufficient. Somehow you've also become convinced that [there is God and] God is a utility monster such that offending him makes one deserving of infinite suffering.

From what I see even most religious people aren't truly making that leap. This is why I don't believe that you mean it, or that you're normal for believing it.

Hell isn't unfair. We deserve it.

How does anyone who isn't born a pathological misanthrope come to believe this?

without the corresponding duty to be drafted into a war they voted themselves into, something we see in Ukraine today

It sounds like a very American thing, to assume that all wars are something you vote yourself into.

The research into Russian elections that's out there (percentage digit anomalies, turnout:percentages correlation anomalies) leads me in the direction of believing they're fake as in they don't count the ballots. They pick a number and say it's the result. At some voting stations there had been videos of what looked like ballot stuffing. Perhaps not in the latest election, but other ones.

Why would Putin do that if he can be confident he'd win? Extra control freaking? Local attempts to ensure the numbers look "correct"? 4D demoralization chess? Your guess is as good as mine.

I wouldn't take input on the way society should be organized from someone who's suicidally depressed for the same reason I wouldn't take any from those who place themselves at the apex of the proposed pyramid - clear conflict of interests with not only myself but the majority.

Of course, there are also Russian complaints in the "let me fight well" territory.

One significant difference I observe is the ethnonationalist motivation in particular. It appears that nationalists are usually the most fervent fighters. Ukrainian nationalists think they're in control of the country. Hell, even Russians are saying that Ukrainian nationalists are in control of the country [and it's bad]. Russian nationalists, the explicit ones, are split between "all citizens are Russians, don't you dare to rock the boat" and "why should we fight for this country while Chechens are taking our money and Tajiks are taking our jobs?".

I would be willing to give up the territory already lost in exchange for peace. If Putin says no, I'd keep fighting.

Why keep fighting and not offer more territory? Putin, in any case, seems to believe he doesn't need to settle yet.

You position yourself against the "pro-war". Presumably you'd name yourself pro-peace. How high do you price peace that isn't merely full capitulation?

Have you asked the Ukrainians how many they're willing to sacrifice?

Ironically, a pro-cop guy sounds like the least threatening one, here. The connotations of a Muslim getting someone's faces on camera for personal retribution... let's just say losing the future job would be the least of your concerns.

I concede that recording your opponents for the purposes of knowing who to launch a harassment campaign against later is a part of harassment, but not recording an assembly in itself.

HBD explains this far better than socioeconomic factors.

HBD doesn't, in fact, explain why high IQ black people do worse than high/mid IQ white people. To my knowledge most HBD theory proposes that IQ is fully general, and higher average IQ should correlate with more pro-social, civilized behaviour in general - I've seen no theory for a separate "criminality gene" being fleshed out.

"Identifying with a criminal culture", on the other hand, does explain rather well why high-IQ black people are disproportionately likely to go to prison, for me at least. (I know that criminal culture exists. I know that if you act according to criminal culture, you're more likely to go to prison than if you acted according to prosocial culture, IQ being the same. I do not, however, know if there is a criminality gene orthogonal to IQ.) This is without going into the anti-black racism theory.

There have always been some Jews who’d rather not be part of the Jewish community. Some succeed, and we never hear of them as Jews again.

Of course, the Early Life always remembers.

In both of those examples, you've added implicitly threatening traits to the "trespasser" (a cop protected and abetted by the power of the state; "desiring to record all of their faces") that weren't as present in the original scenario.

Recording a public assembly is harassment now? I am having serious trouble imagining you apply the same standard towards any situation where your sympathies are reversed.

The only thing I recall really resonating with me from school was Gore ot uma/Woe from Wit. Naturally, back then I thought Chatsky was a based sigma, whereas now his antics reveal him as a cringelord who can't read the room.

Tell him that he is, in fact, much more capable and interested in software engineering rather than hardware. Apply to college accordingly, with a fallback in something easy in case he doesn't make the cut into the competitive majors.

That what matters in college is not the base coursework, but everything else. That is not to say the coursework should be neglected, but the opposite. Knock it out of the way first thing in the afternoon - it's easy - and look for opportunities otherwise.

Be more open to social drinking. Like it or not, you're awkward with new people except in very specific contexts. A drink will help, and if you think you don't need other people to have fun now, consider that later, you will.

Be less afraid to impose, particularly in dating. You ostracise yourself 100% of the times you keep your mouth shut.

Tell him I'm sorry I don't have a list of crypto for him to flip and get rich.

At least if bodymodding is available to all, then everyone will be able to reach whatever equilibrium there is (square-cube law should eventually put a cap on height).

I do believe women can be interesting as people to men. It's just that, without sexual attraction in play, they have to compete with the other men on that front.

Maybe women find it naturally harder because they aren't interested in the same things as men to connect with them platonically as well as their male friends. Maybe most women never learn to be interesting due to having sexual attraction on their side. When I match with a woman on a dating app and see an empty bio or something that barely provides any hooks for a conversation, I am certainly overcome with an intense wave of apathy, no matter how hot she is.

I think there's a lot of work you're just leaving on the table on the part of both boys and girls and assuming they won't do it and just be "boys be boys and girls be girls". 16 is old enough for boys to try and put in more effort into connecting with the girl on a personal level (and getting good at sex), and for girls to be a bit more forgiving about initial unimpressiveness (while also learning that the more physically impressive the boy is, the less incentive there is for him to stick with her and learn her preferences).

You've provided examples of destructive rather than constructive "brutal honesty", but it doesn't have to be.