@sun_the_second's banner p

sun_the_second

could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server

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

				

User ID: 2725

sun_the_second

could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server

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

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 2725

71 percentile among anglophones. Naturally, carried by technical and computer knowledge, heavily tanked by aesthetic and literary domains.

The question about number of pages in the books seemed completely arbitrary, because books can be printed in different font and paper sizes?????

So how low a percentage of a group can be destroyed before it's no longer an attempted genocide?

Yeah, that's the problem - they don't feel the need to flaunt it, and many probably don't feel like their experiences apply to everyone. That's why I'm proposing sponsoring it. Like lifestyle influencers, but they'd be advertising pair-bonding values rather than makeup brands.

Naturally, it would have to be an exercise in philanthropy because there's no money in it.

I wonder how far can one get sponsoring successful, well-adjusted and ordinary-seeming men and women to promote their choices and the advantages of following them.

What I mean by:

  • Successful - they are in a relationship that appears good for them.
  • Well-adjusted - neither of them is a covert or overt cheater, and both are serious about staying together (not necessarily married or planning to seal the deal, it's not like marriage carries a lot of weight with divorce being as easy as it is)
  • Ordinary-seeming - do not possess qualities that would lead the viewer to assume such life can only be achieved with outsized luck, effort, lifestyle changes. I.e. not overly rich, not met through a niche career or a heavily religious subculture, do not radiate youth pastor energy.

If we call killing 2% of a population genocide then it seems like we have to create a new word for the kind of genocide that kills 67%, for the sake of clarity.

Depends on the drug to be honest. If it's equal to every social outing including a mandatory dose of heroin, then sure, being an outcast is better. If it's more like having a beer now and then with some risk of getting blackout drunk - I'm pretty sure such harms and risks were usually implicitly accepted as part of growing up.

I know that groups of people have different traits and they can be partially attributed to descent. I do not observe, and refuse to nakedly believe, that specific romanticized expressions of those traits magically pass through dozens of generations, intact, despite since then intermixing dozens of times and being subjected to environments that are unlike the one that brought out those expressions in the first place.

In other words, no one is actually just like their father.

If someone wants to instantiate a breeding program to make more people with as high percentage of 1776 American blood as possible, that's the motte to the "national character of pioneers and settlers" bailey.

I am in favor of limiting immigration to the level sustainable by assimilation in my country and I believe it would be sensible for USA.

What I'm pushing back on are the kind of people who go on redefining what "assimilated" means because they did a DNA test or dug up the family tree and found dead old things to be proud of instead of actual substance.

National character is not merely the past. National character is not merely ethnicity. National character is not merely the line "nationality of father" in the birth certificate.

National character can be directly and plainly observed.

I don't see you building national character, for now I only see you advocating for no immigration. I'm afraid a certain Scottish Deutchman has you beat there.

Why does that mean I have to allow millions of Indians and Mexicans and Chinamen to live in it?

It's not up to just your decision. The question I'd suggest you ask instead would sound more like "how do I get people who don't want to bother proving the purity of their blood to vote/fight for me?".

their posterity inherits from them their mannerisms, attitudes, proclivities, and ways of life.

If true, a birth certificate would not be required to see it. In the best scenario (a person with completely unmixed 1776 heritage), they carry the potential for those qualities that might have blossomed in similar circumstances. You might notice that circumstances are not the same. And what I think of potential men can be summarized like so.

That it is in your, as you put it earlier today, ethnic interest to claim the suffrage in USA as solely yours is not cohering with the arguments you put up. If America must belong to the descendants of the founding fathers because of the heritage rights, make your point so. When you bring vibes about pioneerhood and the American spirit into it, it exposes that there are a great many Indians with more American spirit than you.

I want America to be for the Americans, that is, the pioneers and settlers whose labor tamed this continent and brought civilization to its farthest reaches.

These people died. Their grandsons pioneer no longer, the land has been settled and the continent tamed. Whoever today carries the qualities that make them most like the Americans of three hundred years ago, is not likely to carry them because they have inherited them through an unbroken patrilineal chain of heritage extending to Mayflower.

The sentiment is that the future is going to be, at best, pointless and at worst, bad anyway. So anything that causes an upheaval and bloodies the nose of the groups they dislike is good.

Maybe in the land of the brave and the free the hospitals allow patients to smuggle in McDonalds by the trolley, smoke right in the ward until you can't see the opposite wall or shoot up heroin with the conveniently-available syringes, but I'm used to the kind of hospital that, actually, doesn't allow patients to ignore such medical suggestions during their stay.

Requiring patients to be vaccinated from the virus which is currently being fought against, regardless of how misguided such a fight you believe was in the end, is a perfectly consistent mandate on behalf of a hospital. Why would I want to increase the likelihood of all my staff and patients catching covid on top of whatever illnesses they're already here for?

How often do you think new admissions should come in order to fill the empty beds of a hospital to capacity?

I remember all the nurses so bored they made tiktoks all day.

Having periods of inactivity while otherwise having to be available is not the rebuttal that you think it is.

Modern society will absolutely turn people away, as long as they get to feel ideologically justified when they do so.

Who was turned away from treatment based on facts that weren't related to their refusal to accept medical procedures?

"If you want to get treated, do what the doctors say" was true long before covid in pretty much any place that had hospitals, to my knowledge.

That's good advice for making Elon fans look worse.

I do agree that the capitalist theory of labor is more true to reality than the labor theory of value.

I agree that he doesn't look as bad as the story of his looks does. (Unlike the typical lip-fillered, liposuctioned, spray-tanned stereotype of a heavily-plastic-surgeried woman, who does not look good IMHO).

I find that the poorness of the risk is directly related to the likelihood of suffering reputational damage.

I don't know about God, but I could think of a whole bunch of men who would want to smite this town, for pricing them out of happy whores they could have otherwise dated organically.

You could have a lottery to move in, then a whole range of premuim passes to stuff into lootboxes for those who want to purchase extra chances. If you're exploiting primal drives, might as well exploit them to the max.

Wait - so that the community would have lots of free sex, or so that all the social-norms-violating women would be reverse psychologized into becoming tradwives?

Yes. Hence me noting that the non-labor theory of value recognizes risk as valuable, but that within the labor theory of value, risk isn't labor.

Do you think most Onlyfans women are recognized in real life for the sacrifices to their worth and reputation to apply?

I'd assume that for most of history, most men did orient their entire lives around their sexual preference. Regardless of how "disordered" it is to want to fuck your wife and marry her for that purpose.