Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
No bio...
User ID: 297
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
7hr ago
They have relations with men that are not consumed with hate and resentment. A PMC chick tweeting about "#Killallmen" is obnoxious, but is she actually spending her life hating on men, like incels do about women? Generally not. When an incel occasionally manages to land a relationship, he either drops the incel act, or his seething resentment and sense of entitlement still poisons the relationship.
2-4: You claimed I was "copping out" by pointing out that society is also hard on women. You apparently take the position that it's worse for men and women have it easier. Much of this seems based on the grievances of men who don't do well. So no, the fact that incels are unsympathetic doesn't in itself contradict any theory of society being harder on men, but it makes me wonder why you are arguing that we should be sympathetic to incels, and why you want a declaration against both-sidedness. Nothing you have said makes the case that society is in fact more unfair to men than women. Society is "accomodating" to women's sexual desires, because men will always "reward" women willing to offer sex. But they are punished differently than men–men are "punished" by not getting laid; women are punished by the reality of the dating market and aging, with some hard truths it is impolitic to talk about nowadays. I reject your thesis that women just coast on "Women are wonderful."
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
7hr ago
You don't do* "data-based analysis of trends." You post surveys and magazine articles that reinforce your opinion. But to give you a bit of allowance here, the problem is not so much that the surveys don't have meaningful data ("the dating market is a disaster and everyone is unhappy"), but the conclusions you draw from that.
I'll indulge your demand to explain my "epistemic philosophy" when you stop confidently declaring that people don't really believe the things they say because you disagree with them.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
15hr ago
Of course every incel would leap at the chance to score an attractive woman. That doesn't mean they actually like women.
Does society have more sympathy for women? (The "women are wonderful" syndrome?) Yes, generally so (at least in the West). That doesn't mean incels deserve sympathy, any more than the proverbial carousel rider does.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
15hr ago
You can keep saying this, but I sincerely suspect you don't actually believe it.
I'm sure it's a comforting cope to believe that, but I do in fact mean what I say. Your "data" is not meaningful, any more than that Times of India article. (Women today choose not to have children for many reasons besides "Chad wouldn't give me one" and while you can argue their choices are bad, they aren't for the reasons you insist.)
I just like to believe true things
No. No, you tell yourself that. But what you like to believe is things that reinforce your sense of injustice inflicted upon you by the world. You construct just-so stories that reinforce a particular narrative, you take surveys as "data" and you dismiss any other model of human behavior because it doesn't fit your priors.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
17hr ago
The women performatively "hating men" mostly do not, by revealed preferences, hate men. Incels really do hate women, and while you can cast them as victims, they are victims only of their own inadequacy and self pity. Society isn't making them feel that way , and society isn't obligated to reorder itself so women who don't want them will want them.
As for their being such a difference in how society treats women, yes women have their own pressures men don't, which many of them find very unfair and oppressive.
I don't think society is as hard for either one as they say, and find whiny feminists and loser men equally insufferable, mostly victims of their own mindset.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
My favorite series as a child.
They made a movie that was so bad, Susan Cooper got kicked off the set for complaining.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
Women may despise individual men, but the few who despise men as a class don't want to fuck them.
Incels despise women as a class but still want to fuck them.
I agree men and women should both be given better advice about realistic expectations.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
From a matchmaker. Almost as convincing as your old OKCupid survey.
We've been over the flaws in your analysis before. You won't accept them because one cannot be reasoned out of a position one did not reason himself into. Your personal disappointment over my lying eyes, obviously we will both trust our respective sources.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
You're missing the underlying point because I was being sardonic. Most women do not, in fact, refuse to settle for anything less than a 6/6/6. Even nice and pretty women!
I do not believe the incel exists who couldn't find a woman, and probably a pleasant enough woman, to be a partner. What they generally can't find is a woman who meets their various standards of attractiveness, personality, virginal shy-yet-freakiness, and willingness to be a bangmaid.
Somehow having standards that may be out of your league is evil and unjust on the part of women, but reasonable and tragic on the part of men.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
How is wanting commitment-free sex from a rotating harem of virgins less "stupid and evil" than wanting commitment from a "chad" who probably won't commit?
Women don't want to fuck a beta who fundamentally despises them. Truly a mystery and an injustice wrapped in an enigma.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
2d ago
Are China's economic fundamentals sound? Do they not have a problem with cooked books and all the usual problems of a command economy that can make everything look like it's absolutely splendid until it's not? Do they not have their own demographic issues?
I am not "incurious" or saying I don't think China is a first world power. Of course it is. I am not "looking down" on them. Their technological progress, and their prodigious transformation since the days of the Cultural Revolution, is truly impressive. But that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of rot underneath. Or that they have already become the future hegemon, however much they may intend it.
There is a lot of ruin in a country, as they say- the West, and the US, are arguably coasting now until our own wheels come off, and China may be able to coast longer. Who knows? But it bemuses me that people who are quick to point out all the rot eating away at the West, despite us still being, in most respects, in a much superior position (which I do think is near a tipping point), take every piece of knob-slobbering news about Sino-ascendancy and their roaring economy and industrial output at face value. Because, good gosh, at least they aren't "woke."
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
2d ago
Well, I need to disclaim that I have not personally lived in China. But:
Obsequiousness towards the state is the big one, but it's also a very socially conformist society. Uighurs and Tibetans are oppressed, yes, but it's also not a great place to be a Christian (my understanding is that you can pray and go to church, but evangelizing is highly frowned on and anything that smacks of "activism" will get you slapped down in a hurry). The things you cannot talk about except in a state-approved way are numerous-- Tienmen square, Taiwan, anything critical of the government. There is a reason they have the "Great Internet Wall of China" that, while very porous and easy to bypass via VPN, is still a crime which can get you in trouble if caught. If you find yourself in legal trouble, forget about any of the due processes you are accustomed to in the West.
It's honestly baffling to me that anyone would say "China seems fine, better than being forced to pray at the altar of DEI." I mean, even if you are in the wokest of woke companies, no one is forced to "pray at the altar of DEI." You may be risking your career if you share your spiciest takes about HBD or male/female differences, but you cannot literally be arrested. Meanwhile in the street or here on the Internet you can call the president a retard, a corrupt tool of oligarchs, a Zionist agent, a pedophile, or anything else, and nobody can arrest you for that either, and you're highly unlikely to be fired even if you said it publicly on X. Try doing that in China. (I believe they also persecute you for "hate speech" in China as well: they may not care much about "DEI" as such, but start posting about how much you hate Jews or blacks or women and eventually you will attract negative attention with an actual government impact on your life.)
Our 2nd Amendment enthusiasts have many valid complaints about the breaches of their Constitutional rights, but you don't have even a shadow of those rights in China. Right now the USA is in turmoil over protesters versus ICE agents. I think some of the folks in this forum would not be unhappy if the National Guard starting machine-gunning protesters in the streets, but most people, even those who are strongly pro-ICE, agree that annoying purple-haired lesbians should be allowed to protest in a non-vehicular-homicidal way. In China, machine guns and tanks would be a real possibility. And not just for your annoying purple-haired lesbians.
Do they have to "worship at the altar of DEI"? Well, their version of DEI is called the social credit score. Would you like the government tracking everything you do and say and whether it is "anti-social" enough to start limiting your access to services, travel, credit, and being put under increased monitoring by the state? That seems better, really?
Again, for the average Chinese person, most of this is probably invisible, and for the affluent, life in the big cities is fine. Chinese have their own forums and social media and their versions of 4chan and the like. But all the stories we share here, about people being persecuted in various ways for wrongthink? Multiply that by an order of magnitude in China. Try being a "normie" Chinese with a few problems, some grievances about the system, or in a bit of legal and/or financial trouble. Try being a real wrongthinker.
I'll take (often dramatically, hyperbolically, catastrophically overstated) DEI bullshit over that.
Other than being a totalitarian police state with no civil rights except those the government pretends to provisionally grant you, and most of its meritocracy and probably its economic numbers being as fake and gay as ours, sure, China is great.
Look, this gets trotted out fairly regularly about a lot of places that are on the surface technocratic modern states with a glitzy veneer where, as long as you are not a dissident, a minority or outsider, or basically anyone disfavored by the state, things are pretty fine. People say similar things about the Gulf states. I remember a few years ago, a lot of "based" trads were saying similar things about Russia: sure, maybe its kind of a little bit corrupt and run by oligarchs and Putin is a dictator who has people who displease him thrown out of ninth floor windows, but he cosplays as a Christian and they don't put up with woke nonsense.
We don't hear that quite so much since the beginning of the Ukraine war, but you still see a little of it here from our Russophiles, who mostly still love Russia because it's not globohomo woke. Leftists put Ukrainian flags in their profiles, therefore invading Ukraine might be... good?
Even the USSR and Nazi Germany were kind of okay for a lot of the population most of the time, and if the thing you hate above all else is anything that Western leftists like, then you can make a case that they were... good because they didn't have pride parades or hordes of imported Africans, I guess.
But I think very few people moaning about how awful things are in the West would actually find they prefer living in China. Unless you are the sort of person who can keep your head down and eat shit your entire life. People angry about having to sit through DEI sessions really underestimate the level of shit-eating that's required in places like China.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
2d ago
You and @Skibboleth (who are so similar in posting styles that it's not surprising I often confuse your usernames and forget who's the low-effort sneering rightie and who's the low-effort sneering leftie- like seriously, even your mod logs are almost identical):
Shall we just resort to "libtard" and "republithug" now? How about "Magtard" and "shitlib"? Go ahead, bring out all your best disses that really killed it on Twitter in 2016.
No, actually, don't. Go elsewhere for pistols at dawn, or get a room, or whatever, but knock this crap off. Neither of you will be a loss if I just say "Pox on the both of you."
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
3d ago
Please stop lying and implying I think something that I did not say I think. ICE never killed anybody "to send the message". The particular officer killed someone to stop that someone from driving over him with her SUV. Lying is bad. Please stop doing it.
People often have radically different takes, so radically different that they think "I cannot believe you actually think that, you are obviously lying." Or someone will say "So it's better to ?" and the indignant response is "I DID NOT SAY THAT YOU LIAR!"
None of this improves the discussion. In fact, it basically ends it. When you're calling each other liars, you're pretty much at the endpoint of the discussion. This is why I almost always mod people for calling someone else a liar. You are not a mindreader. People do usually actually believe the things they are saying. They may be ill-informed. They may be guilty of spurious reasoning. They may be arguing sloppily. And yeah, sometimes they might just be making up shit to win an argument. Not that I am saying any of that is specifically true here, but what I am saying is you'd better be on point when you call someone a liar.
I am not sure why this is the biggest scissor of the year (well, so far) but people need to chill the fuck out.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
3d ago
Elaborate, or refrain from comments that are nothing more than "Nuh uh!"
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
3d ago
You're obviously arguing in bad faith
Fuck right off
People need to chill the fuck out, is what they need to do.
You've been warned repeatedly, though the last time was over a year ago. So I'm only giving you a two-day ban. But control your temper.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4d ago
Since I got tagged in here:
I have no real opinion on your post that set this off, and believe you that you didn't use AI to write it.
I do think your style has gotten worse since you became such an AI enthusiast, mostly in that it is more wordy and "tryhard." I do strongly suspect it's the LLM influence, which you think is a good thing because they "write well," but the thing is, mostly they don't. They write very fluently. They can fill space with words, words that sometimes sound lyrical or profound, but... it's empty.
It's hard to describe without going into a much longer post about writing style, but it's very similar to the debate over AI art. I am not an AI art hater, I think occasionally it can produce really cool stuff, but mostly it's good for outputting placeholder art that gets the job done... you know, D&D characters or "I have a picture in my head that would be cool to see rendered but I don't want to pay someone to draw it" or bland corporate stuff. Notwithstanding Scott's AI Art Turing test, most AI art is very, very recognizeable as AI. You know the look: a little too polished, a little too saturated, a little too uniform in tone and shade and crosshatching (even when prompter tries to make it draw in different styles), an emptiness in the eyes... the illustration might be perfect in form, we don't see six-fingered hands or necklaces that meld with shoulders as much anymore, but it's still full of tiny details and stylistic choices that a human artist wouldn't make. And it's all very samey, like imagine every single artist in the world graduating from CalArts and trying as hard as possible to replicate the CalArts style.
AI writing is the same!
It's not just the tells (em-dashes, "It's not X, it's Y"), which like six-fingered hands and necklaces melding into shoulders, LLMs are starting to be trained not to do so predictably. It's the sameness, the pseudo-profound verbosity, the fluency that mistakes many pretty-sounding-words chained together in grammatically correct sentences as saying something prettily.
You are starting to write like a guy who reads LLM output and thinks "Yeah, that's good writing!" As if all those CalArts students were starting to take their art classes from ChatGPT and imitating LLM style instead.
Maybe in the future, maybe even in the near future, AI will improve enough to make this moot. We don't have LLMs that can write entire novels in one shot yet, and even with lots of prompting, the novels they can write are absolute crap. But I have no doubt people will read them, just like people read progressive fantasies and litrpgs that are absolute crap in terms of writing style (* cough * Reverend Insanity * cough * ) There is no accounting for taste, and some people don't actually care about style and craft and skill beyond basic get-the-job-doneness. "Give me words that tell a story, and make the story interesting. Give me pixels that form big round boobies and a waifu fuck-me face."
That's... fine, I guess? But don't mistake it for good.
I think that fact that you are defensive about this is kind of weird. Like you are insecure either about your own writing, or about the potential of LLMs, or about the intersection of those two things.
There's a writer on Medium I kind of casually follow for his trainwreck-of-a-life stories, and he gets dragged regularly for writing posts that scream "ChatGPT." He has admitted he uses AI for research, outlining, sometimes phrasing, but "he writes it all himself" and after another post that got a bunch of people calling him an LLM, he wrote a long, huffy, defensive post about how this is his writing style, this is how he's always written, ChatGPT is copying him, not the other way around, and fuck the haters. And, well, I guess I believe him if he says he's not actually letting ChatGPT write his posts for him (I don't, really, I think he's letting ChatGPT "outline" his posts and then he does some editing and tweaking and calls it "his writing"). But the degree of his defensiveness really convinced me he knows he's using too much AI in his writing.
Note that I am not saying you're doing the same thing, just... I think you know you're outsourcing too much to AI, and now you're getting pissy when people point it out.
On that note:
-
AI detectors are themselves not that reliable, since the ability to detect AI writing is a moving target, so posting "An AI detector said my writing is 100% human" is probably not that convincing to most people. (Just as many people have had the displeasure of seeing something they know they wrote themselves tagged as "almost certainly AI" by an AI detector.)
-
I do not think we should be using mod logs to tell people "You are a crap poster so I dismiss your argument."
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
8d ago
There are other options besides automatically prosecuting any officer who shoots someone on the assumption that a trial will sort it out. Granted, I doubt ICE's ability to conduct professional internal investigations, but in theory, that is how a professional police force would handle it.
But only one of those sides is making a habit of claiming immunity
Good's side is definitely claiming protesters should be immune from consequences (to include being arrested or forcibly removed from the area, I don't mean they deserve to be shot), and had Good in fact injured or killed the officer and not been shot herself, I am confident you'd see a lot of anti-ICE people saying she should face zero consequences.
No one is really (openly) claiming that the person who killed Charlie Kirk should face zero consequences, because "You should literally be able to murder someone in public and not be charged" is actually insane. (In Good's case, whether it was "murder" is in dispute, in Kirk's case, no one disputes it was murder.) But people were certainly celebrating it, piling on anyone who expressed such tepid sentiments as "Hey, celebrating a husband and father's murder is bad mmkay?", and would almost certainly fist-pump an acquittal for his killer.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
8d ago
You know what you haven't done? Present any evidence that the poster you responded to here made a claim incompatible with the available evidence.
I do not think the poster I responded to here made a claim incompatible with the available evidence.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
9d ago
Regardless of whether it's in the rules or not, what do you think you're even arguing here?
What do you think I'm arguing here?
That's an honest question, because you seem to be accusing me of "pounding the table" for a particular argument, when I have not taken a side on Reed at all, other than gesturing at what I consider to be a number of possibilities, which I explicitly stated were not equally probable.
I infer from your post that you have slotted me into the "anti-ICE, pro-Reed" side, and are seeing everything I post through that lens. Which is what most people do, because if you don't immediately and vigorously sneer and cheer for the right side you're clearly carrying water for the other. This is inane and mindkilling, but here is where even the Motte is now.
If you really wanted to know what I think specifically about any given proposition, you could ask. But people don't do that, they just assume.
My argument is that most of the people on both sides are guilty of motivated reasoning and would change positions if the tribes were reversed, if Reed had been MAGA and Ashli Babbit had been woke. You shouldn't be confused about this, because that's what I said in plain English. But instead you seem to be trying to dig for my unstated tribal priors. You think you know what they are, and you don't.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
9d ago
Yes, so, people may indeed be backing their tribe and justifying actions on that basis. But no one literally believes it's legal to run over a cop. Snarky "hth" "explainers" are a very bad way to engage with someone you think is making a bad argument. Is this what you really want threads to look like here?
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
9d ago
So, just to be clear, your mental model of the OP is that he literally believes it's legal to run over police officers?
Even in the unlikely event one believes this, we still wish people to engage without unnecessary sarcasm and condescension.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
9d ago
Do you think he's actually confused about the legality of hitting police officers with your car?
Are you genuinely trying to be helpful? Because you think he genuinely needed that to be explained to him?
No, you are not. You're being sarcastic in a condescending manner, which feels good and snarky and takes much less effort than actually rebutting an argument.
I would in fact wager you didn't even read the entire post. At most you skimmed it while composing your cutting response in your head.
I did in fact believe you felt angry at injustice done to you. But since you say I was mistaken, I believe you. I came to that conclusion because your tone in discussing your own experiences in the past struck me as very similar to the bitter way our incels talk. So you see, I will amend my beliefs and correct errors.
That said, we've talked before about your expectations of women and how you feel society puts too much responsibility on men and not enough on women. You may not feel you personally are being treated unjustly, but there is an injustice in that we aren't, as you put it, "mean" enough to women.
Amusingly enough, I don't even disagree with you as much as you seem to think about the ground-level truths. But I always get angry responses for not blaming women enough.
If you truly think I think something I don't, perhaps I am a poor communicator, but one way to reliably annoy me is to call me a liar. I believe what I say I believe.
More options
Context Copy link