Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
No bio...
User ID: 80
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
by breaking the law. Wonder why you omitted that?
Because I expected you to be able to parse 'illegal immigrants' as...well...doing something illegal.
I've long theorised that the solution to ivory tower liberals virtue signalling about illegal immigration is to give them some actual skin in the game, instead of letting them escape all the negative consequences of their ideology inside their walled communities. It seems the governor agrees with me, and that the theory was sound. I applaud this action and hope that next time he sends 500. And then 5000. Until the message sinks in. You do not get to ruin our towns from your gated communities with no consequence.
Massachusetts has about as many illegal immigrants (250,000/7,000,000) per capita as Florida does (720,000/21,000,000). Neither share a border with Mexico. Tell me again what consequences Florida is suffering that Massachusetts isn't? Moreover, the majority of illegal immigrants settle in metropolitan areas which vote blue even in red states like Texas. The vast, vast majority of those voters obviously don't live in gated communities. Those that do, do not unilaterally decide policy; Obama and Clinton and so on respond to the desires of their voters.
The message won't sink in, because the hypocrisy that you think is there just isn't, not because you haven't shipped enough illegal immigrants to Massachusetts.
People need to be held directly responsible for the consequences of their advocacy. Foisting it off on border towns and other people far away, ensuring there's no cost to you directly, is immoral.
Our tax dollars (which I understand are still the vast majority of funding for border security) pay for federal agents and facilities in Texas, so I do indirectly bear that burden. If anything, blue states contribute more in federal taxes than reds.
I've said it's regrettable that border towns have these issues, and if there were a robust way to mitigate the effects on them I would support it. But as I've said, even under Trump there were still large numbers of illegal immigrants at the border. Your sponsorship proposal wouldn't stop illegal immigrants from illegally ignoring it any more than they do now. The only real solution I can see working is developing those nations to the point that they don't want to come here anymore; look at how the number of illegals from Mexico has dropped as conditions have improved, and those from other countries has increased as conditions there worsen.
A great man once said feeble minds discuss people, mediocre minds discuss events, and great men discuss feeble and mediocre minds. As befits my station (see: flair), I will endeavor to do the first two.
Yesterday, Ron Desantis proudly shipped 50 illegal immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard. See Breitbart and Fox News’ takes as well. The individuals were supposedly offered a plane ticket to Massachusetts, without being told they were being sent to a small, isolated island unprepared to receive them as part of a political stunt. Amusingly, not sharing a border with Mexico, Desantis actually had to source his illegal immigrants from Texas. I suppose rustling up 50 of the 772,000 homegrown illegal Florida Mans was too difficult, or may have upset some core constituency, who knows. The only shelter in Martha’s Vineyard has room for 10 and is obviously not equipped in the way that Boston, New York or DC would be and the plane ticket to those places would have been much cheaper.
Also of note: see the Fox News article for the Florida legislature’s $12 million ‘immigrant relocation program’ Own The Libs/Desantis for President fun.
I can stomach a border wall and even see the necessity, despite disagreeing with what it represents. I can sympathize with people living near the border and dealing with crime and drug cartels. But manipulating impoverished people seeking a better future and treating them as nothing more than chattel to score political points and ‘own the libs’ absolutely turns my stomach. Which, judging by the Breitbart comments and replies I expect here, laughing at my pearl clutching is absolutely the point. You want me to be mad, you want me get up on my soapbox and bleat some self-righteous Soyjak lines about muh poor illegals so you can get mad right back and it feels good.
So I guess I won’t do that, although I never know what to say instead. I’m sorry that you hate Obama and Clinton (see: Breitbart article) so much that the thought of them having to deal with poor third worlders is amusing. I’m sorry that you’re so angry about illegal immigration and the libs that we’ve come here. Please, let’s all try to treat our countrymen better and do what we can to dial down the hate.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
I was born right at the cutoff and thankfully my parents held me back. I was more than a full year older than three or four of my classmates, which in retrospect, I think definitely gave me a leg up.
The true takeaway from that chapter in Freakonomics was to get pregnant February-May if your school cutoff is in September, and pray you don't have a very premature baby. Getting pregnant in August-October is the worst.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
How dare you actually read the paper abstract instead of participating in the circle jerk? Hilarious that the one comment actually superficially discussing the content of the paper gets fewer upvotes than a half-dozen substanceless posts.
We need to do better.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
Thanks, I'll take a look.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
Too many things being conflated here; your Tier 1 example is very non-central to what we're actually talking about. Getting into your mother's jewellery box in the privacy of your own home is quite conceptually different from being invited to be dressed up by a third party in public and cheered by strangers, at least to me. In addition, doing it out of boredom is different than doing it habitually out of some deeper desire.
Maybe tier was a poor descriptor and it was more a train of thought or logical chain. I think 'children haven't been inculcated with our social constructs of who should wear what' is the least controversial and easiest to accept, even if it is a far cry from trans pre-teens.
For the record, this is where I get off; it is never, ever my duty to validate anyone.
If you'll forgive my assumptions about your gender and relationship status, do you ever feel like it's your duty to tell your wife that she's beautiful? Your child that they're smart or talented, your coworker that they aren't completely useless, your friends that They're Totally Right and their partner is being unreasonable?
We're constantly validating other people, often times even in the face of what (we see as) the truth - it's the lubricant that keeps the gears of social interaction turning. It costs me next to nothing to call someone by their chosen pronouns or accept their choice of clothes, and seems important to them, so why not? You can link Picard counting lights, 1984, or clips from They Live, but the truth is people pick and choose whom to validate all the time.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
What's the actual blue tribe model of the separation of cross dressers/drag queens and transwomen?
Um, not sure if you were genuinely asking me as I assume you know at least as much as I do, but I can try in the event that you were.
I had straight male-presenting friends who would come to social dances wearing a dress or skirt and it was just a superficial thing independent of their gender identity as you mention above. Others were non-binary/queer and would do the same but it seemed more meaningful to them as their exterior gender presentation was matching their interior identity, although superficially it may not have looked that different from the outside.
Seems to get back to the classical tension between (some) non-binary folk who want to end the gender binary and trans people who find the gender binary affirming. Maybe someone, somewhere has squared that circle but I'm unaware.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
Don't have much to say in response, but thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
Then you should be shamed and excluded from the Hugo awards.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
Tier 1: Some children of both genders would like to wear clothes and accessories traditionally associated with the other gender. This has been widespread for a long time, or at least I've ready many stories of parents coming home to their young boys dressed up in their mother's pearls. I dressed up as a woman for halloween in grade 6, one or two people did it most years. I'm pretty sure there's a picture floating around somewhere of me wearing my mother's heels, necklace and TMNT pyjamas, although I was too young to remember it.
Tier 2: We should tolerate such behavior. Rationally, there's nothing wrong harmful about men wearing dresses and makeup or women wearing overalls or suits. Even historically, fashion trends have been ephemeral and men wearing foppish or feminine clothes has come and gone.
Tier 3: We should provide a supportive environment for people who feel this way. People should be validated and feel positive about their chosen identities without being shamed by society.
Tier 4 (going to have to try and model this one): Sexual attraction is the ultimate form of acceptance/'passing.' The way we can best support/validate trans or gay children is to validate their attractiveness to the other sex...? Someone would have to explain this one to me as well.
Thing is, most events I've seen are somewhere between 1-3. It's likely that had the event happened, some children wearing makeup, wigs and dresses would have walked across a stage and been applauded and told they were beautiful, brave members of society with bright futures as the 'twerking with stripper poles and dollar bills' seems to have been the vast minority of such events. Mr. Burns immediately dialed it up to 10 the least charitable take and I respect his intelligence too much to think that he's doing anything other than culture warring, but maybe my expectations of someone living in a red bubble are unfair.
For the record, I get off the train somewhere between 3 and 4. If I had to guess I'd say that the worst excesses of #4 are driven by hyper-liberal moms thrilled that their children are brave culture revolutionaries rather than pedophile groomers, but I confess I'm not very close with people in those circles. The closest thing I've seen is parents pushing feminine toys on their boy-tots, only to be heartbroken that they want to play with monster trucks.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
A less interesting way, though, is to assert that they are the antagonist because they are a Bad Person, and they do harmful things because that is what Bad People do. This is especially pernicious when the author clearly believes that Bad People really exist in significant numbers, and is building their story as an extended sermon on why you should hate them in real life. This attitude does not, generally speaking, help us to sharpen our moral instincts, but to deaden them. Reflexive moral certainty is not the apex of the soul, but arguably its nadir.
I think the above is pretty general. Where it gets specific is that Progressive media doing the above is absurdly widespread and prominent, to the point that it is probably inescapable. I don't remember much that I read in the old days that worked this way, as straight-up advocacy for bigotry. That really does seem to be a... novel innovation.
Diana Moon Glampers, steelwoman extraordinaire, would like a word. As would Emperor Jagang and his group of nihilistic-rapist-socialists who literally hate life and beauty. The infantile POTUS in powers of the earth as well, whose name escapes me.
I think you're conflating two issues, which I suppose I did in OP as well. Not every book on that list is like Iron Widow. Octavia Butler and NK Jemisin have both written fantastic books that I've enjoyed; Parable of the Sower in particular is amusingly pro-2A and nevertheless popular. But it still begs the question of why the slate has been dominated by women unless the people running the Hugos would argue that women are innately better at writing scifi, or if it's some form of restorative justice, just how long they want to keep it up.
The second issue is that some books are indeed political dumpster fires. But as I said, I'm not convinced that progressives have a monopoly on publishing trashy media.
As for the Hugos themselves, the problem you're pointing to was identified years ago, and people of good conscience tried to do something about it. They were crushed, leaving the field to bad-faith actors of both tribes. Actions have consequences.
It's hard to imagine Vox Day as a person of good conscience, although I sympathized with the sad puppies. I'm not sure I would trust any of the groups to recommend me books at this point, which is surprising given how consistently good the awards were from the 1960s all the way through the early 2010s.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
Here’s a list of the Hugo award winners this year:
-
Best Novel: Arkady Martine
-
Best Novella: Becky Chambers
-
Best Novelette: Suzanne Palmer
-
Best Short Story: Sarah Pinsker
-
Best Series: Seanan McGuire
-
Best Graphic Story: N.K. Jemisin
-
Best Related Work: Jane (Charlie) Anders
-
Best Artist: Rovina Cai
Omitted: Best film/tv series and short/long form editors.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg may never (posthumously) see 9 female justices on the Supreme Court. Perhaps she can rest easier knowing that women more or less swept the Hugos this year. And more or less in 2021. And 2019. And 2018. And almost did in 2017. One has to wonder why modern men are so bad at writing science fiction.
I’ve read virtually all of the books on this list prior to 2019, and my recollection is that they are by and large apolitical. Characterization is often sidelined or nonexistent (I’m looking at you, Asimov), there’s some downright weird...social interactions for lack of a better word (Well, rape my lizard!) and the prose is quite often trash. But where it shines is imagining a society reformed by new technology: a space elevator, FTL travel, psychohistory, nanotech, the metaverse (back when we just called it cyberspace), cyberpunk, biopunk, cypherpunk, spice melange and precognition. The best read like instruction manuals for scientists and entrepreneurs to aspire to, the bad were unapologetically sexist and the worst, presumably, have been lost to time.
Looking at the 2022 Hugo list, I’ve only read Iron Widow (I’ve been on a China kick and a scifi adaptation of Wu Zeitian’s story sounded interesting) and the series by Becky Chambers and Ada Palmer. The former was…unpleasant. Some choice quotes:
I think this whole concept of women being docile and obedient is nothing but wishful thinking. Or why would you put so much effort into lying to us? Into crippling our bodies? Into coercing us with made-up morals you claim are sacred? You insecure men, you’re afraid. You can force us into compliance, but, deep down, you know you can’t force us to truly love and respect you.
Men wants us so badly for our bodies, yet hate us so much for our minds.
How do you take the fight out of half the population and render them willing slaves? You tell them they're meant to do nothing but serve from the minute they're born. You tell them they're weak. You tell them they're prey. You tell them over and over, until it's the only truth they're capable of living.
But I have no faith in love. Love cannot save me. I choose vengeance.
I could keep going, but at a certain point I’d be quoting the entire book. Literally every scene that isn’t her fighting in a mecha is more of the above. The main character getting fucked over by her father. By the men in the military. By her lovers. By her copilot. It’s just not readable unless you’re the one being pandered to. She did take her book jacket photo wearing a cow onesie though, so that was pretty cool. Not that it would ever win an award, but I had a similar reaction to The Powers of the Earth with anti-woke libertarian propaganda, and the hypercapitalist Randian rants in Terry Goodkind.
Where Iron Widow is a blasting foghorn wokening our feminist impulses, Becky Chambers is a bit more laidback. I'm still struck by the aimlessness and victimization of the protagonist who just kind of meanders her way from misadventure to misadventure and whose only (?) skill is polylingualism. There's no overarching goal, no training montage or development, no tech wiz hacker bro. The emphasis is on home, belonging, learning about other cultures and refuting the nasty intolerants who disapprove of human-AI or interspecies-lesbian-human-reptilian-nonmonogamous relationships.
I have to ask myself; was I, in turn, being pandered to in the previous eras of scifi in the same way that different demographics are being pandered to now? Am I just primed to like things featuring men or manly women set in space, or that feature nanotech and computers at the expense of character development or good writing? And honestly, the answer is probably yes. There probably is some cosmic Ginsbergian justice to Woke sci-fi taking over traditional awards ceremonies. I don’t think there is a principled, objective stance where William Gibson is a better writer than Octavia Butler and it’s not like we read any of these books because the prose and mechanics of the writing are top tier. Perhaps we’re fated to live in our own little cloistered media bubbles that tell us what we like to hear.
But then…can I at least have my own awards convention so that I know which books from this year aren’t utter crap?
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
Why not? Treatment of syphilis by deliberately induced malaria used to be a thing. It worked.
Injecting bacteria into tumors too!
talked about the allergy thing and Red Queen Syndrome(?),
I'm assuming they meant the Red Queen hypothesis? We're in an evolutionary arms race with pathogens and we have to run as fast as possible just to avoid losing ground.
had the ballsy idea to fly to some African country and intentionally contract a hookworm(!)
Yeah, people have seen this kind of thing for a while. There's been some efforts to identify the molecular bits that mediate the immunomodulation, but my impression the last time I looked into it (probably nearly a decade ago to be fair) is that there's something about live worms that's required to get the immune system going, much like how live attenuated vaccines are normally better. I doubt live worms as a treatment would make it past an IRB, or be very appealing for most people.
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
That's an interesting idea I hadn't really considered, mostly because as a biologist you need to be associated with a lab and research institute to get your foot in the door. Is it different for computational folks?
The other obvious problem is that I have no coding experience outside of messing around with some javascript/html ten years ago and some more recent stints with R/python to analyze sequencing data.
Do you have any suggested resources for autodidact-baby's first machine learning class?
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
Honestly, I probably subscribe more to 'catastrophe environmentalism' myself. I haven't meaningfully changed my habits since I started reading about this sort of thing, aside from washing my produce more carefully. I never wore makeup or ate much processed foods anyways, and I've always scrupulously avoided living close to major sources of air pollution. Increases in atopy and autoimmunity are bad, but probably not up there on the most pressing concerns for humanity.
Interesting to think about immunologically though!
Chrisprattalpharaptor
Ave Imperaptor
2yr ago
Short answer - Probably not really, no.
Longer answer: It's conceivable that when DNA sequencing gets really, really cheap you can feed a small chip blood and/or sputum every few days and we could do something with the absolutely monstrous resulting dataset. You can see from some of the comments here when I suggested something similar that the Bill-Gates-is-microchipping-people crowd merged with the post-COVID skeptic of public health crowd would probably make it challenging though.
I suppose something I didn't elaborate on much is the 'hippie' part of the title. Maybe we should all be living organic and avoiding makeup/processed food/cleaning items. I think the concern is that we don't have any idea what environmental factors are in any way relevant, so it would probably be unethical to suggest that people completely avoid makeup when that could be 100% wrong.
They were (ostensibly, this is dependent on honest reporting) asked if they wanted to go to Massachusetts, not Martha's Vineyard. Would you consider it honest if I asked an immigrant if they wanted a flight to the United States and I dropped them off in Soldotna, Alaska?
Politically, perhaps, although if we had that conversation we'd likely recycle tired talking points about how the United States has always been a nation of immigrants. The US population share of immigrants is higher than it was in the 80s, but on par with the early 20th/late 19th century.
From a humanitarian perspective, I strongly disagree that they are equivalent.
More options
Context Copy link