HighResolutionSleep
No bio...
User ID: 172
I understand what is supposed to happen. My concern is what happens when something goes wrong.
Blue tribe is happy to hand wave away men's vulnerability to women's overwhelming reproductive power as "biological" in origin. I am unsure how biology writes our laws in any sense other than the most reductive and worthless—but on the other hand, I am not opposed to the implementation of cultural protections in lieu of legal ones where the latter may be too unwieldy. Blues would insist that any legal protection for men is impossible to practically implement. I may mostly disagree, but I can see how it might be hard to implement within a marriage context. Cultural protections may be appropriate here.
The problem is that this form of protection isn't offered to men by blue tribe in nearly enough volume to justify the power differential. Blue tribe culture may be willing to condemn reproductive coercion of men by women as being kinda mean, and wag a finger at women who do it, but that isn't nearly enough, and proves that blues don't really care about this abuse of power.
If we're taking this seriously, reproductive coercion of men by women really ought to be considered at a similar level of transgression as infidelity. This is a good example of a love crime that we do actually take quite seriously, and offer serious cultural protection against in lieu of legal protection. If we were to apply this kind of protection as a safeguard against women's reproductive power, things would look very, very different. It would look like blue tribe looking at a sobbing woman whose husband left her because she tried forcing another baby on him dead in the face, and, shedding no pity whatsoever, assuring her that all this ruin is only what she wrought upon herself. It would look like, in the other timeline, blue tribe lionizing a husband as downright saintly for finding it in himself to forgive this kind of transgression, given to an individual wholly undeserving of mercy, even if the true intended beneficiaries are the children.
But in the current blue milieu, unexpected babies in marriage are something that just kinda happen. Like, it's a little bad if the woman is being deceptive, but comon dude, shit happens. You need to move on and focus on making room for the new kid. I don't even want to know how much of the asshole he would be if he up and left due to this betrayal. Sticking around is simply being a decent human being and awards no cookies.
Again, I'd have less of a bone to pick with Blue Culture if the protections it claims to offer to men were real, but as it stands right now calling it a fig leaf would be offering too much credit.
HighResolutionSleep
7mo ago
That being the case, that only one person has the deciding vote under the law doesn't make it "deceitful" to argue that for most people it is a decision of "heart and home."
Right but the people who want me to accept this would never characterize it that way.
HighResolutionSleep
7mo ago
I think this is a good description of the story the modern blue tribe tells about itself, and if it were true to form I'd probably have less of a bone to pick with that side of the isle's treatment of my sex. But like many autobiographies, it gives itself too much credit.
I think you'll find that in practice, very little scorn is offered to wives who decide for themselves that having another baby is "right for her", and very little lenience to husbands who aren't prepared to quickly get with that program.
HighResolutionSleep
7mo ago
Couple of thoughts:
- People who own homes often spend against their equity, and dropping house values would at the very least put a stop to this money faucet;
- People who own homes often don't want their neighborhoods to become more affordable, as they do not wish to live near People of Affordability;
- People who don't own homes often have pensions and retirement accounts affixed to the nominal value of homes.
Under the current regime, if you're savvy, you can buy an asset that more than pays for itself, appreciates over time, becomes completely yours after 30 years, and even gets a lot of tax benefits. Why put your money anywhere else? This can't go on.
I agree with the general thought that homes as an investment is incompatible with a functioning nation, because it by definition requires housing to become only less affordable over time. When you consider the fact that what can't continue won't, it's simply inevitable that this arrangement will end at some point. The only question is who will be left holding the bag, which I imagine will be a hotly battled political contest.
Not sure if I want my money in that fight. Difficult to imagine that property owners will somehow win. On the other hand, the tide doesn't look like it's turning quite yet. We're still patching in buffs to what is already the best asset class.
HighResolutionSleep
7mo ago
Sure, and a car can last a million miles if diligently maintained.
HighResolutionSleep
8mo ago
Perhaps, but we'd need at least multiple generations of favorable cultural iteration before reproductive autonomy for men isn't a fringe lunatic idea. I imagine that by then the issue wouldn't practically matter anymore.
HighResolutionSleep
8mo ago
In the IRL battle of the sexes, Team Woman always wins because that's the team most men are on.
HighResolutionSleep
8mo ago
It's unpopular to say to women.
HighResolutionSleep
8mo ago
If the choice is between the father financing her unilateral choices with 18 years of child support and me and you financing her unilateral choices... I say the father.
As long as truly not a single red cent comes out of my pocket to fund her reproductive choices, these terms are tolerable.
HighResolutionSleep
8mo ago
Putting it differently, what level of sacrifice do you think it is okay to demand from one person to save another from a major financial onus that they knowingly exposed themselves to the risk of?
This argument is always such a mind-bender. You're getting the causality exactly backwards—her choosing to give birth is what engages his financial obligation under the current legal scheme, not the other way around. This obligation can be discharged without affecting her ability to choose.
The engine drives the transmission, not the other way around.
HighResolutionSleep
8mo ago
I feel really bad for the other guy that Twitter thought for sure was the shooter.
HighResolutionSleep
10mo ago
It's been said a few times that our rejection of supernatural stories has left young people without the kinds of cautionary tales that used to transmit some amount of wisdom.
Maybe Keith Gill can be the modern world's Icarus.
HighResolutionSleep
10mo ago
Why is there this special carve out to discriminate against men?
Because men think it's gay to organize and demand things. Simple as.
HighResolutionSleep
11mo ago
HighResolutionSleep
11mo ago
Really? No posts on Wellness Wednesday? Any wellers in chat?
HighResolutionSleep
11mo ago
She's a 10, there's absolutely nothing wrong with her, you managed to bring her home with you, and she's a little tipsy. But you just noticed that on your bookshelf behind her there's an exposed and visible hardcover copy of Ted Cruz's Unwoke. What do you do?
HighResolutionSleep
11mo ago
The problem is that nobody is joking.
HighResolutionSleep
11mo ago
I think roughly 0% of respondents would actually pick the bear. They are, to borrow a phrase from yesteryear, virtue signalling.
The more notable revelation is how cleanly this whole ordeal demonstrates that hating men is very much considered a virtue in some spaces.
HighResolutionSleep
11mo ago
Irrespective of who is receiving them, what's the number of visas that could be issued within the foreseeable future for which shaking your fist at couldn't necessarily be considered evidence of xenophobia? Would a billion do it?
HighResolutionSleep
11mo ago
Is the only principled position either zero immigrants or infinity immigrants?
HighResolutionSleep
11mo ago
My parents forbade me from reading fanfiction.
That's strange. How did that happen?
HighResolutionSleep
11mo ago
It's not hard to make reactors, the US has the technical chops to fit a 300 MW PWR reactor on a submarine along with sonar, torpedoes, stealth all for a total cost of $2 Billion.
Maybe the solution is the for US to commission giant submarines with gigawatt reactors on them, where they can tap into underwater transmission cables that just barely reach out into international waters.
Wouldn't be the dumbest thing we've ever done to get around crippling regulations. Maybe.
HighResolutionSleep
1yr ago
Witnessed is a little important, here
I think the glass half full perspective is more accurate here. Sure, it wasn't detected at the earliest possible time—the second it was committed—but it was only in the most bleeding edge releases of a select few base distributions for a few weeks before it got sniffed out. For such a sophisticated attack, that's lightning fast. Stuxnet took about five years and infected around a hundred thousand machines before it was uncovered. Sure, it's possible that this sample size of one is unrepresentative of the whole distribution of this event repeated a thousand times, but that's less likely and strikes me as somewhat catastrophizing. As someone noted below, we don't know that this wasn't an attack from an AGI sitting in OpenAI's basement plotting to kill us all as we speak.
Visible-source seems to have helped track down the whole story
How would he have tracked down the backdoor without the repo? It seems to me that without it all he would have is some CPU benchmarks and some valgrind errors. What would he have done with that other than submit a bug report to the company that actually had sources, which could be ignored or "fixed" at their discretion?
HighResolutionSleep
1yr ago
Security is hard.
I like to think that this will get better as time goes on. If you think about it, humans have only really been writing software at an industrial scale for two, maybe three decades now. We're not good at it yet.
Every single one of us is running a kernel that was written in the 90s using paradigms formed in the 80s with a computer language that was invented in the 70s.
So little about how we do computing has even caught up to modern thinking. I don't know if Rust specifically is the future, but something like it is.
Let's keep things in scope and specify that this is happening within an otherwise stable marriage and there's an unexpected pregnancy. If you're still willing to assert this, I'm open to reviewing evidence, but as it stands I'm believing my own eyes.
I'd like to point out that men don't produce children, but I realize that the definition of "producing" always shuffles around based on who and whom. When it's calculating who bears the most bodily cost and therefore who ought to have the say, she's doing the producing. When it comes to who pays, well it bears his genes so it's 50-50. (Even if he said no to the sex, because why not.)
It's a risk for one party, but a choice for the other. I will continue to point this out until I am blue in the face, shouting into the abyss, probably until the day I die.
More options
Context Copy link