Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
No bio...
User ID: 732
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
7mo ago
Every person in the church with whom I’ve discussed it has been very clear that caffeinated drinks, other than coffee and tea, are unambiguously permitted. They believe that eliminating addiction from your life is pretty much always an unalloyed good, since it allows a fuller use of your agency and self-control, but that to a certain extent the church is willing to meet people where they’re at and to allow some leeway, particularly for things like caffeine which have clear benefits alongside their drawbacks.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
7mo ago
This past Sunday, I received baptism into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
As some of you may be aware, I have been passively orbiting this church with various degrees of interest over the course of my entire life, as a result of family connections and several very close friends. Like most non-Mormons, I found various reasons not to pursue any active interest in the church: the total lack of anthropological/scientific evidence for historicity of its central religious text; the concerning signs of Joseph Smith’s charlatanry and general strategy of “making it up as he went”; the onerous lifestyle restrictions; the financial burden which tithing imposes, etc.
Furthermore, I’m occasionally cited here as an able critic of Christian ideas about theodicy, the efficacy of prayer, and the apparent contradictions between the idea of a loving and omnipotent God on the one hand, and the sheer amount of random and wanton suffering present in our world on the other. People have linked to my somewhat recent discussion with @FCfromSSC regarding this matter as an example.) Thus, it may strike many users here (and does seem to have struck at least some people in my IRL life) as surprising to see me commit myself to this church.
However, about eight weeks ago I was approached by a pair of pleasant-looking young sister missionaries at the mall while leaving the gym. Although I was sore and tired and just wanted to go home, I couldn’t resist stopping to speak with them. We had a conversation about what I believed about the Book of Mormon, and about my research into, and interest in, the church. They invited me to attend services with the local Young Single Adults ward that upcoming Sunday, and I accepted. I decided that this would probably be my last opportunity to sincerely immerse myself into the church, at least on a provisional basis, and see what my experience would be. I also, for reasons I’ll keep personal, saw this as at least possibly an answer to prayers I’d offered not too long ago. Since that day, I have consistently attended Sunday church services (both the sacrament meeting and the subsequent scripture discussion sessions, where I’ve been an active participant even since my first week of attendance as an “investigator” of the faith) and plan to continue doing so. I have successfully given up coffee (not caffeine entirely, although I’m actively working to reduce my daily caffeine consumption and dependence) and pornography. (I had already drastically decreased my alcohol consumption, so reducing it even further to zero has been trivially easy.) I’ve attended various social events organized by the ward, which has allowed me to ensconce myself into a community of bright, wholesome, surprisingly-mature and well-grounded young people. I finally decided that baptism is the next important step — a costly signal of my escalating commitment.
It is difficult for me to articulate the reasons for my decision in a way that would meet the intellectual standards of this forum. I still have many of the same doubts I did before accepting baptism; I still don’t believe that the Book of Mormon is a historically-accurate description of real events that took place in the pre-Columbian Americas. (Rather, I currently believe that it is an allegorical text, intended by God to usher in a new dispensation by providing a scriptural text which would be narratively and intellectually compelling to the specific audience to which He intended it to be presented, given their particular interests, level of historical understanding, and literary/religious frame of reference.) I still have a lot of questions about Joseph Smith’s character, intentions, and leadership qualities. I’m still working on wrapping my mind around what it actually means to aspire to live a Christ-like existence; toward what political/philosophical positions and actions does this obligate me? There are, however, many elements of Mormon theology and the Mormon lifestyle which appeal very strongly to me. (Ideas about the Plan of Salvation and the nature of the afterlife being chief among the theological appeals, and the sexual conservatism being the primary secular/lifestyle appeal.) I was strongly influenced and encouraged by a post a few months ago by @2rafa — arguably my favorite poster here, and the one with whom I probably feel the greatest degree of intellectual and personality kinship — in which she implored people here to embrace the benefits of a loving and welcoming religious community and to try hard not to ruin the experience by thinking too deeply and skeptically about the inner workings of the theology. I decided that if she could do it, I should probably try to see if I could as well. So far it has been more enriching than I could have imagined.
Over the coming weeks I will undergo the rites of the lay priesthood common to all male members of the church, set myself up to begin automatically tithing, and begin working towards obtaining a “temple recommend” allowing me to enter LDS temple buildings. I am actively working on finding a spouse with whom I can raise a family; I’ve already been on a lovely date with an intelligent and creative woman (one of the few female members of the ward somewhat close to my age, as most are closer to 18-20) and have another one already arranged. I expect at least a few of these people to become long-term friends. I don’t know what else to expect in terms of how this will affect my life trajectory, what will be asked of me, etc. All I know is that right now I am finally beginning to taste what it might be like to truly believe that I have a Heavenly Father who loves me, that my Redeemer lives, and that he has provided me with a way to dwell with Him eternally along with my loved ones.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
7mo ago
I struggle to think of a practical justification for this policy.
It could be a plan to purge the military of Muslims. (And Sikhs, although I imagine they’d just be collateral damage.)
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
Wheel of Fish from UHF
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
Clearly trying to accelerate our national Cold Civil War into a Hot War.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
But I do consider the argument that "this other behavior I engage is inconsistent with someone who hates [x]" as fully discredited, because it's neither engaging with the actual accusation nor engaging with the reality of cognitive dissonance.
Which “actual accusation” are you referring to? I obviously agree that the expansion of “hatred” to mean “supports policy positions which are less-than-maximally-optimal for some specific group” is a transparently bogus rhetorical trick.
Therefore, I am simply refusing to engage with it at all, and instead sticking to an intuitive definition of “hatred”: i.e. sustained negative emotions toward a particular individual or group, desire to see that individual or group come to harm, an aversion to interpersonal interactions with that individual or group, a belief that the individual or group is bad/harmful/obnoxious, etc. Under this understanding of hatred, it would take a pretty mighty and resolute level of cognitive dissonance to intentionally form a long-term intimate relationship with a member of the hated group. Yes, people are capable of cognitive dissonance, but for most people cognitive dissonance is resolved over time.
In the case of a [person who hates white men, married to a white man], that dissonance could be resolved in one of two directions: either the positive qualities of the white spouse, and the continued exposure to positive interactions with the spouse’s white family members and social circles would erode the degree of “hatred” felt by the anti-white spouse over time; or the relationship would break down over time as the white spouse emergent displays the qualities which the anti-white spouse suspected whites of possessing in the first place, or the friction involved with sustained aversive reactions with the white spouse’s white family and friends would cause the anti-white spouse to develop aversive emotions toward the white spouse, even if none were present at the start of the relationship.
Since Kamala has been married to Doug Emhoff for 11 years, presumably even if she hated white men when they got married, she doesn’t anymore. If she still did, I find it highly unlikely that the “compartmentalization” or “cognitive dissonance” which you propose exists would long ago have broken down and some inciting incident or slow buildup of aversive incidents would have caused the breakdown of the relationship.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
In an American context, Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews are white, have always been white, and have never been considered anything other than white. One silver lining of America having so many laws throughout its history clearly delineating who counts as white and who doesn’t (which was relevant for determining things like who got to marry whom, who got access to which parts of public infrastructure, and even at times who was considered for citizenship) is that we can see exactly who counted as white and who didn’t! In the South, for example, there is a very long history of Jewish businessmen and slave traders, as well as Jewish politicians (such as Judah P. Benjamin, a member of the Confederate States Cabinet) which could not have been the case in such a racially-stratified society if those men were not universally recognized as white!
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
But, I'll reiterate, I've never actually observed this happening anywhere.
You are observing it right now, in this very conversation. And in fact you have observed it many times; the entire reason that progressives had to invent this galaxy-brain contrarian psychobabble you’re regurgitating is because so many normal people intuitively recognized that someone who hates X is actually pretty unlikely to form a long-term intimate relationship with an X. This view has not been “discredited”. It remains true, and you have let Social Science™️ enjoyers gaslight you into believing that “Oh, everyone knows that’s been discredited.” It has not! The contrarian critical theory take is actually just wrong!
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
I don't think I've ever seen being married to [x] as being genuinely interpreted as evidence against hatred against [x].
Sure you have. In fact it seems like a very strong piece of evidence against hatred.
You’re repeating a lot of progressive psychobabble, but the on-the-ground reality is that in the vast majority of cases, an individual who is motivated by a generalized hatred of a particular group is very unlikely to marry a member of that group. This is highly intuitive because of what marriage usually entails. You are not just marrying an atomized individual; you are marrying into a family, a social sphere, an inherited community, etc. By marrying a (Jewish) white man, Kamala committed to spending the next decades of her life surrounded by his white in-laws, his white friends, his white children from a previous marriage, the mostly white people who are part of whatever hobbies and social spaces he inhabits, etc.
Presumably Kamala Harris was not facing the binary choice of A) marry Doug Emhoff or B) die alone. She could have had her pick of plenty of well-placed non-white men. The fact that she chose Emhoff, knowing that by doing so she’d be inviting a large number of white men to become intimately involved with her life, is a pretty strong indicator that she does not in fact hate white men, does not want to limit the number of white men in her life, etc.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
my impression was that she genuinely hates white men
I loathe Kamala as much as anyone here and have said so many times, but this seems like an odd accusation given that she’s married to a white man.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
Linda Sarsour, perhaps?
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
jeans are real practical and comfortable
Jeans are absolutely not “American red tribe culture.” They were invented by two Jewish immigrants in San Francisco, and popularized as casual wear by urban greasers in the 1950s and 1960s.
country music is easy to inculturate and you can dance to it, etc.
This is only true if you strip it of much of the sociocultural content that was central to country music for much of its existence. The oeuvre of Conway Twitty is not global dance music. Country can only be made into a global commodity by converting it into “generically lower-middle-class music with aspirationally-American characteristics.”
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
He seems formidable! The puzzle-making background seems to really help him on wordplay categories, anagrams, etc.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
The soft bigotry of low expectations.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
Imagine the quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys had just been murdered by a deranged Eagles fan.
When @FiveHourMarathon finally snaps and takes things too far, your comment will be used to link this site to stochastic terrorism.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
On the other hand, shows that have LONG outlived their relevance (IMHO) like Jeopardy
How so? At the very least, Jeopardy! will (and must) remain relevant until I’ve had my opportunity to compete on the show. And then, if I do well enough to be invited to any future in-show tournaments, its relevance will continue going strong indefinitely.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
I’m not trying to do a gotcha. I’m pointing out that a specific claim you made was wildly overblown. I’m not trying to be insightful or even attack the edifice of your post in any holistic way. I’m literally just focused on that specific claim, which I think was inaccurate.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
You made an over-broad claim, I countered it with actual evidence, and now you’re acting flabbergasted that I took your claim seriously enough to refute it, instead of treating it like the empty bluster it apparently was.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
I did read the contents. There are many of the Columbine-style mass shootings nestled in there among the personal beefs. Again, do you acknowledge that things like Kerch Polytechnic, Kazan, and Izhevsk (just to name three from Russia alone) are Columbine-style school shootings?
How about the École Polytechnic shooting in Montreal, which happened before Columbine? Or the Dawson College shooting, also in Montreal? Or the La Loche shootings in Saskatchewan?
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
Before Columbine, nobody had ever heard of a school shooting, so nobody did school shootings (and even today, outside America, nobody does them).
This is, of course, plainly false. Here’s a list of school shootings in Europe, another list from Canada, and one from Brazil. Russia alone has had a number of notable school shootings, including the Kerch Polytechnic shooting and the Kazan school shooting/bombing.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
I definitely agree that this distinction is useful, although frankly if the Chinese air force could pull off a strike with such precision that they could blow up the Dalai Lama’s house without hitting anything else around it, I’d have to just say “well played”. I’d be more mad at my own government for not being able to intercept it.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
If they had bombed the college basketball stadium or the NYC auditorium at which I saw him speak, would that have been acceptable?
If the ChiComs bombed an entire baseball stadium or auditorium, packed with civilians, I would consider this an act of war. It would evince a grievously callous lack of regard for civilian lives. However, if they planted a bomb on the Dalai Lama’s limo and blew it up, killing only the inhabitants of that car, I would see this as a legitimate act which could be smoothed over diplomatically.
Similarly, if the Ukrainians shot down Putin’s plane over American airspace, I would not consider it an overly aggressive act against American sovereignty; it would be an obviously targeted act against an indisputable geopolitical foe of theirs, and if the only collateral damage to America was embarrassment about our lack of airspace security, that would be something I could live with.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
Given the distance at which he was shot, I’d be surprised if the shooter could hear anything he was saying.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
8mo ago
That wasn’t an example of ideologically-motivated violence, so far as we can tell. The attempted killer was a former professional associate of the victims who seems to have gone nuts.
Your link goes to a removed Reddit post.
More options
Context Copy link