YoungAchamian
No bio...
User ID: 680
YoungAchamian
3d ago
Conservative atheists are a dime a dozen honestly. Vegan-Conservative are much less common, but tend to be religious, it's this weird hybrid trifecta thats unique.
YoungAchamian
4d ago
A fascinating conundrum, apparently the machine spirit of The Motte hates me specifically.
YoungAchamian
4d ago
I think the overriding problem is that hippie chicks are progressive and this man is too autistic enough to not immediately bring up where they disagree or entertain the idea of not talking about politics long enough for them to develop feelings and then slowly bring it up.
I have met one.
Do you know if his wife was vegan? I'm assuming this was from before the time of hyper-polarized politics that dogs these past two decades?
YoungAchamian
4d ago
I see my younger self in him a lot, though I am currently younger than him. I was very black-and-white. I went through an MRA and Red-Pill phase, which is funny enough how I found the motte back on reddit. I mellowed as I got older, learned to see the grey in the world. Some self reflection/introspection, points to the possiblity I'm trying to reach back through to my younger self and help him by helping this friend.
If his failures in life haven't deradicalized him I don't know if you will.
Yeah my fear. He is already too stubborn to take advice.
YoungAchamian
4d ago
I've been posting for several years at this point. Obviously my comments are not making it past the new user filter. I swear me being filtered is a more recent thing. Can downvotes push someone back into being filtered?
YoungAchamian
5d ago
My understanding is that while he is open to marrying a Christian woman, he like you would not convert. Around where we are, supposedly that is a non-starter for enough conservative woman. They want a man to "lead them in loving Christ" I'm not entirely sure what that means exactly, but I can infer.
As far as Veganism goes, I think he's pretty inflexible on that. He thinks its downstream of values, and vegetarians are just copping out, making their life easier because being moral is hard. He of course is morally righteous, objectively. He has a very black-and-white moral absolutist stance on a lot of topics. Apolitical is fine, but anyone even slight left of center is: "infected with a virus that makes them dumb sociopaths screeching about empathy" There is actually a lefty woman who seemingly likes him, follows him around, goes on runs with him, but because she advocates for feminism and socialism, that's a red flag for him.
I am increasingly convinced he, like many incels, has gotten stuck in this red-pill rage phase and is fed by constant social media, content creators, and crab-in-the-bucket blogposts that make him think woman having rights is bad for him and his dating life. He of course dresses this up as "what's good for society" and "illogical decisions by woman to risks in the modern dating market".
In general, the more strict your filter is the more you are going to filter. I always had the approach that nothing was truly off the table. There are gonna be things you like and dislike in a partner. You want it to be net positive in the moment, and for it to be likely to remain a net positive in the future.
I agree. I also think you need to go where your potential mates are, figure out what they are looking for, figure out what are the bare necessities are for you, and make everything else flexible. Having extreme minority political views from multiple distinct tribes leaves a subsection of the populous that is just too few. Doubly so because woman cluster closer to the middle of social views.
age, weight, and looks tradeoffs.
These are expectedly not things he wants to budge on, ditto for divorce or kids. The biggest issue is that he's in his late 30s at this point, he is quickly approaching the mirror of "bitter middle age woman who thinks there are no good men and blames society", expressing this to him gets a screed about how its asymmetric and he doesn't have the same decisions/control/power that woman had.
Any thoughts on how to deradicalize a friend?
YoungAchamian
5d ago
Has anyone ever met a conservative, atheist, vegan before? I have this friend that is all 3 and he feels like such a niche character. 1 in 2k? 1 in 10k? I'm not sure, but I'm informally curious how many folks with this similar set of beliefs there are out there. Particularly how many are women. As this topic is related to finding a mate with compatible values, and I think if he sticks to requiring them to meet his values, he's going to die alone.
YoungAchamian
9d ago
Glad to be of service. I assume this is about house hunting for you are your partner?
YoungAchamian
10d ago
Wait how do vegans justify murdering people, isn't veganism all about non-consensual killing for any reason being bad, humans or animals?
YoungAchamian
10d ago
I recently bought a house in June, and I did 20% down on a 30 yr with a mortgage rate that put me at 29% of my gross for everything (Principal, insurance, taxes, interest, HOA). It's a bit tight but not egregiously so, and my rate was 6.875 no points. So I'm essentially waiting until rates drop (and the 6 months has elapsed) to refi.
Neither my parents nor my realtor thought it was a particular risky maneuver. I was a bit nervous paying that much but it has been fine. I did have to lower my 401k contributions from 20% to 12% and I got some good budgeting software and have been pretty aggressively sticking to it. I'm pretty risk adverse in general but I'd say it has been worth it so far.
idk if this is helpful.
YoungAchamian
17d ago
then he proceeds to get his butt kicked by a girl. Said male warrior, embarrassed, learns his lesson that gender roles are bad, m'kay.
Am I the only one who finds this line of thinking incredibly dumb?
You are failing to understand the world and the source material. Bending is quite the force equalizer. We literally have the chosen one: 11 year old child with no muscle, beating fully grown shredded adults. Apparently strength, speed or endurance is less effective than technique, genius or secret martial arts knowledge(lightning bending, metal bending, blood bending, spirit bending). There are a ton of examples of this in the source material. This is a very chinese/asian mentality vs the western mentality. You see it in many of the old martial arts movies which avatar is undoubtably an homage to. If it was warrior on warrior alone, (Sokka x Suki) you have an understandable take but the vast majority of the girlboss fights are bender vs bender, or super ninja chi blocker(secret knowledge) v bender.
On a meta sense you are doing the same thing wokies do when they put a black elf or dwarf in Rings of Power and offer no explanation other than: "notice it and you are a bigot". You are ignoring the art, the source material, the world building, and are instead trying to force your own worldview on to the material to conform to what you think is right. Just because it's fantasy doesn't mean it doesn't have to be consistent BUT it is also fantasy so it doesn't need to be "real-world accurate". It's a story, let it be one.
YoungAchamian
26d ago
Thank you!
YoungAchamian
26d ago
It's been awhile since I saw the show, but it really jumped the shark. The Spader character wasn't actually Raymond Reddington, I forget who, but was somehow related. The real Reddington was someone else, and then someone else from that. It was a series of fake faces. I don't remember the woman part, but the show got bad, so I buy it.
YoungAchamian
26d ago
Where does he fall on the spectrum, I imagine there are different camps of thought?
This might be a little culture war-oriented, but I know we have some dissident right folks on here. I'm trying to learn/understand their viewpoint more. Does anyone have a list of blogs, twitter, (insert medium of distribution) of folks that I could read to get a handle on the beliefs/narratives/ideology.
I know of Yarvin, but he's the only one I consistently remember. The others are I partially remember but am unclear on are McIntyre(?) Fuentes, BAP(?) Sargon of Akkad, Kulak(?? is he DR?). There was a bunch of internal drama posts here awhile back on this area that I might try and dig up.
EDIT: Thank you all this will keep me nice and occupied for awhile with some reading.
Is he being forced to reply? There's this weird behavior some people do where they can't keep their shit to themselves. Some general thread of the topic, some tribal consensus building, and because you disagree, you NEED to respond. Damn the consequences! The TRUTH is the most important thing. Never-mind its truth as you see, it without room for how others do. It's very annoying, self-centered behavior that makes me want to cuff these people like their parents should have.
In your example your reply of God Does Not Exist was in reply to a thread about what workplace activities we could do to advance muslim goals then that is very different from saying it in the middle of a budget meeting.
Are they talking to you? Or are you butting in? There's a bunch of unknowns in this case that make it unclear what the context was. If this was attempting to use funding from his department/group, then he has lee-way to intercede. But if a general google forum for their workplace is having this discussion, then he's engaging in asocial behavior trying to butt in and swing his dick around, being a "Debate Me Bro" at work.
If people who bring up politics at work should be fired then it is the liberals of Google who should be on the block, not him, since they are the ones who brought it up.
Your terms are absolutely acceptable. I want near zero tolerance for this shit. It's annoying unprofessional behavior.
YoungAchamian
27d ago
He said "gender doesn't exist and god doesn't put people in the bodies of the wrong sex" I wouldn't call that going against trans activism. I'd call that believing that trans people don't exist and anyone claiming so shouldn't be given any special considerations, polite or otherwise.
If I said "god doesn't exist" and want anyone making theological arguments to be denied special considerations for their beliefs, you wouldn't call me "being against christian/jewish/muslim/etc activism"
This is a classic: don't bring up politics at work, end of story. People who do should be fired.
YoungAchamian
28d ago
Curious, my understanding is it felt very much like side act, you just go do some optional quests but very little impact on the story. If you think it's worth it maybe I'll check it out on my next run. Can you convert Solomorne to not dogmatic?
YoungAchamian
28d ago
I enjoy it but yes there is quite the learning curve to push past. I'm not even truly degenerate about builds yet and I try to stay away from reading build guides as it sucks the fun out of it for me. The story is good, its fairly responsive to your choices. The romances feel great, the core set of characters have good arcs and potential. You can push your followers towards Chaos/dogmatic/humanism in ways that make sense. Overall it's a very enjoyable game.
Void shadows is a must. It seamlessly integrates with the core story very well. Technically the core story left side missions with references/hints prior to its release which makes it feel like it fleshed those out and made them immersive. The classes it adds are unfortunately very OP and very fun. 1.5v was a balance patch that mostly just hit them.
The gameplay tips if you are starting out is to abuse office mechanics via Cassia, you get extra turns on your heavy hitters allowing to scale up the needed buffs to be monsters. Late game they generally start fights with the buffs so its less relevant, but at low levels the power fantasy hasn't taken off yet.
Oh DOS2, I have fond memories but yeah very much same feeling. I always hated how you pretty much had to spec your party towards one armor type strip or bust. I remember using the hell out of mods to try and fix it, make combat more interesting to some success but it was just a lot. I haven't tried modding Rogue Trader yet.
RPGs have always suffered from that tension. Real humans have a nasty habit of dying horribly when they take one bolter round to the face.
Funny enough this still happens with high level parties in Rogue Trader, which is part of the combat problem(on unfair). If you aren't alpha striking the enemy they are alpha striking you. I'm not sure what a satisfying system looks like. Thinking back idk if I've run into an rpg system that does it well.
EDIT: on further thought, its the power fantasy that probably causes the combat problem.
YoungAchamian
29d ago
I've become really addicted to my 3rd play through of Owlcat's Rogue Trader CRPG, staying up until 2am on work nights to play it. I'm doing this run as dogmatic priest and am very much enjoying the RP. I just wish the game had a more creative difficulty setting. I play on unfair and don't use an officer(gives lots of extra turns) and combat still only lasts 1-2 rounds. Meaning most builds are just about pumping for 1-2 turns of play knowing that any downsides from consumables/items/abilities will unlikely to affect the combat. The recent 1.5v update added some new talents for less common play styles and I love them.
I haven't gotten the new Arbites DLC but i hear its not very good, unlike the Void Shadows one which is excellent.
YoungAchamian
30d ago
I think the implication is that they arrive and marry Muslim men, have Muslim kids and engage in demographic replacement of the native western population.
A real monkey's paw.
natural-law conservatism
The initial section lauding natural-law as a fundamental building block of an ideal society was great. But then it immediately tried to smuggle the assertion that natural law can be revealed through theological text rather than discovered through interaction with reality. This is a bad trick attempting to smuggle credibility from natural-law into religion. It smuggles an ontological claim “there are objective structures of human flourishing” into a doctrinal one “those structures are what our religion already says”. It's sophistic.
If this passes for a serious intellectual political system then its a bad joke. Worse its a bad joke that was already tried and was specifically repudiated during the Enlightenment because it did not work. This is right version of the Marxists: "No true natural-law conservatism has ever been tried". The tragedy is that Conservatives could do that using the Enlightenment version of natural law, but that version requires trusting human reason more than faith, and modern religious conservatives of this variety are pathologically incapable of accepting classical liberalism.
EDIT: Not attributing any of this to you. Reading that article left me with a very strong opinion/urge to object.
YoungAchamian
1mo ago
Now, now don’t get your horses in a bunch.
I wish, that would be an easy topic to avoid lol, but this has popped up several times recently. Maybe the mods prefer first dibs on responding to me.
More options
Context Copy link