domain:open.substack.com?page=4
Throwaway05
11hr ago
If you consider the answer to the questions I asked it will be clear.
Attempt to understand what you are advocating for.
roche
11hr ago
I don’t buy that meditation can reliably lead to “any emotion or experience”. I don’t think the evidence is weighty enough to support that idea. Certainly you can’t trust the old writings of an institution of monks who are interested in getting monks to meditate as much as possible.
Yeah, fair. This is more or less a supposition that meditation has the same mechanism as a psychedelic experience, but even if that's true, you can do virtually anything on something like LSD whereas meditation is limiting your experiences as much as humanly possible, so by the time you get to a profound state there's a small handful of consistent attainments we can get, and these become the jhana states, deep samadhi, etc.
This is a more realistic aim. Non-effortful meditation is probably beneficial for the Domain Mode Network, resulting in greater rest and general awareness. But if anything, I’d bet the benefits of meditation are precisely insofar as they don’t cause a preferable emotional state. If meditation is boring, unpleasant, but restful, then your “real life” will be more interesting, pleasant, and energetic. It’s like a nap.
You're making the opposite error of me, which is lowballing it while I'm aiming too high. We're not sure what these practices amount to at most, but they absolutely give us more than restful sleep and greater focus.
I don't think your comparison of gender dysphoria to intense romantic infatuation is quite as illuminating as you seem to think it is.
We've all had the experience of being romantically infatuated with another person. Probably almost all of us have felt "lovesick" at one point or another, in the sense of being romantically attracted to someone who's unavailable, or being attracted to someone but being too afraid to tell them how we feel for fear of rejection, or telling someone how we feel and finding out that it's unreciprocated, or getting dumped by someone we're still very much in love with. Short of bereavement, romantic rejection is one of the most unpleasant, destabilising and humiliating emotional states that the average person is likely to find themselves in, and I would never dream of making fun of someone who's having a tough time because they got rejected by their crush or broken up with (one of the reasons "Radicalizing the Romanceless" really resonated with me). (Of all the toxic, antisocial behaviours that social media aids and abets, there are few worse than that trend when a guy texts a girl to tell her he really likes her, and she immediately screenshots the conversation and sends it to her group chat with the caption "OMG CAN YOU IMAGINE 😂😂😂".)
But some people's intense romantic fixations can lead them to behave in extremely unhealthy ways which violate the boundaries of the object of their affection: repeatedly texting them, calling them or buying them gifts when they've made it perfectly clear they aren't interested; following them; bothering them in public places; sending them hateful messages; and (much more rarely, of course) physically intimidating or assaulting the object of their affection, or their current romantic partner. We call such a person a "stalker", and much of the aforementioned behaviour is actually illegal (however difficult it is to enforce), and rightfully so. As sympathetic as I might be towards someone whose affections aren't reciprocated and is feeling sad about it, my sympathy ends when they engage in unacceptable behaviour like this.
Likewise with gender dysphoria. Obviously I have no idea what gender dysphoria feels like, having never experienced it personally. But I can certainly relate to the experience of hating how your body looks in the mirror (both directly and indirectly, as I've had multiple friends who suffered from severe anorexia). I've been depressed for lengthy periods of time, and sincerely wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. Much as I'd never make fun of someone who's sad because they love someone who doesn't feel the same way, I'd never make fun of someone whose gender dysphoria is causing them intense emotional distress. I am sincerely sympathetic.
But some people's gender dysphoria can lead them to behave in extremely unhealthy or toxic ways: emotionally manipulating lesbians into having sex with you by accusing them of bigotry if they don't; getting lesbian speed dating events cancelled; suing women who refuse to wax your male genitalia; sending rape and death threats to a female victim of sexual assault who expressed discomfort about using a bathroom alongside trans women; physically assaulting a gender-critical woman in her sixties; shooting up a primary school and so on. As sympathetic as I might be towards someone suffering from gender dysphoria, my sympathy vanishes the instant they engage in behaviour like this.
So I think I'm actually being perfectly consistent, per the terms of your analogy.
I'm open to correction on this and fully admit I may be falling victim to confirmation bias or the availability heuristic, but my impression from this community is that, when trans issues come up, it's usually not so much people complaining about the former (i.e. "this person has gender dysphoria, gross, what a disgusting fetishist") and more people complaining about the latter (i.e. "this person is suffering from gender dysphoria, which is leading them to engage in behaviours which would be grossly unacceptable if carried out by anyone"). And I admit there's a bit of Chinese-robbering going on, wherein people highlight bad behaviour by self-identified trans people which obviously bears no causal relationship to their gender dysphoria as a means of casting aspersions on the whole group, which I'm not cool with for the same reason I'm not cool with any use of the Chinese robber fallacy.
AnarchyDice
11hr ago
Thanks for the formatting fix! The nice thing about infusing is that once you've got some larger jars and good strainers, you can infuse just about anything.
Brown Sugar Oatmeal Vodka
In a 1 Gallon glass jar, add:
6c dry oats (rolled/steel cut doesn't matter), 2c brown sugar, 11c vodka(I use Costco. Any flavorless vodka will do), 2 tps cinnamon.
Let it infuse for a 7-10 days. Invert and shake every day or so to mix it.
Filter. I start with a colander to remove the oats, and pour it into a tall bottle to rest.
After a day or so, the sediment falls to the bottom.
Then carefully pour it through ultra-fine nylon mesh strainers and a funnel into bottles. Go too fast or shake the bottle and the sediment will wake up and clog your mesh. You can push your luck by pouring the dregs through the strainer, but that will net you maybe an extra shot of cloudy liqueur.
You can repeat the process for a clearer liqueur, but I typically do only one or two passes because I like a bit of cloudiness.
Enjoy it straight or over ice.
Maple Bacon Bourbon
In a 1 Gallon glass jar, add:
1 handle of your preferred bourbon
Make 1lb of bacon. Enjoy the bacon. Retain the grease. (We bake it in the oven on foil lined sheets at 400F, but I think pan fried could work too. Maybe 1/2C of grease?)
Add the slightly cooled but still liquid grease to the bourbon. Don't put the bacon in, it is a mess and the grease does a better job imparting flavor.
Add 1/4C of maple syrup to taste.
Stir.
Let it sit for a couple days, mixing occasionally. Then put it in the freezer overnight.
Once frozen, the grease should form a sheet at the top that you remove and throw away.
Filter the liquid through ultra-fine mesh strainers and funnel into bottles. This catches any remaining bacon bits or frozen fat shards.
Enjoy it straight, over ice, or as part of your preferred bourbon delivery method.
I will note that straining can take a bit of time, so I often have two sets of strainers and funnels filtering into two bottles so I can keep topping them off as they drain. If they slow down too much, dump it back into the infusing jar, rinse off the strainer, and keep going. This is especially true of sediment heavy infusions like the oatmeal.
I can have empathy for gay men
I can have sympathy for all sinners. All are tempted by sin. None of us has lived a perfect life. Yet we are commanded to turn away from sin and repent, while bearing our burdens.
Unrepentant sinners can be treated as pagans or tax collectors. If I'm not expected to have fellowship them why would I be expected to endorse a social or cultural belief that this behavior is fine. Where we will not be heard, we should shake of the dust and move on, our pearls are not for swine. We should not give what is holy to dogs the unrepentant dressed as dogs or cartoon animals as part of degenerate sexual role play.
The idolatry and love of sin is the problem, not lack of empathy.
roche
11hr ago
Good stuff. Will also add keeping your muscles relaxed before bed is quite important.
ControlsFreak
11hr ago
I don't agree with your characterization of the fence, previous message describes why.
No, it does not. You lurched erratically off on a different direction. Please explain why you don't agree with my characterization of how/why the fence was put into place.
Do you think he has a ghostwriter, er, ghostplayer?
Knowing nothing about Diablo...yes, I'm very suspicious of a man who is already busy (and also shit posts half the day) also finding time to become the best in the world at any competitive video game.
At least a lot of the games I'm familiar with would need a lot of grinding and not just raw skill to climb up the rankings. Maybe Diablo is different.
yofuckreddit
11hr ago
So, a word of warning. I am an LDR vet. 5 years of LDR dating before I was 21.
My "big" breakup that fucked me good was a 3 month situationship where we knew we should break up, but she pushed to stay together after a month, we kept falling deeper in love, and then cheated on me a couple months later. I'm fairly confident if we hadn't done that it would have been a good relationship when I returned.
In short, just don't expose yourself to more risk of heartbreak than you need to. Keep moving forward while she's gone and make the call to rekindle or not when (if) she comes back.
daguerrean
11hr ago
They rarely displayed overtly feminine behavior as young children, and their personalities run the entire gamut of the male distribution.
In my limited experience their personalities seem to not just be male, but hyper male. Like take for instance the prevalence of trannies in the speedrunning community, it is hard to think of a more hypermasculine activity than speedrunning. I don't mean masculine in some spiritual sense of idealized masculinity (masculinity of war, hunting, bravery, leadership etc) but in the empirical sense of percentage of partakers in the activity. The motte is similarly hypermasculine, so it doesn't surprise me we have a few AGP types such as yourself around here. But why do you think this is? Are you generally hypermasculine in your other interests and thought patterns?
I have always suspected that I am in the "at-risk for AGP" demographic, even though I've never felt it myself. I imagine that some AI classifier, upon taking stock of my job, my hobbies and even my writing style would probably say that I am male with the an unimaginably high degree of certainty. Job in software (probably 90% male), enjoys Paradox games (probably 99% male), main hobby is a collecting hobby (probably 90% male), participates on The Motte (probably 99% male)...I imagine these things are even more heavily male coded than things that stereotypically come to mind like UFC, hunting, Joe Rogan etc.
Magusoflight
11hr ago
So it’s the opposite of reddit circa 2016 then? Okay, so turn about is fair play
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
11hr ago
These people hate you, they will say it to your face, and then you will ask for more.
To be clear, I don’t watch TV (I haven’t watched a new TV series since Game of Thrones ended) and I haven’t watched a full episode of Modern Family in probably over ten years. So I may be misremembering it somewhat, or maybe I just didn’t have the political consciousness I have now and I would notice everything you’re pointing out if I were to watch it now with clear eyes.
WhateverHappenedToNorman
11hr ago
Also, suspected former CWRer.
Throwaway05
11hr ago
I don't agree with your characterization of the fence, previous message describes why.
With respect to test, previously I said:
"Do patients ask for these? What's the ratio of people who actually need them versus just think they need them? Are their side effects? Are they bad? Are the risks something that someone can easily understand and make informed decisions based off of? Are patients willing to try safer and more effective interventions first? What's the evidence base and recommendations, how sure are we about them? Are their bad actors involved who are incentivizing certain behaviors? What is the level of excess supplementation that production can carry? How many of these questions can you answer?"
Given your lack of response and changing the subject I think I can safely assume you can answer none of these things.
--
-Benefits and risks of a given action exist, for oneself and for others.
-In order to determine the benefits and risks of this substance as a medication you need to know the answers to those questions, and others.
-You do not know the answers to these questions.
-Therefore you do not know the benefits and risks of testosterone.
-Other medications may or may not have similar risks and benefits.
-You do not know them.
-Therefore you do know if medications are safe, for the taker or for others.
-Expanding on that, you do not know the cost to the patient or others have a given medication.
-Decisions should be made with an awareness of the costs and benefits.
-You personally, and patients in general do not have the information to make these decisions.
-Therefore you shouldn't.
Smuggled in there is the premise that people should not be allowed to grossly harm themselves or others, if you are fine with that ....then sure, but if that's the case I'm not sure how you are going to argue against me putting one in the head when someone hurts others with their decisions.
You may say "well sure but they can harm themselves a little bit" but the same frame holds and you don't have the knowledge to know what actions will cause no, a little bit, or significant harm.
OliveTapenade
11hr ago
For what it's worth, from the perspective of someone who's very religious, the worst and most frustrating attitude I've ever run into from non-religious people is the idea that because religion is "a choice" it must always come second to other identities. A gay person (supposedly) can't choose not to be gay, but a Christian can choose not to be Christian, or can choose not to be an anti-gay Christian, so gay identity comes first.
But that's not how any serious follower of any religion I've ever spoken to experiences their religion, and it's certainly not how I experience it. I'm not just choosing this or that on the basis of arbitrary preference, such that I could change my mind. Faith is not like picking which car to drive. I'm practicing a particular religion because it's actually true. Telling me "well, you could just choose not to be Christian" feels like, ironically, someone telling a scientist, "well, you could just choose not to be Darwinist, look, Lysenkoism is a perfectly good choice, why not believe that?"
The atheist who thinks that I'm wrong and my beliefs are false is, to my mind at least, better and more tolerable than the atheist who thinks that my beliefs are mere affectation or aesthetic preference. No, I can't just believe something else, because that would be switching from something true to something false. If you want me to change my beliefs, you have to actually convince me that my beliefs are false. There is no shortcut.
yofuckreddit
11hr ago
While Visual Studio and C# are my drugs of choice, the worst thing about them may be the default linter & style guide's insistence on Allman.
K&R has always been the best, and as you say, it's not close.
RenOS
the mountain passed, the sea in front
11hr ago
To steelman her, not committing to an LDR which is longer than the period of dating beforehand, after just three months is pretty reasonable.
Since she presumably told you how long she will be gone, she can't really string you along endlessly. So keep it casual for the time being, but also make your feelings clear, and that you intend to start again right where you left off once she's back. If she does as well, great, if she finds new excuses or breaks it off after a few dates again, don't fall for it again. You can also offer to visit once if it's not crazy far away and not too hard on your wallet and just see how she reacts. Especially if it's a place you plausibly might have wanted to visit independent of her.
Dunno though how much you should listen to my advice. I've only ever had one serious relationship, with my wife & mother of my kids, and intend to keep it that way. I also always hated casual dating, in particular never used any apps, and made it clear that I only date with the goal of an eventual, stable family in mind.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
11hr ago
Oh, you touched a third rail for me here, Bro.
Modern Family is satanic. It's a show that makes fun of loser normies to their face in such a way that they, the losers, not only don't get that they are the punchline, but they actually like it.
The Phil-Claire family (the most "traditional" of the three featured) is a weird reverse domme fantasy wherein Claire, without a job, enjoys the success of her pliable and doting husband, Phil, as if it were her own. Phil is apparently a Real Estate salesman of some skill - how else can they afford their home in that part of California? But his success isn't the product of a shrewd and hard-working businessman - he's a human gold retriever who sells houses because he's just so darn nice!
And Claire hates his niceness and quirkyness. She is often, obviously, embarrassed by him. But the living is good and, gosh darn it, she just loves that big old goofball at the end of the day. Even in the infamous "Godfather" episode, wherein Phil is attempted to be portrayed as a cunning genius, it's all tongue-in-cheek and sophomoric. Simply put, Phil offers no real danger, competency, or capability and lustfully pines away for his father-in-law's second bride, Gloria. He's also financially stable and a devoted father. He's in good shape. He has his hair.
Phil is also an awful father despite, you know, being presented as a good dad. His oldest daughter dates a notorious dufus (in whom Phil sees himself) and is speedily on her way to Stripperdom. If I remember correctly, the later season had a literal teen pregnancy arc. The middle daughter, Alex, feels both a lack of attention from her parents and a sense of dread that she is obviously smarter than everyone she shares a home with. Although the show had to pivot once the actress playing her developed, that character was hurdling towards Sarah Lawrence levels of political lesbianism. Finally, Phil's son, Luke, is a profound idiot and bonds with his father, mostly, during his most intense bouts of senselessness. Remember, Phil is a multi-millionaire somehow.
I won't cover the other two families. The two gay men adopting an asian female child is so on the nose that the show makes fun of itself for that. The Gloria-Jay dynamic with the wise cracking Manny is some sort of weird Frasier redux. The eternal craziness of the original mother (name forgotten) is Hollywood stating firmly that yes, once you are old and a woman, the world hates you.
Modern Family is not a sincere gesture towards the changing realities of family life. It is a cruel imitation of all the dark patterns of family mis-formation that Hollywood feeds back to the masses to perpetuate a system that's already failed, but still has viewership to capture. We're starting to see this with fat people in health ads and perpetual man-children dating stand-in mom's in Taco Bell ads.
These people hate you, they will say it to your face, and then you will ask for more.
Folamh3
11hr ago
The new trans woman in Congress who was making video threats about bashing their female colleagues head in the bathroom seemed very threatening.
Do you have a source for this?
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
11hr ago
If you get paid by the line, then it certainly is.
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
11hr ago
Do you think he has a ghostwriter, er, ghostplayer? Because the run itself looks legit: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1859304361547182451
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
11hr ago
He was part of the corruption. If you tamper with (e.g. bribe or threaten) a jury to obtain an acquittal, jeopardy does not attain, so by analogy even if a deal was enforceable in the general case, it should not be here.
TwiceHuman
11hr ago
I'm not sure I follow your reasoning. It requires a rather high intelligence to notice that everything is necessarily relative, and people usually don't if they can convince themselves that something is fundamental. Convincing yourself, for instance, that the earth is the center of everything, or that god is the center of everything, or that morality is objective, gives you a reference point, and it takes a lot of questioning to realize that neither of these are true.
Whenever there's a conflict between A and B, A will be correct from As perspective, and B will be correct from Bs perspective. A parent perspective C can be used to judge A and B, but there's no perspective for which you cannot create a conflicting perspective such that both seem equally value, and you're in need of a parent perspective. If two Christians disagree, then then a priest may be the judge. If two priests disagree, then the bible may be the judge. If two religions disagree, then what? You always need something "higher", but there's no "highest". It's also for this reason that there cannot be an authority of truth. The authority will be unable to judge itself, so it won't know if it's mistaken. This limitation applies to everything from the government, to cultures, to mathematics itself. Something merely seems universal when everyone agrees on it. If humanity could agree on morality, it would seem universal until an alien race came along and said something different. Who judges the judges? It's judges all the way down. Who created the universe, god? Well, who created god? Math is based on set theory, well, how do we prove the axioms of set theory are correct? The problem of infinite regres is everywhere. You can arrive at it by thinking, which is why ancient philosophy often says "There's no one true path". It's why Nietzsche said that there's no facts but only interpretations (perspectivism). It's also how Einstein could discover relativity. The axiom "everything is connected" is also derived from this line of thinking.
When you try to orientent, compare, and judge things, in any field, you run into infinite regress. This is generally why thinking too much leads to nihilism, you realize that everything is arbitrary and mistakenly believe that this means that it's counterfeit.
Magusoflight
12hr ago
He’s basically gwern but seems more interested in taboo and political stuff than gwern is
You're not even trying.
Sorry that I'm sooooo stupid that after I have considered the answers to the question you've asked, I still find your position on my explanation of Chesterton's Fence unclear. You're gonna have to stoop down real low and actually explain what you're thinking in a way that is comprehensible to us normal 'little' people.
More options
Context Copy link