domain:youtu.be
The people making this meme don’t think he’s “slightly less hawkish.” They think he’s outright sympathetic to Putin and will explicitly, not just effectively, lead to Ukrainian defeat. Hence side-switching and not, I dunno, kicked for griefing.
Also, I don’t think anyone says he’s “literally in bed with dictators.”
Women are asexual unless Chad is around. The upturn in their identification rates is just an upturn in hypergamy. I'm not sure if Korea's situation is the same.
Also, 50 Shades isn't porn for women; Tinder is porn for women. That's probably part of the situation, too.
Next thing you know, they’ll be appointing antivaxxers and naming departments after crypto.
I'm not sure Nature has an opinion on who reproduces. That's what the phrase "fitness landscape" is for. The fitness landscape can change. It seems like you're trying to abdicate value judgements. It's fine if you don't care who reproduces, but this kind of appeal to nature shouldn't persuade anyone.
If two demons are fighting over to change the fitness landscape, you wouldn't care?
(After re-reading my post, I see I am making essentially a "postmodern"/subjectivist argument, kinda)
I didn't use the word "compassion" in the posts I wrote about vaccines, and that's not what I was asking for anyway. I was asking for understanding - an understanding of the conditions and values that cause people to do what they do and think what they think - but that's different from compassion.
Fair enough. Yet compassion is the more excellent way.
But I don't think that evolutionary fitness is tied in any direct sense to your ultimate moral worth.
Let us review what you wrote:
Humanity will not go extinct; but if it does, it'll be because it deserved to
And to the extent that this "conflict" does have a basis in reality and isn't purely virtual, it's largely a good thing anyway, as its primary effect is to prevent evolutionarily unfit individuals (largely male) from reproducing
Those are judgments based upon moral worth.
I’d also add that you were quite literally saying “it’s not happening, and it’s a good thing.”
You’ve attempted to retreat to the Bailey, by saying you were only descriptively stating “nature’s judgment” as “an objective fact”, but the motte is right there for all to see. You were clearly describing these things in terms of what is good and deserved. “It deserves to” is a moral claim of moral desert.
As it so happens, saying “you are defective, and it is good and desirable that fewer people like you exist in the future” is sneering, and is a moral judgment. If you think it is not so, I find your perspective quite perplexing indeed.
Can you to be more specific about what effective interventions you're thinking about?
A focus on reducing obesity and preventing sickness would be a welcome change. Will it dramatically increase life expectancy? Maybe not at first, but it's a start. And it might at least stem the rapid increase in costs. We're getting very little for our expensive medical system.
What changes would you propose? Cities like Chicago and DC have done literally everything that establishment figures say is good, and look at the results. These are intractable problems. The state can't simply snap its fingers and will away problems. Except crime. That can be made much less via mass incarceration.
The US prosecutes violent and drug crimes far more harshly than Europe, as I'm sure you are well aware. Tolerance is not the issue.
I am not aware. Here in Seattle open air drug markets are tolerated and people who have been arrested for dozens of crimes (including violent crimes) are frequently released onto the streets without trial. It's hard to imagine a more lenient system.
Lastly, it seems self limiting: as women drop out of the relationship market, the women who choose to remain in it move up in terms of the quality of the men they can get.
Seems that the discerning liberal woman can use the Trump victory as a plausibly deniable way to get the competition out of the market. I won't say all the American 4B'ers are "in on the joke" but maybe the most rabid are? See also: "wokefishing," and a post in this space a couple years back suggesting that a lot of progressive-coded dating dynamics are because the gender ratios of woke spaces skew heavily female.
If 4B was a cup size, how big would it be?
Agreed. Governments hate cash for the same reason they hate crypto; it enables people to escape their control. The state can't get of the cash yet, but they are sure as fuck not going to make it more convenient to use by printing bigger bills. Instead, it will watch as inflation slowly makes the $100 bill as irrelevant as the penny.
From "In Praise of Cash" by Brett Scott:
The psychological assault is working. The Netherlands – where I face my vending machine – has become one key front in the war on cash. Here cash is becoming viewed like an illegal alien on the run, increasingly excluded from the formal economy, drawing dirty looks from shop assistants. Signs say ‘Card only’. Who is Card? Card is a glamorous socialite, welcomed into stores. Card is superior. Look at the bank adverts showcasing their accessories for Card. Nobody is building accessories for Cash.
The frontlines, though, are now creeping to poorer countries. India’s recent so-called ‘demonetisation’ was a brutal overnight retraction of rupee notes by the prime minister Narendra Modi to bring discipline to the ‘black economy’. It was an exercise that necessitated choking the poorest Indians, who depend on cash and who often lack access to bank accounts. Originally cast in popular terms as an attempt to stem corruption, the message was later ironically altered to cast cashlessness as a way to create economic progress for India’s poor.
Finally, I think that if you want to avoid having sex with Trump supporters, a better strategy might be to select on geographic location.
Does someone even need to do that? Your statistics give the impression that filtering mates by Trumpism is a fool's errand, and the best she can do is move to Hawaii and hope for the best, doubling her odds.
In Scott's cannon post Outgroup, he writes about his strong filter bubbles. Surely an extreme liberal woman has a filter bubble pretty strong, no matter their location? But, I could see if the American-4B import is here to stay, then it wouldn't just be radical women who partake. More normie liberal women probably don't have filter bubbles that strong.
30% vs 90% (tilde number percent space tilde number percent) is showing non-strikethrough in my preview box, so it clearly can work and the real problem lies elsewhere. Now I'll post and it'll strikethrough and I'll look like an idiot.
Upon reading the comments in the reddit thread, it seems that this meme is also a reference to Team Fortress 2 online multiplayer having a "team rebalancing" function that's intended to keep things fun by fixing imbalanced matches but routinely fails at evaluating player quality and thus often makes matters worse.
So the meme-maker was just going a bit wild with that analogy.
This feels like the uncanny valley of civil rights & protesting. A truly authoritarian country doesn't have protests, because everyone knows they will be squashed. Presumably South African women have it so bad, protesting would just anger the men.
Is it actually an uncanny valley? Do we know for sure that utopias don't have any complainers? Given that utopia is impossible*, is the question even meaningful? Yudkowsky's recent post on future humans being impoverished by lack of oxygen makes a lot of sense to me. As an average progress-critical reactionary, I think its human nature to want more, so my rule is simply the more protests and 4B movements, the better everything is.
And what happens when they get the weapons and lose anyway? Do we just all start collecting Nuka-Cola caps?
I agreed with you yesterday on needing to have more compassion towards anti-vaxxers
I didn't use the word "compassion" in the posts I wrote about vaccines, and that's not what I was asking for anyway. I was asking for understanding - an understanding of the conditions and values that cause people to do what they do and think what they think - but that's different from compassion.
There's an intense sneering involved in what you're saying there
No there isn't.
It's just a fact that some people are more fit for biological reproduction than others. But I don't think that evolutionary fitness is tied in any direct sense to your ultimate moral worth. Some of the greatest men to ever live (Plato, Kant, Nietzsche, etc) had no children.
Nature is dumb; it is opinionated, certainly, but you can decide for yourself how seriously you want to take its opinions. The appropriate response, upon learning that you are defective according to nature, isn't "ah, I am defective, all hope is lost". The appropriate response is "very well, I am defective. I accept this designation. But now what? What can this defective organism accomplish? You might be surprised at the answer."
I saw a chart that showed the people with huge incomes had high (by first world country standards, so around 2.0 or 3.0) fertility, but they're quite rare. It was a U-curve chart, not a diagonal chart.
And it's certainly not commensurate with Niger's 6.4 TFR.
You have South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, the PRC, and some city states. Taiwan is arguably the best comparison for South Korea and it also has a TFR below 1, while the PRC will dip there very soon. The city states are South Korea tier but they’re also city states, I’ll give you that.
I fundamentally disagree that parents have some inherent incentive structure to care for their children that is superior to the incentives of social institutions.
Then the rest of this debate is moot. But you're proven so utterly and violently wrong by history that I have a hard time believing you've ever seriously considered the question if you think the State is a good guardian.
Have you met many children raised by the State? Or checked the
In a different worldly circumstance with different institutions, it could easily be the case that the State is more aligned with child interests than parents are.
It was fine to believe Rousseau before the XXth century. I don't think it's fine anymore.
We have tried that world and discovered that the worst thing an individual can do to does not raise to the horrors that States can visit upon you in both scale and intensity.
Sure some weirdo can kidnap, rape, torture and eat you, and this stuff has been done at scale by institutions too. But is he really going to give you horrible diseases on purpose and keep you alive to study how you die?
Granted the far edge of evil is not necessarily instructive of your median expected treatment. But there is something to how different the incentives are when you're a relative versus a number on a spreadsheet. It's far easier to argue the human experience of the number doesn't matter, in the grand scheme of things.
Do you think doctors (especially in America) were making these medical decisions with the full knowledge that the medical literature did not support these decisions?
Yes. I think they intellectually knew the risks but let their interest, curiosity and politics get in the way of their better judgement.
It is my belief that:
-
the American medical system is uniquely corrupt and ill conceived in that it demands large amounts of scrutiny for new drugs but waives much of this scrutiny for off label use
-
the psychiatric community at large has handled GD very poorly since constructivist arguments made is a political issue and overcorrected its terrible historical handling of homosexuality as LGB and T got put together in a political coalition
A hypothetical
I don't think there is much to learn from this situation since it is a very clear cut case of abuse, which is of course one of the edge cases of parental authority we can all agree on, alongside drug use, wanton violence and the like.
Now let's alter it to make it actually interesting. Say there is no physical evidence of this abuse and you are getting all this from the minor, but you also know for a fact that the minor is mentally ill.
It's not so clear cut then is it?
I've been in the unfortunate position of having to care for people who are paranoid schizophrenics, and the amount of hallucinated lies I've been told is staggering. But then again some people do abuse their kids.
The issue isn't so much how that particular hypothetical could be resolved, but what a good general rule is for dealing with such problems at scale. And I find that despite its pitfalls, leaning on parental authority does provide the best results.
I really don’t like this sudden government panic over UAPs. Either they really exist and the government has no clue what’s going on, or the government really wants us to think they exist. Both possibilities make me uneasy.
I don't know why the election has triggered a renewed gender war
It's the abortion issue, which is more Christianity v. secularism than men v. women, but is often conceived of as men v. women.
Testing.
30% vs. 90%. EDIT: backslashes don't work.
30% vs. 90%. EDIT: <plain> tags don't work. Okay, I'm stumped.
Fairly-boring story TBH (which I have told elsewhere, but not IIRC anywhere that's not login-gated).
My mum's a misandrist (as in, she literally taught me the Y chromosome is a defect), she divorced my dad when I was 3 and got custody, and I'm effeminate in some ways. Fast-forward to puberty and she's accusing me of sexist abuse every time I turn around because now I start registering to her as "man" rather than "child". I developed dysphoria, wanted to transition.
Around this point, I ran away from Mum (who was not supportive of me transitioning; she was at the time a TERF although she's objected to transphobia since so I don't think she still is), because she confiscated my computer for a month and semi-starved me for a week, I ran amok and manhandled her (for the first and only time), and she called the police on me. Went on finasteride, got permission from a psychiatrist for cross-sex hormones, but procrastinated over the fertility problem long enough for the dysphoria to dissipate (and stopped taking the finasteride). Still probably qualify as "genderqueer" - I'm not exactly upset at having moobs from the finasteride - but the intense dysphoria, with phantom-limb and disgust at my penis, is gone. Hence, I qualify as ex-trans although not really a detransitioner.
I ran into the same problem with a post last week. Still have no idea how to manually type tildes without triggering strikethrough.
PRC is closer to Japan than it is to Korea, unless you think the numbers are fake. And I don't think it's fair to compare city-states with full sized countries.
Saying "developed East Asian countries" is kind of a loaded term, because you really only have Korea, Japan, and arguably China/quasi-china areas.
It's not an intentional strikethrough; it's ~ (tilde) symbols (meaning "approximately") before "30%" and "90%" being misinterpreted as a strikethrough by the software.
Senator Gillibrand recently said about UAPs: "We don't know whose they are. We don't know what propulsion they use. We don't know the tech. We don't know it. It's not off the shelf stuff."
Hearing in the senate on UAPs scheduled for the 19th of this month.
Exciting times!
More options
Context Copy link