FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
User ID: 1175
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
8hr ago
My point was that this is the first I've heard of teens sexting being categorised as CSAM, and would genuinely love to know in which jurisdictions it's categorised as such.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
8hr ago
I consider "cancel culture", broadly defined, to be a politically neutral set of tactics. It was invented or popularised by progressives, but conservatives quickly cottoned on, and there have been successfully right-wing cancellation campaigns.
When the OP said "wokeness is defeated", I took that not to mean "cancel culture is defeated" but "the most recent strain of radical progressive identity politics is in retreat". My example of the city festooned with progress pride flags was intend to illustrate that it's premature to claim that said movement
Whenever someone says "woke", do you interpret that to mean "cancel culture"? Most conversations around here would be practically incoherent under that definition. I understand that cancel culture is a political tactic closely associated with wokeness, but it's not the ideology itself, any more than the ideology of the Provisional IRA is "Armalites and gelignite".
Even if we grant this point for the sake of argument, that still leaves "phrases like good genes are taboo" as a bona fide leftist shibboleth that the American Eagle ad campaign would have been stepping on the toes of. The question then is whether they did so out of ignorance, or if they considered that left-wingers would be offended and decided that being seen to mildly upset SJWs suited their PR purposes just fine.
Again: I never disputed that American Eagle was being provocative and intentionally stepping on the toes of wokescolds. That's quite far removed from the claim that American Eagle were explicitly touting the virtues of governments proactively improving the genetic fitness of the populations they govern. Wokes were not rending their hair and claiming "Sydney Sweeney and American Eagle are promoting a belief which is a prerequisite to endorsing eugenics!": they were saying "Sydney Sweeney and American Eagle are promoting eugenics!" The belief that some people are hotter (smarter, taller, faster etc.) than others for reasons of genetics does not in any way imply the belief that governments should e.g. sterilise those deficient in said traits against their will. This really does strike me as transparent sanewashing.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
9hr ago
CSAM includes material produced by sexting teens.
I think this is an extremely noncentral example of what people talk about when they talk about CSAM.
Then why just list "debatably-crazy things lefties are still allowed to say" rather than "debatably-crazy things righties still aren't allowed to say" as the watermark?
Because the OP was claiming that woke is defeated, and wokes being able to say absurd extreme things without repercussion is not what a defeated movement looks like. I presumed it went without saying that conservatives and moderates still cannot express comparably crazy (and in some cases, ordinary commonsense) opinions without repercussion. I mean, it obviously does go without saying: even you aren't disputing it.
It's difficult to take your aside about Pride Month as anything else than "Pride Month celebrations should end" - "
Difficult for you to take, perhaps. I thought the point was abundantly clear: an entire city being festooned with the flags of a particular ideology at the city council's behest is not what a defeated ideology looks like.
Radical progressives would be very uncomfortable with the sheer phrase "good genes"
They might claim to be uncomfortable with the concept, but their revealed preferences (in terms of their choice of romantic partner, their aspirations for their children, who they sexually fantasise about, which sports teams and athletes they bet on, their attitudes towards inbreeding etc.) would tell a very different story.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
13hr ago
You'd be amazed at the number of self-identified leftists whose response to your rhetorical question would be yeschad.jpeg. One of Dublin's most recent mayors, for one.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
13hr ago
CP?
One can be a free speech absolutist and still think CSAM should be illegal. The thing that makes it evil is the manner of its production, not its distribution.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
13hr ago
I need to dig it out. This definitely isn't the article I was thinking of, but it includes the following quote from King:
... whenever the issue of compensatory or preferential treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask for nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic. For it is obvious that if a man is entered at the starting line in a race three hundred years after another man, the first would have to perform some impossible feat in order to catch up with his fellow runner.
From the passage above I infer that King believed some kind of preferential hiring (i.e. affirmative action) was necessary until achievement gaps had been closed.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
13hr ago
Sorry to hear about your engagement. Hope you're doing okay.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
13hr ago
Years ago I read an article arguing that the "content of their character" thing, while a memorable turn of phrase, was not really representative of MLK's true beliefs and he did believe that, in the absence of racial discrimination, the ethnic composition of an organisation would be reflective of its host country. Therefore, we ultimately have MLK to thank for affirmative action and DEI. In that sense he was certainly proto-woke, far more so than Lincoln.
Wikipedia claims the term was first used in 1974, although I can't remember hearing it before the early 2010s.
Weirdly enough I actually think the term is a perfectly legitimate one: it's uncontroversially true that certain cultures promote rape, downplay the severity of it, or protect those guilty of it rather than protect their victims. It's just that every example of a culture meeting this description is a culture that modern feminists would object to being so characterised. "Gangs of adult men sexually exploit adolescent girls in their thousands, and the police turn a blind eye to it for decades for fear of 'inflaming community tensions' (the perpetrators are disproportionately Pakistani men) and because of the girls' socioeconomic background" is such an on-the-nose description of a rape culture it hurts – but intersectional feminists would likely get mad if I said that the UK was a rape culture provided that the rapists are Pakistani. Likewise, pretty much any Muslim-majority country in MENA could reasonably be characterised as a rape culture.
I don't disagree with feminists that rape cultures exist – I disagree with which cultures ought to be characterised as such.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
15hr ago
And your post sounded a lot more like you thought it was a problem that progressives were allowed to voice their beliefs at all.
Well, that wasn't the point I was making at all. Perhaps I didn't express myself clearly enough. My point was that woke people can get away with publicly expressing rather out-there opinions without taking any kind of reputational hit, while conservatives or moderates cannot even get away with expressing comparably (or even much less) crazy opinions. This doesn't look like wokeness has been defeated.
"good genes" is, you know, literally the etymological meaning of the word "eugenics"
This seems like a rather extreme motte-and-bailey/sanewashing to me. Eugenics is the belief that governments should take proactive interventionist measures to improve the genetic fitness of the populations they govern. It is not the belief that some people are congenitally more attractive than others. If it meant the latter, there would be literally no one on the planet who didn't qualify as a eugenicist, and if everyone's a eugenicist, no one is.
The "is" belief "some people are congenitally hotter than others" in no way implies the "ought" belief "the government should intervene to improve the genetic fitness of the population it governs".
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
22hr ago
Honestly, give him a haircut and a change of clothes and he'd look like an indie rock singer the Coachella set would be swooning over.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
22hr ago
In everything I've seen her in (granted I've only seen two or three of her movies), she gave the weakest performance by far. Challengers, despite being the best performance of hers that I've seen, was no exception.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
22hr ago
and/or because men take a woman less seriously if she's hot.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
1d ago
And my point, which you seem determined not to grasp, is that even with woke supposedly in retreat, there's still an asymmetry. Woke people in positions of power and influence can express obviously insane opinions (like "American Eagle is covertly promoting eugenics and white supremacy") without repercussions, while conservatives cannot do the same. Even normie centrists cannot publicly express many opinions which are well-attested by the sciences without being smeared as "far-right".
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
1d ago
Several months ago, I noted the peculiar irony that many progressives believe that there are multiple different kinds of intelligence which are orthogonal to one another, such that deficiency in mathematical or verbal reasoning doesn't necessarily imply deficiency in artistic expression or physical domains.
This demographic is probably the demographic most likely to say something to the effect that "Elon Musk has stupid political opinions, therefore he can't possibly be a talented engineer and must have earned his wealth illegitimately".
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
1d ago
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
1d ago
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
1d ago
Stephen King looks like a weird alien
As a young man, he could pass for Christopher Reeve's less attractive older brother.
Phoebe is pretty hot. Passing resemblance to Ivana Miličević. Looks like she takes after her mum more than her dad.
You're right that famous people tend, to a greater or lesser extent, to be selected for their looks (obviously true of actors and models, less obviously true in the case of successful politicians). Bill Gates is unusual in being a genuine household name who became famous for reasons wholly unrelated to his physical appearance. In that regard he's more akin to a writer or a director, and I wouldn't say he's significantly less attractive than e.g. Stephen King or James Cameron.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
1d ago
It wouldn't surprise me, but I'm not sufficiently acquainted with Japanese culture to pass comment.
FtttG
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.
1d ago
Think you meant to reply to the person I was replying to.
This just seems like yet another tiresome instance of "dog-whistle politics". "You can't talk about this true fact because some people could use it to justify bad behaviour" is a fully general counter-argument which applies to literally any factual statement.
I find dog-whistle politics particularly frustrating because they always, ultimately, seem to boil down to "you didn't actually say anything bad, but I don't like you, so I'm going to interpret everything you said in the most uncharitable possible light and infer things you didn't mean from perfectly innocuous statements, then treat you as if you explicitly said the most uncharitable misreading of your statement possible". I've read multiple people who independently argued that wokeness/social justice politics/whatever seems to attract a lot of people with cluster B personality disorders, and the shoe certainly fits here: "dog-whistle politics" is practically identical to how women with borderline personality disorder win arguments. (That is, without threatening to kill themselves.)
I will reiterate: the factual claim "many desirable human traits are heavily, if not solely, determined by one's genetic makeup" does not in any way imply the normative claim "therefore, governments should proactively intervene in the lives of their citizenry to improve their average genetic fitness". The belief that American Eagle were trying to promote the latter belief (via a fucking jeans and) is silly and absurd, one step removed from the surprisingly widespread belief that the CEO of Procter and Gamble is an avowed Satanist who openly admitted his faith on national television. The people advancing this belief deserve to be ridiculed. The belief that American Eagle are advancing the "many desirable human traits are heavily, if not solely, determined by one's genetic makeup" idea as a "dog-whistle" for literal eugenics is only marginally less silly, and deserve to be ridiculed. If you believe this about American Eagle, then you deserve to be ridiculed.
As an aside, "HBD is true, but the only people who want to talk about are white supremacists, so you should be automatically suspicious of anyone who brings it up", in addition to being one step removed from Bulverism, is just factually wrong. Most HBD enjoyers are acutely aware that Ashkenazim and people from the Far East are above average in intelligence. LKY built Singapore on HBD principles: he was aware from the outset that Malay professional outcomes would never equal Chinese, and took intentional, practical steps to mitigate the resentment that would inevitably ensue. In your opinion, is LKY a white supremacist?
And even if people want to talk about HBD for reasons of political policy, there are plenty of HBD-influenced policies which no reasonable person would characterise as white supremacist in nature. If indeed there is a significant IQ gap between blacks and whites, it follows that we can never expect black representation in STEM to equalise with white in our lifetimes, and so all public monies advancing that goal might as well be flushed down the toilet for all the good they'll do. It is hardly a coincidence that many HBD enjoyers are advocates for universal basic income.
More options
Context Copy link