4doorsmorewhores
No bio...
User ID: 223
4doorsmorewhores
8mo ago
He deserved to have his feral disease ridden animals taken because he is a degenerate pornstar and vain social media publicity seeker. This non story is total brain melting slop.
I'm sure every animal department has stupid policies where they needlessly kill tame housebroken foxes and let feral pitbulls continue to eat toddlers: https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/09/16/cardiologists-and-chinese-robbers/
4doorsmorewhores
9mo ago
People get this causation backwards very frequently. The NFL isn't tricking you into arguing with people online less, or thinking that it's a spectacle, or giving you microplastics. It is downstream from the things people desire to watch and participate in. Consider that the National Lacrosse League has all of the same incentives yet you don't think of it very frequently. Maybe you think "giving viewers and participants something they yearn for" is immoral, but the intuition needs some workshopping, I would suggest focusing on the gambling arguments.
4doorsmorewhores
2mo ago
Celibacy is no marriage, chastity is no sex. Don't worry even Catholics get it wrong a lot (and rise of the incorrect term Incel has furthered that misunderstanding)
4doorsmorewhores
9mo ago
Think of the 99% of activities hobbies or media you have no interest in, then consider that they also hire marketing professionals, perhaps even the same ones. The suggestion that everything would be in peace and harmony without evil corporations tricking us into being fat or dumb is so childish and poorly reasoned that I'm disappointed seeing it on our humble website. People like things they are predisposed to enjoying, or which they objectively value. If the national poop-eating league was given 100 billion dollars to market, I struggle to imagine all that advertising and psychology convincing me or you to watch it. On the margin advertising is obviously effective to get people to play, attend games (both forms of participation, shockingly), buy jerseys, and the like, but your argument here is so poorly developed I struggle to engage with it. Accusing me of mistyping while spelling Reebok wrong is also funny enough that I'll point it out.
The second argument is more coherent, that even if 'sports' are naturally popular, the degree to which they are catered to or how they are played is immoral. My simple response is what I've written above, that if someone tried to open a gladiator coliseum nobody would watch it or participate in it. My simpler response is "tackling people isn't nearly as bad as killing them." The meaningful degree to consent to bodily harm is not clear for contact sports, whereas I think about almost all people would think it is clear for We who are about to die.
4doorsmorewhores
8mo ago
Animals are property.
4doorsmorewhores
11mo ago
I'm not particularly sympathetic to the MAGA/right coalition, and I agree with many of the systemic and political factors others here have analyzed well. That being said, isn't the most obvious effect which is taking place here the result of left wing progressive politics constant demonizing of white males? It's not like we're a small group of society - we matter and there are a lot of us. Young people are less established in their politics and identity - they had to go somewhere, and cultural/political/media environments have spent most of the time telling them that they are greedy vain loathsome lazy stupid bumbling rapists, despite men and boys falling further and further behind in any number of key factors in that time frame (not to mention skepticism of these progressive claims at face value —that society was mostly fine as-is in the 60s etc and these critiques miss the mark — which I'm sure we're all familiar reading this website).
4doorsmorewhores
9mo ago
These arguments and ideas all stem from a very narrow view of consumer choice and individual psychology. The correct answers all lead back to my original post. People have an appetite for leisure, discretionary spending, risky behaviour, lifestyle purchases. Advertising can sway some of these choices from Coke to Pepsi on the margin, but your suggestion that there is mass trickery going on to induce people to buy something which they are otherwise averse to is an elementary and naive understanding of the power of suggestion and consumer preferences. In short, companies aren't spending all their effort to get you spending money on things which you have deemed less socially valuable, but instead to spend your money on their specific product instead of something else. You should re evaluate whether it's likely that everyone shares your value, moral, and belief system and is being tricked by advertisers to do bad things, or if your mental model of their behaviour is perhaps very flawed instead.
4doorsmorewhores
3mo ago
Couldn't you just go in June 2023 or September 2021?
4doorsmorewhores
5mo ago
Does anyone know of any reviews or analyses of Bryan Johnson's food guide/protocol? To me a large amount of this is obviously useful (eating well, sleeping properly, exercising, etc etc) but him also selling $50 packs of blueberries and supplements infowars-style suggests me that some portion of it might be grift. I'd like to see a rating of what's useful and what's more skeptical other than from the author himself.
4doorsmorewhores
6mo ago
Mentally preparing myself for when the Chiefs win a playoff game against a backup QB or a beat up team, have an uncharacteristically bad game from Allen/Jackson, then win the Superbowl 24-20 after a tight defensive performance, some questionable calls, and a late TD.
4doorsmorewhores
6mo ago
This seems like a misrepresentation or at least to have some logical leaps.
My objections:
- It's perfectly fine to hold those beliefs and still want accountability for a drug company that does bad things. Someone's desired counterfactual isn't limited to a binary.
- "I think these firms should do less to limit beneficial healthcare and do more to prevent harmful healthcare" isn't some gotcha where you should object "Well do you want more or fewer free markets"
- The tradeoff between good-quality tested opioids and sketchy street drugs isn't real. I can't pull them up right now but throughought the 2010s the economist had like 4 studies cited that showed about 60% of people dependent on street drugs (from someone else's prescription to black tar heroin) started out on prescription pain killers like oxycontin.
4doorsmorewhores
8mo ago
The squirrel bit a guy I think. If a murderer built a house that tries to punch your balls every time you walked by I'd probably want to demolish it.
4doorsmorewhores
10mo ago
Why would Mr Musk or any other owner be forced to sell their stake to PMC corporations and not other rich people share his goals or ideology?
4doorsmorewhores
1yr ago
This is a bait and switch argument. At first the claim was "The party has current problems because instead of healthy party politics deciding leaders, they anoint whoever has the most name recognition or seniority in the previous regime", now it's "After a somewhat rigorous and unpredictable primary process with votes and wins all over the place, eventually they coalesced around a candidate who they thought was best (And who did in fact end up winning), which proves he was anointed"
4doorsmorewhores
3mo ago
What about June 2023 to November 2024?
4doorsmorewhores
4mo ago
I don't have much positive to say about Trump's foreign policy nominees or strategies but it's very funny to have seen every western country except the US ignoring all of their defense industries, spending, and global security, and then getting mad when the US doesn't spend those resources and materiel in the way they want.
4doorsmorewhores
6mo ago
Are you currently an american or brit?
4doorsmorewhores
9mo ago
How far is this Deshaun Watson situation going to go? All of the analysis I've seen suggests that because of the unique total guarantees in his contract, they are almost completely unable to cut him. Benching him would make the entire coaching and front office team look so bad that they would probably need to be fired - they seem so tied to him that the usual strategy of starting the backup to limp to 7-8 wins to avoid being fired seems impossible.
Solutions?
- In the NBA we sometimes see awful players with huge contracts just floating around on the team for a few years
- New regime manufactures a reason to cut him and not pay his salary for rape or other reasons
- Same coaching staff comes back for 2 years and gets fired the same time they can be rid of the Watson contract
- Retain 20 or 30% of his contract while shoveling lots of picks for another bad team to take the contract
- Trade all of their good players for picks and admit they won't be good until 2027
The NFL's typical lack of guaranteed contracts makes this look like a solution doesn't really fit.
4doorsmorewhores
11mo ago
fellow rhyming username enjoyer
4doorsmorewhores
11mo ago
Do you believe that the winner of the 2024 presidential election will only win because they were anointed by voters on November 8th? That seems like the weakest-possible stance.
4doorsmorewhores
11d ago
Lawyers and judges and legal societies will just make it illegal for a layperson with a skilled AI(Or who hires an Indian paralegal with a good AI assistant for $35 an hour instead of 300) to appear in court, file, argue, represent and so on.
4doorsmorewhores
3mo ago
The Expanse novel series fits this description very well.
4doorsmorewhores
3mo ago
That might be true for you, although I'm unsure about the vagueness of "a lot of people." Obviously we're talking about larger trends for the general public - if you think that a travel ban for some small number of people for a year and a half will have had more of a chilling effect than all of the news hysteria about the recent ICE detainments then you aren't living in reality.
Edit: Replied to wrong comment.
Sorry for the 100th "Feminism is corrupting the youth" post on this website, but this short article was really something
https://www.elle.com/life-love/a62231356/best-friend-from-polyamory/
Written by a woman to extol the value of female friendship as better than the fickle and emotionally damaging heterosexual relationships to which so many of us are accustomed.
The article begins deftly (or dishonestly, depending on your disposition) with the author drizzling her thoughts and emotions onto the page after discovering her man cheating. Only after this framing of hurt emotions does she reveal that they were in an open relationship.
She reveals that after spending her 20s working in journalism she wanted to move to South America to find herself or achieve inner peace. He wanted to stay in the USA (presumably to avoid becoming a professional hobo, more on that later). As a compromise (?) he suggested they open their relationship. She agrees seemingly without objection, but adds the caveat that they share a don't ask don't tell policy.
The framing doesn't even have the sensible presentation of "I didn't want to be in an open relationship, but I was afraid of losing him and he forced me" or something, she is even convinced by progressive literature.
The author further reveals not raising concerns to her boyfriend, but instead the depths of her anxiety and worry. She begins online stalking him (Obsessing might be more appropriate), checking his social media profiles for any change, and eventually finds him interacting and posting photos with the "other woman" Ari.
There are then some rah-rah girl power moments touched upon:
She also has a sit down chat with Ari about her now ex boyfriend
It's not laid out, but you can imagine the dialogue where they spend an afternoon talking about how terrible he was, and the psycic toll he inflicted upon the author. The phrasing “totally cool with everything” is obviously meant to remind a reader of the shitty boyfriend they had that would give half truths and lie about these types of things. However in this situation he is being truthful, as far as he knew they were in a working open relationship. I don't want to paint with too wide a brush, but it's shocking how people allow themselves to become caricatures. As far as I can tell she is fitting the crazy ex girlfriend to a tee. She was upset with their arrangement, didn't tell him about the problems she had, and then would tell anyone who will listen how about how he cheated infront of her or something, and holds him responsible for not reading her mind. From his perspective it's unlikely he did anything wrong (Deciding to open up your relationship could reasonably fit here in and of itself, but it's very likely that he and his entire social circle consider that action acceptable or even laudable), and he's presented as an abuser or liar.
The most obvious irony here is how she wrote an entire article to tell us about how the girl friendship is more meaningful than her old boyfriend and her's, but it's clear to anyone who read it that she had much more thought and feeling for Him than for Her. Even the ending misses the point:
This gets at the heart of the point I'm trying to make. The progressive argument here is one where a person enterered into a bad situation entirely of their own choosing, has deluded themselves about how they really feel, and is now lashing out at the closest "Fucking White Male." Even the pictures the editor chose oozes this belief, kitschy 1930s and 1940s domestic life shots that are often used to hint at a rebellious or sinister undertones for the women involved, is entirely contrived. The last sentence has this attempted-catharsis of silencing the man and letting the women speak (Louder for those in the back queen), but in this entire article we don't get anything from his viewpoint except for 1 sentence in scare quotes. The person calling JD Vance weird for being married with kids and a steady job is deeply unhappy, anxious, contradictory, and packed into a 13 person house in San Fransisco while they hop from job to continent to relationship. They believe that this is ideal and empowering, and something the man has done in this situation has created the ills in their life.
More options
Context Copy link