ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
No bio...
User ID: 626
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
4hr ago
This, of course, is why garbage men and truck drivers are among the most admired and desirable professions.
Not everything is a market, and so not all value is derived from supply and demand. Otherwise jokes like this or this would not land.
The point is that, from a bioessentialist framework, the female role requires little to no particular strength of character. Pregnancy is a completely automatic process, caring for babies may be arduous but is not particularly skilled work, and if you believe the hereditarians, the actual raising of children has little effect on how they turn out.
I'd say in a pure bioessentialist framework there is no such thing as a "female role". You either are a man or a woman, which may have implication as to your strengths and weaknesses, but what you do with that is up to you.
But in any case, I reject the claim. The biological function of conceiving and giving birth might not require any particular strength of character, but motherhood absolutely does. Patience, wisdom, or love, are all strengths of character.
Additionally, none of the above tasks is particularly suited to cooperative effort, stunting the potential for camaraderie; as the saying goes, nine women can't make a baby in one month.
That's... a bizarre way to look at it. There's plenty of room for camaraderie with the father of the children, and with the extended family, and I don't see how the inability to ship off the production of babies to China, to be done at scale, would be a detriment to that.
Thus, if woman's sole or primary duty is to fulfill the female biological role, she will be naturally baser and ignobler than the men she pairs with, who must cultivate virtue in themselves to become capable protectors and providers.
The question, then, is how much impact has this lack of incentive for virtue had on the evolutionary development (or lack thereof) of the female mind. While I personally believe that ingrained differences in potential for virtue between men and women are relatively minimal, what differences exist are surely exaggerated by restrictive norms surrounding women's options for societal contribution.
You're using some strange definition of virtue, because I don't think men's physical strength, ability to rotate shapes in their mind, hand-eye coordination, or what have you, are virtues, so I don't really see a reason to disagree with the statement that the difference in men's and women's potential for virtue are minimal. But if you do associate virtue with these traits than I think you're pretty obviously wrong, social constructivists have been trying for decades force equality, but sex-differences keep reasserting themselves. The idea that there currently are any restrictive norms on women is absurd on it's face.
Finally, you're still not really addressing my point, you're just elaborating on yours. I said that if according to you men and women are the same, and should be judged by the same criteria as men, any failure to perform at the same level as men is proof that they're inferior. It is therefore your framework that robs them of their dignity.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
6hr ago
How would they know the soldier is gay?
Check his social media?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
10hr ago
In this case Americans, Anglos generally, and Swedes. Though I agree Germans are actually pretty early on this trend relative to the rest of continental Europe.
I can't see how you reach this conclusion. If anything, going by current economic conditions, it blatantly supports it.
Pairing up is an economic advantage. You can split your rent by two incomes, and it's a lot more comfortable / enjoyable than co-renting with friends, let alone randos from classifieds ads. You can say you're not ready for kids, and just live together without having them for years. Economically it's an obvious boost. These kind of pseudomarriages were the default mode for every millenial I knew.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
23hr ago
I'm skeptical of economic explanations from simply looking at how much poorer the west was when it was fertile, how poorer countries are more fertile, or even how poorer people in the west tend to have more children.
I could see some economics-mediated social cause, like having children making people go down a few steps on the social ladder. Another theory I heard was that it used to be possible to have a relatively dignified life while being poor, while nowadays this will inevetibly send you to some high-crime spot. It's easier to imagine going down a few steps when it's juat about having a smaller house/flat and fewer consoomer goods, it's another thing when it will get you stabbed or your kids abducted by a rape gang.
Finally I feel like that data on relationshiplessness of zoomers contradicts the "purely economic factors" explanation.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
If womanhood is synonymous with femaleness (that is, performing the biological role of the female sex), then woman has no more claim to dignity (that is, the natural sense which leads us to value man over animal and noble over savage) than any other mammal.
Sure it does. Any value that humanity has above other animals is completely dependent on motherhood, and is therefore subordinate to it.
Also, you haven't addressed anything I said in the previous comment.
If you would prefer an abrahamic source:
I think you'll need to be a bit more specific than that to move me.
If we flinch away from the idea, it is because we realize that such norms are incompatible with dignity of womanhood.
Quite the opposite, insisting that we're equal is what is incompatible with the dignity of womanhood. If we're the same, but women fail to reach the same heights as men, that has far harsher implications than if we're different, and have different strengths. This is why we end up with "systemic sexism" and other epicycles to keep the theory alive, and to drive men and women even more at each other's throats (which really is the whole point of the equality meme to begin with).
Thales
Oh no, not a barely-out-of-the-bronze-age pagan!
This is…actually a good idea?
It's neither good nor bad, how it pans out is about execution, not the idea itself, and the execution was hot garbage. Half of the internet autist reeing at the TLJ was pointing out how they could do deconstruction / subversion properly, if that's what they were aiming for.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2d ago
Did cloudflare take down the weekly tinker threads too?
I posted it, but it's still filtered. @netstack (hoping you'll be first to see since you posted recently) can you approve the thread.
But I think that if your contention is that TLJ is to blame because it didn't radically swerve course and reinvent the whole ST
What are you talking about, there was hardly any ST to reinvent. Just tell a normal story and do it well, stop trying to be original and "subversive".
I brought up manga and anime because the Japanese got so good at getting people emotionally invested into characters and showing their development through a series of flashy fights, it's like they got it down to a science. Yeah, yeah, pseudointellectuals will complain about how derivative it all is and has nothing that deep to say, and I will remind them that we're talking about Star Wars. We're aiming for a not-that-deep but fun adventure that everyone can enjoy watching.
The whole problem with TLJ is that it did try to swerve course... onto a wall. With what it did there was no way for part 3 to be anything other than a disaster, which was not the case after TFA.
Considering that TFA was an Abrams contribution, and the universally-despised RoS is also an Abrams contribution - could even a hypothetically perfect TLJ have rescued the trilogy beyond even Abrams' ability to screw up in the third act? I doubt it.
There was nothing to rescue from post TFA. All the pieces are still on the board minus Han Solo, you can literally do whatever you want. After TLJ not only are Luke and Leia gone, so are the majoroty of the Republic forces, and so is Snoke. Ren was not main villain material and you don't have the time to develop him into one. What the hell were they supposed to do? I low-key hate Abrams, but it's ridiculous to put the blame on him.
That's not mockery on the "can't take this guy seriously level". Compare it to officer what's-his-name getting thrown around the room by Snoke, in front of his subordinates.
, I feel like that reading could only make sense if The Force Awakens by itself was a tolerably good film
Why?
You have two whole acts of the story to play with, characters that can fit into standard archetypes that you can develop as you please, a mysterious villain that you can take in any direction you want... Even if we accept that TFA is horrible beyond human comprehension, there is nothing in it that prevents the next episode from being good. This is in stark contrast to TLJ which does fuck everything up for anyone writing the final act.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2d ago
That is not the case in the ST. The sequels have devoted significant screen time to establishing that their villains are a clown show. Kylo Ren is an immature brat who establishes screen presence through mere physical violence - he's a thug, with none of Vader's presence. Hux is a resentful boob, seen quivering with impotent rage more than he is genuinely threatening people.
That was a choice made mostly in TLJ, they didn't have to set them up this way.
My sense is that Rian Johnson made an attempt to cook a meal with the ingredients he was given, and while the result was kind of crap, it was, given what he was working with, about as good as could have been expected.
Literally reversing the roles of Johnson and Abrams in what actually happened. TFA wasn't that good, but it wasn't bad either, they could have gone anywhere with it. The idea that TLJ was "as good as could have been expected, given what he was working with" is pure cope. If they handed it off to any decent manga / anime writer, Disney would probably have their cash cow that they could milk for another generation
It was The Rise Of Skywalker that was an attempt to cook given the ingredients. Yes, it sucked and no one sane will defend it, but it's a direct result of Johnson spending the entire second act wrecking what was set up in the first, and handing it back saying "ok, you can finish the story now".
Let's be so for real here though, the prequels were mid and only redeemed themselves way later on.
I mean, they didn't redeem themselves. Johnson and Abrams redeemed them.
and it would have been just as bad if TLJ had been better.
I don't know about that that. I think part Rise being so terrible was the scramble to finish the story from where TLJ left off. If they let Abrams do the whole thing, it would have been horrible slop, but it would be a bit more coherent.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2d ago
The Wachowskis were goaded into making another subpar action flick that could make Warner Brothers some money.
I'm willing to cut the Wachowskis some slack because, as far as I understood the situation, they didn't want to make the movie at all, knowing to leave well enough alone, but were given an ultimatum that if they don't, it will be handed to someone else. Under those circumstanfes it actually makes sense to blow the whole thing up, and unlike Johnson, it was actually their franchise to kill.
I don't even know about the "could make the studio some money" part. It didn't ane they did a damn good job of ensuring it turns out that way. It's a terrible Matrix film, but as a rant against Hollywood, it's was amusing to watch.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
4d ago
Not really. It comes and goes in waves ever since it was "solved".
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
4d ago
I don't know about "die", but yeah, poor performance is going to be very bad for user activity.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
4d ago
The one time I tried to look into it, it was a massive pain in the ass, and I'd much rather use Go, or literally anything else.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
4d ago
Sorry, clicking youtube link is such a rare scenario for me that I'm completely satisfied copy-pasting them like a caveman.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
4d ago
So do I:
- https://freetubeapp.io/
- https://invidious.io/
- https://piped.video/
I mostly stick with FreeTube.
It's often enough that when it happens, you're not surprised, but not so often that paying for a subscription makes any sort of sense.
And on the off chance it was taking them a while to update the alternative players, I never experienced the issues ublock / Brave's builtin blocker.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
5d ago
Rightist and anti-AI: it's a threat to traditional values, it undermines the human soul, it's a Satanic deception designed to lead us astray from the path of righteousness.
You have everything from people outsourcing the analysis and reasoning skills - particularly destructive in case of children who might never learn them - a particular type of women getting one-shot by AI-BFs and therapists, and all the way to enabling the creation of dystopian systems of surveillance and manipulation of entire societies, and you're going to go with "it undermines the human soul", huh?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
5d ago
I don't follow him, but I don't have him filed in under "normie" or "less engaged". I distinctly remember him wading into just standard politics (around the time of the 2008 crisis) and culture war (women aren't worse in sports, it's just that the way we do sports is sexist... because of the way the ball moves...). I suppose they're dispersed enough that you could say he's smart enough to stay out of it for the most part.
What did I do? I'm arguing your side here!
More options
Context Copy link