BahRamYou
13hr ago
Nope. Utterly, totally fucking wrong. A big part of why I like cities, as a straight man, is that the dating scene is better. Good luck with your OLD apps in the exurbs though.
BahRamYou
13hr ago
yeah? where do you live, where it's a 30 minute drive to the opera house, live theater, and art gallery, or any other sort of cultural scene, but you can still buy a large suburban home for cheap? are you a time traveler from the 1950s?
BahRamYou
15hr ago
Ironically, i need to first move to a city to find a wife. Only then can i move to a suburb to spawn and become a normie. That's the American cycle of life.
BahRamYou
16hr ago
I'd say its a vibe more than anything specific, which makes it hard to put into words. Almost everyone i meet there is married , has kids, and moved there intentionally to raise their kids. They live in a world of Disney movies and Youtube Kids. Talking about sex, drugs, or anything "weird" is verboten.
And yeah, there's the internet... but I feel like the internet is getting worse every year. And driving 30 minutes for real life culture is highly optimistic. I don't just want to stare at some paintings, i want to be part of a community that looks at paintings, do you feel me?
BahRamYou
17hr ago
- People, at least once they hit a certain age, want the SFH and the big yard with the fence and the space to raise their children.
I would say that's a very specific type of people. Snooty urbanist types like myself sometimes call them "breeders." It works if youre a married couple, age 25-45, with young children and a steady long-term job. It does not work nearly so well for others.
For me, i grew up a place like that. I remember it being great as a kid because the yard was big enough for me to run, and my boomer parents could either leave me at home or easily drive me around town. The local public school was nothing special, but good enough.
When i became a teenager though, it was stifling. A suburban yard isn't nearly enough space for any real sports, so it just become a pain the ass thing to take care of. Everything is designed around driving, so i was stuck dependant on my parents for all transportation until i got old enough to drive. The local school was excruciatingly boring for a gifted kid. No one seemed to care about anything except work, grades, and sportsball. If you were caught outside "loitering," the police would come and forcibly bring you home. The "spacious" surban home still had thin walls and a bad layout, so we had no privacy. I, like many teens, started staying up late to avoid my parents.
When i go back there now as an adult, it seems creepy. An adult single male just doesnt fit in there at all. Everything is oriented around child rearing- for young children. Almost nothing is open at night. There's hardly anything in the way of aets, music, or culture. The social life all revolves around "the parents of my chikd's friends." Its just not a place someone like me can live.
BahRamYou
1d ago
It's interesting that all the 90s era Star Trek shows seem to follow this pattern: A great pilot episode, then a weak season 1, then gradually improve over time. I agree with you that the pilot of DS9 is a great, and I love most of the show, but season 1 was unfortunately a mess.
Normally I think network TV follows the opposite problem. The pilot episode is a mess, everything is crammed into too little time since they're basically establishing and advertising the entire show. They're not even sure if it's going to be produced yet, so they don't want to put too much money into it, and the actors are all still learning their role. If it does get produced, I usually like the rest of season 1 the best, since that's when the writers and producers can really put into place the ideas they had that inspired the show. But then if its good and gets renewed, it tends to go down in quality over time, since they run out of ideas and feel a need to continuously escalate and "jump the shark."
90s Star Trek was really something else. I miss it so much.
BahRamYou
1d ago
Can you find me an example of a teacher (or some other normie core job) getting fired specifically for only fans? all the examples that other people linked seem kind of old fashioned.
BahRamYou
1d ago
Yeah but notice that there's extenuating factors in both. In the first, she was in a movie where she openly talked about being a teacher. In the second, the school initially defended her until it turned out she was still using her porn name to promote Libertarian politics. Both of those are news stories from 10+ years ago about a woman who was in porn 20+ years ago.
Alright, I'll grant you it can sometimes result in them losing a job. And props for researching all these cases. I still don't think it will happen all that often though, and increasingly less with time. Like in your second example, it sounds like the school initially took the side of the teacher, and only decided to fire her after it turned out she was still using her porn name to promote Libertarian politics. And the last one had no trouble working for... 45 years(!?) that's crazy that they still fired her. It will depend on the specific school board and administrator though.
BahRamYou
1d ago
It’s very obvious that she’ll never find any sort of respectable job. She’ll never be a secretary, a nurse, a teacher, an HR manager, an accountant etc
I don't think that's obvious at all. Imagine going in to your local school and telling them that one of the teachers there used to be a porn star. They'll ask "was she breaking the law?" and you'll say "Well, no, it's all legal, but the movies are pretty shocking." They'll ask "when was this?" and you'll say "oh, years ago. Then she retired and went back to school for an ed degree so that she could get a normal job. But we can't let her get away with that, you need to can her immediately for her bad morality from when she was younger." They'll ask "How did you discover all this" and you'll say "I make it my quest in life to investigate ex-porn stars and trace them to their current location so that I can find out what they're up to."
Somehow I don't think that conversation would go well for you...
BahRamYou
1d ago
An argument I've heard is that the vast majority of accounts on OF are barely active. They try it for a few days or a few weeks, upload a few low-effort selfies, and then give up when it doesn't instantly make them rich like they were hoping. Or they just get embarrassed, who knows. But the ones who actually stick with it and grind it out, uploading new content there and on other platforms daily, they tend to make quite good money. Maybe not "mansion in your 20s" money, but much better than most jobs. They have other options to make money too which kinda go together. The typical pattern is like: Make an instagram with sexy non-nude pics, make a twitter that's similar, and then an OF with the nude pics. Depending on how it goes they can make money from sponsorships, work as a model/dancer/promoter for regular clubs, dancer at strip clubs, or just straight up escorting. All of these things go together, and the OF account acts as a force multiplier for getting paid attention in other ways.
BahRamYou
4d ago
Yeah I'm just assuming this is a typical college class where you only write a handful of essays so each one is worth a lot. But the problem starts even with small assignments- you get one zero and you need 10 perfect grades to make up for it.
BahRamYou
4d ago
I feel like it exposes what I've always thought is a flaw in the main US grading system. Officially, anything between 0 and ~60 (depending on the curve) is an F. The best you could possibly do is a 100% A+, unless they want to give extra credit. a 60% is a terrible grade, but it still at least gives you the chance to come back and pass the class. A zero pretty much sinks your grade for the entire class. Giving her a zero here means, not only was her essay bad, it was so bad that she's probably going to flunk the rest of the class no matter how hard she works, unless she begs and grovels for extra credit. There's a bigger range between a zero and a 60% F, then there is between a 60% F and a 100% A+. I just feel like that selects for the wrong incentives.
BahRamYou
4d ago
Personally, my grocery bill has doubled in the last ten years. My house has more than doubled in value - I'm fairly well off, and I couldn't afford to live in my neighborhood now. A new model of the same car I'm driving (5 years old) would cost $20,000 more
My understanding is that a lot of economic inflation models depend on "hedonic regression" adjustments for these prices. So they argue like, "sure the prices in nominal dollars are up. But now your groceries include Flamin' Hot Doritos instead of boring old potato chips, the new car has Automatic Lane Stabilization to keep you safe, and your neighborhood is much safer now that all the people there have gotten older."
Well, the literal mathematical answer would be from the second you turn 13 until just the second you turn 20. So 7 years. Almost half their life at that point, and more than half of the years they actually remember.
A less literal answer is that it's all the years when an adolescent is expected to have adult-type responsibilities, but without adult-type privileges. So roughly from age 10-18, although the exact age range depends on the person and their situation. But the exact ages don't matter, we see the same pattern play out again and again and again- an adolescent is stuck living in an environment that's profoundly bad for them. It's kind of odd to me that so many parents say "I'm moving to the suburbs for the sake of my children," but don't seem to care at all about what it does to their older children.
But hey, I'm an adult single male, so no one give a shit what I think. Let the soccer moms rule society.
More options
Context Copy link