@BaronVSS's banner p

BaronVSS

Sort by controversial

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 07:02:15 UTC

				

User ID: 483

BaronVSS

Sort by controversial

0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 07:02:15 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 483

After witnessing the events of 2020-2022, take my rightful place at the head of the queue.

The only person in life who will consistently look out for you, is you.

Yes, after about 10 minutes of parsing conversations I realised that no one is actually discussing the mechanics of woodland survival but instead it's largely a rehashed "men bad" struggle session.

At this point I've honestly just embraced being an oppressor. I will never be seen as anything else, so why try and change it?

https://news.sky.com/story/muslim-student-loses-legal-challenge-against-michaela-community-schools-prayer-ban-13116385

In what is perhaps the first win Secularism has experienced in a long time, a high court judge has ruled against a challenge brought forward by a muslim pupil claiming that lack of prayer rooms at hier school were a substantial opposition to her faith. The judge's reasoning is that the school explicitly advertised itself as secular and would not permit certain activities in an attempt to minise friction between pupils. This outcome was accomplished in spite of threats and bomb scares made to the school and criminal damage to both the school and a few of the homes of the staff who worked there.

Michaela Community School is not a typical institution, hence why it was not only able to fight back against Islamists, but also win. Situated in a particularly deprived part of London, it boasts extremely successful grades compared to not only the borough but the wider country as a whole. It accomplishes this through rules many consider extreme, including no talking in corridors, demerits for failing to remove your book from your bag and flip to the correct page in under 10 seconds and mirrors removed from bathrooms in order to avoid distractions.

Its head, Katharine Birbalsingh, is not a typical educator. An Indo-Guyanese woman and once a Conservative advisor for social mobility, her comments on education, society and the role of its members routinely antagonise left of centre commentators. Michaela is a free school, indepedent of the local authority and thus she is immunised against potential attempts by that local authority and other insitutions to instill accepted views into her school. This is I think a large part of why she won - she ultimately only answers to herself and those parents in her community who are in favour of her school and the way she runs it, and can thus ignore detractors in a way that an LEA controlled, union dependent teacher can't.

I do sympathise with you. I experienced what you are experiencing now during the lockdowns. Almost everyone in my life was in support of them and spoke very highly of them, blind to the effects they were having on me. I am still dealing with the issues now.

During that time, whenever the topic of conversation came up I came up with situation appropriate lines to shut down or move the conversation on. When I couldn't do that, I drowned them out with loud rock music. Ultimately, you aren't going to convince them and the only real solution is to wait for this nonsense to exit the news cycle.

(Has it really been 7 months?)

I do not see what sort of comfort this is meant to bring. This is no more helpful than the realisation that technically it isn't the fault of the wolf or shark if it has a hankering for your delicious flesh. Wolves and sharks still possess sharp teeth and will attempt to use them on you, while powerful moral spooks will compel other human beings to make your life a misery over things that have no material impact on either them or you.

Society vs Male Radicalisation II - Male Role Models/Surely This Time Our Plan Will Work

I was on the internet this week, and I found this:

Labour to help schools develop male influencers to combat Tate misogyny

It is interesting to note that there is an increasing shift towards talking about "role models" for young men and boys as a means of cooling the gender kerfuffle, rather than by repeating feminist talking points at males until they concede as was the case when I was a teenager. The Labour Party, the UK's apparent next government, has come up with policy to reduce the influence of Andrew Tate among schoolboys with the intended aim of safeguarding women and girls. It means to do this by creating counter role models to whom boys can look up to. This would not even the utterly embarrasing 30 year old boomers trying to guess what resonates with children, but would consist instead of older volunteer boys taken from within the same school. This if it is implemented, will have educators select the real life version of Will from Inbetweeners as its senior male role model and think themselves of sound mind for doing so. You are only ever going to get uncool loser types volunteering, and it is the fear of becoming an uncool loser (or worse) that motivates young men to go and consume manosphere content.

Feminism's defenders will counter that there are many existing role models available for men, often listing real or fictional people like Ryan Gosling, Marcus Rashford or Ted Lasso. These men are either fake or literal one percenters whose lifestyle an average young man has no hope of to attaining. This betrays a complete lack of understanding about why men choose the role models they do and how they attempt to emulate them. These role models are deliberately or implicitly chosen as role models for young men by people who aren't young men often because they display qualities that are useful, rather than valued, to society. This is because almost all policy dreamt up by institutions concerning Men and Boys is not to their benefit, but instead to neuter a perceived threat against Women, Girls and the wider society. For every Marcus Rashford, there are multiple Mason Greenwoods or Kurt Zoumas who continue to receive all the signifiers of male success and receive no punishment for any of their transgressions.

It is clear that what educational and social institutions want are meek, inoffensive and productive men who do not question the rules of society. This is in direct contrast to what young men want, which is to be outspoken, to be popular with women, to be socially and economically successful. No role model ever produced or selected by the state could manage this, particularly not when operating under the notion that it must maintain women's liberation, which itself requires the stifling of men. I question for how much longer this approach will be kept in place. There are hundreds of people like Andrew Tate across SM, each ready to teach boys what society is unable to teach them. Educators can more easily dispel Tate because of the sex trafficking offences and because Tate himself is a clown, but people like Hamza, whose lived experience is much closer to the boys he is trying to proselytize to than that of Tate's, they have no counterargument.

I just laugh. I accept history as absurd. I read some nonsense in the news, and it makes me laugh how stupid everything is, and I don't suppose things were really less stupid in the past. I don't suppose that I'm less stupid. It's funny. You have to accept that basically illiterate positions, even if they're strongly-felt, are not strongly-reasoned. And that's how people are, and nothing you do is going to change it.

To quote the great Carl Brutananadilewski

I think there has been a change in recent years, brought on the effects of children having 24/7 access to porn during the pandemic. The porn is blamed, rather than government policy that prevented children from doing anything other than sitting down in front of an ipad and browsing the internet all day, but hey ho what are you going to do.

We have now had a parliamentary crisis of procedure over a remote dispute between two combatants who have little to no social or material relation to this country. The giga blackpill feed forcibly attached to my veins continues to deliver.

A comparatively small handful of Islamo-lefists were able to overturn the policy of the opposition party through threats of violence and intimidation against a handful of elected politicians and get it to completely agree with its goals in about 5 months of persistent activity. Granted, they had help from the sympathetic media class, but even then the rate of change is incredible. In most other unpopular decisions (the Iraq war, Brexit) the British state largely plowed ahead and either ignored or steamrolled over public outrage. The only loss they've ever taken was on Poll Tax.

The outcome of this is that threats and violence have been proven to work in an established, mature democracy. I expect this trend to continue.

We must also not forget the parliamentary crisis of procedure caused by activism over recent tensions occuring in a region miles away from the country that very few people have a genuine stake in. Granted, a large part of the problem are enablers, not actual theists, but this problem still remains.

The UK seems to have an extreme version of the humanist slave morality that is in fashion across the west (this stated reason being given by Ian Hislop for why he wouldn't publish the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, as it would be "punching down"). It is the prevailing viewpoint of most people who work for the civil service, as well as the centrist or left wing media class. Dom Cummings once pointed out that the people who live or work in the SW1 postcode care immensely about their perception among their peers. Unlike the US, there is no temporing influence among anyone in power - all major parties largely agree on the same things, with the sole difference being that tories pretend to be right wing in order to win the vote of ultra-right shire boomers, who never seem to notice that the tories don't deliver anything they promise.

How can self worth not be a self defeating concept?


The human being is a social animal, and interacting with others is very important to them. A person's happiness, access to resources and even physical safety is determined by both their belonging to a group and their social position within that group. When a person feels that they have little worth and are downbad because of it, others around them will respond with platitudes such as "you need to improve your self worth" or "you to be confident!" Yet often, a person has low self worth or confidence because others assign low worth to them. This treatment need not come in the form outright abuse - if a person is repeatedly ignored or passed over then they end up attaining a low level of worth simply because they can see that others are recieving positive affirmations when they themselves are not.

Most things people do beyond fulfilling their immediate biological needs, such as eating and urinating, is to work to increase their social standing, which may happen immediately or over a long period of time. A person aware of their low worth must convince themselves into believing that if they perform certain actions they can accquire greater worth from the positive reinforcement provided by others. For example, that they dress in a way that will be more accepted by others, or that they act in a happy and upbeat manner even when they are not feeling so. A person must not act as though they have a high worth when this is not valued by others - you cannot for example go to a job interview and say that you are worth some 6 digit salary if this is transparently not the case. This is the fastest way to decrease the view of oneself in the eyes of others.

Hence, a person's motivations cannot ever concern themselves alone, unless you have the strength to withstand spending large parts of your life alone in very bad places. What good is prefixing self to worth if, for a healthy, adjusted human being, worth comes from places other than the self?

AUTISTS: THE LAST OPPRESSED CLASS

(For the purposes of this post, I am defining an autistic person as someone who has been diagnosed with an autism spectrum condition, or could qualify for an autism spectrum condition diagnosis should they given access to the correct services. The disaster spiral trainwreck that is the self diagnosis movement and the widening of the definition of autism to be completely meaningless, I might write about at another time.)

The modern anglospheric society operates off the belief that there are oppressed groups and oppressor groups. It is stated that oppressor groups have high rates of economic and social success, while the reverse is true for oppressed groups. This is often referred to as the progressive stack, with some oppressed groups being more oppressed than others. To alleviate this disparity, oppressed groups are allowed to seek reparations from their oppressor and demean their oppressor in public spheres, while the reverse is not tolerated. There are many examples of these groups: Women are oppressed by Men, Non-white People are oppressed by White People, Gay people are oppressed by Straight people, Non-english speakers are oppressed by English speakers, and so on. However, there is one group to whom this opressed definition might apply, but receive no recognition, appreciation or restitution from society bottom text.

Autistic people have utterly awful life outcomes. They have very poor employment rates, with many being unemployed or undermployed, even if they are level 1 autists in possession of college degrees. The suicide rate is abysmal, with rates being 9 times in excess of neurotypicals and over half of autistic people having considered suicide throughout their lives. Autistic people also experience heightened rates of social and even sexual abuse.

Despite this very strong case for a place on the progressive stack autists have no place whatsoever on it, or indeed recognition that they even exist in wider society. I do not recall the last time there was a front page article on my country's news outlet about anyone with my condition. I do not recall there being any support or preferential treatment for autists in regards to accquiring economic and social capital during the time when I was seeking employment, in comparison to programs that fast track and support women and ethnic minorities, for example. Support for autistic people is very limited, and only meaningfully exists in the early stages of childhood. This support is not provided to allow the child to feel comfortable in their skin, but to minimise friction both with neurotypicals and with the school and work systems. Even behaviours that are not directly harmful to the autistic person themselves or to neurotypicals, such as stimming, are heavily discouraged.

For most opressed groups, the responsibility for the easing the disparity is put upon the oppressor group. For example, men are expected to validate the fear that women feel due to the difference in physical strength in situations such as being in an elevator, or walking alone at night, and adjust their behaviour accordingly. It may depress an individual man to feel that he is and can only ever be a threat, but this feeling is not validated and he is told to Get Over It. In comparison, the autist is expected to adapt to social norms and behaviours that they do not innately pick up and instead learn manually, in the same way that Sideshow Bob learned that there was a rake there by walking into it except this time the rakes are invisible. It is the autist that has to mask, the autist that has to conceal their interests, the autist that has to pretend to be someone other than who they are.

Obviously, this is terrible. How then, are autists to get onto the progressive stack and get the sweet government funding necessary to improve these awful outcomes? The first task is to create an original sin for neurotypicals that devalues their accomplishments whilst providing avenues to redistribute their social and economic capital to autistic people. White privilege, male privilege and so on are all forms of this and it would not be difficult to create a similar privilege checklist for neurotypicals, but to get into a position to enforce this belief on the rest of society would be far more difficult. Autists, estimated, make up roughly only 2% of the global population against a neurotypical 98%, compared to the 13% of African Americans vs White Americans and the roughly 50%/50% sex split among men and women. Moreover, autists are not naturally grouped or forcibly segregated into one place in a way that men, women and ethnic groups are, so they cannot easily band together and overcome oppression they face.

If we were able to overcome both of these issues, there is another large problem: NTs innately do not like autists, finding them to be offputting and thus wishing to interact with them less based on thin slice judgements. You can argue that there are similar innate dislikes against other oppressed groups, however these groups usually have something that endears them to their perceived oppressor in some form, whether these are biological urges or moral spooks about kindness and human unity, or contributions to society in the form of food or entertainment and so on. There are no moral spooks that encourage being nice to the weird asshole in the corner, even if they haven't done you any real harm. Obligations to do the neurotypical social dance run much deeper than any other aspect a human being is othered by.

Lastly, autism is still seen as a male coded thing, and oppressor/oppressed heirarchy is the strongest where it relates to men and women. There are some autistic people who are able to hyperfocus on useful things, and thus can channel their abilities into a lucrative career. However, these careers are usually in something like software developement, research or other high value STEM careers due to their innate rigidity, which are currently the target for cooption by various diversity movements due to their high status and outsized influence on the world we live in. These positions are likely the only place that a neurotypical will not only encounter an autistic person, but an autistic person in their element who may not be masking (and I suspect this lack of masking is one of the reasons that autists in these roles are being targeted.)

Meanwhile, female autists are more heavily socialised into following neurotypical norms and thus present in a neurotypical manner, so they do not register as being autistic. Hence autists are either invisible or irritating to the oppressed/oppressor sensibility and general notions of social status, and must be removed. Where NTs have not met neurotypicals, their perception of the condition is usually influenced by piece of shit media like Rain Main or the Big Bang Theory, where most depictions in the vein of "Guy who punches himself in the head" or Sheldon Cooper."

We live in a neurotypical society.

He was banned for only ever posting about the Hock. His reddit account is still active, so clearly he hasn't gone into the woods to his death.

Due to wider economic changes, Homer Simpson's lifestyle and achievements are no longer feasible for the rate of effort that he puts in. One thing I didn't point out in the above post is that men now face vastly increased competition for all the signifiers of male success from not only women in their labour pool but also globalisation. Had he been born 20 years later, Homer would have turned into Lenny or Barney.

How shit of an idea is just quitting your job without a replacement job to go to?

I am completely, utterly burnt out on my current job. The past few months have been non-stop ass rape on a personal and professional level. We had redundancies sprung on us in December with zero warning that I only dodged because another person took voluntary redundancy, and before that we were doing 9 hour days for about 2 months due to the business promising far more than it could actually deliver. The personal shit could be its own post. I haven't properly unwound since september.

There has been a team change and my team now comprises of me, who works on software written in one language, two devs that work on completely different language on completely different software, and one dev that would normally be working with me but is tied up with temporary projects for the forseeable future. There is no one with lead or managerial capacity on the team. This is a random grouping of devs with no clear overarching goal and it feels like I'm just expected to somehow make it work when I'm least equipped to do so.

Every task seems to take much longer than it should. I keep making really obvious mistakes that I don't seem to ever catch in the moment. I keep saying or doing things that bother my colleagues and they don't bring it to me so I can fix and address them, but to my manager who schedules a meeting about 2 or 3 weeks after the thing in question has occurred to discuss it. My manager also now routinely brings up things that I did wrong in the codebase two or three years ago and beats me over the head with them. I was on holiday last week, and the last thing my manager did before I went off was meet with me to discuss my performance, and then had another meeting with me first thing on the Monday when I returned.

I don't know really if I want to get another dev job or go back into education or work a shit but slower paced job for a while. I do have friends/family I can stay with and I have more than sufficient savings for the forseeable future, so that part is not an issue. I am primarily concerned on the effect it will have on my ability to get jobs going forward.

Female autists seem to have a very... rosy view of what being an autistic man is actually like. It is widely stated in their spaces that we are not punished for our transgressions against NT norms, that we receive early intervention and support and generally live happier lives. Personally, I did not receive a diagnosis until I was 10 and received no help from any government institution until I was 23, and this help I received purely because I had crashed out of uni and entered a multi year NEET torpor, and the reason for this is that I spent all of my childhood and and teenagerhood being bantered to death because I wasn't even given the support I talked about in the OP.

If they expect any kind of help outside of an academic environment, they will be bitterly disappointed. Those male academics long ago learned to shut their pie hole.

Your society will rapidly fail to pay its taxes. Generally, Men participate in a ceaseless hustle to make as much money as they can as it is one of the key indicators of worth they are judged by. This burning drive is necessary for society to have surplus production, even if it consumes the men in the process. In contrast, women are the net beneficiary of taxes due to various reasons such as being the recipient of child and housing benefits and other spending.

I disagree. Quite strongly infact. For the most part autistic people are largely treated like children due to misconceptions about what it actually is, unless they mask to a near perfect neurotypical standard. When you mention to people that you are autistic, people automatically assume that you are some screaming, severely obese manchild who punches himself in the head and rubs his own shit on the walls, and whatever wins they make are done under fake self. Getting onto the stack can only an upgrade at this point.

Masking actively hurts autistic people. It is not the case that you learn to mask enough and you manage to permanently graduate into being an NT, with all the privileges that come thereof. It is an exhausting, miserable slog where you are constantly watching everything you say and do, where you are perfectly aware that no one around you likes you for who you are and if you make one misstep all your signifiers of success will desert you. What is the point of enduring a ceaseless uphill struggle for such people? I have only ever felt happy and liked around my autist friends.

The "best version of yourself" seems to be what is of most utility and least discomfort to neurotypicals, not what would allow someone like me to live a happy, fulfilling life.

The film is overly hyped imo, though that might be because I have had all morally spooked notions like fairness and equality beaten out of me by the mere act of observing how the world works. The lines about white people just bounced off me. I no longer expect to be seen as anything other than an oppressor at this point.

The worst thing about this film is that it's a romcom (and therefore an automatic 0/10) wearing the skin of something far more interesting. If black people have magic and thus are able to do anything they want, why do they devote substantial amounts of time to keeping white people happy when they could instead

  • establish a concealed, seperate society like the wizards have done in Harry Potter, or

  • BTFO the white muggles with magic and create their own nation?

I believe OP view's will become further solidified if you give him more blackpills, not less

A thought experiment that is somewhat too large for the small scale questions thread.

Picture for a moment that a first world, rich, western nation decides to implement an open borders policy. Anyone who lives in a foreign nation can, at any time, apply for and receive permanent residency visa and be entitled to work and live in this country. There are no upper limits on the numbers of the people that may settle in the country using this method of entry.

However, there is one restriction. Only women and girls are permitted entry. Y chromosome owners are not permitted entry through this system and the fullest force of the law will be unleashed against any man who is found to be illegally within the country.

This approach should, theoretically, neutralise right wing arguments against open borders. These arguments either have an economic basis (a vast surfeit of labour will decrease pay and bargaining power for domestic workers) or a social basis (large amounts of unmarried, low skill men will cause unrest, violence and buggery). While the labour disruptions remain, a critical mass of unsettled women is unlikely to fuck shit up in the way that a critical mass of unsettled men are. Indeed, if we look to the current debate around migration in europe, there is an undercurrent of violence and hostility present in predominantly male migrants that wouldn't be the case if they were mostly female. The Ukranian migrants generated no such disruption because they were majority women and children.

Assume for the purposes of this argument that the male only border control is fullproof and has no workarounds. What are the effects of this open borders system? Are there any consequences I have not forseen?

This post was spurred by the latest episode of the Israel and Palestine Show and me accessing the frontpage of my national brodacaster and seeing only one story on the right hand that directly concerned the lives of people living in this country.

The News Problem

It occurs to me that much of the connected world is gripped by "News Problems". A "News Problem" is a problem that ceases to affect you the moment you turn off the news. To determine whether something is a news problem or not, ask yourself this question: if I was suddenly made to forget the information I had just watched or read about, would my life be any different?

An obvious example of something that is not a News Problem would be stories about inflation: inflation trickles all the way down to the consumer. It is made immediately obvious when the price of your favourite foods goes up, or when your money gets you less petrol than it used to at the pump. The topics involved in the story are those that directly affect the material world around you. To go back further, during the terrible time when a large chunk of the world was denied Freedom of Association over a virus with a 99%> chance of survival, the information coming out of the news outlets was of varying utility. For some people, Covid: The Virus was a just News Problem but for almost everyone, the actions taken by the State to control the virus were not News Problems.

In regards to story I initially mentioned, whether the debate starts begins on who you are: if you have family or friends in the region, or if they have been affected by the recent attacks, then this is very much not a news problem. If you are Jewish and living in a city with a large Muslim population (or a population of people who care very strongly about the issue despite neither being Muslim nor Jewish), you may or may be directly affected by the events as they occur in the region, but you may certainly care about how that population responds to you, particularly if you present as being Jewish.

So, can you ignore news problems? The answer, to my eternal chargin, is no. Even if the story has no material affect on my life, I am still surrounded by people who care about it, and in turn expect me to care about it. Should the conversation emerge at my place of work (so far it hasn't, and for that I am extremely grateful), I may be asked for my opinion, and my genuine opinion would piss off everyone in the room. During the summer of 2020, depending upon your position in society, you might have faced social repercussions if you didn't agree with the rhetoric at the time. This could have been something as simple as nodding along to what was being said, or, if you were in a position of power, expected to divert your resources, energy and face to something you strongly disagreed with.

Will there be an end to the News Problem? The obvious cure is to take the grillpill, which in this sense means turning off your device and going outside, but this only works if everyone takes the grillpill. Had you taken the grillpill in a city, you might have bumped into protests about the dispute.

I notice that my state broadcaster, whose staff care more about american goings on than they really should, have not even bothered to write about who the other candidates are, while I distinctly remember pieces being run about Bernie and Elizabeth Warren back in 2020. It is by and large assumed by everyone Important that Biden will be the democractic nominee.

One my (deeply unpopular) autism related views are that the elimination of Aspergers as a diagnosis and the folding of all similar conditions into vague levels has been an absolute disaster. Normies have a slightly less uninformed idea of what Aspergers is, even if their idea gravitates towards Sheldon Cooper. Meanwhile, if you say the world Autism they will automatically assume "Guy who punches himself in the head and screams", regardless of any attempts by the establishment to reband Autism away from this thought.