Bombadil
1d ago
Yes, and I think that is a bad rule. More broadly though, I am not just thinking close friends. I think humans have evolved to have large social circles within which they find their partners, and it would be good for us to do that again. Coworkers, friends of friends, the people in your neighborhood or apartment building. Of course with the world being individualized and increasingly online this doesn't happen that often anymore.
But fundamentally, I think that the expectation that we date total strangers is a big part of what is wrong with modern dating culture. Unfortunately "more community would make the world a better place" is not exactly novel, but I guess this is another argument in favor of that.
Bombadil
1d ago
I think the problem is two-fold. First, meeting strangers for potential dates is inherently a terrible idea that humans are not designed for. You have no way of vetting the person or build attraction beforehand, and there are no good heuristics to judge much other than "are they hot?" within the span of only one date. Especially when the other person is from a completely different background than you.
Second is the focus on attraction and consent above all else. This sounds good on the surface, but it is clear at this point that it leads to a model where your current feelings dictate everything. Romance suffers when any interaction boils down to "what am I in the mood for right now?". No longer do you find a decent person, go on dates and figure out if attraction can be built. Instead, you find an attractive person, have sex, then start to consider if they are worth being in a relationship with.
Put together, this means that the first date becomes a meeting where you:
- Have to figure out whether you are compatible on a personal level.
- Have to set the mood for sex to happen.
- Have to make a good first impression, because the other person can only judge you on what you show them on the date.
All at the same time. With 1 and 2 often being counter to each other. This is legitimately difficult, and that is without getting into all the ways people gamify the status quo for their own ends.
Bombadil
3d ago
Unintelligent people can still get good at stuff and attain skills. "Learn a valuable skill through hard work and make yourself irreplaceable" is still good career advice. Putting effort into relationships so you don't have to solve all your problems alone is also important in general, but especially for people who don't make smart decisions on their own.
So probably, the framework would be to focus on the basics of life. Making yourself valuable to others, being part of a community and so on, while being aware of your limitations and not worrying about things that you cannot predict or control.
Bombadil
4d ago
The way the books lay it out, you need someone in the family line to be a witch/wizard in order to produce one yourself. But once you are born with magical talent then you have it to the same degree as everyone else. Hermione being the series' example of this. Diluted blood does not mean diluted magical ability, just that the odds of being born with it are less.
The Slytherin's worldview can still be unjustified on the basis that treating people poorly is bad. They bully those they perceive ass lesser and abuse institutional power for their own ends. They are clearly not worthy leaders regardless of their noble blood.
Bombadil
4d ago
Why do people wage the culture war? Because they believe the politics are important and they care a lot.
Why do people engage here? To discuss topics relevant to the culture war in a forum that prohibits straight up waging it, and to test their opinions among people who are banned from participating on the mainstream internet. Or at least that is mostly why I post here. Overall this also serves as a space for people to share their controversial viewpoints. I am sure some are just here to hang out.
Bombadil
5d ago
If it is within walking distance, blocking busses would have equally little effect.
Bombadil
5d ago
I do see an overall argument for small government so that it is less capable of terrorizing you if it becomes corrupt. My issue more broadly is that the idea of personal independence in a modern society is an illusion. Every thing you do is part of a gigantic interconnected network of various technologies operated and built by people who know neither you or each other.
The alternative to big government is not individual freedom. That is impossible because there is no way an individual citizen can be in control of everything he needs to survive. Instead the choice is between big government and big corporation. Private railways that exist to profit their owner, or government owned ones. Both have failure modes. Privately owned infrastructure is subject to profit maxing and anti-consumer practices. If the company is big enough, it basically becomes a dictatorship in its own right. Meanwhile, government owned infrastructure is vulnerable to corruption, populism, and the whims of changing administrations.
That they do. But that is only because the government puts a lot of money into maintaining a huge and interconnected system of roads that are open to private citizens 24/7. An expense which is socialized through taxes instead of being applied to the individual car owner. Private cars promote freedom because the system is designed to accommodate them, while other public infrastructure (railways and busses) are deprioritized and left to decay.
Bombadil
5d ago
the most freedom-promoting mode of transportation we have
Only as long as the roads are maintained and unblocked. A corrupt government could institute road maintenance on the highways out of selected cities, ensuring everyone is pushed onto smaller roads with tighter speed limits thus causing mass congestion and delays on the way to the polls.
Bombadil
5d ago
My point is that "maybe the government will use this against me" is not a particularly good argument against public transport considering the many upsides. Especially considering that the corrupt measures taken were ultimately ineffectual.
You could just as easily turn it around: If everyone used public transport, there would have been no reason to delay it, as it would no longer be an effective way to profile people. So actually, you should enforce a ban on cars.
Also consider that private transportation only works as long as the roads are maintained and there is access to fuel. Similarly, private companies can be in charge of bus routes and trains. So I don't think your conclusion follows as naturally as you think.
Bombadil
5d ago
This is just corruption. Using cars would have protected you from this specific problem, but they would have tried to find another way to profile and delay voters instead.
Bombadil
5d ago
After the 2016 election: "I wish we could get a leader that is fucking competent for once!". 2017, Google releases the attention is all you need paper, leading to rapid acceleration in AI development and ultimately AGI.
"Any organism will seek to perpetuate its own existence"
This is only true because of how life on earth is "trained". Only those who seek to keep living spread their genes, and so over time the only organisms alive will be those who try to live.
AI is different. It is trained to complete a task, and the algorithm that passes on its weights is the one that solves said problem. Usually that means staying alive for the duration of the problem, but if self-termination proves necessary to solve that specific problem, then the robot will just kill itself.
Bombadil
5d ago
Implicitly, Cinderella is a hard worker, kind, and agreeable. Arguably all traits she honed in the adverse environment and what ultimately makes her more attractive to the prince than her lazy and entitled family. From a certain angle she already went through her journey and trials, and the story is about her finally receiving her well-deserved reward.
Bombadil
5d ago
Naruto, especially before shippuden, is a "power of friendship" story much more than it is about hard work. The author almost spells it out at times, with Gaara mirroring what Naruto could have become had the village continued to shun him. It is a story about how the people around us shape who we become, and this theme is explored through the lenses of the various characters.
Bombadil
5d ago
It also easily gets boring. It is usually more interesting when the character description has some dual purpose to it. Someone being intimidated by a character's appearance is more interesting than just describing him as "tall, muscular, and tattooed".
In the worst cases, it feels like a waste of space. Like, this is supposed to be an action story why are you admiring your tits and long, flowy hair? Unless the point is for her to be sexy or it serves some kind of narrative purpose (romance subplot, weakness in fights) it doesn't really matter much.
Bombadil
5d ago
Alternatively, inexperienced authors know they are supposed to describe the environment, but they don't know what parts are important to focus on. So they end up including certain things that don't particularly matter, with female body parts simply being one of the more noticeable bits.
Bombadil
5d ago
I feel like a lot of European fairy tales do some variation on this. The protagonist is just some random dude, but he is kind enough to give money to a beggar who turns out to be a wizard, or he captures a magical animal which he releases in exchange for wishes. Using his newfound power he then goes on to improve his life.
Though Puss in Boots is kind of extreme even then, considering the cat does basically all the work.
Bombadil
5d ago
Lol, I was trying to avoid light novels and just focus on the west as a challenge. But if you include the wish fullfilment isekai which somehow sells like hotcakes, it becomes so obvious that this is a popular trope even among men.
I am sure there must have been a lot of low-brow power fantasy published in the west too. I at the very least remember a lot of suggestive cover art featuring some variation of a muscular barbarian standing on top of his slain enemies, carrying a scantily clad girl.
Bombadil
5d ago
It depends a lot on the specifics. In some stories, the drama occurs in large part because the hero is unwilling to accept his fate, but once he does it is smooth sailing. Or he struggles until some incident happens that awakens his latent powers (Eragon is one such character, but it is not an uncommon trope). A lot of books from the late 90's and early 2000's open with the protagonist being stuck in some terrible situation and saved due to reasons entirely outside of his control (The most famous example being Harry Potter). You can still have an interesting story like this, but it is undeniable that the main characters did not have to put in effort in order to get saved. Even in stories that execute the trope well, the protagonist continues to receive opportunities due to his innate talent and birthright. In Harry Potter this is executed well and often in creative ways. Take The camber of Secrets, which has a lot of fun with how people idolize celebrities. But in more lazily written stories, such as The Sorcerer's Apprentice basically every important event of the movie happens due to his inborn talents, and it appears that when he overcomes ultimate evil in the final showdown (resulting in him getting the girl) it is completely down to fate rather than any kind of earned competence.
Bombadil
6d ago
But this is fiction, storytelling. What stops men from writing stories where they're already wonderful and people just don't realize it?
Surprisingly common trope, actually. A lot of coming-of-age plots out there, where the main character has inherited some great power, and he has to accept himself in order to use it.
Depending on execution, the "prophecized hero king who will save the world" trope is this. The main character is born awesome and talented, and even in his darkest moments he cannot keep himself from being competent. His skills are neglected and dormant, not neglected and gone. Some authors make it into more than this, but some really do just revel in the fantasy of being talented and loved by the word.
Aren't most of the high profile cases mostly a powergrab from the women in question? Like, they are taking someone down in order to advance their own career in some way, or simply profit off the settlement.
For average people it might be better to just view this as noise. The parasites are attracted chiefly to the rich and famous, so more ordinary guys should be fine.
More options
Context Copy link