@Botond173's banner p

Botond173


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 06:37:06 UTC

				

User ID: 473

Botond173


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 06:37:06 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 473

If one considers the same overall phenomenon from what I assume is women’s usual perspective, I’m sure one can’t help but roll the eyes at the recent discussion on Aella’s degeneracy, for example. Shaming and punishing e-thots can only work when alternative life paths are broadly accessible for average women.

The norm of enforced monogamy (heh) in the old days of Christian patriarchy (heh) basically functioned as a life insurance policy for women. Someone was surely going to marry each woman, with a few extreme exceptions, no matter how stupid, ugly or fat she was. The same path for heterosexual women today, on the other hand, is largely up to chance and luck, something that is pretty much optional – it may happen and may work out well, but there’s a significant probability that it won’t. Just listen to women’s usual complaint about men, which is usually that attractive men refuse to commit to an exclusive relationship. Of course we see the massive proliferation of e-thotting, sugar-mommying, gold-digging etc. when the social consensus is that a happy marriage is by and large off the table.

One big difference is that a rich guy can throw cool parties and have lots of people come to hang out at his house.

That'll be a great advantage to him as long as he's strongly an extrovert. There's also the aspect that he'll have to clean the mess all up afterwards or hire some maid to do so, and that his social circle will come to expect him to keep throwing cool parties.

he's pretty much forced to always go to other people's houses for social interaction

If he lives in a community where third places don't exist at all, then yes.

Im not sure how to reconcile these two realities.

It's simply the 'alpha fucks, beta bucks' phenomenon in action. And what you and @rae are generally describing are the 'I don't know anyone who voted for Nixon' effect in action.

Dr. Timberlake is correct. If your condition disables you to perform the sorts of work that anyone in your vicinity would be willing to pay you money to do, you're factually disabled.

mixed cycle and bus lanes

That seems sort of dangerous. And yes, I'm sure Bordeaux counts as large.

I'm not sure how exclusive their bike lanes are in relation to cars and pedestrians

@2rafa commented on this very aspect negatively in this thread.

Has there ever been a case of a successful project in any large Western city to build a network of lanes exclusively for cyclists, scooter-riders and Walmart/mobility scooters?

I've seen it mentioned by X channels that follow the war. But even if it's untrue, and why would it be, the Russian government having suspended participation in the treaty in 2023, which I wasn't aware of, renders the whole issue moot anyway. There's no good reason to leave heavy bombers out in the open.

"less degenerate lifestyles"?

It doesn't solve any of that, of course.

I don’t have half as responsible a job as JFK, and I can’t find time to golf let alone to keep a half dozen mistresses happy and on tap. Where did he find the time? Given, he was so hot, with so much social proof, that the seduction itself doesn’t seem to have been difficult, but still: keeping them all reasonably happy, keeping track of who they were, finding time to fuck them all? Where did he find the time?

Didn't he have a large number of trusted staffers?

I've heard the claim that US and Russian strategic bombers are currently required to be stored in a way accessible to satellite recon, as part of the verification sections of our arms control treaties.

Yes, they need to be made visible to satellites of the other party during and after the process of being eliminated in accordance with the treaty.

"Men build civilizations, women build cultures."

It's a bit of a stretch to say that disagreeableness is common on this site, isn't it?

At this point, you basically have to be doing some kind of search on every single container coming in, right?

Or alternatively just store your combat aircraft in reinforced hangars, as they all should be in the first place.

The simple explanation is that they don’t exist anymore.

What exactly counts as either coercion or restriction in this particular context though?

The youngest living Boomers are roughly 70 years old. What's the point in trying to convince them? People generally don't change their worldview over the age of 35 anyway.

So Olga was just another Russian single mom? Because that's how she ends up at the end of the movie.

the oft-quoted statistic that the top 80% of women are contending for the top 20% of men and the bottom 80% of men are contending for the bottom 80% of women, or some similar numbers that are eerily close to the Pareto distribution.

Never have I seen the 80/20 rule stated that way in the context of the mating market anywhere. What I can surely state is that the rule was originally popularized (in the online space, that is) on Manosphere sites sometime around 2008 or 2009 (definitely not 2015). I can’t cite sources because those sites disappeared a long time ago due to various reasons (doxxing etc.). It’s a simple interpretation of the Pareto effect (i.e. that 80% of the consequences/results come from 20% of the causes/effort) applied to the mating market, and was usually stated as “20% of the men attract 80% of the women” or “20% of all men have 80% of all the sex” etc. I’m aware that those statements are rather different but that doesn’t matter because all of them assume the same Pareto effect. (Some detractors even came up with the argument that what’s actually happening is that 20% of all men engage in 80% of all sex acts with 20% of all women, which’d still be an example of the Pareto effect/distribution). Again, the fundamental intent behind the whole argument is to differentiate the current society of unrestrained female hypergamy from the bygone society of enforced monogamy, because a lot of people were unaware of this distinction, especially back then.

I guess what he's alluding to is that you as an upper-class Millennial woman lack the necessary insight to understand the long-term consequences the Sexual Revolution had on men's attitudes towards the mating market.

In what aspect is the discussion clueless? Please elaborate.

I think the argument here is that she, just like the Boomers in general, is unaware of the long-term consequences of the Sexual Revolution.

She did pose naked for magazines a couple of times.

Which is what pretty much all fashion models normally do, I guess?

Where is the number 22 coming from? There has never been a society where the usual age of (first) marriage was 22 for men.