Maybe it's too simplistic to approach the matter like this but I'd say it was the Kosovo War and the Iraq War of 2003 that fatally weakened the legitimacy of the concept of the rule-based international order.
Reasonable question if you haven’t come across FIT before
I surely have not.
My first guess would be these students were just renting a NYC apartment.
It seems I should've read the article before commenting:
According to prosecutors, Freire brought fentanyl to the students’ dorm room March 18 and falsely claimed that the substance, which he’d previously described as “straight poison,” was pure cocaine. At his urging, the women took the drug and almost immediately lost consciousness, prosecutors said. Freire was not a student at FIT.
At a court hearing in April, Freire’s lawyer, Mitchell Schwartz, called the woman’s death a tragedy but said Freire was not trying to ply the students with drugs.
If anything, he told Judge Sidney Stein, what preceded the overdoses — including the woman’s suggestion that Freire wear a wig and “look like a girl” so he could sneak up to her dorm room after she had invited him over — was “a story of teenagers doing what I would call ‘dumb teenager things.’”
“It’s not dumb teenager things to give somebody fentanyl, sir,” Stein replied.
I'd argue the traditional way of learning from other men how to be sexual in a healthy way has been to have a father and uncles who live in happy marriages and to instinctively imitate their mannerisms and attitudes, and the way to learn a healthy (realistic) view of female behavior was to have sisters, nieces and aunts to interact with and observe.
Objectively speaking the other sex is the other, though. Women are your fellow human beings, yes, but also fundamentally different from you. They aren't you, and you aren't them.
Some chicken or egg here right?
Regarding vets, my wild guess regarding the matter is that as the agricultural sector serves as the livelihood of fewer and fewer citizens, things getting to a point where the people employed there are a handful of lifelong professionals and a huge mass of illegal immigrants, any agricultural work pretty much disappears as a potential career choice for anyone who's not already involved in it directly.
I don't think most of the horses that are still kept in any Western country are kept to serve as lifestock.
Rookie question but how was the drug dealer let into the campus? This seems to be a case of negligence.
That will die in a decade or so.
Horses are capable of reproducing though, unlike cars.
I think this is largely the result of anti-Southerner liberal narratives. The accepted line of thinking among the Blue Tribe faithful regarding this matter is that Jim Crow laws, lynchings, anti-black racism in general etc. in the South both before and after the Civil War were mainly driven by the sexual anxiety of angry and frustrated white men regarding the inclinations of their women and the prowess of black men, the main manifestation of this being accusations that horny black thugs are always looking for opportunities to rape clueless white women (this being the usual justification for lynchings of blacks). The average white liberal is soaked in this propaganda and thus reacts with willful ignorance, eye-rolling, incredulity and disdain to reports of black-on-white rapes.
In their own minds it's surely transgressive, stunning, and brave.
'women who aren't selected for priding themselves on their modesty'? What does that refer to?
But elite class proper ladies do not make good comics because comedy is inherently transgressive, and 'being transgressive' is not what elite proper ladies do.
They are perfectly willing to be transgressive against the white outgroup though.
Valid points, I have to admit. I'd bring up the memory hole phenomenon here. Based on my rather cursory knowledge of these matters, the social scare about a new ice age was a rather short-lived phenomenon based on faulty scientific interpretations of dust and air pollution levels and caused by an unusually cold winter. This happened during the Carter Presidency when the concepts of green energy and environmental protection first got official sanction. And since Carter is generally remembered as a one-term disappointment and a well-meaning idealist loser who sadly paved the way for Reaganism unintentionally, down the memory hole this whole affair went among liberals.
The same applies to the whole overpopulation scare. As it pretty much stemmed from racism and classism, at least from a current left-wing perspective (i.e. the perception that brown and poor people are gross, and anything that's gross is always seen as proliferating), liberals generally disowned that as well afterwards. In fact, today they see overt concerns about overpopulation as Nazi-coded. The origin story of Planned Parenthood was also thrown down the memory hole for the same reason.
The campaign for unilateral nuclear disarmament / so-called nuclear freeze? Basically the same story. Such people today would get imprisoned as Russian agents and traitors. To the extent that liberals today are even against nuclear weapons (that is: pretty much none at all) it seems it's mostly just sadness and resentment that Russia has them as well because otherwise it'd be feasible to defeat and dismember (i.e. 'decolonize') the country.
So to sum it up: I think your argument is correct and liberals who adopted such beliefs in the past were probably more mainstream than not on balance. But it makes for important context that their tribe changed their views afterwards and disowned the old ones. Their current view which also shapes the mainstream is that such pessimism and doomerism was never their thing.
I don't know why the observation that there are more camel toes in a modern gym than in a zoo struck a nerve.
I believe the only women who can wear tight-fitting pants and yet not expose their camel toes are the pretty and slender ones – it’s just how female anatomy is – and women who aren’t like this don’t want to be reminded of it. The bygone patriarchy enforced the norm of female modesty which acted as a sort of non-aggression pact among women and took the ‘unfair’ advantage of hot women away. Feminists have demolished this without thinking twice and now their daughters and granddaughters are rightfully mad. Ideas have consequences.
I’m aware that the political strategy of the firewall / sanitary cordon has worked so far. My argument is that the success of this has not merely depended on deterrence, cancel culture and psychological duress but also the ability of the mainstream parties to plausibly sell a positive vision of the future. It’s this ability that has now slipped away, and only punitive methods remain to keep the masses in line. I don’t see how they can keep having electoral victories like this.
You made an error in the code.
I know what you're going to say – sure, straight men have ulterior motives for laughing at a hot woman's unfunny jokes, but straight women don't, so hot women must still be receiving some accurate feedback on which material works and which doesn't.
I wasn't going to say that actually because the notion that hot women would ever feel compelled to tell jokes to or have banter with either other hot women or plain women never occurred to me.
But even if an attractive woman could somehow make herself funny, that in itself wouldn't make herself more desirable to the opposite sex.
Indeed.
It follows that the only women who'll join rock bands are either a) women who simply cannot resist following their artistic muses, or b) physically unattractive women desperate for something to make them seem more attractive or higher in status than they otherwise would be: no man really wants to date a girl who's a 4, but if you had to date a 4, a 4 who plays in a band might seem that bit cooler than a 4 who doesn't.
I'd also argue they are in many such cases willfully entering a predominantly male subculture in order to increase their mating chances due to themselves not being able to find eligible mates the conventional way for whatever reason.
I think women are generally not expected to impress men with sophisticated social skills.
Has anyone involved in this scandal in any capacity had the temerity to state the obvious - that women are generally not funny because nobody expects them to be so?
There’s another aspect to this. Dissident rightists and conservatives in general already have had an image as pessimist doomsayers and alarmists; that’s hardly anything new. It all plays into them generally losing elections. But in the case of mainstream liberals the attitude that is essentially the same or at least rather similar to this is relatively new and contradicts their usual image.
Not only are the stories told from the perspective of male characters, but those characters are completely unattractive to women. Tadano is a soft, unthreatening nice guy whose special ability is reading the room. Gojo is a fucking autist with zero sex drive who enjoys making dresses for dolls; if he was living in a less repressed society, he would be sucking cock in a gay bar, and he would be happy, instead of forcing himself to get hard enough to bang the retarded gyaru.
Well, I've not read the manga but I've seen the series and the bolded parts are plainly false. Either way, it all struck me as being targeted at female cosplayers and would-be cosplayers.
That’s just one aspect of it. Another is that the expansion process entails the provision of an US security guarantee to the Baltic nations, which are usually considered to be unable to defend themselves from a Russian invasion for more than 3-4 days or so, and the idea that the US would actually adhere to this guarantee is questionable. Before the expansion of NATO this was not much of an issue because a potential Soviet invasion and nuclear strike would’ve predominantly targeted West Germany and would have inevitably also targeted US military units stationed there, which is a clear act of war.
Another aspect of this whole process is that it clearly created some sort of illusion among Ukrainian nationalists that the Russian leadership will one day basically capitulate to them by doing nothing while Ukraine joins NATO and retains sovereignty over the Crimea and presumably expelling the Russian fleet from the naval base of Sevastopol.
I do. I suggest you and @Shrike can have a conversation about this.
The Finns sued for peace two times between 1940 and 1944 in their conflict with the USSR. Did they make the wrong choice then?

History teaches us that such atrocities usually occur immediately after a place is taken after heavy fighting in a combat situation that is altogether hectic and fluid. It makes sense to assume that the Ukrainian units that retook the town immediately killed a bunch of civilians they considered to be traitors, collaborators, looters etc.
More options
Context Copy link