BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
No bio...
User ID: 3614
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
6hr ago
And to make matters worse, his decision to focus on the Catholic Nick’s virginity has backfired horribly
This makes me an out of touch old person, but I was under the impression that Nick Fuentes is gay.
If that is not the case, I wonder how I absorbed it out of the noosphere.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1d ago
Fascinating. The closest city to me is entirely suburban, by that definition.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
6d ago
People have generally been pretty nice in real life.
This is not mutually exclusive with the same people disliking or even hating Indians.
Anti-Indian sentiment online could just be where some percentage of those people go to express their true sentiments.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
7d ago
It wouldn't surprise me if we end up observing a similar trend here. No genuinely smart student actually needs "accommodations" to get into an elite college, so the only ones who try to game the disability system to do so will be mediocre students. Like the black students in the paragraph above, they will find themselves near the bottom of the classroom hierarchy, constantly struggling to grasp material their classmates master with ease. Consequently, they will be far more likely to drop out with receiving a degree.
I think the overall point here is good, but that it only misses the magic “civilization is fucked” sauce.
In the 1970s, the U.S. News & World Report Best Colleges Ranking didn’t exist. Even elite colleges were at least somewhat more likely to cut loose the lowest performers. But now, thanks to the wonders of journamalism, graduation rate is the single most gameable factor in maintaining school prestige.
Graduation and retention rates (21%): the proportion of each entering class earning a degree in six years or less (16%), and the proportion of first-year entering students who returned the following fall (5%)
Graduation rate performance (10%): actual six-year graduation rates compared with predictions for the fall 2014 entering class
Social mobility (11%): how well schools graduated students who received federal Pell Grants (6%), and graduation rates and performance of first generation students (5%)
42% of the score is strictly about graduation rates.
Harvard has a 98% graduation rate and the most common grade is an A. These kids are not going to drop out like a merely above-average black engineer might have in 1975. They don’t even know to be ashamed, and the college will do everything it can to prevent them from feeling shame.
We are not prepared for the stunningly brave world’s first Down Syndrome judge.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
20d ago
I assume you meant lasting poverty rather than spending a few years relatively poor compared to the more established couples around you when starting out.
There’s no way that getting married early (20, per @Crowstep’s original age statement) and having children leads to poverty more than 20% of the time, at best.
This paper, which only tracks women who were married at or before age 15, during the mid-century economic boom, comes up with a 31% increase in experiencing any poverty at all, though out life. There’s absolutely no reason to think that gets worse as women age up to 18, 20, or 22.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
23d ago
That's not the way I heard it. He did it because his father suggested it. (I will look this up when I can). He was also not very good with people compared to his more popular siblings, and definitely not a 'natural leader' at that age or really for some time.
Wikipedia obviously not the greatest source, but this is what it has to say.
Hiking with his family in the Alps in 1869, Roosevelt discovered the benefits of physical exertion to minimize his asthma and bolster his spirits.[7] Roosevelt began a heavy regimen of exercise. After being manhandled by older boys on the way to a camping trip, he found a boxing coach to train him.[8][9]
Incidentally, the strenuous life pays off. Look at this future President mean-mugging the camera at 19.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
The average age at first marriage in the US is 30.5 for men, and 28.6 for women, which is close enough to 30-30, IMO.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/371933/median-age-of-us-americans-at-their-first-wedding/
South Korea is further down the same road, at 33.8 and 31.5.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1112935/south-korea-median-age-at-first-marriage-by-gender/
This is a significant increase from mid-century stats, which were around 22.5 for men and 20 for women in 1950.
When the good professor was writing, the American average was 26 and 22.
Age gap marriages of 10 years or more constitute 9.3% of marriages, almost all of them an older man and younger woman.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_disparity_in_sexual_relationships
If you go 30 man, 24 woman, which is a big gap, that constitutes 20.5 percent of marriages. If you also include the vice versa relationship of older woman, younger man, that gets you 23.3 of all marriages.
It turns out when women have control over who they marry, rather than being coerced by threat of economic destitution, they tend to prefer men around their own age.
There is a huge confounder to this statement, which is that even in the Canadian doctor’s era, forced or arranged marriages were exceedingly rare, indicating that women did in fact have choices about who they married.
Additionally, the propaganda and societal pressure that women receive advocates much more strongly for 22+ years of education for women, for having a long-term stable career before getting married, and against motherhood.
In a hypothetical world where women were just as free as they are now, but with the propaganda and societal pressure of 1905, we can, I believe, properly assume a very different age ratio and time to first marriage.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
Dude. I would enjoy living a luxurious life with minimal effort if that option were provided to me.
I believe you and thanks for the counter input, but this is such a vastly different way of thinking than any other man I’ve ever talked to. I have never encountered any situation that would lead me to believe that this goal is equally shared among men as it is among women. I hate to be a Redditor, but do you have any kind of evidence that men and women are both equally interested in being financially supported by the other sex? I think that might be the closest likely study question, but if you have something that is pretty specific about just lives of indolence, that would be interesting also. You could potentially shift my opinion of WEIRD men even lower than it already is!
Most men don’t want to be fuckboys, let alone a fuckboy forever.
Well, except the many examples of all the guys who do end up living lives of vast indolence and luxury, and acquire equally vast harems of women.
We’re in something of a harem lull so maybe it seems like this is not a great strategy that the average man would enjoy, but give it some time and I think our billionaires will get back around to it. Elon is blazing the trail for them.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
I understand what you’re saying, and I obviously feel similarly about Buddhism. Such is life.
But what I’m saying is that you are intellectually wrong about the dogma. You can’t have committed this sin or meet any definition for it because you’re not dead yet.
If you come from a Christian tradition that was super literal about this, okay, just know they are in the minority here and I would be very interested in what their actual dogma said, as opposed to just a rando (such as myself), opining.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
No argument there, the ancients always impress me.
notice patterns
I don’t think I’ve ever really brought it up here, but one of the things about past humans up until maybe the 1930s or so, is that they had nothing but time with which to notice patterns.
Most entertainment activities and almost all of the work ones involved interacting with other humans on a constant basis. Most of them required you to go outside to do them, and mingle amongst other humans. Even if they don’t require it, like spinning, spinning by yourself is extremely boring and it’s more fun to go outside and talk to other people. They had a lot of time to notice patterns and behavioral trends in their fellow humans.
And once we got around to the Greeks, they started writing down their notes for us.
The fact that they had so much time just spent hanging around each other inclines me to trust their observations of human nature very highly.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
Have you considered the health benefits of being leeched? I can assure you that Breaker’s House of Leeches sells only the finest leeches to temper your humours.
Buy one, get one, no returns.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
But kindly also note the double standard: women must be virgins upon marriage, and married off at eighteen (the maximum limit at which nature intends them to be single) else men will be having sex outside of marriage. That men should not be having sex outside of marriage? Well, uh, that's different.
But those who know anything about virtue in the male know that the marriage of our young men under twenty-five, to a woman with a sound body about eighteen years of age, is almost, if not the only, means of preserving the virtue of the rising generation of men.
I assume there is more to this speech than just what you provided, but he clearly expects men to be virgins at 24, at a minimum. They wouldn’t be having their virtue preserved if they were out knocking boots with girlfriends and/or hookers, and he sets the line at “under twenty-five.”
“Remain a virgin at 24,” vs “remain a virgin at 18” seems to me to actually be the higher expectation.
Everybody knows that the one child of the wealthy and highly educated couple is generally a spoiled child and has as a rule, poor health; while the six or eight children of the poor and moderately educated woman are exceedingly strong and lusty.
Exceedingly strong and lusty is hilarious, I wish we still talked like this.
But also…seems plausibly true. I’ve lived near a seven kid family before, and while I have no opinion on their strength or lustiness, they certainly seemed vibrant and not prone to sitting indoors all day. That may also have been a Mom trick to get some peace and quiet, but they were clearly not hothouse flowers.
On the other hand, we have a lot of single children these days and I have heard accusations that a lot of those kids are hothouse flowers. And there do seem to be more fragile kids around, which I believe is even born out statistically.
The 19th century might have been on to something.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
If Top Men are on it, it is my patriotic belief that all of the women are being safely stored in a giant warehouse somewhere for their own good. They may be receiving phosphate treatment, I don’t know.
Smash cut to the Sultan’s harem
I think you should review where rationalists are at nowadays. You're lumping a lot of people with views from mildly positive to actively hostile towards every position you named. I could just as easily say that there is no meaningful difference between Catholics and Mormons. And indeed, to someone completely unfamiliar with Christianity this would be true. But of course to someone who actually takes the time to examine what they believe, it is obviously not true. They share lineage, obviously. Hence my description of "intersecting Venn diagrams that have moved apart."
At least we’re getting somewhere now. What would you say the core tenets of Rationalism actually are, then? Because to me they look the same as, really, generic materialist atheism, and certainly the new atheists.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
Well, that would be flattering to Catholics, certainly
Good grief, are you so bitter about everything that this kind of snark is your response? Fine, the priest can be the elephant’s shitter and your Sunday school teacher the ivory. I don’t care, whatever you want to call them. Come at me with better stuff than this.
What I meant by "I was there" was not some metaphysical experience of the birth of wokeness, but that I actually witnessed the birth of both new atheism and rationalism
Sure, but again, that is just your opinion that they are two meaningfully different movements. They’re both headed the same direction. They both use the same tools. What is your actual, factual evidence that they are meaningfully different? Because to me, they both look like atheistic, materialist, bond dissolving, utilitarian movements.
Seriously, what beliefs of rationalists can you point to that are not shared by New Atheists? They share being pro gay rights, pro feminism, pro trans, pro redistributionist, pro liberalism, they both don’t like the Church, they have HBDers, they have people openly worrying about and discussing AI alignment, on and on it goes.
The People’s Front of Judea can tell me they’re not the same thing as the Judean People’s Front, but they look the same to me.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
As erwgv3g34 says, can’t fault your taste in Winged Hussar arrival music.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
In fairness, I missed that too.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
First, I’m suspicious of anything Mr. Lapthorn Smith states, on account of his being a Canadian. Are Canadian doctors even real doctors? Experts disagree.*
That being said, I’m just surprised to see you posting something as mostly true and eminently reasonable as this. Is his reasoning correct? Well, I’m not willing to buy that higher education sucked all of the blood into your brain and away from your organs of generation.
On the other hand, stupid is not the same thing as content. The problem did start with the, at the time, extremely small educated class, accounting for both men and women. It has only gotten worse as more people are “educated.”
Women do in fact appear to enjoy living luxurious lives with minimal effort and having that provided for them. Women are more neurotic than men.
Women are aiming upwards for the strongest mate, or perhaps the most status providing one. Nothing wrong with that, each group has its mating preferences, but from a societal point of view, it’s just as destabilizing as men who only want to be fuckboys forever, which is of course the optimal male strategy.
Wanting a mate who is already established is reasonable from the female perspective, but also means that in modern society you wind up with either 18 year-olds marrying 30 year-olds, or 30-year olds marrying 30 year-olds. It would indeed be better for 20 year-olds to marry 22 year-olds and then build a life together.
I won’t sign on to his specific take on Roistering Ralph, but the idea that a woman getting married to a much older Lothario at 27 is probably going to end badly for her and more or less fine for the guy seems perfectly reasonable. See many Hollywood marriages. Alternatively, everything about Leonardo di Caprio.
Seems to me that his beliefs were true but not justified, so I give him half credit for making the effort. Minus half credit for being Canadian.*
*This is just a joke. I enjoy seeing your best American jokes, Canadians. Please continue visiting our malls and buying our fireworks.
Edit: I agree with Substantial Frivolity. Volunteering to the degree you are able would be a good road for you.
First of all, at this point you’re halfway through your birthday, so happy birthday, please continue to stick around. Also, it’s a little late to give you direct birthday activity suggestions, so I will aim at trying to make your next birthday an improvement over this one.
General Thoughts:
You have a friend. You have a relationship with your family. Those are good things. I think it would help you to get used to being around other people and doing things with them, in larger groups, more often. And to just slowly, over time, let yourself enjoy it to the extent that you are able.
I’ll be honest, I only know of one free way to pull that off, but if you can find a free way you like more, or one that is cheap enough for you to do two or three times a month, those will help as well. I bet there probably are other places that are free or nearly so, I just don’t personally know about them. All of what follows is translatable to other types of free/nearly free gathering locations.
Okay, here’s the part you might not like. The only free version of this that I personally know of is church.
You don’t want a megachurch, because you’ll feel even more like a face in the crowd. I would say you want to ID every church in a distance you think is achievable in winter time, then go check them all out. Find one that has about 75-100 people in the pews and where there’s room to sit all the way in the back. If there’s an upper level of seating, that might be tempting, but sometimes the choir and musicians hang out up there and it can be hard to make a quick getaway. If it looks empty, you know, dealer’s choice on where you want to sit.
Bring an audiobook or something, put in an earbud, and just get used to being around a number of other people, who are basically all focused on their thing, at a cost of free ninety nine.
If anyone says anything to you, just make the usual mouth noises and disengage to get to your spot. Under no circumstances tell them anything about you that makes you sound like a potential convert. If they get pushy, just say you’re looking at churches in the area. If you don’t like the vibe, bail. Eventually, after weeks or months, the people of wherever you settle will grow used to this strange new newcomer and start trying to make actual small talk, which you can engage with or not as you please, but it will help you personally if you do it.
Eventually, you might get to feeling like part of a community and start wanting to pitch in on something. This is basically achievable without ever believing a word out of the preacher’s mouth, or doing any lying yourself, and is thus accessible to everyone no matter their personal moral code. But that feeling of being part of a community will do you a lot of good.
I’m not going to promise it will get you a job, although church folk usually do look out for each other and try to network those things once you are a known quantity.
I’m definitely not going to promise it will get you a wife and a family. But it will get you the sensation that you are part of a broader group than just your family and one friend, and that that group sort of vaguely cares about you and your wellbeing.
And you can have all these benefits for as close to free as you care to get, without ever changing your personal beliefs. You could be an atheist your whole life and still be a beloved and respected member of a church community, by just putting in the time and not being specific about some things.
If you’re still here, seriously, I am not saying you have to find a church specifically. That’s just the example that I know. If you can find something else that hits the positive points of church that I described above, do what moves you, man. Just find somewhere you can regularly be in a community of 50 or more people, and not necessarily have to talk much or ever.
Please don’t join a cult.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
as science and medicine evolve, the law must evolve with them, no?
I don’t see why that follows. The old law could be perfectly good for humans as it stands, and trying to make adaptations for improved science and medicine could wind up making the law worse.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
That might be the case in a world where modern liberalism doesn’t exist, but in this world, it’s at least the next closest thing to cosmically-preordained.
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
It's a gambit obviously deployed in bad faith. It's a rhetorical tactic akin to saying "You're being emotional." You should know better.
You accuse people of this…
But I would (and am) aware that for all your magisterial apologetics, there is no meaningful difference between her and your priests.
And then you turn around in the same post and say stuff like this. I believe I grasp that you are trying to turn my own statement around on me, by implying that, metaphorically, she is the tail and Catholic priests are the trunk of Christianity. Or whatever “It’s all the same thing” metaphor you want to use.
To which I say…okay? I don’t know what big gotcha you think this is. Every Christian and Christian church at least wants to be headed the same direction, with greater or lesser success. I think she was dumb and wrong, but she’s part of the same elephant. That’s exactly the same thing I’m saying about New Atheism, Atheism+, Rationalism, The Enlightment, Liberalism, Post-Modernism, etc etc etc.
a statement of fact
I just know I'm right and you're wrong because I was there
Moving on to this part. If it is your stance that one toe and another toe are meaningfully different when the elephant is charging at you, then okay, I have nothing further to say that I think will mean anything to you. I think you are contradicting yourself, but I’m sure you will disagree.
I, on the other hand, say that the purpose of the elephant is to dissolve all the pleasant and gainful things about human society in the pursuit of ever greater and greater atomization of man. So if the one toe is called “New Atheism” and another is called “Rationalism,” well, it all looks like an elephant to me.
But then you also say that your argument is a fact based on your personal experience and your self-knowledge that you’re right, to which I say, “Why should I care what you say you personally know?”
I can tell you, right now, that I have direct experiential knowledge that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and Savior of Mankind, coupled with a vast intellectual edifice constituting thousands of years and millions of pages supporting me in that statement of fact. Does that convince you that I’m right and you need to run immediately to the nearest church and get right with God?
C’mon man, that’s laughable. We both know that if you engaged with this, you would tell me that millions of people can say the same thing about Vishnu or the Buddha or whoever. Or some other circa-2000’s online atheism argument.
So if you are going to tell me what kind of argumentation I should be better than, then you should be better than “It’s a fact because I said so.”
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
A few questions:
- Do you live in a rural, suburban, or urban area?
- Do you have reasonable capability to transport yourself around your area? I.E., rural = vehicle, suburban = bike, urban = public transpo or your two feet?
- Do you hang out with people? If yes, small, medium, or large groups?
BreakerofHorsesandMen
Sweet Sejenus
1mo ago
This detailed scholarly analysis of insults in the cultural mileu in which Jesus taught His disciples summarizes Jesus’ likely intended meaning thus
I am very suspicious of a Jew trying to tell Christians what Jesus akshually meant.
This means social media is a moral hazard and Christians should be extra wary about opining online.
Nevertheless, no argument here.
And calling someone a retard is a highway to Hell.
This just adds to my expectation that I’ll have a lot of time to really get to know purgatory on a personal level.
True dadmaxxing is living somewhere with seasons that let you do both.
No AC in summer, no heat in winter. Any children that make it out alive will be wolves among men.
More options
Context Copy link