Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
No bio...
User ID: 1558
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
“One of the things that we always teach our kids is guilt by association. We hold our kids and our athletes to the same code, and Jim, by associating with Mr. Kolar, and then not stopping and preventing this from happening, is critical to why he should not be allowed to be around these kids anymore.”
See I remember my parents teaching me that "guilt by association" is something stupid and horrible that they only do in Stalinist countries, and you should never judge people for something their friends did, because here in Freedom Land you can only be held responsible for your own actions, not anyone else's.
Moldbug's "America is a communist country" seems truer and truer.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
And, first and foremost, because someone's hair color is how they primarily define themselves
It gets recursively difficult to accuse someone of begging the question when they're being sarcastic, so I'll just have to be glib:
People (including both OP's black kids cheering black superheroes, and a multitude of historical groups) primarily defining themselves by skin colour, is an error on their part, harmful to human flourishing, and film makers / critics should not be seeking to pander to it, encourage it, or perpetuate it.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
I am extremely anti-lockdown but I also don’t see any problem with locking down the population for the right virus.
Well the failure mode of this attitude should be obvious (because we lived through it): if you say "no population level mass incarceration EXCEPT for the right virus" then that just incentives neurotic hypochondriac safetyists to hysterically propagandise that a virus barely worse than the common cold IS the right virus.
And then we go back to playing the ol' "Redefine words out from under people" shuffle, where if you lose, you get locked up in isolation for 2 years while the government folks keep on partying (see: Boris Johnson's "Partygate", Obama's birthday garden fetê, etc.)
The thing is, the people responsible are ultimately cogs in the machine.
This is begging the question. It's also coherent to imagine a situation in which they are not machine cogs, but rather masters of their own fate.
The "fan-baiting" definition above does indeed point the finger at Muh Capitalism, but that's not the only possible explanation. Also possible is that the showrunners really do have agency, they really are self-motivated anti-whites, and they enjoy reverse-colonizing white people stories with black actors out of racial animus. That their actions have a side-effect of immunizing the products from criticism of their lazy writing is just a happy coincidence.
I'm not so much asserting that this is the case as I am asserting that it is a possibility which fits the evidence.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
It is also worth to note that prior to COVID, the experts went against lockdowns as effective epidemiologic measure.
Well, maybe, but I'm cynical enough to believe that this was also "Massage the science until it agrees with the policy we already wanted to do in the first place": namely, economic growth be-all-end-all-ism. The politicos didn't want a hypothetical pandemic interfering with their Line Going Up. It's only in the actual advent of a pandemic that the safetyists came out of the woodwork and demanded the opposite prescription. But in both cases the "scientific consensus" was more a function of political climate than actual data, because the scientists who say what the powers that be want to hear are the ones who get funding / airtime / the ear of the Premier.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
have you no shame?
Affirmative action quotas are bad so I support them being reducto ad absurdem'd.
It's only shameful if these people both make a sham of AA by their actions and support AA (the spirit if not the letter) with their words. Because then it's self-serving hypocrisy.
But, like Ayn Rand on welfare, I have no problem with lily-white people taking Abo quota spaces. Because there shouldn't have been any Abo quota spaces in the first place, so this is just taking them back de facto if not de jure.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
Ukraine doesn't have the ability to project power inside it's own sovereign territory, let alone under the Baltic sea.
It certainly has the motive, but it has no means.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
Besides, why would they cock it up again? Are the conditions for that happening even there?
"Unsatisfying scriptwriting" is the default scriptwriting. Ask not are the conditions sufficient to create a cockup; ask are the conditions sufficient to maintain a very unusually high level of quality?
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
Of course the irony in this statement is that many, myself included, consider that the people using xim/xer are ALSO doing it to mock other people ("squares", "my dad", the laws of God and nature) and not because it's a sincere identity. Because play-acting as a girl when you have a penis is the very definition of insincere.
But apparently because they got there first and have the left-memeplex stamp of approval, we're not allowed to call them out for it.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
I wish we could all just agree that sex is biological and gender is a social role
But this is just begging the question, isn't it? It's like Byzantine Christian monothelitites saying "I wish we could all just agree that Jesus' nature is Man but his hypostasis is Divine". To even get into the hypostasis debate is to concede to your interlocutor's point.
The correct response to the Byzantine Christian monothelitites is "hypostasis is just some term you made up to try and make yourself sound smart and smuggle in a bunch of theological assumptions in by connotation, Jesus was just a guy in a robe, he was born a Man and he's stuck as a Man only, that's just biology for ya, sorry, he doesn't get to be Divine by any measure even if he and you really really want him to be.'
You can probably see where I'm going with this but in the interest of plain speaking, the correct response to the gender theorists is "gender is just some term you made up to try and smuggle in a bunch of ideological assumptions in by connotation, Emerald Treespirit is just a guy in a robe, he was born a Man and he's stuck as a Man only, that's just biology for ya, sorry, he doesn't get to be a woman by any measure even if he and you really really want him to be.'
There is no such thing as gender, the way you act is contingent on the hormones in your brain and the hormones in your brain are contingent on your chromosomes. A man acting weird is a man acting weird, not a man filling the social role of a woman (or being the Messiah).
Historical precedent is that there is such a thing as gender, in the definition of "social role strongly defined by sex yet not entirely contingent on it".
No, I do not grant your premise. As [another post which I can no longer find] remarks, the wounded octopus is not a septopus; nor is the crossdressing man a demigirl. The determination to define this behaviour as a whole new axis instead of a pathology on one axis is precisely what I object to.
There's no historical precedent for the divine.
This seems like the worst possible angle of attack given that there is tremendous historical precedent for the divine. "What is the sun and why do those stars move faster than those other stars?" is a question that demands an answer any time anyone looks up, and it's what led all historical human cultures down the divine rabbit hole. "Why do 0.001% of men want to wear skirts?" is not a question which anyone has been required to consider until modernity, an for such rounding errors and answer of "idiopathic madness" seems satisfactory.
There is no such thing as hormone replacement therapy.
There is a thing that is called hormone replacement therapy, but it's a misnomer, because it is actually hormone supplementation therapy.
Swimming in biogenic testosterone + supplemental estrogen is not the same as swimming in just biogenic estrogen.
Also:
-
There is much uncertainty about the degree to which injected supplemental hormones can cross the blood-brain barrier, so they may well not be great at influencing behaviour
-
Hormones have a profound developmental effect on the brain as well as an acute effect at the time of injection. Therefore unless you've been taking them... in utero since conception, your ship has already sailed.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
The expression "a real man" would not exist if a penised-and-testiculed fertile male's manhood could not be in question.
DOES the expression exist in any language other than English? That mongrel tongue cobbled together from the detritus of four other languages and thus should not be particularly expected as being first for purpose?
Anyway, even if it does, this is a tremendous stretch. You're taking as literal that which is figurative. That the phrase "a real man" exists does not imply that the insulters really believe that the object of their mockery might be "an egg", or whatever the term is for an undiscovered trans-woman; or even that they believe such a thing is even logically possible. When I call my little brother "a stinky booger" this doesn't mean I believe that it is genuinely possible that a 50kg pile of dried mucous could be perambulatory.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
I am sure you can see the difficulty in asking a person who has just staked out the position "there is no such thing as gender" a question "So you believe that all gendered behaviour..."
Is this a question can be coherently rephrased with the g-word under taboo?
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
By analogy with adoptive parents - normally parenthood is biological, but we have carved out a social/legal form of "parenthood" for adoptive parents.
This kinda supports exactly the point I am trying to make. Adoption is explicitly a legal fiction: it exists because you want do do something that you know is physically and/or logically impossible (that is, retroactively change someone's parentage), and adoption is just a way of telling lawyers "pretend you don't see the impossibility". Which is possibly fine for lawyers, but as someone who's trying to cleave reality at the joints (and/or arrange a blood transfusion), the scientifically correct answer is once again "No, I will not play your kayfabe, he's not your dad and no piece of paper can make it so, no matter how much state power you array behind it".
The government of Oceania can pass as many laws as it wants that 2+2=5, but paper ain't worth much.
Except 90% of the choices women make in this arena are negative for sexual attraction of men.
Just in the interest of avoiding typical-minding, I ask my fellow whore-makeup-appreciation-chads to rise up!
Bad make-up is better than no make-up because I interpret any make-up at all (just as the feminists' nightmares alledge) as a signal that "I am trying to make myself more pleasing to the male gaze", which in turn implies a receptiveness to male advances, which IN TURN is more alluring in terms of attainability bias than the 'natural beauty' it replaces would be.
And yes, yes, I know that we are lectured relentlessly that "That's not what wearing make-up signals you misogynist", but whether my perception of it's implications is accurate or not is beside the point.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
No.
My Popperian falsifyability criteria are as follows:
-
Levels of neural estrogen equal to or higher than cis females.
-
Levels of neural testosterone equal to or less than cis females.
-
Research not performed in The Current Year (given the large ideological incentives for researchers to massage the figures in a pro-trans direction in The Current Year)
The vast majority of men don't try to have sex with every woman they know
It's not about the women you know, it's about the women you choose to get to know.
Yes, you're right, I don't try to have sex with every woman I know, but that's because most women (and, indeed, people) I know come as unfortunate by-products of going to school, then work. I got to know them due to being forcibly flung together by circumstance, not because I thought they were an improvement over keeping my own company.
The set of people I would proactively choose to get to know is mostly coterminous with the set of busty women 18-35.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
I have yet to meet a male friend in my entire life whose company I enjoy more than my own solitude, so yes.
But I feel this is more a measure of the wonderful richness of my inner life than is is of the spiritual poverty of my neighbours, so I'm not complaining.
I have lots of male friends, I just wish I didn't, they're a tremendous drain on my reading time.
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
But the prevalence of age gap relationships where the female is younger and the male is older vs. the practical non-existence of older-female, younger-male relationships makes my point for me.
I don't think they do.
I don't actually have any numbers so I guess we're just playing Battling Narratives here, but my expectation is that maybe 0.1% of fourty year old men are banging college girls, while maybe 0.01% of fourty year old women are banging college guys*, so even if we say you're right and the proportions are out of wack, by a whole order of magnitude, it's still a rounding error even in the larger case and therefore hardly something to draw conclusions about the general anomie of men/women.
*(In fact while I was typing this the thought struck me that this is probably low, more because college guys are horny all the time than because milfs are attractive. So I am tempted to reject even your premise that 40 year old men get more 20 year old girls than 40 year old women get 20 year old guys. 20 year old guys don't need sugaring lol)
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
Insane he thought he could take on the West.
But this seems to be OP's point: he didn't think he was taking on the West. He thought (very reasonably) that he was taking on a demoralised meme country ruled by kleptocrats with a giant Russian fifth column. I concur that the smart bet in Feb was that Ukraine would fall like a house of cards while it's elites flee to a cushy Swiss government in exile. The country wasn't swimming in Western materiél back then; if the three day blitzkrieg had worked, there would have been no taking on of the west at all because the special military operation would have been a fait accompli before the Javelins arrived in numbers. That it has now morphed into such a take-on-the-west conflict was probably unexpected by Putin (and, indeed, everyone).
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
and that this girl only joined the group because her family members had been killed by an opposing group.
"Only"?
Butlerian
Not robot-ist just don't like 'em
1yr ago
Augury was very useful.
Surprise is extremely effective in warfare, and if the hour you're going to attack is based on augury, then your enemy has no way of predicting it.
If you attack based on an objective judgement of when the conditions are most favourable to your side, aka babby's first campaign, you will quickly find your movements anticipated and hard-countered by your opponent, who was able to predict your movements based on exactly the same objective signs.
Conversely if you attack because the chicken bone pointed towards the Death card, then your opponent will never see that one coming.
Some of them have different hair colours as well. That would've mischling-ed to a uniform mouse-brown over thousands of years too. So why does the skin irk you, but not the hair?
Audiences who are hypersensitive that "the race doesn't make any sense" while not blinking at LITERAL MAGIC DRAGONS... this is a suspension of disbelief with such non-euclidean contours that I think the showrunners can be forgiven it. If you need the in-universe racial demographic logic explained before you need the in-universe flight dynamics of pyroclastic lizards explained, I think that's a "YOU" problem.
...Unfortunately, I also believe that the Hollywood types who showrun these productions really are Yuri Bezmenov's Frankfurt School communist sleeper cells out to willfully commit historical vandalism as a means of waging fifth generation warfare, so I am in the sad position of believing both sides of the debate to be guilty of what their opponents accuse them of. FML.
The balls-to-the-wall total raceblind casting trend would be fine it it weren't motivated by malice, but I think it is motivated by malice, so it's not fine.
More options
Context Copy link