CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
No bio...
User ID: 333
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
3mo ago
The Manosphere hasn't been a thing for quite sometime. It's like referring to Suffragettes rather than Feminists. Once it became clear that the term had outlived it's usefulness, individuals splintered into a decentralized ether of male self interest and self development.
Adolescence is just another focus for the usual groups to assign blame for anything and everything to white boys men. Red pill knowledge is framed as something that causes murder, hate and involuntary celibacy. If only boys behaved more like.. well, girls, then we wouldn't have this problem. Lets force boys in schools to watch this series so they can feel even more demonized. I'm sure that this won't have the complete opposite effect of that which the Karens would wish.
I'd better stop here. I've been noticing misandry against men in Western culture for quite sometime, but now it looks like boys are targets too, which makes me a bit upset.
I actually appreciate the first game's inclusion of homosexuality in that manner because it was realistic for the setting and you needed to build a relationship with him (platonic) to get that information out of him. By realistic, I mean that in that time to be homosexual meant that escaping to a convent was a way to avoid execution as a sodomite.
What I don't appreciate is the dumpster fire trying to insinuate that sharing a bath (spa) with your friend in the first game is low key homo-eroticism.
There's this theory that men in the past were actually more comfortable being physically close in a fraternal/platonic way because the potential of homosexuality in the act was unthinkable. It makes sense to me that now homosexuality is ever present, modern men must telegraph their heterosexuality and avoid anything that could allude to homosexuality. This has cut off so much of male/male platonic affection that it's a tragedy.
Edit: There's a 'how are you enjoying the game?' post in the Friday Fun Thread if you guys are playing.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
6mo ago
There are downstream effects that go beyond the financial loss. Basically not enforcing laws for petty crimes can encourage lawbreakers to escalate to more serious crimes. More police means more natural surveillance and deterrence for opportunistic lawbreakers.
You may as well ask 'why pay for any police to enforce any crime that doesn't directly recoup cash into the cities coffers?'
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
2mo ago
Correct human mating rituals are covertly initiated by the female. She signals interest or, at the very least, availability. But she does so in a plausibly deniable way. He then perceives the hint, and decides if he wants to pick it up. If he does not, she avoids embarrassment because she can pretend there was no hint. If he does, he can approach with confidence because he has been invited. That's how it actually works. But for this to work, young men need to know how to pick up a hint. And young girls need to know how to drop one.
This was probably the most important lesson I gained from the PUA community (replace 'aerial combat' with pick up and fighter pilots with 'PUA'). Not just the words of it, but the experience of it in repetition to truly grok it.
Learning what Indicators of Interest looked like was critical. In generations past there was all sorts of weird things girls could do to show interest, like dropping a handkerchief, but luckily most can be done with nothing at all and are just as relevant today.
Eye contact was pretty much rule zero for getting a warm opener when approaching a woman. There were a lot of other minor behaviours to notice, like a girl standing in proximity or brushing past you, but at the end of the day, eye contact was always the go-to. What was funny is that I think some girls would instinctively look at you in a particular war and be genuinely surprised when you approached them, but would still be warm. And that 'particular way' is difficult to explain, but I think many people know it when they see it. Some girls knew exactly what they were doing ("took you long enough") and others really believed 'it just happened'.
There's something twisted about the whole 'We want you to know how to approach women. No not like that. You aren't meant to learn, you're just meant to know.' thing.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
8mo ago
Well, he certainly got the timing right.
I'm pretty amazed at Trump's campaign to be honest. Recruiting Elon Musk, RFK Jr, Tulsi Gabbard and now finally getting Rogan onside (debatable as it's not an endorsement, but the outcome is the same as if it was).
And these are real investments into Trump's success, not just your usual 'celebrity endorses politician' article that is quickly forgotten. I never thought I'd see Elon (awkwardly, as is his way) holding townhalls around the country to promote a politician.
Overall, this is a really interesting election year that is probably only overshadowed by 2016 for craziness.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
11mo ago
The only scenario in which it would perhaps go the boy's way is if he was hot, in which case he doesn't need to do that to attract girls anyway.
I found friendzone advice is often better reframed as 'Things I would like a man I already find attractive to do'.
I watched the whole thing. The first hour was a bit hard to get through due to Trump being Trump and 'weaving' some long monologues or rehashing the same tired material we've heard before.
After that though, there were quite a few pieces that I found interesting.
-
I really liked when Trump would bring up something that he was clearly knowledgeable about such as regulations and their effects on businesses. His explanation about how environmental consultants (and some lawyers) are incentivized to drag out Environmental Impact Statements and the like, reflects what I've seen about some of this in the real world.
-
He seemed to be pro-nuclear and particularly pushing for Small Modular Reactors over (more complex) Large Nuclear Reactors.
-
He's clearly got a Principal level understanding of the building industry. Actually it was his aside into how building commissioners would ask him to tear something down if it wasn't built to spec that did this (as well as how he stopped himself going into detail about modern construction materials like reinforced concrete). All this knowledge is great when you want new infrastructure to be built. He can sniff out bullshit when people tell him what can and can't be done.
-
I found it amazing that Trump was really nonplussed when Rogan emphatically described how the media and deep state elements had unfairly crucified him. He reacted like he'd been told the sky is blue. He really must just have that baked into his world view by now.
-
He really doesn't care about aliens. At all. He seemed to find them so boring it was palpable, while Rogan was wild eyed talking about them.
-
It was hilarious how they pretended they haven't been trash talking each other in the past. Bridges have been mended it seems.
-
The message is the medium. I mean that in the sense that Trumps ability to do an unscripted 3hr conversation will stand well in comparison to Harris who couldn't do Rogan due to 'scheduling conflicts'.
-
I don't know how many new voters this will win over. To be honest I can't see a lot of normies making it through the full 3 hours. The bite sized clips of the interesting parts (JRE clips) will likely be a lot more influential.
After the McDonalds something-burger (heh), this podcast and Kamala's recent lackluster performance, I'm predicting a Trump win at around 55-60% certainty.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
11mo ago
Create a program to fine business owners $3k per illegally employed person. Then use that money to fund deportations and a snitching program where you get a $500 payment if someone is successfully fined under the program.
All of a sudden there would be a mad push to check greencards and legal workers snitching out their illegal coworkers.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
2mo ago
5 and 7 are about building accessibility. If they conflate 'wanting your building to have wheelchair access' with 'I support DEI', they are being willfully dishonest.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
8mo ago
Nate Silver on the Selzer Poll:
Releasing this poll took an incredible amount of guts because — let me state this as carefully as I can — if you had to play the odds, this time Selzer will probably be wrong.
I'm not believing late in the game polls that show large swings out of nowhere. There's been a few influencers that have wisely said 'don't believe anything you see in the news in the last few days before the election.'
Edit: Nate didn't have much good to say about the Emerson poll either.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
8mo ago
Apologies if this has already been covered, but is everyone aware that Trump is recording an interview with Joe Rogan this Friday?
There's bound to be some zingers to fill the news cycle coming out during an interview this big. We have no idea if the questions are vetted, but Rogan is normally pretty adamant about having freeform interviews where he can ask anything.
Some other points:
- Rogan historically has been anti-Trump and Trump has been anti-Rogan. In July 2022, Rogan said "I've had the opportunity to have him on my show more than once—I've said no every time. I don't want to help him. I'm not interested in helping him,". Trump for his part has been taking swipes at Rogan as recently as August.
- Their views on each other have seemingly softened over the past 6 months, with many podcasters recently asking Trump if he'd go on Rogan and him being lukewarm in his response (as compared to negative). Rogan has been evasive about any Trump interview for years, but has been pretty vocal about the mainstream media being coordinated to criticise Trump in the wake of the first assassination attempt.
- Musk hinted the interview would happen a couple of weeks ago.
- There's rumours Harris will also have an interview with Rogan. I can't see her performing well with Rogan's target audience (around 80% male, around 56% under 35yo) as everything she has done is moderated and controlled. That wouldn't work with Rogan's format.
I really think that the deal for this interview was sealed anytime in the last couple of months and its timing was coordinated for maximum effect. You couldn't drop this interview at a better time to affect the election.
It's Better to be Lucky than Good
I’m not a practiced Bayesian, and to be honest this is as much as a victory lap as it is a reflection on my priors. Oh lets, be honest. This is mostly a victory lap.
My major election posts in the lead up:
-
I noted Joe Rogan had solidified his status as a Kingmaker after the Trump interview. This seems to have been born out by Trump’s quick acknowledgment of Rogan’s endorsement and the large shout out by Dana White in Trump’s Victory speech. Even before the interview, I noted Trump going on Rogan was a Big Deal. I realized I was right about the impact when NBC of all things made multiple references to the ‘Joe Rogan Army’ during their election coverage when noting the young male turnout.
-
After going on Rogan, the McDonalds photo op, and Kamala’s failure to resonate in her campaign, I made a Trump win prediction at 55-60% certainty 10 days before the election.
-
I quickly noted the Selzer poll was likely bullshit.
Things I got wrong:
-
I underestimated the impact of the Garbage fiasco. I thought it was just more random flotsam in the election and would probably be quickly forgotten. To be fair I didn’t know Trump’s team would use meme magic to force the MSM to cover Trump speaking from a garbage truck. The nail in the coffin was when he honked the horn (rare footage)
-
I didn’t post about this, but I did upvote Blackpill posts about Democrat election fraud. I really did expect 3am mystery trucks, election officials putting up paper over the windows and keeping monitors outside, gas/water leaks and restarting the count after monitors had gone home etc etc at about 65-70% certainty. That didn’t eventuate thankfully.
Takeaways:
I’m not an American citizen/resident so I’m not immersed in the election. I am ‘very online’. I rate my election prediction performance as ‘not bad’ for this one, but I put that down to my information diet curation. My major aggregator was actually here at the Motte (with some other centrist non-MSM sources) and I would then go down rabbit holes myself for further research. I leveraged the screening and arguments of this forum to better inform myself, so I consider myself pretty lucky to be here.
One last point is that I’m upgrading my view of betting markets to consider them a credible source. They won’t be my only source, but I’m now taking them seriously. Polymarket got this one right.
This time, a German architecture prize was rescinded over the recipient signing a letter condemning Israel.
I wish someone could come up with a zinger viral label for an award, title or qualification that is contingent on holding the correct ideological opinions. Then all of the ones that are could be labelled and de-legitimised in the eyes of the larger public. Everything from the Oscars, to Nobel Prizes, to Hugo Awards. Even the College of Psychologists of Ontario (CPO) that sent Jordan Peterson to the Commissars for 're-education'.
Once these things are properly deemed farcical, it might be the first step in a course correction. Let people striving for these things know in black and white what their opinions must be in order to receive and keep them. Then maybe you'll get college students/neophytes going 'nah, I don't want to have to be a communist/environmentalist/progressive/ultra-conservative so I'll just pick a different career' so they don't have to deal with it. With the wellspring of aspirants in cut off, the awards risk becoming irrelevant and might feel pressure to change their ways.
Better yet they actually would become irrelevant and fade into obscurity.
But billionaires get open license for underage pussy because they're rich? No, they should face the same crushing punishments inflicted on ordinary people who have sex with underage women, regardless of whatever ameliorating circumstances there are.
Absolutely. There's really no excuse for it. Billionaires can afford to employ a 'fixer' to get them whatever they desire (presuming what they desire isn't something explicitly underage). It's not difficult to do a background check to confirm all the girls are 18+, check them for discretion, make them sign NDA's etc.
I will agree that finding and employing a trustworthy fixer is something that would likely take time and effort though.
Furthermore, Epstein committing 'suicide' in the anti-suicide ward while the cameras were conveniently switched off is clear proof of some kind of paedophile-sex ring deeply embedded in the US government. The Q people were directionally correct.
It was blatant. As soon as cameras malfunction in a prison a tech is called out. High priority camera feeds are constantly monitored by people in a prison's control room on a monitor wall. A camera that is used for suicide watches malfunctioning is not something that can happen unnoticed. If a camera or NVR (recording server) malfunctions, a large blatantly clear alert pops up on the security management system. Most systems, especially those in prisons, have a redundant recording server so there are two copies of the video feeds.
I don't know how they got all the prison guards to shut up about it though. It would have been an expensive and high risk operation to shut so many mouths.
I also don't know if it was a paedophile ring, but Epstein clearly knew something that someone powerful didn't want getting out and that someone tied up loose ends. It must have been very important to them to make such a blatant move that clearly erodes so many peoples' trust in the justice system.
Edit: I should have said I don't know if it was THE paedophile ring and the client list directly that got him silenced or the information that he gained by leveraging that kompromat.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
7mo ago
Yeah, the 'Russian Asset' came direct from Hillary during the 2019 DNC primaries.
Why are District Attorneys so reluctant to charge multiple opposing parties in a single incident? In this case why isn't the pro Palestinian charged with assault or Violation of a Constitutional Right Causing Injury?
It reminds me of another example; the Apple River stabbing, where the teenagers weren't charged with assault which happened prior to the man pulling his knife to stab people. Same problem.
Are DA's reluctant to muddy the waters with conflicting cases like this? Is this a political motivation where they are 'chasing wins'?
Edit: Turns out the DA did charge the other party a day later as per a news article linked in Ben Garrison's post here.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
2mo ago
Its more the 'You aren't against wheelchair access are you? Then approve our racial quotas!' that gets me riled up.
They bundle these things together to get 'inclusion' to do the heavy lifting for 'diversity' and 'equity'.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
5mo ago
"Better keep giving charity to us or we will kill you."
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
8mo ago
CNN and the New York Times can only dream of having the sort of veiwership, and cross-cultural appeal that The Joe Rogan Experience enjoys.
Events like this are just another nail in the coffin for the mainstream media. Could you imagine a single man having more political influence and ability to be a 'kingmaker' than an entire news network a couple of decades ago? Just amazing.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
8mo ago
Snopes tried their best to prove this true and still failed.
Aside from the above-mentioned news reports, there was no tangible evidence of Harris working at McDonald's as a college student. We reached out to Harris' campaign, as well as McDonald's headquarters, seeking tax records or other proof — which could include photos or videos of her working at the restaurant, employment records or physical items such as a uniform or name tag. We also reached out to Harris' sister, Maya, as well as a close friend from Howard University seeking comment, and looked for public interviews by friends or family members of Harris' to confirm the story, with no luck.
I don't think it happened.
I found some commentary on /r/moderatepolitics where she's criticised for being pro-Russian (so of course a Russian agent) and pro-Assad (because apparently she visited Syria and had an opportunistic meeting with Assad; after which she was a 'skeptic' of Assad using chemical weapons on his own people). There was some speculation on reddit that the senate wouldn't confirm her DNI appointment for the above reasons. She apparently also backed conversion therapy when she was younger. I haven't fact checked or done a deep dive on any of this. I'm just providing a hook for people to start their own research.
I'm actually a big fan of Tulsi after seeing her several times on Rogan (Transcript). She is against the MIC, the deep state (unelected bureaucrats) and forever wars. I was disappointed that she didn't get SecDef and worried that she would be sidelined, but my confidence was restored with the DNI selection. She's unironically what I would like to see as a female president.
I don't know how 2028 primaries will turn out, but I'd expect Rubio, Vance and Gabbard to compete. Vance and Gabbard seemed to get along very well on the campaign trail (Vance being an (ex)marine and Gabbard being Reserve Army).
Edit: Adding some links. Atlantic article doing some character assassination here.
Edit Edit: Glenn Greenwald pushing back against Tulsi attacks here.
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
1mo ago
I have a friend that volunteers as a firefighter. One of the disappointing stories he told me was that they were recently told they needed to comply with newly invented needless bureaucratic safetyist paperwork that the regular firefighters have to deal with. Except those guys are paid for it. He said it was really taking the shine off their volunteer work.
I don't blame him for reconsidering. People volunteer because they enjoy what they are doing. Knowing bureaucrats in the public service that have mandated this extra paperwork, they would not know or care about the downstream impacts on manpower that their decision will make.
At least until there's a volunteer manpower shortage and they either pay someone to comply with the onerous amount of boring administration or they wind the requirements back.
So frustrating. High trust, community focused volunteering that contributes to social cohesion and the govt is taking it for granted. Mindless.
Arguably the primary targets are boys
I'd even just stop it here. Feminists like other critical theorists have done their own march through the educational institutions. I haven't really seen any pushback in Western public school systems and when I do it ends up as a cautionary tale..
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
8mo ago
General JD/Rogan comment:
When he heard Trump was shot he took his kids home from mini-golf, loaded his guns and stood sentry at his house. Fuck yeah.
JD's phrasing is exactly how an underling should disagree with his boss before a final decision is made. I've used similar phrasing before, even to my boss's face and it is entirely appropriately to do so in private (sausage factory) communications.
It isn't disrespectful, it provides an alternative point of view ('have you considered these ramifications..?') and he was very clear that he would support the consensus decision. This is exactly the type of thinking you want in committees like this.
Consider the alternative; pure Yes-manning. Would a leader want a sycophant in his camp? Ok, Trump might, but not in a position like VP. If Vance was like that behind the scenes, trump would not respect him and not delegate power to his VP in the way that Vance has been assigned this administration.
More options
Context Copy link