Essentially along the lines described below by other posters. I would expect priests to be disproportionately virgins or bad at dating for the obvious reasons, and they are also often older and regarded as pillars of the community. Finally, Christianity has certain ideas about what women and dating are like and how they should work (as do feminism, PUA, etc.) and priests are sort of expected to uphold those values.
As such, it's not that priests are incentivised to lie to you exactly, but I think to some extent they are motivated to lie to themselves and also they will not necessarily tell you all their own private thoughts. Some very self-aware exception will exist, as with any other creed, but I don't think institutional authority figures in general are very helpful in this sphere.
Forgive my directness, but as someone who desperately needs reliable advice, is this coming from an experienced participant or an onlooker like myself?
At the risk of being circular, one answer is that if your friends are getting loads of dates / sex with reasonably attractive girls, they are in fact giga-chads because that's what being a giga-chad is. Whereas if someone is rich and handsome but can't get girls interested in him, it would be odd to call him chaddish. Some men seem to have It, a strange factor that impresses other people, and much of the verbiage spilled here and elsewhere is working out what It is and how people who don't have It can get It.
I wonder if it’s basically shared knowledge. The thing about dating is that nobody will tell you how it works. If you’re lucky in your social circle, you and your friends figure it out in your late teens and pool your shared knowledge and experience. If not, your only option is people who are incentivised to lie to you: priests, gamer girls, masculinity influencers, MeToo journalists, etc.
For various reasons, all these people tell you what they want you to believe, not what’s true. For high-conscientiousness men especially this is a killer.
People flock to those like themselves, so you have all-male groups who collectively have no idea how to get dates and have male hobbies as an alternative, versus mixed groups like yours who all date constantly.
I think that might explain what you see.
Isn’t that asking someone out? Or at least heavily indicating a desire to do so?
My understanding is that both parties provide plausible deniability whilst looking for positive indications. So the reply might be a laugh and a change of subject for no and a smile + ‘you’ll never know unless you try’ for yes. Am I totally off here? Paging @TitaniumButterfly here also.
Nobody teaches you how to do this stuff, unless you’re lucky and have generous male friends who know better than you do.
Play the game, it’s fantastic. The author really, really thought about how to write a murder mystery after he did Higurashi and the result is literally like nothing else.
The main sticking point is that the beginning until the first death is very slow and the characters seem kind of weird until you get where they’re coming from. If you stick in there it gets a lot more exciting.
The emotion related spren (as opposed to wind etc.) are mostly gloryspren, creationspren, fearspren etc. and I think they are generally attracted to emotion when it's expressed strongly enough that it's hard to hide. In practice the questions you raise don't seem to come up. There are spren related to lying and things you might want to hide but a) they're not around much for reasons and b) they're good at hiding! The nature of spren is explored more later but not really their effects on society - they're bottom feeders reacting to currents, not integrated into those currents per se.
Can actors cause spren to appear which outwardly indicate the appearance of a particular emotion, even when the actor is not authentically experiencing that emotion internally?
No, I don't think so.
I think it’s mostly the former, with the giant flaw if you have a federal government, a sufficient number of illegals living in communities many hundreds of miles away will end up forcing you to accept their own preferences via the ballot box.
And on the other side, why “The Emerging Demographic Majority” caused such a storm when it was published.
Are you using it on carpet? Some scales come with extra feet for that - the cushioning reduces the measured weight otherwise. I got measured as about 38 kilos and I'm... not that. Try it on a flat, hard surface before you give it away.
In no way is an overstatement, although in many ways I agree. To take the obvious one, sexual freedoms have clearly increased, not entirely to society’s benefit.
Don’t be ridiculous, they need to be white or shiny to reflect heat. Otherwise the seats will get uncomfortably hot. Pay attention to the details, people!
They do seem to vary. My friend was given painkillers in hospital and had exactly the same 'all the time, when nice things happen, I think to myself that heroin was nicer' reaction that was reported above; others have said otherwise. It would be pretty neat if we could find a genetic basis for this and know who it was safe to give painkillers to.
Which IMO leads to anarchy, semi-organised militia, and national / international terrorism. ISIS was 'the people sorting it out themselves'. So was the Taliban and so is al-Queda.
I think the darker fantasy in both cases, which you see less often now for political reasons, is they’ll give it up for me.
E.g. James Bond and Pussy Galore. The old, anti-gay attitude is, ‘I’ll show you a real man’. Even the threesome fantasy is not about being used as a temporary novelty by a couple who are devoted to each other but not to you, but requires they be at least somewhat interested in the male partner.
Hmm, fair point. Though I doubt those people have a good diet and other routines for maintaining personal health, which might cause them to smell worse than they would otherwise.
Halitosis is also a problem for some people.
She had that one story about having a breakdown as a child because too many people were looking at her.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if she’d grown up pretty and ’got over’ the shyness by becoming an exhibitionist and basking in the positive male attention. Discovering later on that a majority of that attention (beyond what she could see in direct interactions and on her cams) was actually negative might be quite difficult to bear.
Essentially you're saying we should shame because she's an effective promoter of her ideas through her niceness?
Artistic merit used to be considered an aggravating factor under 19th Century censorship law for precisely this reason.
(I don’t necessarily endorse this position but I think it’s an interesting and relatable historical fact.)
You will be pleased to know that I haven’t experimented with it but I’m open to believing that modern people wash far too much.
Depending on their genes, many people don’t actually seem to produce much body odour and most animals don’t AFAIK smell foul if they aren’t washed daily.
The historical standard was regular dry wipe-downs with a linen cloth and baths maybe once a month; the theories I’ve heard that our oil glands are in constant overdrive from all the hot water seem plausible to me, although that doesn’t mean they’re true.
The right used to feel this way too, didn’t they? Until wokeness got really going.
There was the attitude of, “look, I’m being very polite and reasonable as I make my argument for why Thatcher was right / why it makes me uncomfortable that my home town is being taken over by foreigners. Can’t we just have a civilised conversation about this?”
I suppose that’s not quite the same, as there isn’t the presumption of agreement.
I think the pro-Capitalism and pro-liberal-democracy portions are more prone to thinking that their positions are obviously correct and that if someone doesn’t agree with them then it must be because they didn’t understand the arguments.
Her analysis seems reasonable to me. We had a poster a little while ago who wished it was socially acceptable to join a monastery because he was tired of being jerked around (unintentionally) by pretty girls who would never have anything to do with him.
I’m not sure this is true - nuns have been the subject of male desire for ever, as have Catholic girls and lesbians. And simultaneously the subject of mild resentment - general rejection is still rejection.
Oh, neat. Your people don’t waste any time.
I think he had a very legal way of thinking and the Motte's general move towards 'fuck the legal argy-bargy, this is bollocks and you know it' style argumentation didn't sit well with him. Couple that with repeatedly trying to litigate J6 & Trump's prosecution and he started getting dogpiled a lot. Not entirely without reason IMO but it can't have been much fun.
- Prev
- Next
That seems sensible. I know a fat, short dude who's fun but not good looking by anyone's standards (think fat Gimli) but he has a happy marriage with a lovely girl who he essentially seduced away from a much handsomer and richer dude; he's as forward as that sounds.
I think that it's partly that dating is heavily subject to virtuous cycles - even if you're dating on tinder, if you've got photos of yourself with affectionate women, if you're obviously comfortable with women, if you know how dating works and how to take the lead and make people feel comfortable, that makes up for a lot. Which is encouraging in that it suggests that datability can be improved, it's just that from a certain starting point it's hard to see how in an easily actionable way. @kky had the right of it when he talked about tractability. Also mixed friendship groups probably help a lot.
More options
Context Copy link