@FiveHourMarathon's banner p

FiveHourMarathon

Wawa Nationalist

17 followers   follows 6 users  
joined 2022 September 04 22:02:26 UTC

And every gimmick hungry yob

Digging gold from rock n roll

Grabs the mic to tell us

he'll die before he's sold

But I believe in this

And it's been tested by research

He who fucks nuns

Will later join the church


				

User ID: 195

FiveHourMarathon

Wawa Nationalist

17 followers   follows 6 users   joined 2022 September 04 22:02:26 UTC

					

And every gimmick hungry yob

Digging gold from rock n roll

Grabs the mic to tell us

he'll die before he's sold

But I believe in this

And it's been tested by research

He who fucks nuns

Will later join the church


					

User ID: 195

My father, who grew up a witness before leaving the faith when he went to college, would tell you that the poor witnesses get favors off the rich witnesses, and the rich witnesses take advantage of the poor witnesses. It's like intentionally joining an ethnic minority!

My uncles and cousins over the years have stuck us with all kinds of Witness contractors, at varying levels of competency. They make sure their co-religionists get work! But, they would often call my dad and yell at him for paying the Witness contractors too much, telling him if my father paid them that much then they would start expecting that much from my uncle. They exploit the poor witnesses!

It's mostly just like a serious version of any other sect of Prots. There's a sense of community, there's a strong religious set of teachings and morals, there's family. The theology doesn't seem any stupider, really, than most. Certainly less difficult than Mormonism.

And of course there's the missionaries, door knockers will get some people by nature who happen to be at a vulnerable moment. A family friend became a witness when he was involved in some unfortunate dealings with some unfortunate characters, and one day his car was set on fire by way of persuasion. Well his wife told him to clean up his life that very day or she was leaving with the kids. That very day a knock came at the door, and a copy of Watchtower in his hand.

It's sort of like the Taxi theory of marriage in Sex and the City: men are like Taxis, you can wave at them all you want when they are off duty or have passengers, but the moment the light comes on the first woman to wave at them can get in. The same goes for a man looking for a wife, you can date a man for years and if he isn't ready for marriage he won't propose while once he is ready for marriage he will propose to the next woman he dates, or in this case for a religion. If you happen to run into the Witnesses at a time in your life where you need a religion, you will become a Witness, just as surely as you would have become a Mormon or a Baptist or a Muslim. The Witnesses (and the Mormons) stack the odds in their favor by constantly recruiting, they are more likely to run into a person ready to adopt a religion by constantly Witnessing to those around them.

There's an entire half of my family that are Witnesses, yeah. I can go into the religious history of the family FiveHour if you'd like but I'm not sure it's particularly interesting.

and/or the Kurds invading.

Kurds don't really invade. It's not their thing. Kurds are basically hillbillies, they hold onto Kurdish majority areas easily enough, but there's no amount of weapons you can give them to get them to march on Tehran.

In terms of ability, I agree with the others that the US seems to be pretty good at taking out speedboats.

There's a big difference between taking out a random speedboat, and taking out every single speedboat.

Maduro’s party preferred making a deal with America to dying.

Has Delcy actually done anything that benefits America and goes against their interests? So far it seems like sanctions shuffling or limited sanctions relief with oil being redirected to US refineries. I'm not plugged into what the flow of drugs looks like at a statistical level, but it sure doesn't feel like there are fewer drugs around.

If Iran was ruled by people with the character and belief system of EU bureaucrats they would have surrendered on the day, shaking their heads.

Has this ever come true? The same was said about Ukraine wasn't it, that surely they would surrender their fake bullshit country? I don't know what country has ever actually surrendered under bombardment without even a threat of ground invasion.

Which eliminates the entire idea of inspiring fear to avoid hatred.

Keep reading

Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated, which will always be as long as he abstains from the property of his citizens and subjects and from their women. But when it is necessary for him to proceed against the life of someone, he must do it on proper justification and for manifest cause...

Russia sells oil, reducing the global supply of oil benefits their bottom line.

And there's a big difference between the number of missiles required to make it physically impossible to transit the strait, and the number required to make it too risky to want to transit it.

A guy on his porch with a shotgun can't stop my bicycling club from riding down the road, he can't shoot all 20 of us before we get through! We'd probably change the route, regardless.

I pray for my loved ones, unfortunately on both sides of the guns here.

In WWII, the same situation lead my ancestors to become Jehovah's Witnesses.

Many Iranians in America had said to me before the war, for years in the past, that if Trump just dropped a few bombs on Iran and killed Khamenei it would be the best thing for Iran. Let's not totally ignore that things could improve over time even if right now it seems unlikely. The American and French and Russian and Chinese revolutions all seemed certain to fail at different times.

Iran has done some of that recently: what did the Azeris do to them?

In pure utilitarian terms Iran can inflict more pain on the United States (and by extension Israel) by attacking parts of the world economy than it can by attacking Americans. In two weeks Americans as a whole have suffered more from gas prices jumping $.75 than they have from six or a dozen dead servicemen. Bombing other countries harms the world economy.

I also think the IRGC, just like every other bomb commander in the world, is under the impression that the enemy population in the Gulf is uniquely weak and cowardly and will surrender as the result of bombing. This despite knowing that brave Iranians will get angry and rally to the flag under enemy bombing.

So, assuming for a second that the Trump administration is telling the truth, the Iranians are two weeks from the bomb in perpetuity?

Iran will quickly complete its bomb.

Is it your opinion that the previous rounds of bombing targeting Iran's nuclear program were ineffective, or that from a standing start Iran will still be able to get to the finish line quite quickly?

One might go so far as to say that friendship is the perpetuation of society.

The question in either case is whether your standards are getting you what you want. The standards exist for man, not man for the standards.

Something I don't typically see discussed with respect to friendships, only sex, Standards are too high. This meme, essentially.

A lot of people seem to want their friends to be perfectly suited to them. I want to watch a movie with my friend, but I also want to watch the exact movie I want to watch. I want to join a book club, but I also want to read exactly the book I want to read. I want a workout buddy, but I also want to do exactly the workout I want to do. I want to join a close knit church, but I also want to have these exact and obscure religious beliefs.

Having lots of friends seems to naturally involve disdaining most of them at one level or another, and we seem to have lost that skill of remaining friends and valuing friendships while disrespecting each other. Think of our great fictional friendships. Jerry thinks George is a bad person and Kramer is a nut, they'll still go see a movie together; Hank thinks Bill is a loser and Dale's politics are weird and insane, they'll still drink a beer together; Dorothy thinks Blanche is a slut and Rose is an idiot but the song still goes "Thank you for being a friend..." (I felt insane the first time I heard the original of that song on the radio).

The profusion of infinite media entertainment choices has made this immeasurably worse. When current hit movies in theaters were the dominant form of visual entertainment, you might go to see a movie and hate the movie but you went anyway. You went because it was something to do, because everyone else was going and you wanted to talk about it, and your other option was just not watching a movie at all. Now if your buddy wants to watch a movie on streaming, odds are it wasn't the movie you wanted to watch, so you're not that interested in going over to his place to watch it when you can watch exactly the movie you wanted to watch instead.

Spread this across what concerts you would want to go to. It used to be that the vast majority of young people were listening to the same music at the same time, and if you had tickets to a concert most people would at least consider going. Even the odd guy out who was super into something weird understood he was the weird one. Now, among my friends, few of us share any musical taste, really. Spread this across what books you want to read together. What church you go to. What your political beliefs are. There's an infinite menu and people aren't willing to accept the friction of differences to achieve friendship.

This is why live action spectator sports are such a strong source of social cohesion for a lot of people. Sundays are for The Birds, we all know what we're watching and when. There's no question about picking what to watch, it's an event. We all get together at a set time and a set place. It can be the fights, it can be the game, it can be The Bachelor. But live action spectator events bring people together around a specific constraint, without room for people to make other choices.

You can interpret it many ways!

I think the countercultural reading of Biff tends to focus more on the fact that he doesn't want to get a real job, he liked being an itinerant farm hand.

But the Charley-Bernard vs Biff-Willy conflict is the heart of the "liked but not well liked" iconic line in the play:

Willy: Bernard is not well liked, is he?
Biff: He’s liked, but he’s not well liked.
Happy: That’s right, Pop.
Willy: That’s just what I mean, Bernard can get the best marks in school, y’understand, but when he gets out in the business world, y’understand, you are going to be five times ahead of him. That’s why I thank Almighty God you’re both built like Adonises. Because the man who makes an appearance in the business world, the man who creates personal interest, is the man who gets ahead. Be liked and you will never want. You take me, for instance. I never have to wait in line to see a buyer. ‘‘Willy Loman is here!’’ That’s all they have to know, and I go right through.

Willy and his boys are focused on superficial qualities, athleticism and looks and appearance and popularity, High School qualities. Bernard and Charley focus on academics, learning, focus, and Charley finishes way ahead of Biff and Hap, who "peak in high school."

It's a sub plot, but it's there. And I think it can be considered central because of how Miller recounts being inspired to write the play by his uncle Manny and his "constant endless race" between Arthur and his own son.

I ask you to consider that the Overton window has shifted significantly with regard to judging female sexual choice and single motherhood since Sk8er Boi was released.

Like I said, maybe I live in a different one than you do. Because in my social circles, it's extremely common to mock women for getting ugly or having multiple uninvolved fathers to her kids. I guess maybe it's the kind of thing, like being fat, that's tied to another reason to hate them: look at this BITCH from high school and how fat she got. I suppose I wouldn't bring it up at Church, but it's a common enough topic of conversation.

My own "peaked in high school" anecdotes: a few years back I was waiting for a table at a Perkins with a couple buddies, and in the lobby I kept looking at this guy surreptitiously across the room. Because I couldn't decide if I knew him or not: he looked just like Johny Johnson the quarterback and star pitcher I went to high school with, but he was fat. Like, really fat. Like Johny ate himself. And I couldn't quite make up my mind to go say hello before we were seated, I wasn't sure if I knew him or not.

So I went home and found Johny Johnson on Facebook and, yup, that was him. He was a middle school teacher at a local school, and an assistant coach for their football team. And fat. Very fat.

And I'm not going to lie, there's an atavistic part of my brain that wants to buy into the revenge fantasy of the "peaked in high school" narrative. In high school he was a star and I couldn't make the baseball team, but now I'm in the best shape of my life and he is obese. In high school he made fun of me and got invited to the good parties, now I make twice what he does. It's an easy and appealing narrative for me. He made fun of me on occasion in high school for being a loser (I was), but now I will make fun of him for being a loser!

But if I'm honest, that's both cruel and pointless, and it's an attempt to impose a just-world meaning on events that are basically unconnected. Johny wasn't that mean to me, probably less mean than I deserved if I'm honest, the urge to get one-up on him is just retrospective jealousy. The "peaked in high school" narrative is an attempt to impose meaning: his success in high school destined him to be a middle school teacher, my nerdy loserdom destined me for success. My dateless suffering as a teenager lead me to read Tolstoy and Chomsky and built my mind for law school, while his easy athletic success stunted his growth. But that's not really true. I probably would have wound up pretty much the same if I had made the baseball team, and nothing about his college football career prevented him from joining my gym and staying in shape. My suboptimal talents and choices in high school didn't lead to optimal talents and choices as an adult, nor did Johny's more optimal talents and choices in high school lead to suboptimal outcomes as an adult. At any rate, middle school teacher is a noble profession and I hope Johnny is happy.

Two other kids from my graduating class illustrate the point.

There was another kid on the football team, an absolute brick shithouse of a running back. I was briefly madly in love with his ex girlfriend senior year, she and her family referred to him as "Hooked on Phonics" after a disastrous Scrabble game at her house. Hooked on Phonics would seem a prime candidate to peak in high school, a hulking jock who could barely spell, but last I heard of him he's a captain in the Army, I think in some kind of missile targeting role. Good for Captain Phonics! And frankly he looks like he'd still mog me in the power clean.

A close friend of mine from high school, Ben seemed like the classic kid who would blossom after graduation, he was a straight-A AP student who was majoring in STEM at a state honor's college on scholarship. And more than raw academic smarts, I never met anyone like Ben for competitive gaming, he was a genius, he once pioneered a strategy in competitive Pokemon so unbeatable that it was later banned, he was a wizard at texas hold'em and brilliant at any card or board game. He seemed like he had all the traits to succeed as an adult. Ben got into drugs, never graduated, got arrested a few times, and died a couple years back, probably a drug overdose.

The truth is that provided you graduate high school and go to college, there's not much that happened in high school that will really hold you back or matter for the rest of your life. If you don't get arrested, don't get a bunch of DUIs, or get yourself killed or addicted to drugs, a free man in America can probably turn himself around. In either direction.

I suggest that we delineate female perishableness, which is a biological reality that cannot be addressed in polite company without the penalty of cancelling, from the peaking-in-high-school concept that does exist within the Overton window and is thus safe to discuss.

I guess maybe I live in a different Overton Window than you do, but it's pretty common both personally and culturally to mock the "hot girl in high school" who now either isn't as hot as the female speaker mocking her or who rejected the male speaker mocking her back then but would be chasing him now (see the link above to Sk8er Boi). My free association with "peaked in high school" is the proverbial prom king and queen, the jock and the hot girl, who are fat and ugly and still talking about prom twenty years later.

I’d also argue that it’s a bit over the top to argue that girls are often at their prettiest at 16-18. Realistically speaking I think female fertility and beauty usually peaks at the age of 21-22.

I'm not saying most women peak at 16, just that some do. Women in general peak in attractiveness after puberty and before they get fat, and because that's pretty much a ratchet (pre GLP1) and nobody really loses weight, girls who put on the freshman 15 (or 30) when they get to college are less hot than they were in high school.

If we're doing "peak hotness," if you take care of yourself and you don't get fat I don't think there's any really significant decline until at least 35, maybe later. Up to that point variation between people is much more important than variation between age groups.

I think it varies person to person, not just culturally or on a biological clock. People mature at different rates, hit important milestones at different times, have particular peak experiences at different times. For some people it's high school, for some it's college, for some it's serving in the military, for one of my second cousins he talks the same way about the time he spent working as a milkman.

Total opposite for me. High school feels like a blur in comparison to undergrad. High school me feels largely remote and unimportant, closer to kindergarten than to today, where freshman to junior years of undergrad there's hardly a month that didn't hardwire an important part of me through some experience or other.

So I don't think it's just that. Rather peaking in high school is a useful insult because someone who peaks in high school doesn't do anything high status or interesting (to writers), where peaking in college you probably move on to something more high status. Perhaps, like Stoner you become a professor, the guy who peaks in high school and now coaches the high school wrestling team is historically regarded as less than the guy who peaks in college, hangs around to get a phd, and becomes a professor, even though it's much the same behavior.

I'll check that out! My version, which I purchased for a great books course back in freshman year undergrad, is by Beidler. He doesn't do a poetic translation, but still rhymes occasionally, which I find off putting. If you aren't going to rhyme the whole time, I feel like you can never rhyme, because when I get a few rhymes I start expecting them to continue.

Let's return to some of the original texts: listen to Glory Days and read/watch/listen to Death of a Salesman with a particular focus on the characters of Biff and Happy.

Lyrics of Glory Days:

I had a friend was a big baseball player
Back in high school
He could throw that speedball by you
Make you look like a fool, boy
Saw him the other night at this roadside bar
I was walking in, he was walking out
We went back inside, sat down, had a few drinks
But all he kept talking about was
Glory days
Well, they'll pass you by, glory days
In the wink of a young girl's eye, glory days
Glory days (Alright)
Well, there's a girl that lives up the block
Back in school, she could turn all the boys' heads
Sometimes on a Friday, I'll stop by and have a few drinks
After she put her kids to bed
Her and her husband, Bobby, well they split up
I guess it's two years gone by now
We just sit around talking about the old times
She says when she feels like crying, she starts laughing, thinking 'bout
Glory Days

This is the basic concept: peaking in high school is about a person who still talks about events in high school, when they were the number one in high school. It's also, we can see, gender neutral. If anything, peaking in high school is way more common for women: girls are often at their prettiest at 16-18, I can remember a lot of girls in college where my wife looked at their old facebook pictures and thought "wow they were so pretty 30lbs ago..."

They were the hottest and the best in high school, everyone thought they were so cool, they did all the cool things back then, and now they don't, their life is limited and boring. So they still talk about high school.

Then consider Death of a Salesman, which Arthur Miller specifically wrote in reference to his uncle Manny a salesman. When Arthur was young, Manny was constantly comparing his own sons to Arthur, with the implication that they were in competition. Arthur, the weedy literary type, would go on to write important American plays and bang Marilyn Monroe; Manny killed himself. Throughout the play, Happy and Biff are Willy Loman's pride and joy, and he brags constantly about their exploits as athletes in high school, and derides his friend's son Bernard as an "anemic" loser. Now in their 30s, Bernard is arguing cases in front of the supreme court, while Happy is a cad and Biff is a burnout working as an itinerant farm laborer. The action of "peaking in high school" is largely through the mechanism of the parents, Willy and Charley, rather than through the boys themselves. Willy is still bragging about the high school exploits of his sons, while Charley doesn't need to even talk about Bernard's accomplishment because they are so obviously superior. Biff and Happy are pathetic, man-children, immature.

Salesman lives on as a canonical AP English Lit play because it speaks to something in the human condition: Arthur Miller's revenge of the nerds fantasy against his uncle. A lot of people, high school nerds, recognize themselves in Bernard.

the cover blurb is from the (now disgraced) Neil Gaiman

Is he still disgraced? The whole thing seemed so silly I kind of assumed it would blow over.