@Folamh3's banner p




4 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 13 13:37:36 UTC



User ID: 1175



4 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 13 13:37:36 UTC







User ID: 1175

The second one is pretty cool

I think the font and colour choices would be better suited to some girly Bridget Jones-y chicklit novel than to a sci-fi novel.

#1 makes me want to read the book more than the other two

Issa joke

Obvious trolls/bad actors have been exploiting the various Anglosphere policies on trans women in prisons and sports for years with little to no pushback from the TRAs themselves. I'd be surprised if a tech conference proves to be the straw that breaks the camel's back, although I suppose stranger things have happened. "Academic politics are the most bitter because the stakes are so low" and all that.

No idea what you're trying to say, sorry.

Most nail salons include a complementary colostomy bag on the way out the door.

Reminiscent of Christopher McCandless too.

True, although some of this stuff is more mainstream than you might think. Andres Serrano created the cover art for two Metallica albums, for example.

Following up on /u/MaiqTheTrue's point:

  • A tin of shit sold for €275,000 in 2016.
  • Andres Serrano's "artworks" (many of which involve bodily fluids in some way—depicting, for example, blood (sometimes menstrual blood), semen or human breast milk) routinely fetch anywhere from five to six figures. This includes "Piss Christ", a "photograph of a plastic crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist's own urine", which sold for a quarter-million in 1999 (half-million in today's money).
  • Damien Hirst's entire career.
  • "My Bed" (a "readymade installation, consisting of [artist Tracey Emin's] unmade dirty bed, in which she had spent several weeks drinking, smoking, eating, sleeping and having sexual intercourse while undergoing a period of severe emotional flux... The artwork featured used condoms and blood-stained underwear") fetched £2.5 million in 2014.

In modern art, artists making intentionally ugly, crass and disgusting work is no impediment to their making a pretty penny.

This is far from the first time that you and I have done this particular song and dance. You'll make some blanket claim about X-outcome is entirely explained by genetics and then someone usually myself or @FCfromSSC will point out that all the genetics in the world won't teach kids to read, or turn a flabby sack of dough into NFL athlete if they don't eat well and go to the gym, at which point you accuse your interlocutor of misunderstanding what you plainly said and/or quoting you out context. Rinse, wash, repeat, every 3 - 4 months.

For what it's worth, pretty much everything in this paragraph is unambiguously false. I recall exactly one instance in which I expressed a HBD opinion, you disagreed with me, and I replied to you attempting to clarify my opinion (the comment to which you linked, above). I cannot find any examples in the intervening seven months in which I expressed a HBD opinion and you or @FCfromSSC replied to contradict me. This is the second instance in the last seven months in which you tagged me in a comment to use me as an example of how monstrous and wretched HBDers are, without me actually saying anything new to prompt you doing so. I went through my comment replies from the last year and found five examples of @FCfromSSC replying to a comment I'd posted, none of which bore even the most tangential relationship to HBD:

I went through my notifications on Reddit as far back as April 2021 and couldn't find a single occasion on which @FCfromSSC replied to a comment of mine in the old subreddit. These are the only times you replied to comments of mine in the old place, and neither of them have anything to do with HBD:

I'm open to correction, you're welcome to link me to a comment of mine in which I expressed a HBD opinion and you or @FCfromSSC replied to contradict me, but after digging through two-and-a-half years of comments on two websites, I can't find anything remotely resembling the sequence of events you've described, which supposedly recurs every 3-4 months. At this point I think it's only reasonable to assume that either you've mistaken me for someone else (easy mistake to make, nobody's perfect), or are simply lying.

Either substantiate your ridiculous assertions or piss off and leave me alone.

I stopped considering the HBDers here worthy of engagement.

If you don't consider HBDers worthy of engagement, then stop engaging with me. Stop tagging me in comments as part of conversations I'm not part of.

I don't want to interact with you ever again in any capacity, but you're the one who keeps forcing the issue. Just stop interacting with me and we can go our separate ways.

I don't recall suggesting that the sexual revolution was invented by women.

Get lost and stop trying to involve me every time you have a debate about HBD. I'm not particularly interested in discussing this topic with anyone, and certainly not with someone as obnoxious and inconsiderate as you.

stop providing such good examples.

The last time I provided you with a good example of the poor behaviour of HBDers was seven months ago. If I had provided a more recent example, you would have used it. I haven't, which is why you have to keep bringing up a comment I posted seven months ago. You have this bizarre fantasy that I'm constantly posting about HBD, but you have to trawl through seven months of comments I've posted to find one that illustrates how awful you think I am. And you know what? I think it's sad, I really do.

How long, exactly, do I have to not post a HBD-related comment before you will stop pinging me every time you have a debate on this topic? A year? Two years? Three? You're demanding that I "stop" providing you with good examples of HBDers being obnoxious, but please tell me: what the fuck does "stop" mean to you if not "hasn't done it for seven months"?

If you want to think I'm a horrible wretched human being, fine, go nuts. Just extend a tiny modicum of common courtesy and stop pinging me every time you have a debate about HBD with someone. It's really not hard and I don't see why you have to be so gratuitously obnoxious just because I don't share your opinion.

melanin content

In the comment of mine you linked to, I was discussing the differences in educational outcomes between middle-class students attending private schools and working-class students in state schools - in Ireland. Ireland, as you may be aware, is about 90% white. Almost every student in either the private or state schools under discussion is white. In my experience, if anything the private schools tend to be more ethnically diverse than the state schools, which doesn't impact on their having consistently higher educational outcomes than the state schools. If you think that the comment you linked to proves that I think poor black people are less intelligent than rich white people - well, it doesn't. You are simply, unambiguously wrong.

Perhaps the most striking example is this comedy film from 2002 about a basketball player who gets suspended from the men's league and tries to pass himself off as a woman so he can compete in the women's league.

Well there's a scene in either season 1 or 2 which consists entirely of House aggressively berating a woman for refusing to vaccinate her child, so.

In my follow-up comments to the comment you linked, I made it abundantly clear that when I said "it's all genetics" I was exaggerating for rhetorical effect, and I do not, in fact, believe that culture plays zero role in educational outcomes. My hyperbolic assertion that "it's all genetics" was intended to contrast with the attitudes of certain education researchers who do, apparently, believe that genetics plays no role in educational outcomes, and that educational outcomes are entirely determined by culture, upbringing and school quality.

I've made my actual position on this matter abundantly clear to you, and I think it's rather tiresome and dishonest of you to quote this off-the-cuff comment out of context. You seem convinced that this off-the-cuff comment I made in passing was some sort of "mask-off" moment for me, and all the follow-up comments I made expressing my actual position in more nuanced detail were simply lies. I don't know how you arrived at this position and I don't appreciate being misrepresented.

I would greatly appreciate it if you would knock it off and stop involving me every time you want to make a point about how evil and wretched HBDers are. And don't tell a story that you're only pinging me because I'm "one of the Motte's most prominent HBD proponents" or whatever: I barely discuss the issue at all, and the comment you linked is from seven months ago. In the interim, out of the dozens if not hundreds of comments I've posted here, I've discussed HBD in any capacity a grand total of three times, in one case because you were pinging me about it, in another case to explicitly refute the claim that HBD is the cause of disproportionate homicide rates between ethnic groups in the US. It's not a topic I know much about, claim any expertise in or discuss with any great frequency.

If you're so convinced that rabid, unqualified endorsement of HBD is the median position on this site, it shouldn't be remotely hard for you to find a better example to illustrate your point than me, a guy who has never claimed any expertise in the topic, doesn't find it particularly interesting and barely talks about it. Given that you know all of the foregoing, it's really obnoxious of you to repeatedly bring me up any time you're trying to score points in a HBD debate, especially now that you've been explicitly requested not to do so in future.

Understood, apologies.

Or at least that you can't depict a character behaving like this if they're intended to be a likeable anti-hero the audience can sympathise with (up to a point). Nowadays a character could only be depicted behaving like this if they were an out-and-out villain without any redeeming qualities.

I recently rewatched seasons 1 and 2. One that jumped out for me was a season 1 episode in which a black politician is running for President. House scoffs at the idea that a black man could ever be elected President, and by the end of the episode the man himself admits that he doesn't expect to win, but thinks it's worth it in hopes that the act of doing so might inspire change.

In the second episode of season 2, there's a nine-year-old girl with terminal cancer who asks Chase (a thirty-year-old man) to kiss her, as she doesn't want to die without having been kissed. He's reluctant, but eventually does it. His colleagues tease him about it, but it's presented as an essentially compassionate act.

In the third episode of season 2, the cause of a Mexican day labourer's illness is a disease he contracted from a rooster at the underground cockfighting ring he works in. One suspects that this plot point would be decried as promoting harmful stereotypes against Hispanic people if it happened today.

There's a season 2 episode featuring a couple who practise consensual RP and BDSM. It's eventually revealed that the wife is trying to murder the husband for undisclosed reasons. You could argue this is stigmatising people with kinks.

I hadn't thought of that. When I think about immigrants coming to Australia I immediately think of Chinese and Vietnamese, but I suppose there are a lot of Lebanese as well, aren't there? Would you happen to have stats on the most biggest immigrant groups by source nation over the last few decades?

Wow I can't remember the last time accused me of being "triggered" by something.

Ballard, who was played by Jim Caviezel in the hit film Sound of Freedom, is said to have sent at least one woman a photo of himself in his underwear, festooned with fake tattoos

I was reading your account and, because I don't know what Ballard looks like, I was picturing Jim Caviezel sending a woman a sexy mirror selfie. I looked up the man himself and he looks like a weird cross between Ray Liotta and that one blond guy who was the villain in every movie/TV show made in the Noughties.

I'm not sure if he quite fits, as to my knowledge no evidence has been presented suggesting that he personally abused the child trafficking victims he ostensibly came to rescue. Abusing your position of power to try to get your subordinates into bed with you is the kind of run-of-the-mill sex scandal not peculiar to any individual line of work.

Thank you for your clarification, but I still disagree with you.

It's not just feminist sources pushing this culture: It's songs, it's movies, it's TV shows. It's in the assumptions college professors

College professors, Hollywood movies and TV shows, and American pop songs being famed for their rabid opposition to feminism.

Do you think most men who expect women to sleep with them on the first date expect this because they are feminists?

Just because the bootleggers gained financially from prohibition, doesn't mean that prohibition wasn't fought for by the baptists.

I'm not saying that the only people saying "hey, casual sex is cool" are feminists - obviously teen sex comedies, sitcoms etc. do that too. But the specific adjective you used was "empowering", and I honestly can't remember the last time I heard that adjective used in conversation by someone who didn't openly, loudly identify themselves as feminist. There may be many kinds of sources telling young women that casual sex is fun, cool, exciting etc. but I think it's reasonable to assume that the only people telling young women that casual sex is empowering are feminists.