@FtttG's banner p

FtttG

Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.

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

https://firsttoilthenthegrave.substack.com/


				
User ID: 1175


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
FtttG


								
								
									
								
								

								

								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				
Gheobhaidh mé bás ar an gcnoc seo.

				
				
				

				

					6 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					joined 2022 September 13 13:37:36 UTC
				


				
					

					
https://firsttoilthenthegrave.substack.com/



				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 1175


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					All
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 25, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


But there is certainly a subset who have a different gender identity hardwired and would be harmed not helped by letting puberty happen.




Citation requested.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 25, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


With parental consent (PC), a 16-yo can marry a 30-yo and bear his children in a lot of states. Or a 17-yo (with PC) can enlist in the army and get blown to pieces in some war on another continent. Or he could murder someone domestically (without PC) and be executed for that, until the liberals in the SCOTUS put a stop to that in 2005. And of course every 10-yo has the ability to kill themselves (without PC), not granted by the SCOTUS but by physics (i.e., God). Sadly, suicide is the second or third most common cause of death for teens (though homicides are ahead of suicides in the 15-19 group, second only to accidental injury, which I find even more fucked up).




Uh, one of these things is not like the others?


Yes, we have not implanted microchips in children's brains en masse preventing them from taking their own lives until they've reached the age of majority. Very astute observation. In the West, just about any sufficiently determined ten-year-old can kill himself. By extension, any sufficiently determined ten-year-old could probably emasculate himself if he put his mind to it.


Anti-trans posters are not complaining that we don't live in a maximally totalitarian dystopia in which no harm of any kind will ever befall minors. (If anything, I'd say the median anti-trans poster would be more in favour of minors incurring the occasional skinned knee or broken arm rather than sitting in their bedrooms staring at their phones. I'd hazard a guess that there's a significant amount of overlap between the most trans-affirming parents and this modern breed of safetyist helicopter parent. I could even map out a plausible causal pathway wherein safetyist helicopter parenting results in one's child identifying as trans.)


We are complaining about: medical organisations violating the principle of primum non nocere and being derelict in their duty of care to their patients; these organisations carrying out elective procedures on patients too young to understand the implications thereof; claiming (on the basis of extremely flimsy and far from dispositive evidence) these procedures are necessary to prevent the patients in question from taking their own lives; ignoring any evidence to the contrary; browbeating and gaslighting the patients' enormously distressed parents with emotionally manipulative slogans like "would you rather have a live daughter or a dead son?"; and flat-out lying to the public about how many such procedures have been conducted, and for what reason.


The fact that (short of having him sectioned) any sufficiently determined ten-year-old cannot be physically prevented from killing himself is not, in any way, a rebuttal to any of the above complaints. In fact, it strikes me as a complete non sequitur. It doesn't even rise to the level of whataboutism.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 25, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I think I'm in the same boat. But even when I disagree with him, the manner in which he expresses himself can almost always get a chuckle out of me, which is appreciated.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 25, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Alice and Bob have been used in cryptography discussions for decades. While initially you would just incrementally add new characters in alphabetical order, over time people began deliberately choosing characters' names as a play on words based on their role in the situation being described (e.g. "Eve" or "Yves" are characters who are eavesdropping on a conversation, "Mallory" is a malicious attacker). I view Slutty Sabrina etc. as a logical extension of that principle.




why is this a thing in the first place, to want to give names to these weird fake straw people?




I prefer Alice and Bob framings because when I'm describing a hypothetical scenario with any degree of complexity, failing to name the characters results in clunky, unwieldy prose where it can be difficult to follow which character is which. Compare:




Supposing Alice has a lot to drink and knowingly gets in the driver's seat of her car, fully cognisant of the fact that she's too inebriated to drive safely. Predictably, she has an accident in which a pedestrian, Bob, is killed. Upon her arrest, Alice defends herself by claiming that, while she did drive drunk of her own volition, she never consented to hitting Bob with her car, so she can't be held responsible for it.




With:




Supposing someone has a lot to drink and knowingly gets in the driver's seat of their car, fully cognisant of the fact that they're too inebriated to drive safely. Predictably, they have an accident in which a pedestrian is killed. Upon their arrest, the driver defends themself by claiming that, while they did drive drunk of their own volition, they never consented to hitting the pedestrian with their car, so they can't be held responsible for it.




The second example is actually pretty close to what I started writing when I originally wrote that comment, but after awhile even I started getting confused about who the pronoun "they" and its derivatives was referring to. Naming the characters made the situation much clearer. (And this is a scenario with only two characters: with three or more, naming the characters is practically obligatory.)


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for May 24, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I was just joshing really. If you would like to read it and see what happens next, I would of course be interested to hear your opinion. But I don't expect you to go through the whole thing with a fine-toothed comb, and if, based on what you've read so far, it doesn't seem like your cup of tea, that's completely fine too.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 25, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Of course, Aella is something of an interesting counterexample to your specific argument because she is unable to find a husband despite offering a bounty of 100k for an introduction.




I don't understand why, instead of offering cash upfront, she didn't first try bathing more frequently.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 25, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


The truth is that some of the highest status women marry sluts.




Should this have been "men"?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for May 24, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I mean, I could recommend you a novel, but I have something of a conflict of interest.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Transnational Thursday for May 21, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Or indeed with Alex Coughlan, a man in his thirties who was murdered by two black Muslim teenagers in a less central part of Dublin five days later. Where are the protests for justice for him? Where are the accusations that his murder was a racially motivated hate crime? Nowhere to be seen, of course.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 25, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
This is a really idiotic question, but would the coding you describe distinguish between an elective mastectomy and a medically indicated one i.e. for an adolescent patient with breast cancer?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Transnational Thursday for May 21, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Ireland has its very own George Floyd.


... kind of.


Two weeks ago, a 35-year-old Congolese man named Yves Sakila was accused of shoplifting perfume from a department store in Dublin. Private security guards from the department store restrained him by holding him down on the footpath outside the department store. By the time police officers arrived on the scene he'd stopped moving, and despite performing CPR on him, he was pronounced dead at the hospital. An autopsy was conducted the following day, but the results have not yet been published (that is, it has not yet been conclusively established that Sakila's death was caused by his being restrained). An investigation is ongoing.


Depending on what the investigation determines, I will have little difficulty believing that the private security guards acted overly aggressively in their restraint of Sakila. It's the nature of the profession that private security guards tend to be macho and aggressive, often with criminal records for violent offenses, and tend to have much less training in how to safely restrain someone than a police officer would. However, it will not surprise you to learn that I don't think Sakila was killed because he was black, that the security guards "murdered" him, that the security guards would have treated him with more forbearance had he been white, that he would still be alive today had he been white and so on. It will equally not surprise you to learn that these are the exact accusations already being irresponsibly lobbed by Ireland's cadre of woke activists and NGOs, not to mention (and far less excusably) elected officials. Who will then immediately turn around and accuse the mythic Irish far-right of employing "hateful" and "divisive" rhetoric.


It's all so tiresome.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for May 24, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Come to think of it, my fiancée and I did watch the first episode of season 3 awhile back, but for some reason gave up. Not because we weren't enjoying it, I think we just got distracted or left it too long before watching the next episode. I would like to pick it up again.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
No, absolutely not. A primary reason that Country A doesn't invade Country B is because Country B has an army i.e. a group of soldiers who will attack Country A's soldiers should they cross Country B's borders.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I agree that providing deterrence at the geopolitical level is a purpose that armies serve, but not the sole one (e.g. when an army invades a foreign country). But in any case, it's a distinction without a difference. The only reason armies are an effective deterrent is because they are willing and able to do lethal violence on their masters' behalf. Functionally, there's no difference between training someone to do lethal violence and training someone to be willing and able to do lethal violence should the need arise.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I think you should spend less time inventing pedantic counterfactual hypotheticals.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
The only reason an army exists is so that their employers (typically, the government of the nation they represent) can credibly claim that lethal violence will ensue if the need should arise. Thus, the purpose of an army is to kill people.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for May 24, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I loved seasons 1 and 2 of Mad Men. They felt adult and novelistic in a way that Breaking Bad was claimed to feel but, to my mind, never really did. For some reason I've never watched further than that though.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for May 24, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Nearly finished The Matriarch.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
The means by which armies secure the borders of their respective nations is by killing people or by providing a credible threat that lethal violence will ensue if their demands are not met. Any purpose an army might conceivably have therefore ultimately boils down to killing people.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


It's like saying armies exist to kill people.




Of course armies exist to kill people. Any other statement of their purpose (e.g. "to secure a nation's borders") is just a euphemistic rephrasing thereof.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Sure, but he'll be out of office in two years and probably dead in less than ten.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Friday Fun Thread for May 22, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
David Cage is a hack. Twenty years after his first interactive fiction/CYOA thing, his writing skills don't appear to have improved one iota.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I don't think he's a crypto-conservative, but I do think he might undergo an ideological shift over the following years.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Read any of his recent Substack posts. His seething hatred for Israel is on full display.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 18, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I can't speak for Fetterman's policy stances in general, but it's indisputably true that he used to support a two-state solution in Israel but no longer does.