@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

					
				

				

				

				

				

					

User ID: 1175

How's your luck?

Non-existent. Congratulations, though!

I'd prefer not to say. ;)

I thought of that, but I really cannot imagine how that isn't already adequately covered by "prefer not to say".

Definitely not.

Father Ted and Co. as well

So we have:

  • the titular character, a greedy, embittered narcissist, sent to Craggy Island as punishment for his assorted financial improprieties – his catchphrase is literally "That money was just resting in my account!"
  • Father Jack, a violent, greedy alcoholic routinely implied to harbour some ephebophilic tendencies
  • Bishop Brennan, a cantankerous bully who takes pleasure in humiliating the protagonists, and who does not take his oath of celibacy remotely seriously
  • Father Dick Byrne, Father Ted's opposite number and hence like him in almost every way.
  • Father "Todd Unctious", who becomes so obsessed with trophies and trinkets that he tries to steal one of Ted's (and steals a fellow priest's vestments as a disguise despite himself being a priest and having vestments of his own, seemingly out of spite)

There is also Father Dougal, who can't be called evil only by virtue of being too stupid to understand the consequences of his actions.

I genuinely can't think of a single sympathetically portrayed priest in the show.

they cast two actors that are pushing fifty

Renate Reinsve is only thirty-eight.

I was filling out a form last night which asked for some demographic information about me.

  • Sex:
    • Male
    • Female
    • Intersex
    • Prefer not to say
    • Not known

???

I have nothing to offer, other than that reading this made me feel sad.

I think the conception of "gender identity" as something wholly unrelated and untethered from one's anatomical sex is functionally indistinguishable from an immaterial soul. Ergo, gender ideology is a dualist worldview.

You mean that people who say this are tacitly admitting they themselves have evil impulses?

I know I've seen sources which demonstrated this was Roske's motivation and remember sharing them with my brother, but I can't find them. I did manage to find this collection of screenshots from his Reddit account:

I am pro-abortion (in favour of aborting fetuses, not pro-choice)

I think that something as significant as consciousness should not be imposed on matter (the person below they gain consciousness) without consent, and as a non-conscious person cannot give consent, being born is inherently done without consent.

It doesn't seem open to debate that he is an antinatalist (or was at the time of writing, anyway), although I admit this doesn't prove that was his motivation for trying to kill Kavanaugh. Will try to do some more digging and see what I can find.

I was basing my description of Gnosticism on Montaillou and The Perfect Heresy.

I ended up having sex with this girl which broke a pretty long dry spell.

My man! Where's she from?

Yes, antinatalism is just one example of the general trend wherein politically radical people are almost invariably those who are least satisfied with their lives. An antifa meetup will not exactly be swimming with charming, good-looking people, but neither will a gathering of white supremacists.

If you're interested in this topic I highly recommend Eric Hoffer's The True Believer. I was a bit disappointed to find that I'd been scooped seven decades in advance.

Antinatalists justify their worldview on the grounds that, because every human being is guaranteed to experience more suffering than joy in their lives, having a child cannot be justified on utiliarian grounds. The Gnostic equivalent is the belief that it is cruel to trap a pure soul inside a flesh prison. In both cases, the admonition not to have children is justified on the grounds of the suffering that the hypothetical child would endure were it to be born.

I agree that antinatalists aren't intrinsically dualist, but there seems to be a great deal of overlap between the worldview and support for gender ideology, which I view as dualist in practice. Trans people are overrepresented in r/antinatalism.

New Year's resolution check-in:

  • Posted my twelfth blog post of the year last night, also cross-posted here in the CW thread.
  • Went to the gym three times last week. The weather's been so nice the last few days I haven't been able to summon the resolve to go any evening this week. Will have to go this evening. Can deadlift 1.84x my bodyweight for 3 reps, squat 1.22x for 8 reps and bench press .87x for 6 reps.
  • Have not consumed any pornography since waking up on January 1st.

How goes it @self_made_human, @thejdizzler, @birb_cromble, @ThomasdelVasto and @falling-star?

It is frankly staggering how few Western women are familiar with the term "geriatric pregnancy". Some of them even get offended when I mention it, like I'm making a value judgement.

If I'd been born ten years later, I probably would have been diagnosed with autism and identified as trans.

This is an indirect way of saying that I am neither.

This novelette is approaching novel-length.

Complaining about people lying about their self-professed reasons to not breed seems pretty pointless in my opinion. What will change if they are honest? If they don't want to have kids, they don't want to have kids, the end, and whatever excuses they make up about it is their business.

As Scott would say, "If It's Worth Your Time To Lie, It's Worth My Time To Correct It".

I want to respond to you in more detail, but I haven't fully woken up yet. I'll come back to you after another cup of coffee.

Right, there are obvious differences.

I'm really not sure how to answer the question "why should people stop lying to themselves if it makes them feel good in the short-term?" The question seems to contain (or at least imply) its own answer.

I suppose that's a point. On the other hand it frustrates me, because if you're not having children because of how awful the world is – well, look around you. From a historical perspective, along most legible metrics (dirt, disease, violence etc.) the world has never sucked less. How much better does it have to get before you start making babies?

Why would a drug addict stop using heroin, when it makes them feel better than the alternative?

I think the general thinking is more that they were morally incompetent

Yeah, I was considering including a paragraph saying that the people claiming that they aren't having children because it would be cruel to bring a child into a world like this would presumably claim that people in the past were ignorant and foolish, but Now We Know Better. But the post was already too long as it stood.

On an unrelated note, I don't think the Gnostics were as a rule always antinatalists, though some of them were.

From reading Montaillou and The Perfect Heresy, my understanding is that the ordained men of the church were forbidden from having children, but not ordinary parishioners. But I think the theological position of the church was that conceiving a child is evil, even if it's a necessary evil.