Nerd
I had sex with a vacuum, it sucked.
User ID: 1024
Nerd
4d ago
Meh, kind of. But its not like not being able to find someone is all that bad either. Single and non married are a significant and rising portion of the population. At this point, its fairly normal, even if it doesn't give the same social brownie points.
Nerd
4d ago
Why avoid relationships for this? You can just get the tubes tied or snipped in that case.
Nerd
5d ago
I agree with this for those who actually dont want to have children, however as far as a childless world goes - the main reason for this is because people are not getting into relationships or having sex in the first place. So any policy that tackles childlessness needs to tackle why people arent pairing up to begin with. Perhaps thats an aside, but still something worth pointing out.
Nerd
10d ago
This actually a really good write up, and not something I thought about. I dont think mothers get a worse deal, but they are definitely under appreciated!
Nerd
10d ago
that it would be unclean and abominable for anyone to invade or modify your body without your consent
And yet, fascinatingly enough, female genital mutilation is considered evil and immoral, but circumcision is regularly practiced. Tells me all I need to know about the "body is a temple" argument.
Nerd
10d ago
If a maniac demanded that you rape your preteen daughter or else he'd kill your family, what would you choose?
Its intresting, because I think rape (particularly child rape) might just be a special case. If it was "let me harvest your daughters lung and kidney" or "let me chop off your sons leg", you might get greyer results. And in most cases, as far as I'm aware, murder is punished more severly than organ harvesting, and its about equal to rape in terms of maximum sentencing. The psychological effects of rape are probably what make it really bad, not necessarily the violation of bodily autonomy.
Nerd
10d ago
And weirdly enough, their logic is looking to actually become true in the near future if AGI and full automation actually happens. Each new person really does just become someone else to share the robots with in that scenario. Why would you ever want to encourage the population to grow if that just means you have to share more?
Would having to share even be relevant at that point? You could probably produce enough resources to satisfy pretty much everyone. We already produce enough food to solve world hunger several times over. The pie isn't some limited resource.
"The Russians are coming right now to destroy our country" is an obvious immediate direct threat. If we don't fight right now, it's over as a nation.
Meanwhile "in the next few generations we'll have the same population we did a few decades ago" both isn't obvious or immediate, and to many people isn't even seen as a threat.
Those individuals are wrong in my eyes. South Korea is on track to lose 85% of its population. This is pretty catastrophic, and has negative implications going forward primarily with civilizational downscaling like @professorgerm & @gattsuru has explained. And there isn't much reason to believe that not gonna keep going down the toilet.
For an analogy, here is how i see this. The draft is like getting a seizure, birth rates are like a being obese & eating unhealthy. Obviously, you need to treat a seizure right then there to save the person. But being obese, even if it doesn't end you immediately, is still something you ought to curve because obesity will catch up to you eventually.
But even besides the negative consequences, its just a net bad to see humans and families dwindle, in the same way many mourn and are sad about extinct animals.
Nerd
11d ago
To me this reads like another of those situations where a hypothetical burden on men, regardless of its actualization, is used to justify oppressing women in a way that does not seem, to me, very justifiable.
According to pew research, Men do feel the pressures of masculinity as mentioned, and they are punished more by society for stepping out the gender expectations. (And yes, women do have the whole "expectations to an involved parent" situation, but I'd wager thats more for a person already in the parenthood position - not having the kids itself.)
The primary point of what bothers me here is this: If you want to remove gendered roles and expectations, ok, we can discuss that (not something I'd agree with but still). But it seems to me that many don't want to be rid of the "patriarchy" and gender norms in reality. Switzerland, for example, had an opportunity to remove the draft via ballot measure, it failed. People like gender norms when it benefits them (or when they benefit women), and actively dislike them when they hurt them (or women). It basically ends in a situation where mens rights are up for grabs, while womens are off limits, because reasons.
Its "justifiable" if you look at it from a fairness standpoint. Either everyone has gendered roles and expectations or no one does.
And for the record here, I'm not in agreement with any crazy islamic style patriarchy, if thats your primary concern.
Nerd
12d ago
Meh, I kinda see what you’re saying. But going to war and fighting is probably a lot worse morally and on the psyche compared to raising a child.
Nerd
12d ago
I've been really thinking about this tweet.
Forcibly draft men to die for their country and no one bats an eye
Suggest that women have children for their country and suddenly everyone starts freaking out
We can force men to die, but can't even ask women to become mothers
This point is interesting, and I think rather noteworthy. There were many protests over the Vietnam conscription, Muhammad Ali's being the most famous example, so perhaps saying no backlash at all is a bit hastey. And who could forget our poor friends in Ukraine.
Still, I think she raises an interesting point. Most men still, (both legally and socially). Have to abide by the traditional man script. And this pressure is more on them then womens end of the social contract, which (from what I can see) is basically non existent.
Now the easiest explanation for this double standard is probably just gender bias: we simply have less empathy for men as a whole.
The way I see it, there are a couple of plausible solutions to make things for fair or consistent(any additional ones are welcome):
-
Gender "Equality". Extend "bodily autonomy" rights (for those who are actually consistent and believe in the concept, as a side note, I believe this is just a silly excuse) to men and end the draft, eliminate male disposability. Both men and women ask each other out. Stop valueing men as pure economic units. Men aren't wallets or soldiers, their people! Ect. Basically "Masculism" or some variation of MRA movement.
-
Extend the social contract obligations to women, and all that entails. Basically bring back some (or all) of the "patriarchy".
From what I can tell, 1 has kinda been tried, and has basically failed, probably due to the gender bias mentioned. I imagine Lauren favors the 2nd option, (& I kinda do). Implementing it may be unrealistic, however, due to various political and environmental constraints. I think realistically though, we are probably gonna have take a hard examination at the female end of the social contract at some-point, when birth rates and their implications become more severe and un-ignorable. Maybe we get lucky technology bails us out, but fundementally, I find the prospect of a society with no children, no families, etc, to be deeply dystopian.
I think one thing conscription shows (and the fact that many societies have it) is that, no society really wants to cease to exist. Nor should we. There is something valuable about societies existing, and continuing on into the future, even if we have to make some sacrifices for it. I think one can make a case (and many indeed do!) for extending some modified version of the social contract/roles to women. I've been deep thought about if societies might attempt this in the future, or what a modified variation of feminine roles/obilgations would look like. What do you think?
But why shouldn't you ban weapons that are easily concealable, much more destructive or have some other bad property that doesn't increase their productive use?
Many of these weapons can also be used for self defense. My ex girlfriend has a revolver at home that she actually had to use once to protect herself from sexual assault. I think if one lives in a dangerous area or is particularly vulnerable having a concealed weapon is beneficial.
Nerd
17d ago
I mean, if you take a look at the evidence, far more people die of handguns than the big bad rifles you see used in those shootings. Even if someone could mow down 100's of people hypothetically, thats not really something that happens statistically. 5 guys killing 2 or 3 with a revolver every now and again happens way more often than one dude mowing down 25 people and you'd be saving far more if you just banned hand guns.
Nerd
18d ago
A simple argument against gun control.
For context here, they are playing chess.
Mr. Terrific: I’m trying to map the multiverse. There are infinite Earths, each with their own history based on choices our other selves have made.
Mr. Terrific: So what do you need?
Superman: More of your T-Spheres.
Mr. Terrific: May I ask why?
Superman: I want to get rid of guns.
Mr. Terrific: For use around the world 24×7, you’d need to replicate the T-Spheres on a massive scale.
Superman: I’m only concerned about one. Actually, while we designate our Earth “Earth One,” it stands to reason that our other selves would do the same. Interesting, don’t you think?
Mr. Terrific: Still, you could never get rid of all the guns.
Superman: But most. You know we could.
Mr. Terrific: Just because we can doesn’t mean we should. People would resent us.
Superman: And they’d be alive to do that. Check. Think of the lives we’d save.
Mr. Terrific: Check. Smoking.
Superman: What?
Mr. Terrific: Cigarettes kill far more people. People keep smoking even though they know what’s killing them. Their families can only watch them die, and you want to save lives?
Jail everyone who smokes. Check.
And imprison anyone who speeds. Traffic fatalities are huge. Check.
Lock up everyone who leaves a dangerous dog unchained. Check.
Finally, we kill anyone who doesn’t recycle. Checkmate.
Superman: You’re not going to help me, are you?
Mr. Terrific: No sir, I am not.
I find this reasoning really interesting, because Mr.Terrific points out how selective much of the things that are being banned for killing people actually is.
Here are some other weapons that are banned or restricted in certain states in the US, and some countries:
Switchblades, butterfly knives are banned in places like the UK, and in some states like Minnesota & Massachusetts.
Brass Knuckles are banned in about 20 states, also in the UK and Canada.
The real issue I have with these bans and restrictions on guns, and even brass knuckles or knives, is that, the outrage seems to be selective. You can probably find pocket knives that'll do the job stabbing someone to death fairly easily, you could do it with a hunting knife or a kitchen knife. You could beat someone to death with a baseball bat, (or hell, you could make brass knuckles out of some nuts from Home Depot). And as stated, some of these kill far more people than other things, that are actually meant to harm, per the fbi, a kitchen knife has likely killed more people than brass knuckles have (for this, we'll say brass knuckles would probably fall into the "blunt objects" category). And as stated by Terrific, smoking kills far more than guns.
Perhaps the argument here is just to say: Look, bro, hunting knives - tobacco - cars, etc, aren't meant to kill people, so we aren't as interested in targeting them, but thats not personally how I judge (or others) would judge these situations. If I have a psychopath, who stabs someone to death with a kitchen knife vs one who does it with a switchblade. I'm not looking to judge them off the murder weapon in a trial. The dead person before me is what actually matters. Why should we care about the means of death? Its the ends that we are passing judgment for.
Nerd
24d ago
Intresting, so what are the actually "races" genetically speaking? Is it just, black people, whites, than asians? How is it classified?
Nerd
24d ago
For those with knowledge/believers of HBD, what does it have to say about Indians (East Asia), Arabs, & Hispanics (IQ wise)? I've been living in my city and I've noticed Indians tend to live in the nicer neighborhoods. Perhaps just selection effects from immigration? Hispanics have similar problems as black people, what does HBD say about them? Arabs?
Nerd
24d ago
The best argument I can think of is that someone needs to pay for the kid. The state will do whatever possible to avoid taking that task. Partly due to the economic expense, partly for the sake of the kid.
Its fascinating to me that the state paying for other people, such as the sick and the elderly, is accepted, but paying for our children is somehow a bridge too far. Why? Its not like the government begins to regulate the behavior of old people to my knowledge, or prevents life saving healthcare, etc. I don't see a problem with them paying for the kid, but leaving how they are raised up to parents. Thats not even getting into the fact that we already have entities like CPS and the education system that play some part in how children are raised.
Nerd
28d ago
Does anyone here work in the IT industry? Would anyone happen to know of anything someone can do to get a leg up potentially become full time during an internship (Network Engineering).
Nerd
1mo ago
In this system I’m suggesting all parties as stated will adhere to some extent to one of these three positions, and those who are opposed to it will have to be disbanded or reformed to be eligible to participate in elections. Similarly, the creation of new parties must require the approval of an office capable of judging the conformity of these new groups, and former leaders within disbanded organisations must be monitored to ascertain that they pose no threat to the state or the people it’s sworn to protect.
Ahh, yes. Using anti-democratic means to defeat (supposedly) anti-democratic parties. You have to see how this is hypocritical, right? Is this not the same behavior you would be hating the big bad fascist for? If people are electing populist-far right parties, how about you take a look at why thats happening and try to appeal to voters on things they care about, instead of betraying your beloved liberal principles?
Nerd
1mo ago
I mean.... I posted other stuff like this before, if you think that this post is bad, your welcome to point out why.
Nerd
1mo ago
I wouldn't be surprised if this contributed. But I'm not convinced that this is the main reason for what happened.
Nerd
1mo ago
You go on to propose that black men should be encouraged to be less masculine, basically. In other words you are trying to bring him down to a level where you can compete with him as you are a non-black man.
Um, Im not? This is largely in their interests. Black mens variation of masculinity does have an element of clear toxicity, driven by historical, societal circumstances, and governmental policy (and maybe we'll say here that HBD might be playing a role, but I'd like to focus on what we can control here). This clearly doesn't make them very attractive mates, a la them being more likely to be single. It actively damages their relationships.
Women find both masculine and "feminine" qualities attractive in men. Again, no ones arguing against being manly, I'm merely arguing for a slight tweak in masculinity to include some of these softer elements, that would aid in keeping a mate in the long term. If you insist on a slightly manlier variation of this, the comic-book hero Superman fits the bill fairly well.
We shouldnt be overstating womens preference for masculinity. Yes, women are looking for elements of masculinity when selecting mates, but the man in questions cant be too masculine, because that risks turning the strength aggression on her and the children.
Again there actually are black pretty boys. Usher is pretty.
I actually stand corrected! Excellent. For the record I actually forgot about Usher and RnB black men existed for a second (& sadly, we don't see them that much in the mainstream anymore). I'd like to see more!
So I think the problem is women need to stop desiring dominance or rather they need to stop putting themselves in positions that require dominant positions. I have a friend who happens to be an obese Black woman. I have experience with weight loss so she sometimes asks me for advice about it. One time she confided in me that she had been thinner in the past, but that she was "afraid people would beat her up."
This is counter-productive in almost all cases. A fit in shape person is gonna give a fat-ass an proper ass-whooping 99% of the time. Size matters to a point, but there is a distinction between sumo wrestler 200lbs, & Brock Lesnar 200lbs. But sure, inner city violence incentivizes masculint behaviour, fair enough. Solution? Crack down & lock them up.
This attitude is so arrogant to me, people do what they're programmed to do, why are you trying to socially engineer their behavior to begin with? She can choose the more sexy masculine dominant male over the really sweet guy, the problem isn't her, the really sweet guy if he's such a great partner needs to man up and express his masculinity in addition to his ability to take care of his mate and offspring at the same time. If someone whose brain is designed to opt for a masculine dominant mate who are you to encourage her to go against her millennia of programming in favor of you and your preferences, the less dominant male? What's in it for anyone but you?
Again, this is a false dichotomy. The goal is for our sweet guy to have both traits, that's basically the whole point of this post. I care for the black community, and I'd like to see them succeed. Having children "raised" by pookey and ray ray is counter productive to this end goal. Do I need emphasize that women aren't only attracted to just the hyper-manly health inspector?
Nerd
1mo ago
as far as I can tell women are, generally, into pretty masculine men.
I mean, yeah, but I'm not really denying this. My point here is that, black men in particular are hyper masculine to a substantially detrimental degree. They feel the need to do dumb shit like this. I think, with the correct social policy and guidance, they can become the men i linked previously. Yeah, pretty soft guys, but you can hardly say they arent masculine either.
Nerd
1mo ago
The point of teaching ballet and other soft activities, particularly for black men, is to tone down the manly man stereotype that is so commonly associated with them. I'd like for them to realize that you can be more than just a thug. But going beyond this, I think there is a case to be made that men need an element of creativity and softness to aid in their navigation of relationships with women, and with others within society, and that this can coincide with masculinity. The pretty boy archetype comes to mind here. Ideally, we get mostly masculine men, with a dash of sweetness and softness. Kinda like these guys.
I've spoken previously about possible solutions to the current masculinity & dating crisis. But another overlooked part of the conversation is the role race plays in dating and sexual selection. I think to fix this problem, we may have to tailor policy towards each individual race, based on their unique circumstances within the country. I'd like to start with the race that is having the most trouble with this: black people.
A Profile of Single Americans
According to pew research, about a little less than half of black people are single. That is about 68% more than other racial groups. It's also no secret that black people are more likely to have children out of wedlock, less likely to marry, and are more likely to divorce. A big chunk of this is because there is a shortage of eligible men (& women).
Whats the problem with black men?
There are..... a lot.
First and foremost, black men are less likely to attend and complete college. This not only makes them less attractive mates in terms of status, but also in terms of resources (those with a degree make more than those without). They are more likely to be incarcerated ,unemployed, and/or dead. Not good. On top of all of that, they are more likely to be the perpetrators of domestic violence and rape. They aren't great partners in the grand scheme of things.
Whats the problem with black women
Black women do, like women in general, prefer a mate that is high in status and with a good resource pool. They are completing college at a higher rate and also are more likely to be employed. But they also have issues, mainly:
-
They are more likely to be obese/overwieght.
I also wouldnt be surprised if many of these women were "less feminine" than their non-black counterparts, particularly because black women are in a more violent and aggressive environment, that demands more masculine behavior as a matter of survival. This is more of a hunch than something I have direct evidence for.
Solutions?
For black men in particular, there needs to be a re-imaging of black masculinity. Black Men tend to see themselves as more masculine. I'm gonna argue here that this perception is largely harmful to themselves and to the community at large. Especially with black men, the whole manly man with a huge bbc stereotype is incredibly culturally pervasive. Everyone thinks of a black man as a athlete or rapper, instead of a scientist or a physician. There are no black pretty boys (EDIT: well, there were RnB stars but they have fallen out of favor recently), like we see with asians. I suspect much of this is because of the toxic environment that was created via the war on drugs & the familial breakdown following the sexual revolution.
The first step really should be trying to have mentors setup via government interference, particularly for black men. Their ought to be more skills to black masculinity besides "guy with huge dick and a Glock with a gold chain". Programs helping the community become more wealthy would contribute to this change in masculinity, as it would give less reasons to be toxically masculine. Have them do ballet, painting, and heavily emphasize soft and social skills. This should be done in combination with rugged stereotypically masculine activities such as wrestling or football. Good men have strong elements of masculinity, with some healthy doses of feminine attributes on the side!
Education needs to be emphasized, even if its not college. As the knowledge economy grows, the labor market demands those with social and technical skills. I'm not just talking about college, if they cant or wont go, fine. But there needs to be something after high school, with a job that is decently paying lined up shortly.
This next one isn't one I'm personally endorsing, but depending on whether or not someone is a racial nationalist. You might want to encourage black men to date within there own race, as they are more likely to date outside. Assuming we make black women more desirable, this may fall by the wayside on its own.
Ok, so what about black women?
The first step with black women is to get them on some kind of glp-1 (honestly, this should just be done for both sexes, but lets face it, looks are more heavily emphasized for women, and black women in particular are more likely to be overweight). Women get more options and attention the more physically attractive they are, and its healthier to be skinnier anyway, so this is a no brainer.
Also, the culture around birth control is more conspiratorial than what is warranted. Put an IUD in, and be slow with putting out. Black women are less likely to use birth control. I'd like to see that changed.
I'd also like to see young black girls engaged in girl groups (such as girl scouts, for example) to sharpen feminine attributes and personality more in black women.
Gender Neutral Policies
Another step that needs to be emphasized is what a healthy relationship actually looks like, and how to select a dude who will give you a healthy relationship. I have an intuition that this skill, particularly with black women, is somewhat lacking, hence high multi-partner fertility (Note: what drives multi-partner fertility is relationship breakdown, not just promiscuity). Show young girls how men are suppose to treat you, what they are suppose to do, and how the courting process is suppose to work. Many women have seen way too many bad examples of this. They need to be shown good examples. The same works vice-versa: Young boys and men need to be good boyfriends, and have examples of what that looks like.
Social media needs to be targeted here. Screen time at a young age extremely limited. Kids need to play outside, with other children to learn social skills. Relationships are a lot harder to build if you are socially retarded.
Lastly, I'm probably gonna get some people here arguing about how much of this is genetic vs not. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and just argue that these policies are good in their own right. Even if 70% of the black race couldn't be saved for whatever reason, if we are able to turn the tides for the other 30% that can be, then I'll consider that a job well done.
Yeah, that's the plan. I will say this though: I don't want to have children, then have them deal with poverty or a bad mothers. I'd need to find: 1) A good job (working on that, almost there hopefully) 2) finding a women who'd be a good mom (I'll do that once I find the job).
Reproduce, yes. But it should be done responsibly.
More options
Context Copy link