Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
"...Perhaps laughter will then have formed an alliance with wisdom; perhaps only 'gay science' will remain."
User ID: 342
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
12hr ago
I thought Elfen Lied was great… when I was in high school. Now, it’d probably go in the “guilty pleasure” box at best.
I can’t imagine recommending it to someone who’s just getting into anime, unless I already knew they were into that sort of thing.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
1d ago
we don't see the appeal in a dangerous partner
It's actually not a fantasy structure that's exclusive to women! It's just more common in women because, obviously, men are the more violent and aggressive ones.
Do you know how many audio files there are for guys with titles like "serial killer yandere ties you up in her basement because she wants to be with you forever ASMR"? A lot more than you might expect!
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
1d ago
What do these ratings mean, what is the scale?
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
1d ago
You and most other posters on this thread seem to think that women are only interested in dangerous men being dangerous to other people and are obviously in denial about the possibility that dangerous men are dangerous to them.
Oh no, I don't think that at all! In fact I thought about including a line about that in my post - "she could simply have a masochistic streak, she could enjoy the palpable sense of danger" - but I decided not to, because I find that comments are generally more persuasive and attention-grabbing when you only include one bizarre claim instead of multiple.
I do think the "I'm a highly distinguished person to him" aspect of it is probably stronger in the majority of cases than the "I like being in danger myself" aspect, simply because even the most masochistic and self-destructive people still show an aversion to acute physical danger. Although, funny enough I just linked someone downthread to Freud's essay on the death instinct, where he explores how a primordial instinct for self-destruction could coexist alongside an apparently overriding concern for self-preservation. That could certainly be relevant in cases like this.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
1d ago
I honestly don't know why some women are so stupid. Yeah, loving and devoted up to the minute he swings at you with a sword, you silly girl.
Because up until that point, they think it's hot that he could attack other people with a samurai sword, but he could never do that to them because he just loves them that much / they alone have the power to tame him / he's so emotionally dependent on them that his world would collapse without them / insert-their-preferred-framing-here.
So the hotness can win out over prudence and risk aversion.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
1d ago
The long answer would involve starting here.
The short answer is that I didn't say that, under self_made's described social system, the man would enjoy his wife's transgression per se, but rather that the feeling of power he derives from exercising his authority over those who have transgressed offers something to enjoy.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
1d ago
Do you think there's no alien life anywhere, or do you just believe that it's implausible that it's a) intelligent and b) has the means and desire to get here?
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
1d ago
[comic sans]UAP DISCLOSURE UPDATES[/comic sans]
The mood in the UFO community has been rather dour lately due to a string of disappointments and setbacks, but Rep. Eric Burlison of Missouri dropped some promising indications this week that Congress has not forgotten about the topic and full disclosure may very well still be in the works:
"We're pursuing a hearing date. We've got a list of people that we're looking at. We're actually looking at potentially doing two. One with some people that are direct whistleblowers, who have had direct, and when I say direct, they had eyes directly on or have personally encountered UAP. In their formal operations."
"Not somebody out and about like Joe Blow out there that saw something. There's thousands and thousands of people like that. We're talking about people that worked for the Pentagon, worked in a government program, where they worked in and around this technology. Whether it was through crash retrieval, or through reverse engineering, that's what we're pursuing right now."
"The next hearing after that, once we're able to get information, we're looking at doing some interrogatories, which is where you take some of the things that have been said in these briefings, in these open hearings under oath. And then we send a formal letter as a committee, asking for answers from, whether it's Tulsi Gabbard, or whomever it is that we need to be asking these questions of. And then which would send up the potential second hearing, which would hopefully be able to clear people like Tulsi Gabbard to come forward."
"And I've been told she's very... friendly when it comes to this topic. That she wants disclosure. She wants to help bring about disclosure on this topic."
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
1d ago
but if the tariffs are painless and everyone is still buying cheap shit from China, aren't we losing???
Pretty much, yeah.
Of course it was never reasonable to think that "tariffs" meant "stop all trade with China". It couldn't have meant that, because that's just not how things get done in the neoliberal world order. I'm not an economist and I haven't followed the technical details of this story closely, but I do know that there's no big red switch labeled "TARIFFS" that they just flip on and off. You look at the actual details of the agreements and it's always something like, "an O(n*log(n)) prorated surcharge will be applied to soybeans from these three farms just outside of Shenzhen every fifth Tuesday when Venus is in retrograde", rather than "fuck China we got our own soybeans now". The devil's in the details.
So either Trump's powerless to implement his vision of reshaping global trade, or he doesn't actually want to, or this IS the agenda as he envisioned it and this is the extent of the impact. But either way it doesn't look like much of anything is going to change.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
2d ago
I mean even in your own home away from home, there are plans to just get rid of Women's prison.
The rise in MTF transsexualism is partially explained by utter humiliations such as this.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
2d ago
· Edited 2d ago
For example, how would this situation be handled in India? [...]
Firstly, the extended family would have much more power. This is the rare case where both the husband's side and the wife's own family would probably agree that something needs to be done, the latter for reputational reasons as well as concern for the kids. She'd probably end up committed, if she wasn't beaten up or ostracized to hell and back. The police would turn a blind eye, should she choose to complain, they'd be profoundly sympathetic to the family's plight and refuse to act against them.
When dealing with questions of punishment, we always have to confront the problem of how the authority figure's prosocial motivations can be disentangled from the pleasure he gets from enacting the punishment itself. Can they even be disentangled? Is it possible that they're always one and the same?
For the suburban Karen who calls CPS because her neighbors let their son ride his bike without a helmet, the wellbeing of the child is of secondary importance at best. Her primary motivation is the feeling of power she derives from being able to commandeer an instrument of state violence.
In your case, the violence is not even mediated through the state, but is dished out by the man's own hands, "with a good conscience" -- this makes the charm all the more seductive. Are we to suppose that the man is not secretly, or not-so-secretly, hoping that his wife will someday commit a transgression which merits some familial intervention? An "evolutionary genealogy" of such a system might reveal that its primary and originary purpose was as a system of ritualized violence, with its usage as an instrument of "justice" being vestigial or epiphenomenal.
There are no pure assertions of "negative" restrictions on rights -- there are only positive assertions of rights. "You should not have the right to do X" can be rewritten as "I should have the right to punish you for doing X". Or, more explicitly: "I want the right to punish you for doing X".
And people still wonder why feminists get up in arms over the concept of "traditional family structures". In the system thus described, is it ever the wife who beats the husband for his transgressions? She can try, and she may even have the support of the community on her side, but due to physical asymmetry, it's unlikely to end well for her. She can get male relatives to do it for her; but the prerogative of deriving full enjoyment from the act of punishment remains with the man. That hardly seems fair.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
2d ago
Probably seen friends, family and coworkers spend a weekend in jail on some trumped up charges.
I was gonna say "surely that's exaggerating" but then I remembered that I know someone who literally went through this kek
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
3d ago
more people are single nowadays and unhappier nowadays because more people have avoidant attachment styles in the past
There are a lot of structural/social factors to look at before we zoom into the individual level and start talking about "attachment styles":
-
We invented a technological solution for boredom. You can entertain yourself infinitely without ever leaving your house. Many people find it easier and more fun to stay at home and watch Netflix than to go out to bars and clubs, talk to people, enter into relationships, etc.
-
Women's economic independence means that the range of men they find attractive is increasingly restricted, because men have fewer things of value to offer them. ("I have a career, I make more money than a lot of the men I know, I don't particularly want kids, what do I need a man for?")
-
Dating apps and hookup culture make it so that it's easier for people (well, some people, anyway) to achieve sexual gratification without entering into a committed relationship.
Anecdotally, the majority of men I know are in committed relationships right now. Frankly, none of them fit the "classical" definition of a "high value man". They are perfectly average people, with average looks, average jobs, average levels of social acumen. So in spite of the structural factors I listed above, I really do think that a lot of the "singleness epidemic" is due to a combination of personal choice and unrealistic standards.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
3d ago
-
I would not have personally banned you and I don’t think you’ve ever posted anything banworthy.
-
But @netstack was correct that based on your comment record, you’re here to pick fights rather than engage in constructive dialogue. Like everywhere else in the world, we have multiple competing values that we want to balance: we want a diversity of viewpoints represented, but we also don’t want people who are just here to pick fights.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
4d ago
Why do you think so?
Because she's hot and I wanted more. Give her a 100 day route in the DLC, Kodaka.
(The dynamic is as you described in your linked post, but there's an entire genre of femdom / role reversal fiction that works like this, it's not at all limited to /ss/)
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
4d ago
Uchikoshi overall wrote less of it than Kodaka did, but he had a block of routes in the back half of the game where he had free rein to do his own thing. So if you’re willing to tolerate the Kodaka parts to get to the Uchikoshi parts then I’d say it’s still worth it.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
4d ago
It's the "doesn't owe you femininity" of the art world.
I kinda think that's just true though! The artwork doesn't owe you anything. In fact, it's a good exercise to ask yourself what you owe to the artwork.
Walter Kaufmann said of Kierkegaard, "there's no other author in world literature who gives me such a strong impression that my soul has been placed on the scales, and found wanting". I think that's what great art should aim to do. There's something fundamentally anxiety-inducing about it.
Of course, if the work serves literally no purpose whatsoever, aesthetic or otherwise, then yes, by definition we would have to question what the point of making it in the first place was. But it's actually quite hard to find a work that meets that criteria; maybe impossible. You know, even something like Joseph Kosuth's "Art as Idea as Idea" where he would print placards with dictionary entries on them and hang them up in an otherwise empty room... even something like this produces an aesthetic experience. It has its own kind of texture, it induces its own kind of perception. It's more subtle but it's there if you can grab onto it. He probably didn't even want that work to induce a "classical" kind of aesthetic experience, and yet it does, because it's inescapable.
Ever notice that, especially evident with how the Western world interacts with other Kodaka VNs, that 'how the presentation will be perceived' is a central element of every ambiguous-gender character
Well, that's a result of the fanbase being largely tumblrites.
I've loved Danganronpa ever since SDR2 first released in English but I never really interacted with the community, so I was surprised to see what a big tumblr/fujo following it had. I suppose it was a result of Danganronpa being relatively "gender neutral", and having some pretty boys like Nagito to latch onto. Although I was even more surprised that the fujo contingent showed up for Hundred Line as well, because that one is much more unabashedly targeted at a straight male audience.
Which one?
I want Hiruko to step on me!
V'ehx is close though, god damn they did her dirty by giving her such a short route...
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
4d ago
I'm not a mod and I don't speak for them, I only speak for myself and my own opinions.
There obviously is an anti-woke consensus here, I don't see what point there is in denying that. That doesn't mean that wokes aren't welcome, it simply means they're not in the majority. The rules about neutrality and consensus building made more sense in the early days when this was all new and the ideological split was closer to even, but now we've gotten to the point where the regulars have been here for 10 years, and they all know each other's positions fairly well. Nitpicking someone about consensus building this late in the game seems a bit silly. As though every post in a 10+ year dialogue has to assume that we're starting from a totally clean blank slate.
I think it's good to still have the rule about consensus building on the books to deal with particularly obnoxious violations (like, saying "obviously we all know that [woke position] is wrong..."), but I don't think it should be enforced that stringently.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
4d ago
Religious leaders did not adequately stand up against the mass movement.
Academics did not adequately argue against the mass movement.
They ARE the movement bruh.
This is problematic: if learning the best of western culture does not lead to protecting said culture in any genuine sense when it matters the most, then how great is the actual utility of such learning?
People have been asking this for at least a century. "The Nazis listened to Wagner and read Goethe and they still plunged the entire planet into total war, how is that possible?"
Philosophy in the Socratic tradition (and if we can speak of a "western tradition" at all, as distinct from other traditions, then we must start with Socrates) never promised wisdom. It promised a love of wisdom; it promised a critique of those who pretend to wisdom. But wisdom itself is for the gods alone. So it is unsurprising when mortals do things that are unwise.
The main “public critics” of the period have little in common except that they were passionate and somewhat neurotic men.
You have to be something of a weirdo to violate social consensus as publicly and flagrantly as Peterson did.
Random people online were able to sense a threat that leading experts weren’t able to sense, and made arguments that leading academics did not make.
Because the experts wanted it to happen, they couldn't perceive it as a threat if it wasn't threatening to them in the first place.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
4d ago
what's your opinion/review on the Hundred Line game?
It's a lot of fun! Definitely recommended. If you liked any of Kodaka's or Uchikoshi's other games you'll like this too. Especially if you liked Danganronpa, because although it's a very different kind of story than Danganronpa it's got a similar "vibe".
you called it a VN where I got the impression it's more like a TRPG. How do the two mesh together?
Yeah so it's not a "pure" VN because it does have a combat system, but most people I've talked to classify it as a VN. (The main gameplay loop is long VN segment with a chance to upgrade units -> battle -> another long VN segment -> repeat). The combat (assuming you play on normal mode, I finished the game before the patch that added hard mode) is more than just a "formality", but it never gets super difficult. It's less complex and involved than what you would find in a game like Fire Emblem or FFT. You're really here for the story, not the combat.
Plus if you keep playing long enough (meaning you explore multiple routes instead of just making a beeline for the true ending) you basically get the ability to just skip combat altogether, which means you're just free to explore and at that point the game becomes a "pure" VN.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
4d ago
I would drop immaturity from the conversation entirely if you want to avoid getting people's hackles up
Yeah, I have to work on my presentation. But at the same time, I really do have to ask my readers to suspend certain pre-existing conceptual and emotional associations they have around certain terms, y'know? Not erase, just temporarily suspend. Otherwise we can't make any progress.
There was a conversation here a few weeks ago where I said that love is impossible. That got a few people upset. But did I ever say that people shouldn't do things that are impossible? Did I ever say that there's no place in the world for impossible things? Not at all. Similarly, did I ever say that a certain amount of immaturity is not warranted? Not at all. (I suppose the Hegelian way of talking about it would be, you have to go through maturity to arrive at a mature immaturity.)
which VN btw?
The Hundred Line: Last Defense Academy
It feels like you are trying to intellectualise that away by referring to 'emotions'
Not at all! "Intellectualize"? Goodness gracious no.
an artist shouldn't try to manipulate the viewer, what they should do is try to express themselves
We're in complete agreement that there is an intimate link between art and what might be called "emotion". But this phrase, that an artist should "express themselves", makes me nervous, increasingly nervous, for reasons that I don't fully understand myself and have never been able to entirely articulate. There's clearly something right about it, and yet we should also be cautious. Taking a shot in the dark, some of the reasons may be:
- It implies that the principle modality as issue is expression, as opposed to alternative modes of thought and comportment.
- It implies that the work is about the artist and what he wants to express, as opposed to being about other things.
- It implies that the artist knows what he "thinks" or "feels" well enough to "express" it. (Derrida wrote some of the only good commentary that's ever been written on Nietzsche -- "the truth of Nietzsche's text is that there is no truth of Nietzsche's text". He was quite correct about this. And yet Nietzsche's text simultaneously contains an overwhelming plenitude of truth, it contains too much truth. This is what the authentic work aims at: "expressing" something while at the same time undermining what it expresses and pointing beyond itself.)
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
4d ago
I don't just dislike horror, I don't see the point. It's either jumpscares or unending tension. It boggles my mind why anyone would enjoy this genre.
I've been planning on eventually writing an effortpost here about the horror genre and some of its problems. So I'm glad to see there may be some interest in that here.
The TL;DR is that the "modern horror film" as such has a lot of issues, as you correctly point out, but I think that works that have horror elements are quite fascinating (David Lynch films are a good example).
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
5d ago
The fact that a magic trick falls apart if you look at it too closely
Various 20th century artistic practices that are now grouped under the heading of "abstraction" could be described in precisely this way, as an attempt to "look at the magic trick closely". Artists set out with the self-conscious intent of "breaking the illusion", of foregrounding the process of creation that normally remains hidden; in painting this took the form of abstract painting, painting that embraced the "flatness of the canvass" instead of trying to retreat from it into the illusion of 3D perspective, painting that owned the fact that it was nothing more than blobs of colored goo.
The idea was to ask whether it was possible to construct an art without illusion, an art that would endure even when the magic trick was ruined. Surely you can agree that this is at least an interesting question, even if you think it must ultimately be answered in the negative?
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
5d ago
I'm always in an unenviable position in these discussions, because I'm always trying to bring people to a more refined and complex position than the one they currently inhabit, regardless of where they're starting out from. If I'm talking to stuck-up hipsters who say "well, there's obviously a divide between High Art and 'pop culture', the former being more valuable, more intellectual, etc" then I say, no no, let's stop and examine that assumption. But conversely if people say, "well art's just about having a good time, I know what I like, you don't have to make it complicated with all that fancy shit", then I just as forcefully say, no no, let's stop and examine that assumption. It's never supposed to be a direct denial of the starting position, but rather an invitation for us to walk the endless spiral of the Hegelian dialectic, together, as a team. But it always seems to come off as a direct denial. That's my fault; I need to work on my presentation.
Now, regarding my own capacity for "suspension of disbelief". I just finished up playing a VN recently. Fun game. I binged it as fast as I could, I was on the edge of my seat waiting for each plot twist, I got weirdly obsessed with one of the girls and wanted to waifu her, I cried when important characters died (yes I am a grown man who cries at video games). So am I incapable of enjoying stories like a "normal person"? Not at all! There's nothing I love more than a good story, it's basically what I live for. But, you know, you eventually want something more, you want to move the conversation forward. So you ask yourself: yes, I had this experience, this particular type of experience, but what of it? Well for starters, we can question the "naturalness" of this type of experience. We can ask ourselves if this type of experience might not be historically and spatially delimited. (Did the Iliad have "fans" in ancient Greece? How was their experience of the Iliad different from how we "experience" "stories" today? On the one hand, I think it may not be as different as some might suppose. But on the other hand, it might be utterly alien.) I had this experience, but what is this experience, really? What does it mean? What is it symptomatic of? Where did it come from, and where is it going?
It's as much about making your self and your own experience an object of critical inquiry as it is about inquiring into the artwork and the artist.
It is prioritising emotional connection over intellectual dissection
Not at all! Not in any way. Not that the two could ever be separated to begin with.
But, you know, this question about the connection between art and what might be called "emotion", it's a highly complex and fraught question. The way forward is not at all clear.
Adorno defined "kitsch" as "art that tells you how to feel". Genuine artworks don't tell you how to feel. Meaning, there's something fundamentally manipulative and coercive about an artwork that sets out with the explicit goal of inducing a certain emotional state. When the sad music plays and the camera zooms in dramatically and all the characters start crying, you know you're supposed to feel sad. The work is telling you to feel sad. We've left the domain of art and we've entered the domain of the "culture industry", the domain of pseudo-art and pseudo-emotion, the domain of mass market objects produced to fit utilitarian specifications. Or so this theory would have it.
Is this the same as saying that art should be "emotionless"? Not at all. Adorno was a great lover of Mozart after all, and Mozart's music could hardly be described as emotionless. But I do think he correctly identified a very real and very serious problem here, namely that an attempt to control the emotional resonance of a work too tightly can collapse into simple didacticism.
Watch Death Note. I've never found a human who didn't like Death Note.
More options
Context Copy link