@PutAHelmetOn's banner p

PutAHelmetOn

Recovering Quokka

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 06 21:20:34 UTC 

				
User ID: 890


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
PutAHelmetOn


								
								
									
								
								

								

								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				
Recovering Quokka

				
				
				

				

					0 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					joined 2022 September 06 21:20:34 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 890


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom New Old Controversial
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 5, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Some people have argued that to affirm a trans person is lying. I sympathize with someone who says, "if I call a trans person by his preferred pronoun, it feels like I am lying." If this is all that is meant, then I suppose the rest of this post isn't relevant. To me, the stronger claim is, "if society calls a trans person by his preferred pronoun, society is lying." I never bought that claim, because I never encountered a contradictory set of definitions for sex and gender.


But recently I realized the term passing is actually transphobic according to the definitions laid out.


This is pretty clearly a woman. I can tell because of the hair and clothes. I infer she goes by "she." If I had to publicly address her, I'd do so with she.


People typically speak of passing as a woman. Since I can infer she is a woman, it follows that she passes as a woman. But as far as I can tell, nobody would describe her as passing, because she looks transgender (i.e. male). Based on how "pass" is used, it seems to really mean pass as cisgender. To see passing in this sense, as a good thing, is deceptive. It also seems transphobic. Surely a less transphobic worldview would suggest she passes as a woman because I can correctly infer her pronouns, and that her womanness is just as beautiful as a ciswomans.


Inb4 replies castigating me for just now realizing this: nobody had ever crystalized to me that passing meant to misrepresent a trans person as cisgender because most discourse talks about "passing as a woman"


Am I missing something? Can anyone else steelperson all this?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 26, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
This goes the other way, too: I've seen LGBTQ friends complain about conservative signs that say, "we support all sexes, races, religions" for not "mentioning anything LGBTQ" and "even said sex instead of gender."


That is to say, it is simply tribal signaling. The reason I am annoyed by white-bashing isn't because I identify with my racial coalition. As you mention, much of my outgroup is literally caucasian.


The white people that support her simply see a neon sign that says "ingroup." You see a neon sign that says "outgroup" but is it really because they call out straight white men (ironically by not calling them out), or because calling out straight white men is the kind of things your outgroup does?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 31, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Awhile back, there was some conversation about how a new social media platform could replace twitter if twitter users really don't like Elon Musk.


Today, I read about Bluesky social and it reminded me of that exchange. Now, the article includes a quote from Jack Dorsey that throws out a lot of applause lights, like "freedom," "choice," and "independence." Has anyone else heard about this?


Something I think is interesting is the remarks about needing an open-source model instead of a company. Whereas companies can change direction and leadership (Twitter...), an open-source standard can be implemented by all sorts of groups.


It's also possible that there will be attempts to migrate The Conversation off of twitter and onto Bluesky. I personally don't think it'll happen, but I'm also not brave enough to give any specific predictions or confidence numbers. Is anyone else?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 26, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
You're still focusing on the words as being vehicles for literal meaning the way a scientist would use language. What do you mean they can plausibly say they support anyone? The sign is a rather obvious signal of conservative allegiance posted in the 2020s. You don't need plausibility to get that documentary "What Is A Woman?" removed for hate speech when the signaling game is obvious to everyone except mistake theorists.


Absolutely nobody makes this distinction you're making between:


    

  1. 

    what the conservative sign did -- listing a couple of axis (axes?) and omitting other axes
    

    2. 

  2. 

    what the politician did -- listing a couple of directions on an axis and omitting other directions
    

    3. 



				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 26, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
What good is the right's subtle dog whistles (according to you) if they still get called out on them? Think anti-Trumpers talking about how Trump dogwhistled to white supremists or the white working class during his 2016 campaign. How would you argue to someone that one side actually does it differently?


I'm not asking to explain why This Dogwhistle is different than That Dogwhistle, I'm asking to explain why we see the same calling out on both sides. (Actually, do we see the same calling out on both sides?)


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 26, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Am I misremembering or are you speaking figuratively? Didn't Rittenhouse kill 2 and wound one?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 19, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
There is a certain beauty to some definitions of Rectangle. The one I am singling out is




a parallelogram containing a right angle




Why? this was the definition listed in my high school Geometry textbook. I remember it because the wording was a little peculiar. But, later I came to enjoy it. This is the kind of subtlety only a math nerd could appreciate.


I began to appreciate it once I learned how feminist theory defined patriarchy. The wording (doubtless there are many) I recall is, "a system of gender roles which is harmful to men and women" or some such. Some might say that this definition smuggles in a claim: that gender roles are harmful. That's not quite correct. You see, a non-harmful system of gender roles would simply not be Patriarchy as a matter of definition.


The reason I wrote this post was because of the earlier discussion that "Rape is about power, not sex." I was reminded of many past times I've heard rape defined this way. You might say that this definition smuggles in a claim: that men are motivated by power (or some such). But that is not quite correct. You see, a man who is motivated by sex is simply not committing rape as a matter of definition.


My textbook used the phrase, "at least one right angle," like Wikipedia uses a right angle. This is critical to leave the reader mentally itching, to leave him thinking that maybe a rectangle contains a mix of angles -- some right, and some not.




If a parallelogram has one right angle then it has four right angles




Behold! The full force of a theorem (not a definition)! So there is no doubt in the mind that there could ever be a parallelogram with mixed angles. This relation between the angles cannot be expressed with mere definitions.


Much later, I learned a name for this: The virtue of precision. Definitions should be as small as necessary.


What other imprecise definitions smuggle unproven claims?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				The scientific method rests on faith in God and Man.
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I understand why no finite amount of evidence can give you a statistical confidence of 1, but you go on to say that




there is no statistical law that would justify belief in the law of universal gravitation with even one tenth of one percent of one percent confidence, based on any finite number of observations.




Is this just because gravitation is claimed to be "universal" e.g. for all we know, gravity could suddenly change to work differently tomorrow, or work differently as soon as we leave the solar system?




it is a miracle that the scientific method works




Is it? Maybe since I live in this world, I am corrupted by it and I can't imagine it any differently. But: I cannot imagine a world where the scientific method doesn't work.


I think the Sun rises every morning because so far it has, but even if it didn't rise every morning, there would be hidden order to it. Maybe it rises every other day. Maybe on some mornings it rises, and on other mornings it doesnt - maybe I never learn to predict whether the Sun rises on a particular morning, just like how we can't really predict the weather, or which way a leaf blows in the wind. But if I spend decades failing to predict the Sun's rise, then tomorrow I expect it to be difficult to predict. If the Sun did alternate between periods of "rising every day for 10 days in a row" and then "a period of complete unpredictability," I've still summarized it with some compression, so I'm not totally ignorant.


I suppose a world that doesn't have this hidden order would essentially have to be free of cause-and-effect. In that world, I'm not sure how I could exist as a lawful being within it. Maybe there's an anthropic argument here?


Overall, your post seems to be a weaker form of what a lot of philosophical skeptics claim. Skeptics say things like "you can't know things with 100% confidence" and your post seems to just zero in on "the laws of physics, the source code of the universe." I'll reply to you the same way I reply to philosophical skeptics, which is: while it would be nice to know what is True, I'd rather send rockets to the moon anyways.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 26, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Some tests are meant to distinguish object-level ability. Take for instance, becoming a fireman or infantryman. It would be sexist to deny a qualified woman these positions because she's a woman. Furthermore, mumbling something about oppression or double standards is stupid, because you want your positions staffed by qualified applicants.


Whether or not something should be test or a competition can be contentious. For example, those college orientations where they say, "look to your left and to your right. One/two of you won't pass." Those always angered me because I figured a certification should be a test and not a competition.


Competitions are a little different than tests because it's not really about object-level ability. If it was, you would never have weight classes in boxing. After all, being heavy is simply part of the ability in boxing. And I think this is the primary argument for sex-segregating sports. But it's unclear what to do about a female (XX) who happens to somehow be naturally stronger. Why reward her, because she was born stronger than her peers? (I'm trying to sidestep any trans issues, that's a different issue).


As far as I can tell, the entire idea of rewarding winners in a competition has to do with spiritual merit, like determination, or how hard someone practiced.


Or something else I had issue with is how a lot of online games use "time played" as a kind of bonus, and let players grind up more powerful equipment to offset differences in mechanical ability.


Do people construct competitions that they'd be good at in a bid to win status for being good at them? Does TheMotte try to push "effortposting" as a spirtual virtue so that society rewards us?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				not-guilty is not the same as innocent
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Should we be agnostic about Russel's Teapot?


E: Mostly focusing on continuing your thought about agnosticism. Your point about guiltiness is right.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				not-guilty is not the same as innocent
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Russel's Teapots seems bogus to me. I would absolutely not like to be "skeptical" (not-guilty) about Russel's Teapot. I don't believe in such a teapot (innocent). Can it be proven?


When I continued to think about this post, this is the reasoning that occurred to me: I am not completely ignorant. I know a few facts here from experience:


    

  • 

    Teapots do not naturally form in outer space.
    

    • 

  • 

    Humans do not normally send teapots to outer space.
    

    • 



Based on this line of thinking, I'm comfortable with believing it doesn't exist (innocent).


The one can come to me and say I haven't proven it beyond a reasonable doubt but now it feels like we're haggling over the standard of proof, not the burden of proof.


Whereas your post gets the burden of proof right, it doesn't say much about standard of proof. Perhaps that is just a different topic?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 3, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Cranes, like the cotton gin, manufacturing plants or programming language compilers, are engineering tools used to serve a purpose. That is, an actual purpose. Whereas things we consider art tend to be done because it is fun or for status.


The difference is, that the existence of a crane doesn't affect the status of powerlifters. You can still appreciate a power lifter because you know he's not a crane. To the extent that Stable Diffusion etc. mimic art, you can't really tell.


Now, there are a lot of good reasons to have AI-art generators. Like cranes, they can help us engineer and build things faster. People here have mentioned that AI art is probably already being used for generic business presentations for when a slide needs to be livened up and it doesn't need to be too precise or fancy for the audience to get the point.


Fine, artists no longer get their money ripping off people making powerpoints, but AI art still threatens the status market they're engaged in, which as far as I know, has no analogue.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 5, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Relevant: dissolving disease.


In the face of fatness, a consequentialist might posit 2 solutions to reduce suffering:


    

  1. 

    Cure fatness.
    

    2. 

  2. 

    Restructure society so fat people aren't disadvantaged.
    

    3. 



Arguments over whether transgender, fat, autism, etc. are diseases seem like rhetorical techniques in order to enforce a preferred aesthetic on society.


Anti-memocide activists take option (2) in order to preserve cultures they like, such as the LGBTQ or autism community (what's the difference? snicker). Others, disgusted by these groups, suggest (1) we thin out those populations (without violence of course) to reduce suffering.


I imagine the disgust reaction to transgender and fatness happens first, and the designation of disease happens second. Of course, it's the same for actual diseases, like leprosy.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 30, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Someone who pushes the pill could say it's to increase gay representation. With a pill like this gays could become not a minority. That everyone would take the pill would be denied, so the future you outline here wouldn't concern anyone. Indeed, as concerned as you are, you must have an ulterior motive!


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 24, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Speaking as someone who (I think) feels similarly as OP, it's purely about principle. Family should be beyond reproach, as he wrote. In a hypothetical universe where I didn't get vaccinated, it should still be beyond reproach. I hope I'd have the courage to spew this kind of bile in real life if the old, tired topic of covid ever comes up in meatspace. I'd know my success when my friends reply to my rant: "wait, aren't you vaccinated though?"


Yes, and?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 3, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
The invention of the crane reduced the reach of the powerlifter status market, because when people look at buildings, they're assumed to all be made by cranes, but you can still watch real people lift weights and they're obviously not a crane.


AI Art will reduce the reach of artists and their monopoly on making pictures. Maybe in the future, people will assume most logos and the like are made by computers. That's all well and fine. But how can you prevent imposters from submitting AI art to museums and competitions? It would be as if a bodybuilder could hide a hydraulic arm under his clothes (or take steroids!) and compete without working.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 19, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
What are "your views" that you tell them? Would you be able to off-handedly mention if the topic comes up, "Yeah, I think Ben Shapiro is basically right" and also not act like Ben Shapiro?


Your comment about Brooklyn doesn't really strike me as "supports trump" or problematic on the object-level. The reason someone would get mad at that trolling is if she thinks gentrification is too sacred to be joked about. Most people don't feel that way, and if they do a little bit, they would probably swallow (haha) their mild discomfort as a form of settling.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 31, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
What if the universe just is, a timeless unchanging thing (unchanging from outside) and time and causality describe relationships within it and it's parts? As an analogy, a filmmaker shoots a reel and the reel itself is unchanging, but within it still seems to move.


To me, this has the advantage of only talking about observable things, and doesn't have the first cause problem. Am I making some elementary error?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 21, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
There's a lot of talk in online dissident right about how terrible public schools are, and how they are all gonna home school their children. (Usually tradcath types, too). They talk all the time about how daycare is awful and the wives all talk about how she and her friends love being stay at home moms and how they have way higher happiness levels than single in-debt professional women.


A common theme they point out seems to be the opposite of what you are pointing out, in a way. Whereas you mention that there are few role models for children nowadays, the trad-right-winger always bangs the drum saying that the centralized public schooling pipeline is a faux-family, the government trying to raise your children. That is, he is saying that children are being taught to follow the wrong role models.


This is not a new idea; I've seen people say all sorts of things like, "family is the most important bond, so any authoritarian institution needs to break it, something something communism." The idea of school, for example, brainwashing "educating children to be tolerant in order to function in an inclusive democratic society" is something I've read actual educators write and I cringed a little reading it.


Who benefits from children being deprived of traditional role models, as you mention, as illegible knowledge is being removed from the pool? If children today are primarily learning from school, maybe they do? It's very tinfoil hat, but if "the long march through the institutions" is real, I wouldn't discard the theory that the role model crisis is an intentional plan.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 26, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
This would predict more spectators for e.g. male sports than female sports which as far as I know checks out.


Who's greater, heavyweight fighters or mediumweight fighters? My instinct says "heavy" because the number is bigger but I might be wrong.


The conclusion I've been under for awhile has always been that these competitions are segregated like this out of a sense of fun (to participate or to watch); it's boring to watch men beat Serena Williams or watch a heavy guy sit on a toothpick.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 19, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
It's possible that this is an effective strategy. But it's also possible it isn't. I know many young progressive women who know "libertarian" and "centrist" and the like are crypto-right-wing dogwhistles. I don't know how common that perspective is. Maybe that perspective is what "a deep understanding" entails.


Whatever it is that is causing normies to be shallowly progressive (Cathedral?) could add "centrist is a crypto-right-wing dogwhistle" to the doctrine, couldn't it? What would your strategy be then? "I'm no centrist; I'm a moderate-to-strong leftwinger." Doesn't exactly exude enthusiasm.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 17, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
How would the test misclassify you? Your role in this community seems completely consistent with a wokeness score of 0%.


Someone who infers "anti-woke" somehow means republican or right-wing in any way is wrong, but that's not a problem with the test.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 12, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
The reason rape is worse than murder is because a women's value in society is her body. When feminists say, "a woman is worth more than her body" they are speaking normatively, or more accurately, saying "a woman ought to be worth more than her body." Undoubtedly, feminists will deny this, and say that no, they really mean a descriptive to be. "Rape is about power" therefore asserts the worth women.


When opponents of sexual redistribution say "sex is not a commodity" they are also speaking normatively. They will deny this, but prostitution's position as the oldest profession implies that descriptively speaking, sex simply is a commodity. Women intuitively understand the value of their sex appeal, as any cursory glance at social media reveals. I also have funny anecdotes of female friends volunteering egregious details of their sex lives (apparently women talk to each other about this) and once she figured out I wasn't gay, she was imminently disgusted at me. The implication here is that since I enjoyed hearing it, I was being a free-rider.


"Men undergo some experience and feel raped" is just about the most pathetic anecdote ever, so I might as well go all in and give an example of that, too. One time I gave money to a panhandler and I felt unsafe. It's unclear to me if feeling unsafe was important to my overall vibe, but it bared remarkable correspondence to a drunk college girl:


    

  • 

    he didn't use force
    

    • 

  • 

    I regretted my actions afterwards
    

    • 

  • 

    I felt like a chump
    

    • 



I think the last bullet point here is very important to "the feeling of being raped." What's extra funny is already having crystalized these beliefs, I came across this clip (Did you know Chris Hansen had another show about catching a different kind of criminal?), so clearly jaded men like me aren't the only ones trivializing rape. (To those not aware of the context: the woman was a victim of identity theft and lost a lot of money).


To recap, if rape is about sex then an uncomfortable truth would come to light: that a woman's value is her body.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 7, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'm not an expert in shop, but what's stopping people from publishing digital, open source schematics for using more traditional metalworking to make firearms? Would it be too effective, a kind of "how to build a nuke in your kitchen" type thing, or are 3d printers really that much more accessible?


What does it take to make an AK, probably more than just a lathe right?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 10, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I was reading American Renaissance's "A White Teacher Speaks Out" (ctrl + f for goth) and a teacher described that his black students all seemed basically the same to him. (This might just be "seeing the other race as all the same"). Whereas in his experience the white students might form cliques. As far as I can tell, it is mostly whites who join gender subcultures. Just like goth etc., gender might be a way for white people to feel special.


I do not mean this in the uncharitable, "a way to be on the oppression pyramid" -- I don't think it feels like that on the inside at all. It could be that whites, being "normal boring default," want to feel more special and do weird and quirky things. Whereas people who are already a little quirky, a little weird, or less normal (racial minorities, actual gay people with abnormal lifestyles) aren't inclined to join weird subcultures themselves. Scott had an essay comparing this state of affairs to weirdness points but I can't find it.