Stellula
13hr ago
This was your original claim;
In a normal, healthy, average relationship, men trade resources and services for sex. That’s just how it goes. Prostitution simply formalizes the exchange.
Elaborate on this. I have never traded resources or services for sex.
Stellula
14hr ago
I, along with perhaps billions of other people will tell you that they are in love with their wives/husbands and children, and that yes it is subconscious.
Your frustration with this is because you haven’t personally experienced it. You should reevaluate your belief that you are experiencing a wider range, more intense set of emotions than most people, because you apparently have no experience with the emotion that much of the world feels most intensely, and you apparently do not feel at all.
As to your question: the harm that people like Aella have done to society is to convince people of the incorrect, unhealthy, anti social framework of understanding that you are presenting here.
Yes, love is real, yes it is healthy to love your wife and children, and no this is not all transactional. You, nor Aella, nor the red pill people, nor the pickup artist people before them, nor any of the other people of that persuasion have discovered something unique insight into human emotion. Aella et al have figured out an exploit in the human psyche that enriches them, at your expense and the expense of the rest of their customers.
Stellula
1d ago
I really want to explore your claim about feeling more emotions than other people, but also imagining a romantic relationship as purely transactional.
Can you expand on this?
Stellula
1d ago
2 sigma above the mean in terms of the intensity and variety of emotions I experience
Given that you cannot imagine the love that a man and woman would have for one another in a relationship, I doubt this.
Stellula
1d ago
In a normal, healthy, average relationship, men trade resources and services for sex. That’s just how it goes.
That is not just how it goes.
Do you believe that human emotions exist?
Stellula
1d ago
How should society treat a prostitute who encourages other women to become prostitutes? She's a predator. She is preying on the minds of other young women, as well as on the minds of young men.
There are countless stories from every culture in the history of the human species that portrays people like her as some form of demon that should be cast out of society at best. People aren't being as nice to her as she wants, and she wants to continue preying on them. Even this sob story about how she claims to be surprised that people don't like her is yet another attempt at hijacking the attention of people by violating sexual norms.
Yes she is a human being and I don't want her to suffer, but she should feel a nearly infinite amount of shame for the harm she has done to the people around her. I hope she figures this our and starts working to repair it.
No human being is irredeemable, and this includes her; part of that redemption is an acknowledgment that what she has been doing has been harming society. I truly hope she can figure this out, and once she does society will welcome her with open arms.
Stellula
2d ago
No, I'm positing that the category {adjective}-{noun}, does not automatically imply zero overlap with category {noun}.
Is an orange apple any part orange? There are many subcategories of orange, but is an apple which has been colored orange in any of them?
No. An orange apple is an apple.
This is also why trans-activists fight so hard to call these men "trans women", instead of the correct "trans men" (men, who are trans). They are part of the super-category "men", and then part of the subcategory "trans", as in: they are men who wish to violate the typical dress and behavior norms of other men.
There is no amount of linguistic sophistry that means that a man in a dress is no longer a man. Even if you could get the entire world to refer to men in dresses as women, we would create a new word for actual women, and the language would change to accommodate this. Changing the words does not change the underlying reality of what they're describing, in this case: men.
Stellula
5d ago
You're just continuing down the linguistic treadmill. Are trans-women a distinct category that is different than "cis" women?
Yes, that is why you can identify them as "trans women". Regardless of the semantics: trans woman(2030 parlance) = man(<2030 parlance).
It doesn't matter. The language is simply describing the reality, which is that "trans women" are men.
To use your analogy: if we genetically engineer an apple to be the color orange, it is still an apple, just an orange one. We could call it an "orange apple", but tit's still just an apple which is orange.
A man in a dress is still a man, just a man with a dress on.
Stellula
5d ago
Trans women are trans women.
Your (correct) point highlights the biggest flaw in their arguments. "Trans women are women", well no they aren't because you already gave them a category called "trans women" which you can obviously identify, is obviously useful to you, and obviously has a meaning. That meaning is: men who are dressing like women, or in other words again: men.
Stellula
8d ago
Bannon does a daily podcast with an extremely active base of people. It's not like anything else that I know of.
As much as he doesn't really have Trump's ear anymore, he does have the ear of a lot of MAGA.
Stellula
18d ago
Downside risk is serious, upside benefits are usually small.
You've got this backwards. The upside risk is infinite, and the downside risk isn't. Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates are still billionaires, btw.
admit that current advice is insufficient?
The current advice is insufficient only in that it is not clear enough to men that they need to stop whining.
Whaaa this untamable wilderness isn't being fair
Whaaa this untamable ocean isn't being fair
Whaaa this vast untable universe isn't being fair
None of the men who have ever done anything of note ever at any point in human history have done so by meeting something that was fair. Your effort and the effort of the women you want to date will not be equal. It will not balance out. If anything, the shortcoming of the advice you have heard is that you would ever expect that.
Man was not owed the wilderness, and men are not owed women.
Stellula
18d ago
Why is it so impossible to be better? And why don't you simply date lower status women, and then elevate their status?
Stellula
18d ago
My wife certainly would not fit your criteria and we have been happily together for almost 15 years, married for a substantial portion of that, and have a bunch of kids.
My wife started significantly more liberal than me, but is now radically more conservative than I am, she was vehemently anti-religion, and is now an extremely devout Catholic who prays the rosary multiple times a day, wants endless deep conversations about religious philosophy, and would happily go to church with me every day if we could handle it with the number of kids we have.
I'm going to be blunt: a lot of the men I talk to about dating are just weak losers. Stop being a weak loser. Women want a man who is going to take care of them, and in a sense "tame" them. Look at every single female erotica story and it's some version of "strong willed man tames crazy rebellious woman" (often wrapped in: strong man sees the thing in rebellious woman that nobody else saw and they tame each other, but she still wants him to remain strong and only tamed towards her).
I see a lot of men who whine and complain that they don't want a "project", or a woman that isn't already the perfect match for them. Well...okay, man, but the entire world is made mostly by men who like the idea of a "project" in basically every facet of their entire lives, so maybe your status as single is a feature of evolution.
The only thing I agree with on your criteria is: STDs/sex work. That is a dealbreaker.
Stellula
20d ago
Can anybody give a QRD of why Trump seems particularly pissed off at Harvard?
Stellula
24d ago
Can you give the comment? I don't know what you think relates these things to each other.
Stellula
26d ago
The people at the hotel know what's going on. She knows what's going on. The guy knows whats going on, and even the person who lost the scarf all know what's going on and if anybody in this chain of people cared, then it would break the chain and the behavior wouldn't happen.
This is just a totally different thing than stealing and the fact that so many people can't understand this is illuminating.
Stellula
27d ago
Because the scarf wasn't stolen from me. I lost it.
If I lost something useful, I would prefer that somebody find it and uses it rather than it going to waste completely.
Here's a slight rotation of this: if I buy something online and don't end up needing it, instead of throwing it away I usually post it on a "buy nothing" group, or put it in the alley so that somebody who wants it can take it. It feels like less of a waste than if I throw it in the trash.
Stellula
27d ago
If you forgot a scarf at a hotel, would you really go back to the hotel, presumably in another city, to get it?
If I forget a scarf in a hotel, that scarf is community property now. I hope it gets used for something useful instead of just getting thrown away.
Recently Douglas Murray went on Joe Rogan and had a conversation with Dave Smith about, among other things, the responsibility of influencers with huge platforms to the public. Smith and Rogan took the familiar position of "muh marketplace of ideas", while Murray believes that people with so much influence should be a bit more selective, because exposing the public to bad ideas will lead to some part of the audience uncritically adopting them.
Douglas Murray spent the first, like...hour of the podcast talking about how Darryl Cooper, the noted Winston Churchill historian, had spent his career tearing down Churchill and "just asking questions" about why Darryl is devoting so much of his time to focusing on Churchill.
Except in reality: Approximately a year ago, Cooper spent about 2 minutes making a throwaway comment about how he takes a devil's advocate position about Churchill with his friend, a big Churchill fan, as a way of riling him up and playing around with him. Douglass couldn't do 10 minutes of actual research into this topic before then spending an hour talking about how only experts, people who really understand the topic, should be allowed to talk about things publicly. Darryl Cooper in reality is a podcaster who puts out 30+ hour long series about things like: The Formation of Israel, The Civil Rights Movement/The People's Temple/Jim Jones, World War 2 from the perspective of the Germans[1], The History of Slavery, and The horror of war (a standalone episode called "The anti-humans".
[1]: His whole point with this, stated explicitly, is that Germany didn't just wake up one day and decide to be the Nazis, one of the most evil institutions to ever exist, and then at the end of the war just decide to stop being the Nazis. It was a long process of humans making (bad) human decisions. The implicit point here, and with almost all of his work, is that good people can be talked into doing really bad things, and to be cautious around "movements" (like The Peoples' Temple, or a lot of the civil rights groups) because they can slowly-then-suddenly turn into a nightmare.
Douglass showed his cards, and it turns out that he's an idiot with a nice voice. The Strange Death of Europe was a good book, but it turns out the person behind it is probably a fool.
The things Mormons think are not the same as what Christians think, though. This isn’t a case of like…Protestants disliking the pope but still having more or less the same core ideology, or Eastern Orthodox Christians not agreeing on “the filioque” or whatever it’s called. Mormons think god is an actual physical being with skin and bones that you could touch with your hands from near the planet Kolob, and that there were major mass civilizations in North America where most of the mythology comes from. That’s not me being hyperbolic to make point, that’s literally what they actually believe. It has almost nothing to do with Christianity. Muslims have more in common with Christians than Mormons do. “Unitarian Universalists” have more in common, as far as beliefs are concerned at least, with Christians than Mormons do. When Mormons talk about “god” they aren’t talking about a mystical unseeable unknowable entity like Christians are, they’re talking about a physical person who traveled here from another planet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolob
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Mormonism
Mormons also don’t share the same creation myth as Christians, Jews, and Muslims.
It’s just seriously not the same religion. Again not because of some minor disagreements over interpretation, it’s just fundamentally a different religion.
The whole reason I’m probably being so annoying in this thread is that I had always heard of Mormons, had some ex Mormon friends, live around Mormons, and had honestly no idea what they actually thought or taught each other. Looking into their beliefs was a WILD experience to me because of how insane it all is. It’s a group of people, who are rapidly growing, who have made a religion out of what essentially comes down to worship of actual fucking space aliens. MAJOR WTF experience learning this.
Here’s a hymn about traveling to kolob: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/music/songs/if-you-could-hie-to-kolob?lang=eng
The work the word “practical” is doing in that sentence is: anybody with even a passing understanding of Christianity.
You’re right: to a person who has no understanding of Christianity, Mormons are Christians because what they vaguely look like.
This is the same true for people who think Buddhists are Hindus. Or Jains are Buddhists. Or any of the many tiny middle eastern religions are all Muslims.
But they aren’t. While there are definitely various flavors of Buddhism, and various flavors of Hinduism, these are not the same thing. In fact, even the Mormons own propaganda about “the Latter Day Saints movement” where they talk about the various flavors of Mormonism aligns with the “Hindus aren’t Buddhist, Mormons aren’t Christians” point I’m making here.
They’re trying to have it both ways. Both that it is a separate religion revealed to Joseph smith when an angel showed him some magical golden tablets in 1830, and also that they’re Christians.
Muslims, who also recognize Christ as a prophet, affirm the virgin birth, and acknowledge some of the Miracles, but they aren’t Christians, although some Muslim evangelists may try to claim some alliance with Christianity when recruiting people in the same way that Mormons do.
As I have said, you really need to reevaluate the claim that you are "2 sigma" beyond the depth and breadth of emotions that most people are experiencing.
My wife does not "grant me access to her body", sex is an act of mutual participation, and a physical manifestation of the love that we have for one another.
What you are describing is sex with a prostitute; a simulacra of sex inside of a loving relationship. It is the Polynesian cargo cultists constructing bamboo control towers and runways hoping to summon back the western airplanes, but without an understanding of what they were doing.
In the analogy, Aella and her compatriots have noticed the cargo cultists and started selling them bamboo. They have realized that there are men who recognize the aesthetics of a loving relationship, and that they can simulate this and charge for it.
More options
Context Copy link