ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
No bio...
User ID: 822
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
5mo ago
What is woke?
"Woke" applies to an individual or work for whom all of the following hold:
- whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that this individual's actions, taken as a whole, appeal to the interest of their own class or privilege a set of protected characteristics they share;
- whether the individual in question pursues or conducts, in an intentionally offensive way, the privileging of certain types of sexual conduct or other discriminatory functions, as specifically defined by the letter of applicable equal rights legislation; and
- whether the works of this individual [or the work itself], taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific merit
The first category is to exclude those who are socially conscious of issues that aren't just a scheme to enrich themselves, which is a key feature of woke thought, and covers the standard "diversity over meritocracy" complaint. Compare stealing offense; they take that which isn't being given to them because it improves their social standing to do so (this is bullying/political strategy 101).
The second category serves to indict so-called "reverse" discrimination as discrimination- the "I can't be sexist, I only hire women" thing (which is usually used as an excuse for unevenhanded treatment when those who interpret the law are unwilling or unable to address it, typically because of the above). Again, if this occurs but isn't intended as nakedly self-enriching at the same time, it's more morally neutral than it is when perpetrated with intent; seeking eradication denies opportunity for education (hardened hearts and all that).
The third category must exist for free speech reasons; after all, are you truly free to possess selfish, illiberal views if you at no point are allowed to voice them? Steven Universe [for instance] thus cannot truly be considered a "woke show" even though it (and its creators) arguably satisfy (1) and (2), because it's done well and actually has something to say; compare how Lolita generally escapes the "child pornography" category.
The same principles we used to be granted offense to, and punish, obscenity serve to similarly convict wokeism and its practitioners- intentional, anti-social, and without any other mitigating merit. (Which is why I borrowed the Miller test for this definition.)
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
5mo ago
And at that time, by the time the kids were capable of a reaction other than "eww, gross", they had already moved out.
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
8mo ago
nobody thought that made them men
Obligatory: what's a man?
(If you consider a 'man' to be a 'human doing' rather than a 'human being' it... actually kind of makes more sense to consider women who do that men in this context- but there's a right way and a wrong way to do that.)
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
8mo ago
because it's transparently dishonest to associate yourself with menial work that you do not do and have never (in my knowledge) done
Yes, but associating yourself with them is the thing you have to do if you want to manage a company filled with the people doing those things regardless of whether you see yourself as above them or not (which you'll recognize as the stereotypical Karen mindset).
That is [one of] your job[s] in that position; Kamala is refusing to do that job.
(And that's completely ignoring the "leader is himself a servant" thing being... kind of foundational to the "Protestant" part of "Protestant work ethic".)
The entire philosophy is based around respecting what consenting adults do. They're fine with restricting what children do.
- Define all X as not-human with some scientific-sounding justification ("brain not developed till 25", "they're closer to gorillas", etc.)
- Claim anyone who disagrees with that definition is in opposition to the Science, and are obviously just in favor of X freedom because they want to have sex with [more generally, exploit] the women in X
- Rinse and repeat for Y, Z, etc. until you've reinvented traditional morality wholesale (more popularly known as "intersectionality")
No, I can't imagine why any freedom-minded person would have any problems with that. From a liberal standpoint, the problem with this strategy in an illiberal milieu is that you can't really take it on directly, and liberals being mistake theorists (and their tendency to be sexual mistake theorists doesn't help that) generally fail to understand that.
Thus, they tend to get baited into attacking (2), when the actual answer is to either go after (1) [which isn't scalable and is still vulnerable to "why do you care so much about hoaxes?", where people who can attack (1) can still be somewhat-credibly accused of having the same motivations as the people who just attack (2) do], or seek/implement/maintain social conditions such that yeschad.jpg is a valid response to (2)- this is being able to respond "all of them" to "how many children have to die before people who have (and will do) nothing wrong will give up their freedom to X" criticisms of [insert civil right here].
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
11mo ago
Sexist, yes, obviously, but you really have to squint to get to sexual.
A lack of active and/or claimed sexual intent doesn't mean it isn't sexual abuse.
Then again, I do agree that "sexual abuse" is not something that has a particularly coherent definition (since most of the time the definition is weaponized; if sex isn't special, rape is neither meaningfully nor mechanically distinct from other kinds of battery).
So I'm willing to concede it's mostly just bog-standard emotional abuse, but then, why are we permitting that on an industrial scale again?
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
1yr ago
No, .22 and 5.56 use what is, functionally, the same projectile; the simplest explanation for 5.56 is just a .22 with anger issues.
Sure, the projectile for 5.56 needs to be pointier and covered in copper so it doesn't disintegrate due to spinning at ~300,000 RPM, but it's not meaningfully different in terms of weight (from "slightly heavier" at 55-62 grains to "exactly the same" at 40) and identical in terms of diameter.
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
1yr ago
That's what the internet's for.
Yes, there are specific points around the 'ring' that are more sensitive than others.
No, it's not a surprise that the remnants of the cover will retain some of the cover's effects when that cover is amputated since that's where the nerves would normally pass through.
Honestly, cutting that piece off is as stupid as the routine tonsillectomies were, for the same reasons (apathy, anger). Penises are supposed to have that ferrule installed for the same sorts of reasons they're on fiber optic cables (so that the thing covered by that ferrule remains as sensitive [to light] as possible). Of course, since this ferrule is biological in nature, it requires maintenance (and can malfunction) for reasons and in ways similar to the female end of quick-disconnect air hoses.
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
1yr ago
or making their husband's life hell until he files for one.
I don't think this works as well as the women think it does; men have memes about this (ball and chain) that aren't meaningfully replicated across the gender boundary. Head-crushing (by men) and heel-striking (by women) behavior is the baseline for Biblical gender relations within the context of a marriage, after all.
Any medical professional/social worker who worked at them or still does that took any sort of oath to "do no harm" knowingly and deliberately failed that promise and is a disgrace.
Why? If we Truly Believe that teenagers are still developmentally children, then if this sort of approach works on smaller children it's only natural to assume it'll work exactly the same on larger children too.
As such, these efforts are "doing the least amount of harm" by our definition of "harm", since we depend on that particular bifurcation of human/subhuman for other reasons and won't let it go even though there's evidence (and hundreds of thousands of years of doing it some other way) that suggests it's wrong: this definition cannot fail, it can only be failed. (Kind of like the modern Western understanding of homosexuality, for that matter.)
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
1yr ago
a better world for everyone except those with unearned privileges. They certainly don't believe they're fighting for a world where 9,999 people out of 10k are going to be worse off.
This is a contradiction in terms. They know those people are going to be worse off; they're OK with that as they believe those people deserve it ("unearned privileges" has taken literally every form under the sun already).
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
2yr ago
Wait, goatse qualifies as existential horror?
I guess it's true what they say: you gaze into that abyss, and that abyss gazes back into you.
The broader society and its consensus is… less like this.
Well, yeah; they don't currently perceive the barbarians are at the gates.
And unfortunately for those [men] whom the existence of barbarians is a time-tested way to extract payment and investment from broader society in exchange for security guarantees (and has been since the dawn of humankind), they're correct; this is why the entire society must rationalize its newly-enabled refusal to pay them.
Hence, degrowth as religion; men staying in one's parents' household until they're dead would in a normally-functioning society be hideously perverse, but it's certainly a clear reminder of the human cost of the actions of their social cohort (and probably the rational thing to do in a society like this).
Yes, investing in growth is objectively the right thing to do, and will make the society even stronger in the long run, but why do that when you can just hoard your gains until death takes them from you?
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
2yr ago
Why should the US allow China to exercise the same kind of narrative control that the US is doing on other social media platforms?
True- why should the US allow US citizens to use Chinese printing presses?
After all, they could print seditious or blasphemous material, or find out about our culture and weaknesses through our writing, and surely our own printing presses are sufficiently neutral and decentralized to result in all content legal under the First being printable so there's no reason any of our citizens would need to go around that. Our citizens always act in such good faith towards each other that this is not a valid problem.
That's the main reason I'm suspicious of the ban, and read other legislation that specifically targets the ability to bypass bans as running up against 2A issues. (And yes, I'm aware that Chinese-made weapons are banned from import through the same legal mechanisms- too bad that import ban greatly benefits US industry so the lobby groups won't ever touch that one; I doubt the EFF will lift a finger over VPNs for similar reasons should it come to that provided the Blues pick the right initial target.)
[To piggyback off a sibling comment's argument]
but would they need [pressure to be anti-DR] at all?
True- the Chinese have a history of "fortifying" Blue politicians in the West (evidence of this always red meat for red tribe).
My objections center around not being sufficiently convinced this is true on their platform right now; I support the ban coincident with my certainty that it is.
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
2yr ago
Then we took a u-turn with modern art and focused on the most absurd, ugly, and unnatural things the human mind can create.
Don't worry. If it makes you feel any better, AI image generation should do a good job in making this kind of art commonplace, thus low-class. To distinguish themselves, artists will need to pivot back to things the AI really can't do very well, and fine detail (along with, well, an understanding of general beauty) is one of those things that AI tools currently struggles with (I think the fact it struggles with placing fingers is indicative of this).
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
2yr ago
Wait, that somehow passes for porn? I've seen beginner DeviantArt and Wattpad pages have more... stimulating... writing and artwork than that- even AI can do better these days. And if that's the absolute spiciest thing LibsOfTikTok can come up with (does it get spicier, or is that just to stay within Twitter rules?)...
But actively trying to get kids to read that sort of thing is suspicious.
The reason they want to get kids to read it is because, first and foremost, it's "oppression pornography". You know, the kind of porn straight educated women really like; and it's fig-leaf deniable in the "actually, it's about ethics in gaming journalism the loli vampire is really 7000 years old" way. And since it's porn women like (and women really like heteronormative gay porn; they self-insert as the tortured bottom that the dashing top comes to 'save'), and female sexuality isn't inherently threatening, they get far more leeway (remember the headlines when 50 shades of grey came out?). However, when it comes to the question of 'is it sexual', though, it might be intended to be but in practice it's not going to "groom" anyone because it's garbage lol.
So while sure, you can point out the object-level, society's cover to women is going to be too strong for anyone to really do anything about it. (Humorously, it's also why their examples of "pornography" never depict any straight women or girls in similar circumstances- you'd expect that it'd be far more prevalent if the model the stereotypical "male pedo trying to seduce young girl" example that people who say "groomer" are intentionally trying to provoke was correct, but it's pretty blatantly not- and "male pedo x young boy" doesn't wash either because even gay men don't actually respond to oppression porn.)
And sure, it might still be "female pedo x young boy"... but you're not going to find anyone's in any hurry to deal with that, either. Double standards gonna double standard, and complaining about that only really works for women anyway.
They were largely not sovereign nations
The Swiss and Spanish were (almost like that's why I mentioned them). The French remain relevant simply because they never adopted 7.62 NATO in any meaningful way until after the FAMAS.
The Czechs are also an interesting case, having fielded a service rifle in 7.62x45 in 1952 (more powerful than the existing 7.62x39 cartridge). So clearly the 'intermediates are the future' case isn't as clear-cut even when you have weapons available to you that are already in intermediate cartridges, but intermediate cartridges are limited in their usefulness if the gun you're using isn't a carbon copy of the StG-44 (the Czechs even had some of these actively lying around that the Soviets used to deniably arm some of its allies in North Africa).
And the StG-44 is a legitimately expensive gun to make especially if you're not well-versed in German space magic- you need magazines (and they need to be completely interchangeable; it's easier to do that with 9mm), the gun itself is more complicated (it needs to fire from a closed bolt to be viable at range), you need to supply it with enough ammunition to work (and you go through more rounds with these than you would with a full-power rifle round), and it's just as heavy as a full-power rifle is. The Czechs would eventually do the vz. 58, which is still a milled gun 15 years after it theoretically could have been made with stampings; Germany was legitimately that far ahead with the technology.
Another interesting example is Yugoslavia; they bought up most of the German surplus and were still actively using StG-44s (and AKs in 8mm Mauser, of all things) into the 1980s to supplement copies of Soviet equipment. Of course, they were and remain a relatively poor part of the world, so that wasn't as much by choice.
and forced to do so by Americans due to NATO
There was nothing stopping other countries from fielding two weapons or even to adopt it in the first place if they had sufficient logistics to do something different (or had already adopted something in large numbers re: France- who I will remind you was in possession of the future-HK engineers in charge of the StG-45); the US was doing that themselves (.30 Carbine) in the first place anyway.
So no, I'm not interested in the "stupid burger country intentionally screws up procurement" story. I will happily say that about the XM7 but in that gun's defense the US doesn't have any usable 7.62 NATO small arms in inventory aside from stuff at the end of its service life, so if they're going to switch to a more efficient (and more powerful) cartridge for a rifle and machine gun now is indeed the time.
Japanese adopted 6.5mm
Which is why I said
or with the .264s
for plenty of nations fielded rifles and machine guns in 6.5mm and 7mm (the 6.5mm cartridges all use .264 projectiles, except for the Italians who used .268). The two largest ones that actually used them in combat all dumped them for something in .30 during WW2 for reasons I already stated.
In fact, it's a good exercise to ask yourself what you owe to the artwork.
True, but the child[ish]-ness of that approach goes both ways; an audience that doesn't do that misses out on what the artwork had, but an artwork that isn't trying to hide what it has [beyond what is inherent/integral to the artwork] for [and this is subject to interpretation] "fuck you lololol" reasons.
Well, that's a result of the fanbase being largely tumblrites.
And the "fuck you, domination over accommodation" thing they embody means they legitimately don't understand those characters. Hence their rush to overwrite the plain text with 'no, he can't just be a crossdresser with other motivations, he has to be trans' [even though this breaks the entire reason his character arc ends the way it does].
I want Hiruko to step on me!
>Tells the MC to kiss her
>Accidentally pushes MC off the roof instead
>Promptly commits suicide
The funny thing about her characterization is, and unique to Hiruko due to her circumstances, that a good chunk of it is in the background and implications of certain events. I think she's the only character that does this across any of his works.
Vehx route too short
Why do you think so?
(I was legitimately shocked when I played that route because it's in large degree a match for this. Which is why I don't think it needed to be any longer; it showed V'ehxness was this way, and then ended.)
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
10d ago
Why would having sexual intercourse in general be the equivalent of shooting to kill?
No, the purpose of having proper sexual intercourse (i.e. using your genitals "properly, for their intended use") is the equivalent here. Not just sexual intercourse in general in the "mutual masturbation" sense, which is as suspect (smuggled assumption: sinful?) as "using a gun only for target practice" is to certain other people.
Again, genitals (as with guns) can be used for pair bonding and pleasure, it's just that that's not their telos/"what they're meant for".
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
17d ago
They did not marry young because they were successful young.
Sure they did/were. A man in the '50s was wildly successful compared to the older cohort of men, and that success was bestowed just for showing up.
So they started their lives very early: a huge luxury. As the old get disproportionately more successful compared to the young, the average age young men get married increases. (This is part of a feedback mechanism that naturally depresses TFR when a society is overpopulated, though naturally that lags reality a bit.)
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
18d ago
to avoid calling it a paraphilia.
Yeah, but that's both because nobody knows what a paraphilia is[1], and because it sounds like that other '-philia' that means you're into kids.
(Actually, the same's true of using the expanded form of 'AGP', for the same reason, and those who use it know that.)
[1] I mean, I like that caliber and being prepared and all, but I've yet to develop a sexual attraction to bullets and MREs.
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
18d ago
That doesn't follow whatsoever. It presupposes that we're always capable of evaluating deep consequences, which is plainly not the case. It also presupposes a ton of wisdom on the part of the person being persuaded.
Yes, progressives say "it's not my job to educate you" as well. (Traditionalists are just the progressives of 50 years ago, after all.)
If the only difference between you and them is that they have the social power to enforce it and you don't [because your thing is Totally 100% True Trust Me Gaise] then you're worthless and offensive as a movement, and people are right to reject you.
People generally don't like being tricked or called stupid; when you do that I'd argue it costs you a bit of your saltiness.
No, they’re those people’s children. Not the same thing; sometimes wise or well-meaning parents end up raising children who are neither.
More options
Context Copy link