ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
No bio...
User ID: 822
It has to be visceral/instinctual; there's just no other explanation that makes sense. The people who do feel that are going to try to rationalize it quite a bit harder and, logically, would rather not have to work at sexual attraction because it makes the relationship much more likely to succeed (for obvious reasons). Compare [the emotional impulse behind] 6/6/6 for women. Preference falsification applies to everyone, especially those that suggest vanity.
Conversely, we should expect men who have to fight themselves every time they need to prove they're attracted to their wife to be worse at marriage, which naturally leads to a higher divorce rate. The implication when it's brought up is that it's all on the woman, but obviously that's not true (and considering the market value of sexual access to the female body has fallen through the floor -> sex is expected when dating, women who might not otherwise want to do that really aren't in a great situation).
It makes sense that the revulsion is instinctual; from a biological standpoint women who intentionally seek out sex are malfunctioning since it's very risky for zero benefit. It's only been within the last 70 years that the risk (of pregnancy) dropped to literally zero, so this trait hasn't evolved out of the male population yet, and the selection pressure might actually be in the direction of reinforcement anyway.
no instinctive revulsion
Interestingly, there are a couple of sex things I do feel instinctive revulsion towards (seeing two conventional men interact sexually is one of those; actually, I suspect this is also true for [obligate] gay men, which probably explains some furries... among other things) so I just kind of map that feeling onto this.
Perhaps that's just a side effect of my general pattern of sexual deviancy.
Personally, I would be more concerned about marrying someone who isn't sufficiently deviant/has too much instinctual revulsion about sex to actually be any fun to sleep with... but then again, low body count kind of falls out of that equation anyway for other reasons so maybe that's just a self-serving rationalization too.
and there's no obvious way to fix it
Sure there is: the old simply need to decide/be forced to pay their damn taxes.
The old in the US chose to pay their taxes: they, wisely, chose someone who campaigned on imposing them- he even managed to make them fun. And while the results of figuring out that new tax policy have been... interesting, especially because the reformers choose to televise negotiations (which I will point out was vital to making them fun in the first place), this is necessary for American society to avoid becoming too top-heavy and collapsing under the weight of its unpaid debts. Or in other words, "a deep-seated economic crisis at a structural level".
The old in the rest of the Western world, by contrast (and you can blame some selection effects- these countries define themselves by their social conservatism, Decorum, and Orderliness), have soundly rejected paying their taxes and, as provinces of the Empire, now need to be dragged kicking and screaming into doing so. "Muh Trump" is simply an excuse for this (and the fact that nobody in any one of these nations can articulate what is actually wrong with him besides righteous indignation reveals that).
The housing situation could be solved overnight if you mass-mobilized your potential workforce; I'd leave my current job instantly if someone showed up at my door, thrust a journeyman ticket with my name on it into my hands, and said "we'll pay 1.5x your current salary, and guarantee you a single family home in whatever location you choose, to come build houses for us for the next 4 years", and I think a lot of teen and twentysomethings would be willing to do that too. If the political will was there, it would occur.
There's no way out of this mess.
Well, not until the war in Ukraine wraps up, at any rate. I wonder where that massive surplus of small arms is going to end up if the Ukrainian government wins but can't pay its soldiers (to say nothing of the Russian one)? I suspect European nations in particular are not going to like the answer.
Otherwise, it seems self-evident to me that God would not have made something so fundamentally part of our nature feel good to us if he didn't intend for us to enjoy it
Counterpoint: It also feels good to dominate other human beings, but I don't believe God intended for us to enjoy that.
Now, match "domination" to "sex", combine that with the degree that marriage is inherently an exclusive prostitution agreement for sociobiological reasons, mix that with a generally-productive instinct for men to do this sexually more often... and now you know why traditionalists have an emergent, adversarial relationship with sex. For progressives, mix that with the female zero-sum social game, and the result is "yes, all men do that for power reasons, and they all do it on purpose".
Yes- progressivism (the current dominant ideology of women and their corporate arms- schools, etc.) is omnipresent and an extremely socially conservative force, very publicly allergic to any kind of human dignity (typically referred to as "risk").
Sure, they sometimes pretend to be on the side of "liberalism", but they cheer when kids get arrested by CPS (or are themselves doing the arresting) for not being visibly accompanied by the head of the household, something they have in common with fundamentalist Muslims. That doesn't scream "freedom-respecting and risk tolerance" to me no matter how much leather they're wearing.
Well, no surviving ones, at any rate; the most famous one was the mass of women cross-dressing in the '60s and '70s. Of course, that movement was so overwhelmingly successful that it's just the room temperature now.
There's also tomboyism, though that's not really an organized subculture so much as an emergent phenomenon.
The main way to tell whether a particular crossdresser is doing it for fetish/sexualized reasons or not is to look at how well they fit into the surrounding environment. If they're in formal wear when everyone else is casual (which covers both your average drag queen and Sam Brinton) it's 100% fetish/sexual, but if it's not then it's reasonable to assume they have other goals (where, sexual or not, they're unlikely to try and make it your problem).
However if you prefer, let us taboo the term "racism" and instead discuss "racial identitarianism".
The same should also be done for "sexism" -> "sex/gender identitarianism", which not only covers feminism/gynosupremacy, but LGBT/homosupremacy too.
Ok, so forced arbitration then military action.
I think the current English order is evil enough to order them shot as a motivator if no alternative can be found; whether the soldiers actually pull the triggers when so ordered is another matter.
the nation of Canada is one consequential urban corridor containing 50% of its population (Quebec City -> Toronto)
Which is why it should be its own country. They have very little in common with those outside there and everything they do is destructive to those outside of it.
That is how it should be.
If I were looking for a gotcha passage showing Jesus giving priority to men or being demeaning of women, I feel like I could do better.
That was the impression I had from the exchange (though even if it was 100% true, which I honestly don't believe it is, I'm expecting a first-century Jesus to act in a way common to a first-century people where it isn't conflicting with the job He is doing; that's just the way it works). I'm not bothering to discuss the latter half of the NT because we both know they contain a bunch of this (or at least, the excuse to justify a bunch of this; there's still a lot of 'male should lead and be household's head' too with the implication that it's not a job suitable for women, which gets used as an excuse to underperform or fail to delegate then make that failure the woman's problem).
Interestingly, I find that if you read those letters in a slightly more sophisticated/charitable manner it contains a lot of relatively standard group dynamics stuff. Everyone is aware of, or at least able to conceptualize, someone not being able to shut up during the sermon, and odds are you conceptualize this person as female even if you're a woman. So that + cultural outlook = "women should be silent in church"; it's applying the cultural meme in brain-dead fashion to people for whom it isn't true that creates the issue, but t'was ever thus.
For your statistics, I...
- Understand: 1, 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 15, 16, 19.
- Certain I've encountered, but I'd have to look up to be sure: 4, 17
that particular actress are... kind of ugly
Everyone in that movie was ugly. Ramona, in particular, looks like a man (and even looking at her actress after the fact gives me that impression- it's not just for the movie).
Seafood pasta dishes are actually more traditional.
To be fair, that's also true in Japan- instant noodles (just add water and boil for a while) are convergent evolution.
Because we'd be a neutral alternative to both, allowing us to peel off free/red states should the US be rewarded with a real tyrant of a D sometime. Canada (as in, Toronto to Montreal) is a dead end for anyone not living in those areas and, much like how FCfromSSC talks about a national divorce for the US, the divide (and emnity) East vs. West is very strong here too.
The G in GIF is pronounced like
I tend to pronounce it with a 'y' sound. This can create problems with programmers since they tend to prefer yiff GIFs.
If you're tied up about it specifically needing to be about the sex act itself, sure.
That doesn't not make every Taylor Swift song the PG-rated version of that.
it’s being used as a cope
Why do you believe men feel the need to use it as a cope, and why is there anything to cope with?
My argument is that if you take the perspective that the beliefs are sincere and literal, everything starts to make sense.
Sure... but nobody's that self-centered that they'd destroy most of the compromises set up to channel disputes among maximally self-centered individuals, right? Besides, when I do self-centered stuff, I'm lucky enough that it usually has some productive end, and the woo woo shit I might otherwise be partial to/where I work towards what makes observable, repeatable sense is generally... not, so naturally they'd have a sense of that and know when to moderate it.
This is the model that "reasonable citizens" have; that's why they can be defeated.
Cheap Civic-ish cars used to be available in convertible form
A wide variety of cars used to be available like that. Now there are only two that sell for less than 50K new, and one of them only seats two.
The Canadian government doesn't control where Canadians live
But it does have some laws controlling what they do while living outside the country, including ones that have to do with certain types of commerce.
If they can ban that (and as far as I know the courts are fine with it), they can ban working for American companies. Enforcement is another matter, but since when has that stopped anyone?
Are you sure it wouldn't be more disruptive to Canada?
I don't think Canada cares nor is in any position to care.
Canada will have 5% of it's workforce pissed off at losing an American salary
They already have 100% of the workforce pissed off at having their COL jump another 20% overnight. And honestly, they can do business here, and work on making Canada better rather than America. Of course that would require a pro-growth government, which the sitting one is very much not, but one step at a time.
I don't know what kind of jobs we're talking about
The ones that are worth it- the engineers, the scientists, the programmers. There's a list of occupations subject to this; generally if not exclusively requiring at least a Sciences degree.
they can literally just say "don't worry, bro, you can stay here as long as you want"
I already answered this.
You need to read less Dread Jim.
Or perhaps more practically, locate the bars that cougars frequent, if one looks/is still on the younger side.
Well, you can either run the scripts, or pay 10-30 bucks to some reseller so you don't have to re-run the piracy scripts every time or risk them breaking when certain updates are installed, which was a problem back with earlier cracks. (Plus, I just don't really like piracy- though I have much less of a problem when it concerns software the manufacturer is unwilling to sell, including Windows versions that are only generally sold to businesses.)
There are a few manufacturers that offer their hardware without Windows installed (at a substantial discount, no less); a few laptop manufacturers offer this for their business lines (which, naturally, are the only kind of laptops worth buying outside of the gaming ones, and the gaming ones have to have Windows for better or worse anyway).
I observe those things are called "work" and "taxes", respectively.
Oh no, the safety discourse is the same people, it's just that the "uncivilized" discourse has taken a backseat because most of their pet demographics do it. Being overly concerned about "muh order" is basing your public moral
faggotryon fathers overstepping their bounds; being overly concerned about "muh safety" is when you do that based on mothers overstepping theirs.Everyone has always hated the liberal types: either because they're incapable of doing it properly/just like the aesthetic and actually end up doing that damage, or because they're worthy to do it and hence resented by everyone else/crab bucket mentality.
More options
Context Copy link