ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
No bio...
User ID: 822
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
22hr ago
services such as AOL, Genie, Compu$erve, Fidonet, and standalone dialup BBSs
These still required specialist knowledge, and specialist equipment, to actually use (AOL did try their best though). The technology became refined enough for general use in the late '90s; graduation from dial-up to dedicated always-connected hardware helped with that especially in the pre-cellphone days.
Academia was a few years ahead of that in terms of having those kinds of networks ahead of time, of course.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
22hr ago
Why is prejudice based on sex tolerable, but prejudice based on race & religion, not?
What made you come up with that observation?
Prejudice based on race and religion is not only accepted, but encouraged.
This is downstream of (I'd argue a direct result of) prejudice based on sex, which is accepted even more than prejudice on race or religion.
And that's just downstream of the fact that Cain's rights and responsibilities are fundamentally different than Abel's- so whenever you have an easily-divisible dichotomy where one side is lesser than the other, that dynamic re-emerges. Man vs. woman maps onto that pretty well (especially in the age of mechanization, and especially if Abel isn't paying attention to the downstream social effects), as does white vs. other and Christian vs. other to lesser degrees.
The Abel side has to pay attention in a way the Cain side does not. Abel doesn't need an in-group bias because he'll generally succeed wherever he goes (and developing one would be corrosive to Abel-ness); but in-group membership is life or death for Cain.
Ironically, encouraging the side of a population perceived as more likely to contain Abels to develop that in-group bias is the main thing that would destroy that perception, but the problem is only an Abel could do that.
Not as much as you think, because transing kids is just a logical extension of what the state's actually backing, that being feminism (or to be more precise, gynosupremacy).
In fact, I'd go so far to say that 'gynosupremacy with self-identification' is technically better than the alternative for those who suffer under it, though whether the people most likely to take that opportunity deserve to benefit is another question (I think the typical term for that is "poor sportsmanship").
Telling them to pull back on the corruption there isn't going to solve the underlying cause, but it would be enough for progressive-driving-the-speed-limit-style conservatives.
The internet was not, in fact, invented just in time for the millennials
Oh no, of course not. Gen X is 45-60 now; millennials are 30-45. The Internet graduated from being the domain of the specialist to general usefulness in the late '90s, so "just in time for" is still broadly accurate. At that point, Gen X was half past 35, so per Douglas Adams the Internet is still against the natural order of things for a lot of them, where for Gen Y it is not.
The Greater Eternal September came about coincident with the advent of the mobile VT-100, most commonly known as the "iPhone", but that's more a Gen Z thing. (Gen Alpha's major technological advancement is AI; they have the most to lose from Gen X caprice, as they're actively in its crosshairs.)
Actually, a good chunk of millennials aren't digital natives either, but in 30 years most of what Gen X is about to impose will likely start to lose significant ground. Most of the younger generations know "but teh pedos" is a Gen X thing anyway (outside of the conservatives among them that just copy whatever Gen X does, much like how millennials did with Boomer thought [particularly 2nd wave feminism]), or are at least in a better position to see it as bullshit as they grow up.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
1d ago
Many of the self described feminist, and many leftist i ran into quite literally believe this.
Yes, but I'm not sure what information you get by noticing that, other than "people believe what is obviously self-serving/in their sociofinancial interest to believe". Which is true for everyone, including classical liberals.
Can be used to argue for gendered treatment of individuals
No, it's avoided because it provides an alternative (or rather, the logical/unselfish conclusion) to "feminine neutral vs. conservative masculine" sense of "gendered" treatment (since at present, we only have non-gendered treatment in the 'in its majestic equality, the law bars men and women alike from acting like men' sense).
This will be the real travesty of Epsteingate IMO.
Evil women gonna evil woman, what else is new?
we might be looking at the most draconian assaults on ordinary people's civil liberties and digital lives since the Patriot Act.
This is also just the natural result of Gen X aging into the Moral Majority position. They're not digital natives, which is part of why their approach is largely Boomer 2.0. Remember that a good chunk of them came of age in the peak Pedophile Panic years, so this being one of Their Issues should probably be expected.
Liberals can likely beat them, just like the Boomers were beaten last time (and 1A code-is-speech + most Internet business located in the US + current administration unfriendly to blatant foreign attempts to assert extraterritorial sovereignty helps with this), but the technological conditions may not be as favorable this time around for the freedom side due to (among other things) long-established better alternatives and an increased amount of centralization, especially considering what apps are permitted to run on which devices. And trivial inconveniences aren't.
Maybe you are just genuinely disillusioned and don't want to believe your favourite leaders and intellectuals are evil but, if not child sex trafficking, what will get you to rescind your support for them?
I can accept this form of "abuse" more than the kind of abuse evil women administer, with polite society's permission, daily. At least we can harden targets against this, but nobody would dare cross a teacher transing their kid, let alone give them the Adolescence treatment that behavior actually deserves. (Not that that series was anything other than woman-approved child pornography anyway.)
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
3d ago
AIUI, the protestors came first. The US was too slow to respond; by the time the air support showed up their infantry and their command structure were already dead.
If that's the case, this suggests an intelligence failure more than anything else- if they had waited for the US to show up, maybe they'd be in charge now. But they aren't.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
3d ago
Which is, of course, why every non-US Western country operates in the "vibe around absorbing corruptionbux and not missiles" mode.
After all, who in a post-scarcity society would want a repeat of the early 1940s?
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
3d ago
"I'm declaring your race irredeemably evil for historical crimes"
Or its related cousin, "I'm declaring your sex irredeemably evil for historical crimes", which is what the entire West has been doing for about the last 60 years or so.
about certain noble lies and keeping inconvenient data locked behind extremely secure doors
Or "respect" for short.
Let's think about a recent populist spasm- BLM: the noble lie we tell is that cops are to a degree beyond reproach, that movement sought to refute that, and it did billions of dollars of damage and lead to a 5-digit death toll of the population the populists claimed they were protecting (though indirectly as a result of higher crime rate, but if 'stupid people at the controls' includes Mao's policy of causing a famine due to killing sparrows, this counts too). A clear-cut case of populist stupidity.
The higher death tolls of the 20th century are magnified compared to today in part because the 20th century hadn't solved scarcity like the 21st has.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
4d ago
I'd say they don't like change
In other words, they're "conservatives". They don't like that name because in their worldview (informed by a memeplex that began in the '60s that they applied despite its ideas being objectively too advanced for them) it means they're the bad guys.
I think the term TDS is perfectly appropriate for both dislike of the man and dislike of the change, because the former is how conservatives launder the latter.
The problem with (2) is that I would not say the vast majority of objectors fall into that category, because if it was you'd find quite a bit more measured discourse rather than, y'know, what we see right now. And half of these also tend to fall back into TDS by going "Trump stupid, reeeeee", which you can see in every thread that talks about the guy on this forum, to say nothing of what happens in the wider world.
And at that point, you end up causing a crisis and delivering the government back to the very people you wanted to remove from power. You put on a flashy show, but just end up as a small detour in Cthulhu's leftward swim.
That's just kind of the nature of government, though. However, I would mention that Cthulhu swims rightward- towards the conservative and the local maxima of corruption (International SJWery, at present)- not leftward, which is more just general chaos.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
4d ago
far more than the total amount of abuse by religious figures.
Teachers are religious figures. The Christian Right was correct when they made this observation back when they were a relevant political force, but they also believed that was in large part a good thing and were as such unwilling to actually do anything about it.
Which is in part why they got away with it even when the gender balance was closer to 50/50 than it is today, and now that it's shifted further into a majority-female profession, that gender's sexual abuse is harder to prosecute because [for the 50% of the population that doesn't benefit from being able to do it], a significant portion of men don't believe it's a coherent concept, and even if they do, they think that the only way it happens is not actually destructive (re: South_Park_Nice.jpg).
Yet, if you believe the statistics that show this population 'abuses' students in the male mode at a far higher rate than men did at their peak, it's likely that the female mode of sexual abuse occurs at an even higher rate than that.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
4d ago
Has everyone forgotten the gay marriage debate so quickly?
I mean, you'll find people forgetting that Western society literally went full Nazi 6 years ago and destroyed ~20% of planetary wealth (mostly through inflation) in an ill-fated attempt to cure a particularly nasty variant of the common cold.
So not only is 20 years ago ancient history, but the loudest contingent opposing it has shrunk by half due to a dynamic best described by actuarial tables. People who were 60 and driving the opposition to gayness in 2008 are 78 now, so half of them are dead and the other half have been brainrotted by social media, usually into TDS (these are the kinds of people you see at No Kings protests).
Children need both their parents
Yeah, that's not what the people who came of age during the '70s (and so are 65-70 right now) think (remember, divorce was [simplification] legalized at that time), which is why it's not a big deal for them to have family units with 2 'parents' of the same sex. Which is why once the last generation grew too old to combat it, that "need" was done away with.
conservatives
Conservatives have conserved nothing.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
4d ago
And now they want to tell us that if there is some creep who is jerking off to nude pictures of five-year-olds, that is a civilizational emergency and we need to bug everyone's phones to stop it.
This is just general man-hating; the women who vote for those parties want the power to ban all men jerking off to nude pictures of women (so that men can be maximally exploited by women) and 5 year olds are just the motte of that argument. Traditionalists (or more loosely, 'Christian conservatives') and progressives are in agreement that this is a thing that should happen and the language differences between the two groups are just bikeshedding.
Half of them are in a church which a mere generation ago was systematically enabling priests to sexually abuse kids.
And their opponents are progressives, who are... also systematically enabling priests to sexually abuse kids, but it's totally different this time because instead of men in churches with an abusive hand it's women in schools with an abusive mouth.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
6d ago
The entire anti federalist argument against the bill of rights was that people may assume that what was not written meant the government could invade those rights. The response was the 9th and 10th.
Which, it turns out, was completely and trivially correct (the 9th was poorly-written but it's not like they could have done any better at the time)- they already invade the ones that are written down and invent novel legal theories to do so; how much worse would it be for the ones that are not (and are unpopular enough that would need a right to protect them)?
Remember that you're talking about the Groupie Generation here. They're '70s people. And House is kind of peak liberal (as in, not progressive) media anyway so it's natural that people who aren't tied into knots about the fact sex exists are going to treat hangups about that as a punchline.
The gynosupremacist "every female teenager who has sex was raped" angle ramped up later, in the '80s.
More options
Context Copy link