ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
No bio...
User ID: 822
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
2hr 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
4hr 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
2d 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
2d 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
2d 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
3d 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
3d 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
3d 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
3d 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
5d 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)?
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
8d ago
Rather, it's reasonable to look at both sides of the equation, so to speak.
Yes, that's called "victim blaming", and here's your obligatory apoplexy about how this means little girls will now get raped because they clearly wanted it.
The right way to deal with that is just to ignore it. Men are slowly learning to do that, but it's not an instinctual thing for them to do, so it's going to take another few decades for them to evolve far enough to have a healthy response to this.
So abuse might be happening, but they lack the cognitive symbols that would allow them to actually conceptualize it as abuse.
And of those that can conceptualize it as abuse, they can't communicate that effectively.
To provide a concrete example, this is why the first label a traditionalist reaches for is "pedophilia" when [female] teachers teach 7 year olds they're transgender- and it's also why normies find that claim completely incoherent.
Ironically, to formulate effective cognitive symbols in that way, you have to think like [and value yourself as] a woman [would]. And I don't think many men really want to do that, and so with the choice they have they choose not to think at all.
The tds allegers are onto something that we find it hard to see past our antipathy.
That's because you're [now] a conservative, and furthermore, Trump has solidified what the reform movement that actually has a chance of damaging your conservatism is going to look like. I am not really a conservative (or rather, what modern conservatism is right now does not advantage me), and as such have had the exact opposite gut level feeling about Trump for the last 10-ish years. If neoreform wins, I'll likely become a conservative then.
I'm not particularly pleased with the Iran situation given that strikes at a rift in the current neoreform coalition- that being the late-'70s people who just have psychological problems with the Parthians vs. the early-'00s people who spent the past 20 years in that exact same low-level Middle Eastern ego trip warfare that seems to be threatened now.
But I would want the slave-importers punished, I want the slave importation (and offshoring) stopped because it undercuts my wages, I want the socially-accepted answer to "but it's social justice to accept that" to stop being "yes dear/ma'am" like [the '70s progressive-sympathetic liberals] currently do, and I want the current crop of conservatives out of power because they're more interested in DIE-ing than actual results (and will punish anyone who delivers results yet refuses to do so in a DIE manner). They also mishandled the common cold and did a Middle Eastern War's level of economic damage simply because they were angry neoreformers had a better conception of the risks (which cost about as much as the 20 year Middle East war did).
Those things are as offensive to me as Trump is to you, and like the so-called progressives before me I tolerate what takes me no effort to tolerate while offloading the emotional turmoil it causes onto you.
they think this reaction is pathological and not based on anything substantial, whereas we think it's soundly justified by a wide range of facts and life experiences
And that's just how conservatives work. I get that the progressives/"liberals" (as they call themselves) have kind of built a strawman around the term for reasons that have a lot to do with the 1960s and 70s (the people that came of age then are currently at the height of their political power, so naturally the lens through which they see the world dominates), but you have to realize that "I don't want to do it because I don't like it aesthetically, and I'm going to dig my heels in no matter what" is not a meme about conservatives for no reason.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
11d ago
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree here, provided you have the right (meta) frame of reference.
In this case, witness the results of genetics predicting a higher likelihood of "latching hard onto the dominant counter-cultural-but-actually-not-really social issue of the day and holding onto it throughout the rest of one's life".
In the '70s, that narrative was white supremacy; in the modern day (late '10s), that narrative is gyno/trans supremacy.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
13d ago
and his progressive/lib bias overshadows the history in videos like Reform or Revolution? 1830 to 1832.
I honestly found the last part of that video particularly funny, as it's his side (progressive/the current Establishment) that has been standing in the way and blocking elections from being won/any reform from occurring.
I doubt he'd've condemned it if he understood the full implication, but most progressives are invested in not understanding that, which is why they still call themselves "liberals".
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
14d ago
Apparently, it's a shooter game resembling paintball, where squids (or kids, it's ambiguous) battle.
They spray brightly-colored ink at each other until the loser violently explodes. The object of the game is usually to paint the floor, but can be other things.
Wow, those graphs are physically difficult to parse- in fact I'd actually say they're actively harmful to a proper understanding of the data. A "plain reading" (at least to me) of that data suggests 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 12 boys have been sexually penetrated in an unwanted manner before the age of 12, which isn't passing the sniff test given, if I remember correctly, prevalence of sexual contact by 12 is about 5%, or 1 in 20. So I doubt I'm reading the graph correctly, but there's no way to derive the total context or get a scale of the proportions involved relative to all respondents.
Being sexually assaulted causes people to become non-cis
I think this is ignoring the obvious-to-me confounder that becoming non-cis can cause them to become a victim of sexual assault [or reinterpret themselves as such] where they hadn't necessarily considered themselves as such before. This can also happen to cisgendered people, and women more than men for reasons that have to do with an asymmetric biological incentive to claim abuse for social or financial stability or gain (it's very popular to do this and makes headlines when it happens re: #MeToo, also, internal narratives matter to people re: 2rafa's comment below).
If you grow up poor or insecure or to young parents or female you become anxious and depressed, which leads you to be more likely to suffer sexual assault
Well, no, if you grew up poor, 2 things are likely true for kid-you:
- Your peers, especially the adult ones, are more likely than average to have poorer than average impulse control (or "high time preference", for short)
- Less stability means less trust in institutions, and less of a chance you try and 'rock the boat' (and give in to something you perhaps don't want to, or let it go further than you'd like)
Which means you're more likely to be "propositioned", and less likely to feel you have the power to pull back before it happens, and apparently this decreases monotonically by wealth level (outside of the 'elite' answers, whose error bars are very large- though I can believe this becomes truer for elite children simply because the chance for catastrophe in that scenario becomes large/taking 'no' for an answer and being driven enough to take risk kind of selects you out of the 'elite' group, obviously).
Also, and perhaps most importantly, we don't actually hear the first question: what's abuse? The analysis buries "indicates that they might be the most enthusiastic participants" in there, which suggests the question of "abuse" wasn't worded properly (i.e. in the legal sense, not the objective 'it was unwanted' sense- and I'd expect a survey designer who claims to value childhood autonomy to know better), which is a massive deal, especially when it comes to drawing conclusions on the last question.
Perhaps the second set of data will be more illuminating, though I'm not holding my breath on this one. If the base question/premise is bad, the analysis won't get better.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
14d ago
normielib friends who seem to have lots of latent violent cruel nationalism suddenly unlocked
Jingoism is the natural state of society. We forget this because it hasn't happened for a long time, but the latent-violent-cruel-nationalism is very much alive in Western countries, typically by the 65+ crowd. It's usually accompanied by some slogan related to a stereotypical national past-time, perhaps "elbows up", and lots of said crowd claiming they'd be more than happy to pick up a weapon.
It was radicalizing to see it happen in real time, even among those who nominally aren't particularly interested in even having a military; should these people get the violent conflict for which they were agitating, it wouldn't be them on the front lines.
Maybe it was a bad breakup. Former boyfriend is now pissed-off and is threatening them that unless they get back together, all their intimate photos and videos will be shared with everyone. Or maybe former boyfriend skips the threats and goes straight to uploading this on porn websites etc.
And this is different than the general blackmail case... how, exactly (especially in the AI context)?
We already have laws to deal with this case (and in the cases where we've chosen not to have them/are prohibited from doing so, we've already made the tradeoff). You don't need another law like that, or at least, you wouldn't if this was actually about protecting people from harm and not just a case of
In other words, invoking "consent" is the one-word fig leaf to cover up the fact women are blatantly abusing privileges meant for the people they claim are the most vulnerable, and to claim that if you're opposed to this abuse it's because you want 7 year olds to be raped. It's quite effective, as you can see.
which is perhaps why you did exactly that in the first edit.
Or would it just be more "women are sluts who need their sexual autonomy removed and to be controlled by
fathers and husbandsthe State" fuel for the fire?
Given my assertion is "that's exactly what women themselves are agitating for here"? Of course, it's not really "controlled"- it's always legal for women to have sex for reasons that have a bunch to do with an echo of '70s sexual liberalism- it's just permanently illegal for men to participate in any way
First it was just sex itself, then it was sex-adjacent activities, now it's pictures (real or otherwise) of it. Salami-slicing.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
15d ago
I have to exert considerable resources to change that.
And yet so far you've failed to do so.
Of course, "maybe try a different approach, here's why" (rather than getting glazed for your efforts) may understandably be offensive to someone used to sending their problems to their room if their first pass doesn't work. But hey, at least I don't have to live with the consequences of that.
ThisIsSin
Tomboy miscegenation
15d ago
He's repeatedly had trouble just sticking to the course
Yeah, I totally can't imagine any other reason, at all, why that would be. How could "boring and pointless bullshit" [from the victim's point of view- if this was interesting, you wouldn't be having this problem] ever lose to some readily-available distraction? This sort of thing has been stumping parents since time immemorial.
Perhaps not setting appropriate metrics is the actual problem? When I tend to procrastinate and go down a YouTube rabbit hole (or, y'know, write comments on the Motte) it's because either the time I have to complete a particular task is far longer than it's actually going to take (especially if I don't want to do it for some reason), or everyone's agreed it doesn't matter and I'm rationally deprioritizing tasks nobody cares about for stuff that's actually important (even if it's just important to me).
This is especially true when it's a parent ordering their kid to do something they really don't have much experience in themselves, so they have no idea how to set goals/metrics, meaningfully check in, or motivate progress (or have no idea that they even need to be doing those things). Which means that the task of figuring that out now falls to the subordinate, and if that subordinate isn't particularly motivated to do it, you're going to get some, uh, interesting answers.
Organically, I notice that others trying to learn songs will tend to set goals based around practice times- have this song/technique memorized in X practices from now- and the timetable imposes itself intrinsically based on how long that process actually takes. Some take a long time, some do not, but the key there is that if it doesn't get done, the next conversation tends to be "well, then what the fuck were you even doing, scrolling through Shorts for 8 hours?". Figuring out how long something's going to take is a skill that needs to be practiced too. (So's justifying it, for that matter.)
Also, here's your obligatory "trying to use tech to solve a people problem". Besides, what do you think's going to happen if you manage to accomplish your goal? I bet your answer isn't "they stare blankly at the wall for most of the allotted practice time", but I have first-hand experience in employing exactly that strategy in the Before Tech times, and they'll likely do it to you.
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.
More options
Context Copy link