Huh. I thought therapists were for talking about why you were sad or whatever. I don’t mean to be rude but this just sounds like a paid friend where you just chat about whatever you like. Would he play xbox with you if you asked? Is there a reason you don’t just talk to a free friend about this instead? Once again, not trying to be rude but I had no idea people used therapists this way and it is very shocking to me
Ok apologies, there was definitely an element of trying to enforce a consensus there and I was certainly transgressing. That said, it was hard for me to believe the user wasn’t a troll and had somehow stumbled here without being aware of the culture/consensus that does exist here (even if speaking of it or acknowledging it is mostly against the rules).
The police are almost always justified in these cases. Best to wait, like in the case of George Floyd, it usually is not as it appears
Your essay doesn’t even use rationalists as an example once in the cases you examine. You have two examples, Ligma Johnson and a Scott Adams statement. The victims of which are journalists and Paul Krugman respectively, neither of which would describe themselves as rationalists. Just a nonsensical essay
Gay guys drink water too, right?
What would it take to convince you
How about her successfully killing herself on her own, for starters?
Was this a known effect of fluoride when it was introduced to water supplies?
Are you married or is this just your speculation on what would work? In my personal life I have found like does not work well with like. Two committed ideologues of different stripes in a relationship just sounds miserable. For me it works way better that my wife has no political opinions or knowledge or interest so she can just “Yes honey” when I’m done sperging out and delivering monologues
Why does he strike such fear into the heart of rationalists? Just ignore him and downvote
When did you come to have this preference?
This actually ties in well to that recent overkill conspiracy theory post. Surely the Israelis had to have known the US would figure out they did it, did Egypt even have any airforce left by that point in the war?
If Israel expected the US to figure out they were responsible, they would have to be absolutely confident in American subservience to them, that they would take such an attack lying down. But if they were absolutely confident in American subservience, why do they care if Americans hear about them killing some POWs? Wouldn’t it just be easier to count on American loyalty to look the other way on POW executions, as opposed to relying on Americans to look the other way on sinking their own ship?
Any way you slice it sinking a US warship is more likely to piss off the USA than executing Egyptian POWs. So doing the former to cover up the latter is nonsensical. Classic overkill conspiracy theory
Any person in the entire world probably has some stake in what the US does, if nothing else at least in our foreign policy and immigration laws. You have to draw the line somewhere
If a guy enjoys his anus being penetrated by a pseudo phallus, yea, it’s safe to say he is somewhat homosexual. Oh, but he isn’t actually attracted to being anally penetrated by a man, he just likes the physical sensation.
What if he regularly engages in anal sex with men, but not because he is attracted to men per-se but just because he finds that they are more capable of stimulating him physically in certain ways? Is that not gay either?
Basically, it’s a physical simulation of sex with a man. What more need be said?
I am sorely disappointed the post was deleted and I won’t receive any credit for this
They’re both bad. Critics fall for wokeshit but audiences fall for shitshit. Superhero trash and Black Panther are at the top either way
Right, but his original comment implied that Alex Jones would have died for questioning 9/11 cops when in the Dorner situation he didn't die for questioning cops but for going on a killing spree. So yea, I guess if Alex Jones decided to question 9/11 and then go on a killing spree he would have something to worry about, but I feel like the "killing spree" is the integral part of that much more than the "questioning 9/11"
Am I once again missing something here? What do you mean by getting "Dorner'd"? Perhaps he was wrongfully fired, but my recollection was he then went on a killing spree and committed suicide. How is that analogous to getting assassinated for conspiracy theories?
Seems possible, but it feels like “I invented a character that disagreed with me but then realized my opponents were stupid and I was right all along.” On the other hand, is using an example of a real person much different? Sure, it reins in the most ridiculous excesses, but there are so many people with such a variety of contradictory experiences in the world that maybe even cherry-picking a real person isn’t all that different from inventing a character out of whole cloth.
That’s the feeling of your brain growing. Keep at it, you’re doing well!
This is just bitchy and unnecessary
We can now see that the incessant fears of “AEO” and “Sneerclub trolls” were always just ways to shut down discussion of certain topics. There is literally nothing to worry about now that we’re no longer on reddit but the accusations haven’t stopped
How does one look at the current entertainment landscape and conclude we need even more remakes?
Why would he lose his life? Is not endlessly escalating a war against the US also a good way to lose his life?
Any Julius Branson post. He’s the undisputed champ, caused more seething and inspired more terror than anyone else
He also really captures the spirit of this place and has a truly inimitable style and sense of humor
I don’t understand what point you are making. You’re upset Carini gave up too easily and feel this degrades women’s sports. You’re upset people are questioning Khelif’s gender despite evidence that there are legit questions there. You feel that because Khelif has lost to a biological woman that their sex is irrelevant.
Is it that you want the anti-trans side to wait for Prime Mike Tyson to transition and kill a few women before raising any objections?
These are just reasons why drinking is good, not why it is a costly signal of trustworthiness.
Is a social drinker more trustworthy than a completely sober guy? Maybe, but you can make plausible-sounding arguments either way. Maybe the drinker is less likely to have elaborately hidden secrets, but the teetotaler has also demonstrated capacity for self denial and high impulse control, which has to be worth something.
Do teetotalers have higher or lower than average rates of criminality? I would bet lower, but I could be wrong.
More options
Context Copy link