anti_dan
11mo ago
I mean, your weight of 150 lbs is approximately my starvation + dehydration weight...as a junior in high school. That being the 145 lb weight class for wrestling. Its unhealthy to be that weight as an adult male with my build. Now that I've filled out, I weight 175 at extreme cut levels of both body fat and relatively low levels of water. I am also shorter than the average American male. More realistically I should be at or around 190. Again, as a short guy. I am not even a gym rat. This is me, doing mostly lots of walking and body-weight exercise.
Also your emphasis on soy in the protein (And several other) sections seems problematic given its hormonal side effects
anti_dan
11mo ago
Nope, slightly shorter than the national average. A tall person with my build would probably be considered freakish even in the NFL.
In the context of BMI, I am considered obese even when more real measures have me at 8% bodyfat.
anti_dan
11mo ago
Not that there weren't recognizable proto-wokist streams within leftism at the time, but it wasn't nearly the all-encompassing thing it can seem to be now.
One of the primary left of center talking points beginning on 9/12 was to watch out for violence against Muslims.
anti_dan
11mo ago
Would you not say this is a major overreaction to what was, objectively, a minor screw-up, which they, if I recall correctly, quickly apologized for?
It wasn't a minor screw up, it was a major screw up that they had hoped would be a major win. Remember, the point of the endorsement was for it to go viral, in a positive manner. Have all the tic toks and youtubers basically doing the ice bucket challenge, but with Trans-light. That it went viral was intentional. That it was negative was the mess up.
They also have not really apologized. Unless their statements have gotten far less milktoast than the initial set.
anti_dan
11mo ago
he problem isn’t even necessarily wokeness though they just seem to be putting out absolute shit recently.
These are not unrelated. Being woke not only influences hiring decisions, it influences narrative decisions. You can't write a flawed character that is anything other than a white male. But you also aren't allowed to have all your protagonists be white males. Thus you get Galadriel in ROP who is a perfect girlboss who's only flaw is people don't trust her quickly enough. The show could have been interesting with Elendil as the MC, because he, as a white man, could have been interesting and flawed, but it couldn't have Elendil as the MC, because that would be just another white man MC.
anti_dan
11mo ago
This story has made me revisit my college days and think on how close many kids are to lifetime worries if they aren't just total spineless cowards. We would host parties, from time to time, not ragers on the level of frats (but those obviously exist) and from time to time people who weren't invited, or were kinda shady friends of a friend of a friend would come. Then they would inevitably do some drug other than alcohol/weed and become a crazy person in need of restraint. Typically this never escalates when an average guy is confronted by my roommate (6'5'' pitcher), and if we added in that I was a wrestler, another roommate in BJJ before it was cool, they are easily dealt with. And then they go home.
But one time at one of our friend's place, some crack smoking person showed up and cold clocked a girl. Then he fought and fought and bit at least 3 people until roommate pitcher and I fully submission held him. He attempted to bite me at least 3 times over the 10 or so minutes before the cops picked him up. Could we have killed him? Well, yes, accidentally, as well. Or he could have George Floyded on us and had a dubious possibly drug induced death, possibly aggravated by being placed in a painful restraint for a long time. What to do? Just let people going around socking co-eds? At least the cops slipped me some of those ziptie cuffs as they carted him away...
anti_dan
11mo ago
I posit it is sort of magical bean type of thinking. Lots of people don't like mass imprisonment/institutionalization. They also happen to not like being assaulted/raped/murdered by smelly people on the subway, or don't like strolling through a park full of feces and needles. Mental health is the magic bullet that lets you mentally square this circle, you don't have to make tradeoffs! This theory also generally fits into the worldview of the modern PMC and other urbanites who value talking and words very highly. In this unrealistic theory of the world the steps go like this:
-
Get people to talk to social workers and shrinks.
-
They now are fully functional citizens who can work at whole foods and live in (totally available) housing just like them.
-
Now the streets are also clean and safe.
anti_dan
11mo ago
It seems to me that there are many ways we could 'reformat' our conception of gun ownership in a way that would preserve the ability of 'the people' to bear arms while making them less available for use in crime or mass shootings (or suicide), but I find it incredibly unlikely that the current American gun culture would find it at all tolerable.
Well, the issue is that while gun control proponents like that frame, you are actually talking about three completely different issues with three different plausible solutions.
-
Crime. This is the vast majority of non-suicide gun deaths, but most generally gets no attention (except when being aggregated to push gun control, or to scare boomers about cities). Simple solutions that don't really impinge gun rights exist for this such as: actually prosecuting straw purchasers, targeted Terry stop regimes, border security, and other general law enforcement scrutiny being increased such as beat cops and more enforcement against domestic violence complaints (in other words, stop dropping charges when the girlfriend recants a week later).
-
Mass shootings. A tiny minority of deaths that drive lots of discourse. Hard to fix without significantly affecting gun and free speech rights simultaneously.
-
Suicide. Something I think most people don't actually care much about, other than using it to aggregate "gun deaths" at a higher number. To the extent people genuinely care, the fix is also quite hard without also impinging the 1st and 2nd simultaneously. Low hanging fruit might include cooling periods t prevent spontaneously buying a gun and killing yourself on the same day.
anti_dan
11mo ago
Do you (that is, the generalized you of gun rights advovates)? One of the constant fights in Congress is about universalizing the background check system to curtail private sales that don't go through it.
Because that is a regulation that mostly just would exist to annoy hobbyists and the inheritors of pap's guns, and would have no statistical impact on gun crime in any way.
Likewise, the ATF is frequently cited as a boogeyman and the paperwork FFLs have to do described as overly burdensome.
Because they are? The current system both places heavy burdens on FFLs, but focuses almost zero effort enforcing laws that would actually prevent homicide.
What are the particular ways in which enforcement of existing laws could be strengthened that wouldn't catch the ire of gun rights advovates? Can you be specific?
They could re-purpose 95% of their enforcement actions to border security and prosecuting straw purchases. They could also probably tinker with minimum security requirements for commercial distribution of guns, that is semi trucks, etc which occasionally are successfully raided.
anti_dan
11mo ago
You know this is comical. Its like when Biden says something like, "what are you going to do about nukes." You can't fricken drone strike a single family house (let alone a single person's apartment) without causing mass collateral damage. Plus, the fact is you can't just siege Joe in 1F until he shits himself to death when there are 10000 Joes, nor can you snipe him when he leaves 1F without eviscerating all the other civil rights that exist. You'd be treating suspected gun owners worse than indicted criminals skipping bond.
All, in the end, probably for little benefit. Ask thyself, would the average gun control advocate accept this compromise (assuming it was ironclad): You get 10 years of doing your thing. But, if in year 10 the homicide rate of America is greater than any of Germany, England, or France all gun control laws enacted since 1900 are repealed permanently. Would they accept? Of course not. Nor for 20 or 25 years. Probably not even 50. This would all be rational, even though most of them would be dead, or nearly so at T=50. Because they would lose that bet. I mean, unless they engaged in a massive genocide program and somehow managed to gerrymander that to not be included in homicide.
anti_dan
11mo ago
Not clear to me why we think it absurd to ban matches (50,000 burns require hospitalization every year, 4,500 burn deaths per year) just because it makes it harder for people to light candles, but civilian-owned guns are somehow inherently dangerous to even own.
Dont forget to add in the deaths from pools. Or seed oils.
anti_dan
11mo ago
Discharging a gun in your front lawn without a good reason (self defense), is already a crime in the vast majority of jurisdictions (including that person's according to some reports). Which would make this another example of "just enforce the law you losers" cases.
anti_dan
11mo ago
Sure. Under my rule, you can concealed carry in public, but you can't pull out your weapon until and unless there is in fact a justifiable belief in an imminent threat.
This is supposed to be the rule for police and security guards already in most places.
anti_dan
11mo ago
This I'm a bit skeptical about because we did get crime quite low by the 2010s and it didn't do much of anything to tamp down gun culture and purchases.
They were still high by international standards, and there was an entire political coalition promising to enact soft anarcho-tyranny on the issue.
anti_dan
11mo ago
I mean, because she was kinda proven correct? They lost to might makes right, even after gambling the entire future of humanity on her political enemies winning a battle where her aide could have been significant.
anti_dan
11mo ago
There have been other amendments to the constitution. Why not make another to improve things?
Sure, the US is basically smashing every other large country on everything, when demographically adjusted. Why not constitutionally amend to eliminate social security and medicare? Or the income tax? Or mandate the execution of drug dealers? Evidence is much more in favor of those than the repeal of the 2nd Amendment.
anti_dan
11mo ago
In GOT (the show at least, I'm telling myself I should wait till he finishes to read, lest I be disappointed as I was with the show), Cerise's reign is ended by an overwhelming army and a freaking dragon.
anti_dan
11mo ago
Then they'd welch. What are you going to do about it?)
Well obviously, but space aliens or something. The point is they don't even truly believe it will work.
anti_dan
11mo ago
Original stuff does quite well when it is good. See, for example, Inception. The thing is that doing good original things requires talent, and the ability to have make bold choices. Sequels and the like can coast off brand recognition so long as its not absolutely horrible (Star Wars has been teetering on the edge of this question as of late).
anti_dan
11mo ago
Indeed, just like you will likely sell more pizza when you have a killer pizza recipe than you will sell equally banging arancini.
anti_dan
11mo ago
I dont understand your theory of the case at all. It is that 15 years in prison is an appropriate sentence for... being inexperienced at restraining violent crazy people?
anti_dan
11mo ago
Speaking as someone with an extensive combat sports background, this idea that training should have helped him is highly dubious. I'm sure he was given some training, but probably never used it in real life, and hasn't kept up with it. Indeed, it probably makes things worse. He kept trying to do the thing he was trained to do, but kept getting it wrong, which is made very difficult by being in real life (not on a mat) and battling a live opponent (who also probably was giving off odors that made him less able to focus).
If there was a lack thereof, reddit would have more conservative content, and then the media would focus on it. Particularly it would be smeared as full of hate speech, disinformation, etc.
More options
Context Copy link