coffee_enjoyer
☕️
No bio...
User ID: 541
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
6mo ago
This is one of the reasons I consider Christianity the best religion. Men don’t need a civilizational exemplar who is also violent, horny, and acquisitive. That’s our default state as is. Our exemplar instead needs to be exaggerated in the other direction: compassionate and loving up to self-sacrifice, pure of heart, freely giving. So when men come together as a community to hoist one of their own up as an ideal, they see the exact ways in which they are deficient (per our nature) and the virtues that complex civilization requires to function. The crucifixion is literally the hoisting of a man up on a cross for this reason. “Behold, (the) Man.” Why would you want to extol a warrior? They already have their reward.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
3d ago
Jewish billionaires conspire to change the narrative on the protests. From WaPo. (Archive link)
A group of billionaires and business titans working to shape U.S. public opinion of the war in Gaza privately pressed New York City’s mayor last month to send police to disperse pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University, according to communications obtained by The Washington Post.
Business executives including Kind snack company founder Daniel Lubetzky, hedge fund manager Daniel Loeb, billionaire Len Blavatnik and real estate investor Joseph Sitt held a Zoom video call on April 26 with Mayor Eric Adams (D), about a week after the mayor first sent New York police to Columbia’s campus, a log of chat messages shows. During the call, some attendees discussed making political donations to Adams, as well as how the chat group’s members could pressure Columbia’s president and trustees to permit the mayor to send police to the campus to handle protesters, according to chat messages summarizing the conversation.
Some members also offered to pay for private investigators to assist New York police in handling the protests, the chat log shows — an offer a member of the group reported in the chat that Adams accepted
The messages describing the call with Adams were among thousands logged in a WhatsApp chat among some of the nation’s most prominent business leaders and financiers, including former CEO of Starbucks Howard Schultz, Dell founder and CEO Michael Dell, hedge fund manager Bill Ackman and Joshua Kushner, founder of Thrive Capital [..] The chat was initiated by a staffer for billionaire and real estate magnate Barry Sternlicht[…] In an Oct. 12 message, one of the first sent in the group, the staffer posting on behalf of Sternlicht told the others the goal of the group was to “change the narrative”
The chat group formed shortly after the Oct. 7 attack, and its activism has stretched beyond New York, touching the highest levels of the Israeli government, the U.S. business world and elite universities. Titled “Israel Current Events,” the chat eventually expanded to about 100 members, the chat log shows. More than a dozen members of the group appear on Forbes’s annual list of billionaires; others work in real estate, finance and communications
“He’s open to any ideas we have,” chat member Sitt, founder of retail chain Ashley Stewart and the global real estate company Thor Equities, wrote April 27, the day after the group’s Zoom call with Adams. “As you saw he’s ok if we hire private investigators to then have his police force intel team work with them.”
The mayor’s office did not address it directly, instead sharing a statement from deputy mayor Fabien Levy noting that […] “The insinuation that Jewish donors secretly plotted to influence government operations is an all too familiar antisemitic trope that the Washington Post should be ashamed to ask about, let alone normalize in print.”
One member asked if the group could do anything to pressure Columbia trustees to cooperate with the mayor. In reply, former congressman Ted Deutch (D-Fla.), CEO of the American Jewish Committee, shared a PDF of a letter his organization had sent that day to Columbia President Minouche Shafik calling on her to “shut these protests down.”
Usually I wouldn’t post so much from the body of an article, but there’s a lot of information to unpack here. It appears that Jewish donors secretly plotted to influence government operations, as well as the highest levels of media and academia. This comes after Mitt Romney admitted the tik tok ban was influenced by the extent of pro-Palestine content. IMO this is going to be used in American discourse about Jewish power for many years to come. You have Jewish billionaires across industries banding together to manipulate the narrative, influence politicians, and “shut it down” — literally a trope of Jewish power. The influence here is, frankly, incredible: a dozen billionaires alone, conspiring with journalists and academics and advocacy group leaders, talking about using black celebrities to push their narrative and applying “leverage” to university presidents. As Cenk Uygur tweeted (no friend of the alt right), “You can't complain about the trope, if you do the trope”.
I kind of wonder if some of this is even illegal. Not that I am naive enough to believe a charge would occur if it were. They are sitting down in briefings with the Israeli government and discussing how to best push their influence machine. Isn’t this lobbying on behalf of a foreign power?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
I don’t think that’s right. Gambling has been a problem in every culture where it was permitted. If it is available it will trap men, as it did to important men of history like Tesla and Mozart. It’s a superstimuli, So it will be inherently addictive regardless of what is going on in a culture. Video games are a hyper-extension of gambling, involving all the same cognition but with added superstimuli.
Porn, like gambling, is also a superstimuli. No matter how healthy your culture is, superstimuli activity will always be more desirable by definition. It doesn’t matter how hot your wife is if you can see a variety of the world’s most attractive women by clicking a few buttons.
I would say these things are definitively in the category of “causes”, just like the availability of opiates and alcohol are also causes. If every human had the ability to click a button and be administered an opiate, probably half the world would be addicted, because human nature involves occasional lapses in judgment and willpower.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
10mo ago
Hamilton though, being an expensive broadway musical, mainly influenced the opinions of young white women and homosexuals. By casting all the villain characters (British) as white and making the protagonists non-White, it set up clear tension between the two with one side coded as losers. Hamilton reads to me as an obvious example of taking a positive white story (that everyone learns about) and subverting it shamelessly so that the viewer’s feelings can be altered for a social-political purpose. In this case, regardless of some original intention, the effect was that white girls and gays from affluent families were shown a revisionist story in which their white ancestors were evil and the heroes of a tale they heard as children were changed to an array of black and mixed race characters who speak, act, dance, and sing their stereotypical cultural art forms. The positive valence for these minorities increase, that of their white ancestors decrease, and they are left being less interested in the American Revolution (who are filled with the well-mannered white people specifically portrayed as bad).
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
3mo ago
I think a good example of this is “Leave the World Behind”, the Obama-produced Netflix movie. The social dynamics are engineered in order to reduce the positive valence and social status of whites. This is accomplished through the following:
-
The nice, wealthy home where the white family and black family stay is owned by the black family. The white family is in disbelief, and the black guy brags to them about his board seat at the metropolitan opera. So immediately the white family is coded poorer and racist, and the black family coded socially superior. What’s interesting is that the viewer learns to associate Mahershala Ali’s phenotype with the highest social class. If I tried to pull that off with Chet Hanks, you would laugh at me, but the viewer learns to ignore his own learned and often accurate intuition about phenotypes because he is black, which affects a total increase in social status and positive valence for blacks.
-
The white husband is coded as a naive, easygoing guy; the black homeowner as wise, deliberate. The white husband’s wife flirts with the black homeowner. As an interesting aside, the first Netflix CEO and cofounder Marc Randolph is related to both Freud and Edward Bernays, the latter of which was an expert at changing the behavior of the masses through subtle psychological manipulation in imagery.
-
There is a curmudgeonly white conspiracy theorist who withholds giving medicine to a child in need. Because of course. Although he does change his mind in the movie, the overall sense is that he’s a bad person.
Something else interesting in the movie is that — in this Obama-produced, star-studded title — the enemy is a joint Iranian/Chinese invasion that starts by hacking the American grid.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
3mo ago
Major social media companies colluding together to prevent the voter from accessing vital information about a candidate is such a significant violation of democratic norms that it should be our entire focus when discussing election fraud. We had information hidden from us which indicated a candidate’s son was paid by the spy chief of our geopolitical rival, and a corrupt oligarch in the most important geopolitical region of Europe (Ukraine), and that the candidate met with many of the players paying his son, and that Biden-as-VP held Ukrainian aid hostage unless he fire the prosecutor that was investigating the corrupt company which was paying his son. (This oligarch went on to participate in one of the largest money laundering cases in American history, in a little discussed story, using his Chabad-affiliates — but this is a story for another post).
Russell Brand Accusations
Russell Brand has been accused of sexual misconduct and/or rape by four women in a large exposé by the Sunday Times [2]. The mainstream consensus online is that the testimony of these women is absolutely correct. I wonder, though, how many false accusers we should expect given the context of Russell Brand.
Russell Brand is not just some guy, he was at one point a party icon in the UK. As such, he has slept with 1000 women. And these are not just some women, just like Brand is not just some guy. This is not a sample size of the median woman in the UK. The women he slept with would differ psychologically from the average woman: more likely to make poor choices, more likely to be partying, more likely to be doing things for clout (like Russell Brand), more likely to be involved with drugs and mental illness. A study on the lives of “groupies” in the heavy metal scene found that groupies were more likely to use sex for leverage, to come from broken homes, and to have issues with drugs and alcohol. (This is not a one-to-one comparison; heavy metal is different than the rock n roll persona of Brand).
Scott has written that up to 20% of all rape allegations are false. But with Brand, we have a more complicated metric to consider: how many false accusers will you have sex with if you’ve had sex with one thousand women who make poor choices? Scott goes on in the above article to note that 3% of men will likely be falsely accused (including outside of court) in their life. If this is true, we might try multiplying that by 125 to arrive at how many accusers Brand should have. That would bring us to four, rounding up — but again, this would totally ignore the unique psychological profile of the women he screwed.
There’s yet more to consider. Brand is wealthy, famous, and controversial. His wealth and stature would lead a mentally unwell woman to feel spite, and his controversy would lead a clout-chasing woman to seek attention through accusation. What’s more, (most of) these allegations only came about because of an expensive and time-consuming journalistic investigation, which would have lead to pointed questioning.
All in all, it seems unfair to target a famous person and set out your journalists to hound down every woman he had sex with. It’s a man’s right to have consensual sex with mentally unwell and “damaged” women, which would be a large chunk of the women Brand bedded. Of course, this cohort appears more apt to make false accusations. Quoting Scott,
in a psychiatric hospital I used to work in (not the one I currently work in) during my brief time there there were two different accusations of rape by staff members against patients […] Now I know someone is going to say that blah blah psychiatric patients blah blah doesn’t generalize to the general population, but the fact is that even if you accept that sorta-ableist dismissal, those patients were in hospital for three to seven days and then they went back out into regular society
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
9mo ago
This is bizarre just from the perspective of politicking. You’re a politician, in Ohio, how do you not know enough about Christians to expect this kind of response? I’m reading and apparently there was another politician in Ohio who also called on her to delete the tweet, Casey Weinstein, but he then deleted his tweet. This is just basic religion literacy. Christians as part of their religion are obliged to “confess the name of Jesus”, this is commanded of them and it’s a minor plot point during the Passion. This should be tolerated in the public sphere just as everyone should tolerate Jews professing a chosen status and Muslims calling Muhammad a prophet.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
14d ago
We ought to interpret “unrapeable” more charitably as “even a driven (evil/damned) rapist would pass up the opportunity because of how ugly she is”. There is no indication that the boys have formed some some crypto-pro-rapist organization which hides their aspirations by including the word “unrapeable”. That is too uncharitable to consider. It’s like, if I say I wouldn’t eat your cooking even if I’m starving, I am not making a positive value claim about the state of being starved.
A problem with this essay is that it takes everything that a Jewish student says as true, when we don’t actually know if what they allege is true. There are no links to police reports and investigations, and no rigorous comparison of “Jewish student victimization” versus “Palestinian student victimization”. That is problematic because it allows a random anonymous Jewish student the power to change the discourse, because he can tell his story to the author who then writes it in the Atlantic. It’s doubtful that the author has as many Palestinian friends as Jewish friends, or considers everything a Palestinian student alleged to be true in the same way he does for Jewish students.
The piece in the Atlantic is… a story. It is written to persuade the reader. He omits things not part of his narrative, like that a Jewish organization was caught writing a hoax anti-semitic message at Stanford. Similar hoaxes have occurred at other universities: 1, 2, 3. Jewish groups love their hoaxes. If one of the only(?) people caught writing something antisemitic is Jewish, what then is the probability that the other writings and postings are by a Jewish student? We can’t ignore that there would be a strong motive to do this and that it has been done frequently before.
If there have been some altercations and insensitive comments which have victimized Jewish students at Stanford in the year 2024, I expect to see a video recording or audio recording, at the very least I would need it to be confirmed by two gentile witnesses who are not affiliated with Jewish organizations.
edit here’s a Twitter thread of alleged altercations at Stanford in which an Arab or Palestinian was victimized. Are these events real? Well, isn’t that the point — the author picks and choose which hearsay to post in his article. We need a clear breakdown of victimization rates, not more hearsay narratives.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
6mo ago
But one of the reasons the Arabs fought Israel is because they predicted they would turn into an expansionist state and claim its ancestral borders. This is a damned if you, damned if you don’t. Israel is literally creating new colonies each year within the West Bank and (more egregiously) the Golan Heights, and its history is illustrative —
In 1976, former Israeli defense minister Moshe Dayan said Israel provoked more than 80% of the clashes with Syria in the run up to the 1967 war, although historians debate whether he was "giving an accurate account of the situation in 1967 or whether his version of what happened was colored by his disgrace after the 1973 Middle East war, when he was forced to resign as Defense Minister over the failure to anticipate the Arab attack."[89] The provocation was sending a tractor to plow in the demilitarized areas. The Syrians responded by firing at the tractors and shelling Israeli settlements.[90][91] Jan Mühren, a former UN observer in the area at the time, told a Dutch current affairs programme that Israel "provoked most border incidents as part of its strategy to annex more land".[92] UN officials blamed both Israel and Syria for destabilizing the borders
The argument sounds almost like, “why didn’t you let me take your land peacefully? Now that you defended it, you’ve forced me to take your lane!”
I also doubt anyone would make this argument if it were the Arabs destroying Israel militarily. Israelis would be in uproar about Arabs violating international law and taking rightful Jewish clay.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
6mo ago
Why was there so much pressure for everyone to rise up and speak out during other injustices (Ukraine, Uyghurs, BLM, etc) but for this one, the advice is to shut up, sit down, stay out of it?
I don’t think this is the advice, I think there’s just chaos in the discourse. Ukraine and Uyghurs were Kaczynski-type pseudo-revolts, the System’s Neatest Trick: capturing the energy of potential rebels and sublimating them to what the system actually wants. BLM was similar, killing three birds with one stone: propagating against Trump, pitting the white majority against each other (including upper class vs middle class police / small business owners), ensuring youthful energy is wasted on something irrelevant. In the case of Israel-Palestine, there’s contention over who the victims are. This is because what the system requires (sympathy for Israel) is at odds with what the system generally teaches: sympathy for poor brown people who are marginalized and colonized by white people. It strikes me that the system usually teaches this because it’s implicitly pro-immigration, helpful for getting middle class people not to care about demographic replacement or wage issues caused by tens of millions of illegal brown immigrants. But the propaganda values clash here, hence the schizophrenia of discourse.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
Menendez chaired the Foreign Relations committee. He was the most important politician for foreign relations, all the while taking bribes from a foreign government. It makes you wonder how serious American corruption must be if this is happening at the top and he was so terrible at hiding it.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
11mo ago
Sisters of […] Perpetual
This is a phrase used to describe Catholic Nuns, because of the Roman Catholic title “lady of perpetual hope”
Indulgence
This is a play on the Catholic practice of indulgence. Combined together this is sufficient to prove their malice, but to add another:
Wearing Nun-like vestments
I suppose an inverse example would be if I called myself “the LGBT Queer Alliance”, and my public spectacle was actually St George defeating a rainbow dragon which just happens to be prancing around in rainbow colors. Clearly my intent would be malicious against the LGBT theme.
I don’t see these events as anything but (1) a textbook example of college student protests and (2) a frightening display of Jewish social and cultural power.
The students believe that Israel is killing too many innocent people. Lots of intelligent people believe that; whether or not it is factually the case, it is a rational belief that many reasonable people hold, including many Jews. Even Chuck Schumer of all people has the opinion that Israel is behaving immorally. The students want their universities to cut financial and academic ties with Israel. All very simple, all very traditional, and very reasonable as far as college kids go. No different than protests against the Vietnam War or South Africa or the Iraq War. The protests have been exceptionally peaceful; if BLM was “mostly peaceful”, PLM is utopian. Try as I might, I could find no clear case of a Jewish student being physically victimized. Most of the arguably anti-Semitic comments have come from outside the campuses, by random non-affiliated protests, one-off statements that do not tell us anything about the college protestors. There’s your typical extremism college student view, but this is normal as far as college students go.
What makes this event so unique IMO is how Jews have finessed the narrative in their favor. Despite no evidence of any physical attack, the most over-represented ethnicity on college campuses (with the most advocacy groups and the most political clout) claim to feel “unsafe”. The media reports this as if it is true, and now the narrative is no longer “is Israel committing human rights violations?”, but “are Jews safe?”. In a reasonable world, the discourse would center on whether Israel is or is not committing human rights violations, and why some of the smartest students in America strongly feel they they are. A secondary question may be whether Jews in America are too close to Israel in terms of political ties, because that’s a serious problem if Israel becomes a pariah state. But Jews have strategically shifted the narrative to their own victimhood, with zero evidence. They have influenced politicians to make statements and start inquiries. They have significant sway over MSM narrative. They threaten to take tens of millions of their donations away from universities who don’t prevent the protests.
I found a video from earlier this week that illustrates the power of victim politics. An immigrant Uber driver arrives to his requested client, but can’t fulfill the request because the client accidentally ordered the wrong car. A verbal altercation ensues; phones are equipped by both parties. The client brags about his status as a lawyer, threatens to get the driver fired, claims he is being aggressed, claims the driver has threatened his children, and when all of these fail to exert his power, he claims that the driver muttered antisemitism under his breath. This last accusations makes the driver flee immediately.
The internet is saying that the client is a big shot music industry lawyer. If the internet is right, the client was on the board of directors of UJA, a Jewish charity that oversees more than one billion dollars in endowment (one of the largest local charities in the world). The man is from a pedigreed family: his Dad once ran Columbia Records. Without any shame, he punches down to a poor immigrant rideshare driver and falsely accuses him of antisemitism to record him and get him fired. And not for anything serious, but because of a minor inconvenience. If this is the attitude of someone on the board of UJA, then I think it could hint to a larger, dangerous attitude in the Jewish-Zionist community: that it is permissible to weaponize victimhood for personal or communal gain.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1mo ago
I think Folamh3 is close to it ITT. He had confronted his cheating partner who then emotionally abused him, leading to his suicide just hours later. If he were already depressed and planning suicide, he wouldn’t have cared about her infidelity or would have messaged her something else. The fact that he attempted to reconcile the relationship hours before taking his life indicates that he had no plans to do so before the event. So the overwhelming probability is that the experience was causal to his suicide. Which then should make us disgusted that the woman who caused it received attention and pity after the event.
Now what’s the deepest reason he committed suicide? We could blame it on the immoral woman — iirc, the actress he was seeing took Harvey Weinstein as a date to the premiere of her movie, likely indicating she sold her body for status. But I don’t think this is the deepest reason, because as a rich icon Bourdain could easily have found a morally upright partner. The reason definitely isn’t depression; that to me is a truly dangerous “just so” story that thwarts all thinking. I would assert that the reason is poor moral value.
Here is the liberal-individualist boomer par excellence. He tours the world and waxes poetic on the quaint social life, yet considers himself above their primitive family and social ties. He sits down with large families to eat, he attends their communal festivals, and he transmits this all to the solitary Americans in their living room. He is the rootless cosmopolitan, an omni-tourist, an enjoyer of spectacle over substance. Seeing all these wonders of the world, he’s yet unable to internalize their moral significance and necessity. He is self-worshipping; he cooked himself an identity in Kitchen Confidential and was too blinded by pride to ever revise it. Bourdain wanted to be the cool Western individualist loner, enjoyer of all but adherent to none. He attended every place’s ritual meal — each one a eucharist, essential, consuming God — but only as the aloof tourist, the narrator. It was this pride and absence of self-reflection (one’s real needs and obligations) which is the deepest reason. He let his heart be captured by an exotic woman to fulfill his own self-image, the idol he worshipped, which led to his demise.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
4mo ago
Your last sentence rests on a category error fallacy. Arab is an umbrella group, but Palestinian is a specific ethnic group. The Palestinian homeland is Egypt in the same way that the Irish homeland is Spain, both being Europeans of Celtic origin; in other words, it’s a mistake to assume that an ethnic homeland is the same as an umbrella group’s territory. The DNA of Palestinians is closer to Samaritans than “North African Sunni Arab Muslims” for this reason. Also, I don’t think this argument would be made if the Palestinians sought to repatriate Israelis to Brooklyn or Lakewood. Isn’t Israeli culture unique despite belonging to the general umbrella group “Jews”?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
5mo ago
I think when the arcane, longterm, complicated multivariable analyses on economic cause and effect conflict with common logic, we must trust common logic unless there are clear real world cases to disprove it. I have never seen anything approximating a simplified model that explains how increasing the low wage labor pool would not result in worsened quality of life when the wealthy hoard resources and min-max for greed. I have never seen any persuasive argument that supply and demand suddenly stops to work as a principle when you constrict the supply of workers.
If I start a business that requires COBOL engineers, I have one choice and one choice only: hiring COBOL engineers. If there are many to pick from who desire work, I can keep more resources and pay them less. If there are fewer on the market, I need to pay more, end of story. There can be so few COBOL engineers that I can’t hire them to start my business, but before this occurs I would cease to be a billionaire or multi-million! Clearly our country is very far away from having insufficient workers if there is still so much wealth inequality. In every scenario I can think of, in every industry, reducing the labor pool should result in greater wealth equality by forcing C-Suite and investors to let go of resources to use them to recruit and retain talent. God, it’s just so simple… why would any NBA team pay 50 mil for Steph Curry? It doesn’t matter if they don’t want to, they need to, if they want to win, and winning means money. How does this not apply to ever industry, magically, only in complicated studies?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
5mo ago
This was worth posting in main thread IMO.
I have a friend who, for his honeymoon and at his wife’s request, went on a very expensive Disney cruise to a Disney island. When I heard this, I did feel an intuitive sense of disgust, but I had a difficult time justifying the feeling. What’s so bad about Disney that isn’t bad about going to Burning Man? What’s the difference between someone going to Disney, and someone buying an expensive car? And hell, what’s the actual substantive difference in consequence between going to Disney and going to the Sistine Chapel, or to the Eiffel Tower?
It irks me because for a normal adult American, there really is no difference in personal benefit. And actually, there’s probably a greater benefit to going to Disney than the Eiffel Tower — the tower is ugly and irrelevant to one’s life experiences, but the one who pilgrimages to Disney is reigniting and reexperiencing the fervent and innocent feelings of youth. Someone goes to the Eiffel Tower simply because of its cultural connotation (if not I have a cell phone tower to sell you), but Disney has even greater cultural connotation plus more. Not to mention less vagrants and peddlers. Is the difference that the socially advantageous trip to the Eiffel Tower is concealed as an interest in culture and not status? But wait, are we now on the same page of treasuring and hyping Western culture? And waiting even longer (as if a Disney ride) since when is Snow White and Fantasia and so forth not frankly wonderful pieces of Western culture? Better than a glorified cell phone tower, to be Frankish.
There’s a lot of tangents I want to go on here, but instead I’ll just briefly list two attractions: the key difference is indeed whether one adjoins his identity to a cultural tradition, which we all intuitively know is valuable; another key difference is whether there is a deeply substantive benefit to one’s soul (deepest level of personality), and cathedrals can do this better than Disney, but perhaps not by as much as we wish.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
7mo ago
We should probably wait for third party inquiry and confirmation before blindly agreeing with sensational stories coming out of Israel right now. Lots of hidden intel officers among the Israeli public for this exact kind of scenario, and there’s a vested interest in presenting heinous but unverified information involving rapes.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
9mo ago
Steelman: every librarian should be a wise old man who can tell you stories and has lists and lists of books for every possible personality type and interest. He should be on call throughout the day for anyone who wants to chat about a book or author. This would motivate children to read, and influence them toward good books!
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
11mo ago
Homosexuality is, conjecturally, naturally disgusting for the heterosexual. This doesn’t seem learned — no one taught me that two guys kissing is gross, it was just gross to consider until the normalization propaganda reduced the innate “disgust” alarm. (This would be a very useful instinct because it disincentivizes men to take out their lust on each other; in the same way, humans develop a disgust for the idea of sex with people they grew up with). So there may need to be a constant stream of reinforcement to keep homosexuality normalized. Additionally, if LGBeTc is in any way associated with a desire to transverse norms and exhibit oneself (IMO 60% likely), then its public push could be considered part of the sexuality. It’s also beneficial for Democrats to incense LGBTs against “tradition” or anything that codes right wing… until their polling says the trade off isn’t worth it anymore. Lastly, LGBT pride has a covert psychological effect that may or may not be intended by the deep state, in that it reduces sum total non-sexualized pride; if you want to reduce straight men having pride period (the most dangerous cohort), you would associate pride with gays, transvestites, and transgenders. This is a good technique for reducing people proud of their culture, for instance; there really aren’t many synonyms to the sophisticated construct of “having pride”.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
19d ago
Connotation plays a big role here. “Stuck in a forest with a man” is a phrase that has horror movie connotations, and isn’t going to be analyzed in some dispassionate objective meticulous way (the median forest of median size, with the median man, some random distance away). That’s just not how humans will interpret questions on the fly. The question begs to be understood in terms of conflict: why else would you be stuck? Why else would man be compared to bear? The question would be a lot different if it was: “[points to a random man] would you rather be 200ft from that man in a forest, or 200ft from a bear?” Women also do not want to signal that they are interested in strange men, but they do want to signal that they like animals, which is feminine-coded in America.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
4mo ago
Always found it interesting that the studies on marijuana use focus on health and not whether the person is being as productive, forming memories of positive experiences, or engaging in a social community. i know a dozen people who used marijuana and then had to stop because it essentially drained their vital life force — they stopped doing anything worthwhile and stopped being motivated toward things. With tobacco it’s the opposite — it’s unhealthy, but no one’s ever been like “this tobacco is really ruining my creativity and preventing me from bonding with friends”. Perhaps the state cares more about a docile population that is not costly for medical services?
In the year of our lord 2024, we should not believe political activists when they claim an event was violent without videographic evidence. Given that the event was hosting an IDF soldier and director of the Kohelet Policy Forum (the think tank responsible for Netanyahu’s judicial changes), it’s reasonable to assume many of the students in attendance were Jewish/Israeli ethnonationalists — so, political activists in the purest sense of the term. The group hosting the speaker, Tikvah, explicitly “espouses the repatriation of Jews to their homeland, Eretz Israel,” so these students don’t even believe that America is their home, showing their extreme political stance.
The Kohelet Policy Forum collaborates with the Misgav Institute, which writes stuff like:
I looked at all the videos on Twitter and see no evidence of any violence.
More options
Context Copy link