dailydogma
20hr ago
Not at the same level of studying as white people. Their IQ in that case is much lower. Maybe 95.
dailydogma
1d ago
What I mean is that for countries like Korea and India to produce engineers on par with Europeans, they require 200% more effort, because they have less natural intelligence.
dailydogma
1d ago
Obvious comment about outgroup midwits, aside, no, there aren't.
Yes, there are. The statistics are clear on this. How much time have you spent generating all of this thought based on backwards empirics and equations? It's kind of impressive.
dailydogma
1d ago
My honest take having had a compressed homeschool education is that the basics can be done in an hour or two a day
Yes but you don't come from a country with an average IQ of 80 that wants to pretend to have an average of 100.
dailydogma
1d ago
We are now in the timeline where the journalistic integrity of the New York Times rests upon whether or not it is physically possible to train a dog to anally rape a human.
No we're not. They don't have journalistic integrity. Never have.
dailydogma
1d ago
In case you were wondering what the effects of an oversupply of smart/high potential people looks like for a particular region, here it is.
You have it reversed. When there are lots of stupid people, stupidity is legally protected by the legions of stupids. There are more stupids today than in the past.
The white percentage of the population has sharply declined. The first census in South Africa in 1911 showed that whites made up 22% of the population. This declined to 16% in 1980,[32] 8.9% in 2011 and 7.65% in 2022
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_South_Africa#Ethnic_groups
Two reasons: the first is that they're bright, but not brilliant. A lot of rich people have opinions that are pretty normal among their approximately 120 IQ striver peers. A 140 IQ person is a whole 20 points smarter than Elon Musk but might be a grad student instead of the richest web developer in the world. Some rich people are 140+ IQ but the intelligence-wealth correlation is only about 0.40 so someone in the top 0.01% of wealth will have an expected IQ of like 122. And this tracks with my personal experience, the reality is that most billionaires are just palpably upper-midwit. They all like to pretend otherwise and a lot of low wits buy into a wealth-intelligence correlation of ~1 because wealth is the only thing they value other than sex, but they like to imagine themselves as appreciating intelligence, and so all rich people must be geniuses etc and if most geniuses lack sex and money they must really be idiots but that doesn't make it reality. The second is that smart opinions do require some effort, so greedy people will have worse opinions than less greedy, equally energetic people at their own intelligence level, because the greedy people are always focused on profitable behaviors, which well-crafted political opinions are not.
dailydogma
8d ago
Public schools are run by the local community. There is no conspiracy to education children in centralized boarding schools far away.
dailydogma
16d ago
I can't tell if this is an exceptionally well crafted troll effort or yet another exhibit of just how broken and toxically effeminate the culture of the liberal striver class has become. The warnings in CS Lewis' Abolition of Man reframed as imperatives. Forget making "men without chests" what we really need to do is make no men at all!
Incels often float the idea of getting rid of women once there are artificial wombs. I propose a competition: one country gets rid of their men, and the other their women. Which country wins?
dailydogma
18d ago
I think if you ctrl-f 14 and replace with 7, or 10, or 12 for that matter, then I agree with your reasoning everywhere. Except for your position on the study.
I don't think you need studies to prove that harm exists. I think you only need to look at what the victims have testified to to know that they have been harmed.
There are myriad cases where so-called victims testify in favor of their so-called abusers. This is brushed off as the „child“ not knowing what is „good for them.“ When they testify against their ex-lover, it is usually because he abused her in another way, by beating or cheating usually, or even forceful rape, but the government takes the easy route of applying the easy-to-prove charge of sexual misconduct with an underaged person. While this has its upsides, it's a civil liberties disaster, because it allows the no-victim cases and it bypasses the accused's right to a fair trial. It's directionally the same thing as making speeding a felony, but pinky promising to not prosecute the good people. A lot of times, somebody who everyone thinks is a burglar is sentenced to 10 years for going 90 in the 80, because it's much easier than going through the motions of finding fingerprints or DNA inside a burglary scene, which might not be successful, and then having witnesses scrutinized based on their eyesight and biases by the defense. It's much easier to show, here he is speeding on a camera, we all know he's a bad guy, let's throw the book at him for this pseudo-crime.
So, funny and cute little bypass to the justice process you have there. Sadly, I value liberty over your safety, so I can't stand for it and I don't care how instrumental it was to getting bad guys off the street. This speeding felony atrocity has got to go.
Your retort amounts to, actually, that going 90 in an 80 is empirically tantamount to manslaughter. Driving is dangerous. In other words, you write about 14 year olds like they are 7. I concur that going 200 in an 80 could be tantamount to manslaughter. But nobody does that.
I cite studies supporting my empirical position on speeding, and you reject the scientific method and stick with the civic myth of speeding taboo. If you don't accept scientific studies as a way to bridge this gap, I don't think it can be bridged.
dailydogma
20d ago
What about a woman who only gives birth to sterile children? Why not include other animals, why is reproduction important?
dailydogma
20d ago
I still don't know why you keep qualifying it with "real" rape. What kind of rape isn't real rape?
So-called statutory rape. Which is not even its name in most places. Usually it's something like sexual misconduct with a minor.
society has found that general laws against rape are insufficient to protect children from being raped, so it has enacted more.
So, for 14 year olds, which society are you talking about? My society has an age of consent of 14.
If you're college age, you're probably dating other college age adults and at basically any college you have a sufficiently big dating pool of them. I don't think this is an actual problem.
Apparently Anglos think it is a problem, since they have tried to make it a „felony,“ as you say.
What kind of evidence would convince you? Have you tried, you know, interacting with them?
Yes, well, I don't like to abridge liberties based on vibes. Some are smart, and some are dumb. I wouldn't oppose granting adulthood based on IQ. But if we can't do that, I want the least intrusive age limits possible, so high IQ people aren't impeded unnecessarily. Dumb people can fend for themselves and beg to be restricted based on low IQ if they don't like it.
That doesn't mean any adult is allowed to have sex with 14 year olds. I also don't think the standard by which we should have laws is "what are the other nations on Earth doing?"
It's too bad, because such places exist and continue to exist, and most people are in them, including people on this forum. Sorry not everywhere is some backwards American state.
This seems like a severe and unjustified leap in logic. 20 year olds are a lot more mature, and it's easier for them to manipulate a 14 year old than a 16 year old could.
I highly doubt this actually. Rather I think the 20 year olds just more attractive.
A 20 year old guy "committing more" to a 14 year old girl just means he's grooming her.
What if he marries her?
First, even the Wikipedia page you linked lists rebuttals and criticisms of the study, including studies that contradicted it.
Looking into those, the critiques are that the sample was all university students, and that scoring the experiences as negative, neutral, or positive was reductive. These aren't compelling critiques. We know rationally that people are going to be motivated to generate bad critiques of this study if they can't find good ones. That's probably what's going on. The best critique would be that a lot of the participants who said it was positive were teens when in happened. Therefore, the study doesn't show that real pedophilia isn't harmful, but it does show that an age of consent of 18 is too high. Obviously when you are 14 and horny, voluntary sex is not going to be „traumatic“ at all. Negative experiences will be caused by non-sexual events in a relationship, like being dumped, lied to, or cheated on.
The benefits are that 14 year olds don't get raped.
But we already have laws against real rape.
What are the costs, exactly? That adults don't get to fuck 14 year olds?
Innocent people are put in prison for doing nothing wrong, more people are discouraged from reproducing. The main cost is to young men. People put in prison for this are mainly under 21 (!), and almost all are under 25, so, basically kids themselves, just older. And they are put in prison because following the law can be costly for them: if you are a 20 year old man, and you have the preference that your mate be younger than you, which is a pretty universal preference, you face an extremely unnaturally restricted pool of available mates. The most fertile age gap in marriage is 6 or 7 years, so in nature, 20 year olds will date down into the early teens. In many places, they are restricted from going 18, and they face reductions of more than 50% of their dating pool in most places, even if they can go slightly under 18. Whereas for „creepy old men,“ the law is extremely lenient. They can be in their 50s and date their daughter's high school friend, as long as she turned 18 a few months ago. Then it's all clear!
Society and laws are not like math where if you find one counterexample the entire premise is invalid.
They are if the laws and society are reasonable. If they are fundamentally unreasonable, then yes, they lack that property. But laws that are unreasonable are unjust and a society that is unreasonable is wicked and stupid and should lose political power.
and that doesn't mean that the vast majority of children aren't susceptible to grooming tactics.
I haven't seen any evidence that the vast majority of 14 year olds are susceptible to grooming tactics. The only evidence I'm aware of regarding this was denounced by the US Congress for showing that sexual trauma from underage sex is a myth. Isn't weird that a bunch of politicians thought they could denounce an empirical study? Might as well denounce 2+2=4 or the existence of matter. It was published back in the 90s I think in a leading psychological journal by real academics. Since then, no evidence to the contrary has been produced. Do you know what that looks like?
We just say that a reasonable person would feel extremely traumatized and emotionally damaged from rape, and prosecute the crime accordingly.
I don't think a reasonable woman feels raped from voluntary sex at 14. Tons of people agree with me, which is why the majority of polities on Earth allow 14 year olds to consent to sex with somebody. Some let it be anybody, most allow a small age range. If she isn't traumatized by banging a 16 year old then she won't be traumatized by banging a 20 year old. If anything, 16 year olds treat girls like shit while 20 year olds commit more.
Which study? And just because there may be only n=1 study in a topic doesn't mean it's accurate or reliable.
It was an N=8500 meta-analysis. Yikes.
dailydogma
22d ago
Gambling has no utility.
dailydogma
23d ago
The normie is a ball and chain around our feet.
dailydogma
23d ago
So is every other law. That doesn't mean they're not useful or worth keeping around.
They vary in their cost/benefit and arbitraryness, and my position is this law is all cost, no benefit, and the most arbitrary one every dreamed up. So it's not worth keeping around.
An adult knows there's more to life than shiny video games and if given the same gift, sure they might feel obligated to do something in return (such as sex) but it's not as overwhelmingly likely as a child would.
Okay but then I wasn't a child at 14 because I wasn't like this.
Rape, by definition, is forced. There's no such thing as "non-forced" rape. This is a confusing term to use.
Then there's no victim and no crime.
I don't think Motte commenters and society in general would cause (to a reasonable person) the extreme level of emotional damage, powerlessness, and lowered self-worth that someone gets from being raped. Is it a nonzero amount? Sure. Is it close in orders of magnitude? Not even in the same ballpark.
How would you know? How did you measure feelings? The one study on this topic says trauma from consensual sex is fake.
dailydogma
23d ago
This might be shocking to learn but people generally like to have money. And most things in the world get done because people want money to trade with, not just to do "good honest work".
So greedy people who like to scam instead of doing quality work and letting money come along?
Just because you don't see a value doesn't mean there isn't one. I don't care about going to concerts but I can understand that other people do and that's why the industry makes tons of money off of it. I don't like soccer, but I understand that lots of the world does and that's why they make tons of money.
Circular argument. If anyone makes money, it's legitimate. What about Bernie Madoff? Geez.
dailydogma
23d ago
Silk Road, Alphabay, and some others had good reputations for paying out. I'm sure there's something up now like that that pays out reliably, although I wouldn't know.
dailydogma
23d ago
He is the founder, he created it. He is the world's youngest self-made billionaire so clearly he's added a lot.
Circular argument. Was it necessary to line his pockets? What good comes of it? I doubt it.
Because it wants to be a successful business that could eventually make lots of money for the owners.
Right. Instead of a good website that can run honest prediction markets. Great.
dailydogma
23d ago
Why isn't Polymarket a darknet site that runs on Monero? Why is it run by that kid with the afro? What does he add to it? Expertise in making CRUD slop? Did he make the decision to do this? All of it seems so poorly done and thought out. The economy is fake; people will literally do anything but meritocracy.
dailydogma
23d ago
I mean not being dependent on anyone else for money, and the typical signs of this are things like having your own job and owning your own place.
Arbitrary line.
I bring up financial independence because a classic groomer tactic is to shower a child with gifts they wouldn't be able to attain themself.
How is this different than the usual courting of women by well-off men?
A child is highly likely to feel complex emotions they hadn't felt before if they end up in a sexual encounter, and highly likely to want to back out and stop, but also highly likely to be too scared to say no. The harm is in having sex with the child when they don't want it, and the subsequent emotional damage, feelings of powerlessness, lowered self-worth, etc. not uncommon when someone gets raped.
Okay, then prosecute for forced rape then. If it's not forced rape, what is the issue? Even causing emotional damage, feelings of powerlessness, lowered self-worth is not a felony level harm. Intelligent motte commenters and society make me feel like that all the time. Am I raped?
dailydogma
23d ago
I'd be hard pressed to find a 14 year old for which this isn't true.
It was true for me.
they would have to be already financially and emotionally independent
I don't know what emotionally independent means, financial independence doesn't matter, 99% of people don't have this.
The harm when a minor agrees to sexual acts without fully internalizing what they entail and then being too scared to say no once it starts.
I hope all 14 year olds understand pregnancy and STDs. Is there any other harm? If a man wears a condom, what's the big harm exactly?
I don't agree with the existence of Onlyfans.
Great.
I'm not aware of any laws in Western countries that prohibit premarital sex between consenting adults.
I think you misread me, I was complaining that they don't prohibit it.
dailydogma
23d ago
It's easier for a 30 year old to manipulate a 14 year old than a 70 year old can a 22 year old.
This is probably true for some 14 year olds, but not others.
it would be enabling pedophiles who would then go on to harm the many people who are not fine with having sex at 14 years of age.
Do you value virginity at marriage? Most people don't. Let's say the hymen doesn't matter, and sex is fun and it feels good. Most people believe this. Obviously, the sex with the 14 year old is voluntary, not forced, or else it would constitute rape. Why do you need staturtory rape laws? On the basis of what harm? The problem is that when it comes to everything but the age of consent, men lose out because „the hymen is a social construct,“ „it can be broken by a bicycle,“ „Onlyfans at 19 is a human right,“ but when it comes to the age of consent it's suddenly Great Harm if a girl consents to sex and then regrets it. What great harm? The law does everything it can do to make sure her virginity is blown out by another man at marriage, but suddenly if she loses it to a loser man who is not her age, it's Big Bad. Why? What harm?
dailydogma
23d ago
26+ is too old for a first-time marriage. In general, they should not be on their second marriage unless their husband died, which is extremely rare these days, so women over 26 marrying should not be an issue in a traditional parish.
The women who are young enough to marry for the first time should seek men between 4 and 10 years older than themselves. Statistics show this produces the best reproductive outcomes and this is what most human societies of the past practiced. That the first item on their complaint list is immaturity tells me they are not doing this.
In other words, the solution is to double-down on traditionalism. A thin gloss of God and chastity is not enough, small age gap, 27 year old bride marriages are simply not traditional. Therefore, they do not work.
More options
Context Copy link