Why? Were there not hungry people at the soup kitchen who would otherwise starve?
Truly, I don't think the people who were coming were THAT bad off. Orders of magnitude below me in income, yes, but I don't think I saw a single person who was dressed in rags, strung out, covered in filth, or completely crazy, over the course of years that I volunteered there. I'd guess that they were all very low income, but not destitute. They were well off enough that almost all of them were able to afford to get there in a car, or get there with a friend who was in a car.
Then there's the factor that if I wasn't helping at that location, it was a fact that there would be other people who would be instead. There are more people in my area who want to volunteer than there are spots to volunteer in such facilities.
haroldbkny
1yr ago
The teacher example's got a lot to do with the proximity to the age of consent, though?
Maybe. Though let's say for the sake of argument that we knew all these girls were 18. I'm generally fine with people sleeping with 18 year old women, if the women want to. But in this case, I think I'd still have an issue with it, due to the relationship. It could be that my disgust response is somehow downstream and influenced by the proximity to the age of consent, however, though I don't think so.
Are you completely certain that the government was doing most of the work of locking people down? From my perspective. It all started as a grassroots sort of thing, the most vocal people decided that they wanted to be locked down and didn't want to be exposed to the virus, or expose people they thought didn't want to be exposed. It became very clear, very early on, that any company or government institution that didn't fall in line with this policy would face massive social sanctions, callouts on social media, accusations of violence and racism ("you're literally killing people and people of color are the most vulnerable"), etc from these most vocal proponents of lockdown. That was my perspective from leftist-city USA, that the government and everyone else was just doing what they were pressured to do. I don't know if that's true everywhere, though.
haroldbkny
1yr ago
And that access to porn is a bad idea, I've personally seen what crippling porn addiction can do to a man.
What exactly can it do? Make men that don't want to have sex with real women anymore? That doesn't sound like nearly the end of the world, other men will gladly step in to fill the gap. And for those men, does it create severe unhappiness, or just men who don't care to participate in the rat race of trying to get laid. Also, doesn't sound like the end of the world.
I think if women want to be treated like adults, and have the privileges of men in modern society, then they should have corresponding responsibilities, and they should not get to lean on antiquated notions that their comfort and dealing with whatever irrationality they have has to be prioritized over other people's interests. If women still want such consideration, we should not pretend like they're not being treated specially.
Note before people accuse me: That's not to say men don't have irrationality too. But IME, men don't usually expect the rest of society to make it their problem.
haroldbkny
1yr ago
Ah, I see. Then my next question would be, what has Ilhan Omar or Rashida Tlaib done that you feel the left is turning a blind eye to? As far as I'm aware, Omar has said a lot of anti-Israel things, but has she said anything like Kanye, which implies some sort of Jewish conspiracy? Or anything else that we've seen the left take issue with in the past?
haroldbkny
2mo ago
I guess not. But I don't exactly respect them, either. But I do sympathize with some of their frustrations.
haroldbkny
2mo ago
IDK, for some reason I like the white space. Less congested. It's just like if someone dumps a lot of text without using paragraph breaks, I find it much harder to read.
haroldbkny
2mo ago
Man, I just don't understand why everyone likes old reddit so much, maybe because I didn't get into reddit until after old reddit was over and done with. Why do people like it?
Well, if anything, that says something about the criminals issue, not immigration. Or, the criminals issue could be complicated by neighborhoods. I could easily see it being the case that these white women are not living in predominantly black neighborhoods where it's likely the bulk of the crime would be (the true "urban" areas as opposed to the "metropolitan" or up and coming gentrifying areas). Or they simply don't know how bad things might get if their activism achieves it's goal, out of sight out of mind.
Another thought comes to mind as well. What if they DO complain about such populations, but the complaints are coded in a blue tribe fashion. I.e, they don't complain about "crime" and "criminals", they complain about "patriarchy" and "men". They dislike being victimized, cat called, robbed, but they blame their own causes.
haroldbkny
1yr ago
First, you say that "novel bad things are happening," but of the three you mention, one of them (tech layoffs) is hardly novel, and re another (increased serious illness) you present no actual evidence that it is actually occurring.
I think you'd have to be living under a rock to not be have been hit in the face constantly with evidence of either of these things over the past month. Google it if you haven't.
it is not obvious how lockdowns that ended a year ago would cause tech layoffs now, nor why other areas of the economy would be experiencing labor shortages, rather than imposing layoffs
f3zinker does a great job of explaining it in his reply.
Re serious illness, again, it is not at all obvious why lockdowns would cause increased serious illness.
That seems like the most obvious thing of all. People were sheltered from all illnesses for years. I know I couldn't talk with any pro-lockdown people without them telling me how great it was that they never get sick anymore over the past few years. Now that society's basically fully opened again, their immune systems are getting walloped by common sicknesses.
haroldbkny
1yr ago
That's an interesting perspective. I would add as an addendum that I don't necessarily think men's anatomy makes more sense for how they make themselves cum (though it's possible that's the case). But I think the biggest factor is that at a certain age, men start to experience crippling, debiltating urges to cum. So they undergo the self exploration of how to make themselves orgasm by necessity, whereas for most women it's an optional thing.
haroldbkny
1yr ago
I may be wrong, and others may contradict me, but I feel like the predominent view in society is that once a girl is 18, it's not wrong to have sex with her if she so chooses. I generally subscribe to that view. My issue is primarily with the high school teacher student relationship
haroldbkny
2mo ago
For me, for example, leftist seething is a plus. I enjoy it. I don't care about national unity. It is not one of my preferences. I like the political tensions and the rage. For me it's a plus of Trump. I like right-wing seething too
If that's the case, is this really the best forum for you to be participating in? It sounds like your values and the values of this forum are fundamentally at odds.
Infantile seething is not just a leftist thing.
No arguments from me here. But for whatever reason, I expect more from the left, and the fact that they've devolved in this way from previously having the moral high ground (in my previous estimation), taking everyone around me, and no one around me seems to be willing to acknowledge this, really drives me nuts.
haroldbkny
4mo ago
Yeah, I've never heard of Jews getting offended about acknowledging Christmas
I kinda disagree. I, for example, used to date a Jewish girl who kinda hated Christmas and objected to institutions she was in from doing things like putting up Christmas trees. It's not every Jew, but a lot of them do seem to have a stick up their ass about Christmas, as if it were some personal offense to them.
I've bounced between a few SSRIs and SNRIs in my life, but haven't seen much difference other than the fucked-up sex drive.
Are you certain they didn't make things better? I had to go on and off of SSRIs and SNRIs like 4 times before I finally accepted that it wasn't coincidence that better things seem to happen to me when I'm on them, and worse things seem to happen when I'm off them. I really thought it was coincidence at first, but eventually realized that I notice and accept the better things when I'm on these drugs.
haroldbkny
5mo ago
Governments love to restrict supply and subsidize demand
Why is that?
I agree with everything you just said. But I also wonder, is there a genetic hotness/beauty component to the trend as well? I will admit that when I was in college, I actually kind of thought that there was not such a thing as an attractive black woman (or rather that they were exceedingly rare, like only Halle Berry and other movie stars). I since have come to know black women in everyday life that I think are legit attractive. But I do wonder where my previous belief came from and if there's any truth to it. Is it nature, nurture, or was I just completely wrong in my belief? Does the black female face structure more commonly have more masculine components to it? That's what I used to think. Or is it obesity like you say, or ghetto dress culture of wearing baggy ugly clothes, or even is it that our culture really just doesn't prefer African American features like frizzy hair?
Also, I think that another trend for low dating appeal is personality, as well. This is easier to believe as just being "nurture". You'll hear this from black men all the time, about how black women are unpleasant to be around for being nagging, abusive, and even violent. The causes for this could be many things, from just confirmation bias, to black women being bitchy because they've been told by intersectional progressives that they have the shortest end of the stick, to maybe even them actually having the shortest end of the stick, and getting a raw deal, stuck with the unwanted kids, etc.
haroldbkny
6mo ago
If muting ads and sitting there works for your lifestyle, good for you
haroldbkny
8mo ago
Those people aren't on my side. That's a separate party, the group of people who hate fat people. I'm not a part of that group of people, and I dislike and disavow that group of people. Whereas my wife would say that she does feel that the fat acceptance movement is a fundamentally good thing, that she does like, and she would not disavow them. There's the big difference.
You're entirely putting words and thoughts into their mouths when you say this. You seem obsessed with the notion that pedophilia is wrong specifically because it's very impactful on the child's future, and you always talk about that. That could make sense. But maybe other people think pedophilia is wrong for other reasons. Leftists think pedophilia is wrong because it's an unfair power dynamic, and takes advantage of children, who are weak and need our protection. That reason could make sense too. But it's not okay for you to wave that away and say "sure, they say they're against pedophilia, but what they really mean is something else, because of <roundabout justification regarding how underage sex is impactful just like trans surgeries>".
No value system is bulletproof, and all are subject to people finding edge cases and random gotchas. But when you do that, you're not really listening to them, you're just attacking them because you want to attack them. Your values aren't theirs. That doesn't mean they are okay with pedophilia any more than you are. This all just comes off as you trying to find any random justification to believe that your outgroup is a bunch of monsters. You're specifically focusing on pedophilia being wrong because it has impacts on the child's future because it allows you to attack the left for not seeing it quite that way.
Thanks, I agree with this largely, just one minor nitpick:
I have to act in line with the modern progressive ethos of women being just as Strong and Powerful and Capable as men in contexts where it would benefit them, then accept "But women are so weak and incapable and afraid, and are uniquely capable of being made to do things they don't want" in contexts where this reasoning could be used to justify special favours for women.
On more traditionalist, or traditionalist-friendly places like the Motte, they may say "But women are so weak and incapable and afraid, and are uniquely capable of being made to do things they don't want". But when it comes to actually dealing with progressives and feminists, it's even more insidious. For 100 years, people were pushing towards women having more rights along with responsibilities like men. Then the 3rd wave feminists came along and started to push back on this. They started insisting on special privileges for women. They claim that this is not because "women are so weak and scared" but because "men are evil and privileged" or "society uniquely hates women". I cannot abide this explanation, because I still see so many privileges for women, where women are already elevated over men.
So for this example, they'd claim that men need to be constantly cognizant of not making women uncomfortable, not because women deserve special consideration, but because women have historically been oppressed, and men and society don't care about women's feelings, and men need to correct this.
haroldbkny
1yr ago
Wouldn't you get the same feeling volunteering in or contributing to a local soup kitchen? Or mentoring through Big Brothers/Sisters? Coaching Little League/Pop Warner/AYSO (team activities cut suicide risk!)? Filling in potholes in the road to cut traffic accidents? Are local people any less "real?"
No, those are good activities, too, and I did some of them as well. But that doesn't say anything about my main point in that paragraph, which is bang for the buck. The price of my time is generally considerably high, so really, I was contributing potentially a lot more than just a few dollars when I was volunteering my time. And still, even when I would give time or money to those places, I doubt I was really saving lives, the way paying for malaria nets would be.
Why wouldn't you think that far-away cases would have their own complex social politics? Why would you think that "aid" parachuted in from strangers would be any less likely to fall afoul of these problems than you, working in an area you're presumably at least a little familiar with, among people you presumably share at least a few things in common with?
Because they don't know the person who's giving it, and also they probably understand how life and death things are. If my life were at stake, I'd take aid from anyone.
And that I seems like a moral superstimulus to me, which substitutes the sugar-water of depersonalized "effectiveness" for the hard, hard work of improving ourselves and the uncomfortable things close to us.
I mean, maybe. I personally mostly thought about it as the QALYs-per-dollar thing. I wanted to try to help in the most efficient way possible. Save the most people with as little money as possible. I just think that some far away places probably need that kind of help more than the northeastern US.
haroldbkny
1yr ago
I agree it was terrible. I don't necessarily think either is worse, but I personally can't stand social shaming used to enforce policies, which is the MO of the left.
Well, I'm no expert, but if I wanted to steelman the position that male sex toys are worth it, I'd say that the biggest difference between vaginal sex and manual masturbation is that vaginal sex is very wet. So maybe the biggest value-add is in something that lubricates.
For that matter, the only thing I ever did which was similar to buying a male sex toy was when I once bought some masturbation cream. It was advertised as that it was supposed to make your hand feel just like a vagina when the cream heats up. But I wasn't impressed, it wasn't worth it, didn't actually feel at all like vaginal sex, and had annoying cleanup.
More options
Context Copy link