haroldbkny
2mo ago
I'm not a Bush fan, but if I were to try to say:
- He managed the country without it dissolving or getting destroyed. I know this may be a low bar to some, but I don't think it is. It must be the hardest thing in the world to be the president
- He rallied America after 9/11. Getting the nation through that, and stoking feelings of patriotism and solace, and trying to get people to believe that they're actually safe in the face of the most unprecedented event in American history is no small feat.
It's pretty well known that the sexual revolution of the 1960s led to a lot of pedo stuff
That seems kinda like consensus-building, to me. That's clearly what ZHPL is trying to say, but it's a very controversial statement. Very many people around here are trying to connect both present-day and past leftism to pedophilia, and even though I can't stand the left, I can't stand when people try to make that connection even more. I find it insulting that ZHPL justs waves his hand in that general direction and is like "people got into leftism in 1968, and than all of a sudden 9 years later: BAM! age of consent was revoked (in France)". It's almost comical.
Alan Ginsburg was a member of NAMBLA. Lolita was considered a classic. Roman Polanski was Humbert Humbert in real life and the French celebrated and protected him.
There are pedophiles everywhere. You know the arguments: The plural of "anecdote" isn't data. Chinese Robber Fallacy, etc.
I hate when people try to say the Right is full of pedophiles because some priests molest kids and some backwoods rednecks are inbred, so I also hate it when people gesture at the left for similar things.
Today, of course, we see a strange bifurcation where 23 year old women are incapable of consenting to sex with a 40 year old man, but its okay to subject young children to intense discussions and demonstrations of sexuality. Perhaps he's trying to invoke all of that. I don't know. His writing is vile.
I have no argument with you on most of this paragraph, especially with regards to the strange bifurcation existing in leftist thought.
Though I may slightly disagree with you about whether most leftists are okay with "demonstrations" of sexuality for minors. They definitely are okay with "discussions" with minors, and I think they go too far there, but I don't know if they're really mostly down with "demonstrations". Other than the aforementioned pedophiles, who as I mentioned before are everywhere and on all sides.
haroldbkny
5mo ago
You ignored the modern part, and tried to defend the 1970s left
I'm not really interested in arguing about the 1970s left without connection to the modern left, tbh, I simply have little interest in the subject. But look at the timestamps and you'll see that your caveat of
Furthermore, I am not talking about the modern-left
Came after the post you just replied to.
haroldbkny
5mo ago
Is any of this supposed to contradict what I said in my last post?
There are pedophiles everywhere. You know the arguments: The plural of "anecdote" isn't data. Chinese Robber Fallacy, etc.
haroldbkny
8mo ago
Well, for whatever it's worth, I've always been someone who hates people who hate other people for hating people. That's just the way I am. I'm a 3rd order hater. I guess I feel like the proper response to dealing with bigots is to admonish them, but try to do better yourself, not to debase yourself like they do, and not to play the victim.
haroldbkny
5mo ago
I definitely believe both you and OP that there are probably people for which these drugs have no effect. But I also think it's worth doublechecking, since I definitely had my aforementioned experience.
haroldbkny
2mo ago
Thanks! I kept thinking of The Pyramid and the Garden and kept combing through it to try to find it, but it is funny that it's actually from Scott's post about this exact topic!
haroldbkny
5mo ago
I have two fitness goals at the moment, in priority order:
- Lose pounds of fat
- Gain pounds of muscle
For the recent past, I've been focusing on this by adopting a more "bulking" strategy, wherein, I'd use larger weight for my exercises, and try to push my muscles to hit higher and higher weight limits. I'd usually do this by doing 2 to 3 of sets of 12 to 15 reps for each muscle, trying to push myself to muscle failure. So basically, more weight, less reps.
However, for achieving my stated goals, how does the above bulking strategy compare to a "toning" strategy, where I'd essentially be doing less weight, for more reps, and more time. With this sort of strategy, I may be doing up to 5 minutes of reps at a time, but with 1/2 to 1/3 of the weight as I'd be doing for bulking.
Which strategy is better to help me achieve my goal? Or should I do a mix, in which case, what percentage of time should be spent on each?
haroldbkny
6mo ago
Well, I can't say that I know for a fact other platforms would be able to survive. But I bet that there will be a bunch that would be willing to try, to fill in the gap of YouTube. I also think it's likely that some Big tech companies are in very different situations than small ones, enough that they may want to try to cash in their chips where others may not
haroldbkny
10mo ago
If you go home with someone and discover that their genitalia are different from what you had presumed, you are perfectly entitled to leave.
What if you can't tell visually? I've heard that surgeries of this sort these days produce a very realistic looking vagina, even if it doesn't feel realistic, such that you may only know by actually sticking your penis in. And even then, many people may not even know what a fake vagina feels like, they may assume something else is up.
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?
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.
haroldbkny
2mo ago
The "with" in that sentence was intentional - I'd say there is ample evidence that the post contains a sentiment that could be summarized in that way, not that the sentiment is all there is to it
This seems to me that you're backpedalling. Your original phrasing was
with a sentiment amounting to 'DAE leftists are whiny bitches?'
To "amount to" something means:
to add up to, be in total, be equal to, or be the same as
Therefore, by saying my post had sentiment amounting to "DAE leftists are whiny bitches?" you were not saying that my original post had that tone. You were saying that my original post was entirely equal to "DAE leftists are whiny bitches?". As I said verbatim above, that was "not the sum totality" of my post.
Furthermore, I think that saying things like:
It feels like the left, or at least the leftists in my life, are taking an infantile tactic
is actually a very gentle way of putting it, and I was attempting to convey my point while still maintaining detachment. If I wanted to be less, detached, I would have phrased it as "they're being crybabies", or if I wanted to be "egregiously" inflammatory I could have even said things that were far worse.
haroldbkny
2mo ago
Please do this, I'd love to read it!
It is worth noting that the liberal elite/centre-left establishment/Deep State/Blob do not have the same kind of hate-on for Reagan that they do for Bush Jr and Trump (and, as far as I am aware, never did - although I was too young to be following US politics when Reagan was in office.) For example, Reagan usually comes slightly above average in historical rankings of Presidents by academics.
That's interesting. I will say that it's hard for me to determine how much the left (in various factions of the left) hate Reagan, and this is probably because I wasn't around then. But fairly often, I hear people positively hating on him in what seems like an irrational way. I may be weighting those cases too heavily.
haroldbkny
2mo ago
takes you away from the rest of the thread to a "you are looking at a single comment's thread" page
Yes, I do find this annoying. I don't mind so much the "(+) 3 more replies", when it actually does work and when it also doesn't direct me away from the page.
I don't think I could really say much better than what @Goodguy has said in response to you. Go talk to him.
But I'll say one more thing, less directed to you than to all of the Mottezians who just loooove to spend all their time all day thinking about how much the left is full of pedophiles who can't wait to start molesting kids:
Do you know how irritating it is to have to defend a group of people whom you despise, against people who also despise those people but despise them for stupid reasons? People who want to think the left is full of pedophiles and therefore should be hated for that reason are watering down actual arguments against leftists. There's plenty of reasons to be against the left. Your efforts are better spent on those causes, and will do more to hinder leftism than this pedophilia bent.
More options
Context Copy link