sun
9mo ago
The proverb that goes "Strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times, hard times create strong men" is almost entirely wrong.
For the purposes of this chunk I've decided to put into its own top-level post, man has two natures. The survivor nature is concerned with enduring and overcoming threats to one's life and one's society. The thriver nature is concerned with extracting value from life.
The ones that are called "strong men", i.e. those in whom the survivor is dominant - they love hard times. That's their element, that's where they're at advantage, and they go cranky and depressed when the environment is not competitive enough for them. Naturally, hard times create strong men, by incentivizing the survivor nature.
Strong men create hard times. It's what one can observe quite clearly anywhere with an abundance of them. It also follows from the incentives - why would they not reproduce the environment that favors them? Most of the time, there are enough other tribes around that much of hard time-creation is aimed at them. However, strong men love hard times so much that they gladly spare some for their own tribe. When the outer enemies run out of juice, those with the survivor dominance that have trouble adjusting turn their attention fully inward. (Recall that tongue-in-cheek alteration that goes "hard times create strong Slavs, strong Slavs create hard times"?)
Weak men create good times. Weak men love good times, and it is often mentioned as a bad thing. (I disagree.) But it is not the survivor who creates good times. Naturally, there are very few people who are fully of one nature, and strong men do create good times, usually for others and sometimes for themselves. But only to the extent that the thriver is present in them.
The thrivers adjust society to be more suited for thriving, to have more good stuff and more time to enjoy it. They do it when there is space for that indulgence. An overabundance of survivors, particularly the inflexible ones, gets in the way of that as much as it might help such a society endure. A society that's comprised fully of pure survivors is the image of boots stamping on human faces, forever. A society that's comprised fully of pure thrivers will dwindle in a few generations.
As someone who puts value primarily in my individual life, I know which one I'd prefer and which one I'd rather not exist at all.
sun
1yr ago
Handpicking the most outrageous content isn't "just" holding up the mirror. Indeed, if the only thing necessary to denounce the Wrong People was to let them talk, there would be no need or demand for sneer outlets of all varieties.
sun
9mo ago
Judging by your derisive tone, I must assume you get paid to post, then? How much?
sun
1yr ago
I can just as well say that the conflation of whites and racists is done primarily by whites, racists and white racists themselves. I suspect I would even find a few people here who would eagerly act as a case in point.
sun
9mo ago
It is mysterious becuase it looks like you're grouping "reeducation camps" and "lockdowns" together on the basis on how legally similar they are - not on how horrible the experience is.
sun
1yr ago
What it definitely was, was a big middle finger to the Red Tribe. And I didn't go to the film to see people making hand gestures.
I don't suppose you boycotted the Captain America movies as well, on account of them implying America is best represented by a white blonde athletic man?
sun
1yr ago
Her first one says she is going to represent all people, yet she only mentions certain people in the second.
If my establishment says "customers with dogs welcome", that doesn't imply I'm going to turn away everyone without a dog.
sun
5mo ago
Less delusional how? The way I see it, it should be blindingly obvious that however small the influence of whitey's oppression on racial disparities is, it is larger than 6000 years compared to 4 billion. Not to mention the whole god thing.
sun
9mo ago
It makes sense to speak against lockdowns because they were actually harmful in ways you can describe, like the guy above with his children who couldn't do speech therapy with masks on, or because they were dumb and unproductive/counterproductive towards their stated goal. Or it makes sense to speak against the government for moving the goalposts and Fauci-ing it up.
Tophattingson on the other hand, the whole idea I get from his posts, is all about how they're bad because they're somewhat like imprisonment according to its dictionary definition, and imprisonment is against human rights as written by libertarians, and therefore they must be the Worst Evil Ever. I cannot help but associate this kind of legalesthetic thinking and tunnel vision with sovereign citizens.
I would be prepared to forgive and forget if they were taught as a ‘never again’ moment and written into history books as the worst human rights violations in the modern west
Do you honestly believe they were the worst human rights violation, or is it just a condition for forgiving and forgetting?
sun
9mo ago
No more stoning? No more conversion camps? No more "camps for troubled youths"? No more parental abuse?
Two can play the "as long as your side has even one excess you're duping us" game.
sun
9mo ago
Strong men like good times too.
As I said, pretty much no one embodies the pure archetype. But from what I observe, the more someone valorizes being able to act when life is hard, the more they valorize shunning pleasures, sometimes to the extent of fetishizing suffering. Not a 1:1 correlation, but certainly not orthogonal.
The failure mode of tough construction site man is "I had/have it hard so y'all should too". This is what I'm attempting to expose and warn against in my post.
sun
9mo ago
At this point grooming has taken on such a wide definition in this sphere that you could argue (and many do) that anything involving sexuality and children in the same room should count as grooming. While I agree reading porn to children is not appropriate, I refuse to contribute to torturing the word "grooming" further. Be more specific in your objections.
sun
9mo ago
Straight man molests girl, permanently damaging her trust and comfort with men. She then becomes either asexual or lesbian in practice.
This is what some lesbians (usually of second wave feminism flavor) say, at least, and I do believe it's plausible that something like that could bump some Kinsey 4s up to 6s.
sun
1yr ago
That's what people usually say when asked to demonstrate whether their claims of God-ordainment are falsifiable or not, yes.
sun
1yr ago
Having a [possibly exaggerated or wrong] model of what a racist/queerphobe thinks in one's mind is not the same as being one.
sun
1yr ago
Do remedial classes "exclude" pupils who are doing fine? Does welfare "exclude" a healthy 6 figure maker? If that's your definition of exclusion, then yes, it is still a black-dominant country.
sun
1yr ago
I'm going to be a contrarian (as I expect, in this place) and say just wear the damn shirt. Then tell all those students you taught the value of contrarianism that sometimes you can just put on your football team's jersey even if it doesn't help that team play football.
sun
6mo ago
Interesting how all those brave heroes went to fight against "communism" and "bolshevik hordes", yet ended up mostly fighting Soviet people.
sun
7mo ago
Is this "pressure" or is it playful banter that both parties are enjoying
It's cringe. I'd be leaving her on read after that first response. I wouldn't be enjoying this "playful banter" and it would be a pressure for me to reply.
It's good advice for someone without options, too. It's not a job or a meal (hell, some jobs are worse than nothing unless you're literally going to be out on the street, and some meals are definitely worse than nothing). You won't die from not securing a date. I haven't, and a "month-long dry spell" sounds like a luxury to me.
On the other hand, when I try to talk to someone who isn't returning the effort I often wish I was dead. Small talk is already a chore for me as it is. Going on a date with them for a 95% chance of more of the same? No thanks, would rather have a free evening to myself.
It's less "why won't they eat cake" and more "why don't you drink a good whisky once a month rather than spin the drink gacha every weekend and end up with cheap swill most of the time, without enjoying either the taste or smooth inebriation yet getting a hangover just the same".
sun
7mo ago
A guy like Andrew Tate who pimped women? Gee I wonder why his spin on "mutual flirting" got him hammered.
What does it matter what the rules are in the dating app? The actual rule is "don't creep your match out and she won't report you". That's also why most internet venues implement rule 0 usually phrased as "don't be a dick". That's the only real rule, the rest are guidelines on what to avoid.
You think women come on Tinder to read their rules and strive to enforce them on their matches in a literal manner like the nerd in school who makes sure the teacher doesn't forget about homework?
For one, that comment of yours was blatantly false. There's no such thing as "just" telling people to not drink Bud Light, the context of doing so is common knowledge. I would expect more awareness of that on the forum where leftist causes are routinely delved into for any sort of covert allegiance with communism/leninism/pedophilia and whatnot.
Were I a mod there I'd ban you not even because you're a "heretic", but for feigning ignorance.
More options
Context Copy link