@thegayrabbi's banner p

thegayrabbi


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2023 April 04 15:49:26 UTC

				

User ID: 2311

thegayrabbi


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2023 April 04 15:49:26 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 2311

Here's a question that I have about that handmaid's tale maternity photo shoot that you linked. Is this gay couple going to include that woman in the child's life as the child's mother? If not, is this weird picture going to be something that the child gets to look at in their lonely moments wondering who the woman was who gave birth to them, and what it would have been like to have her as a mother? Did this couple think any of these things at all themselves?

My biggest problem with surrogacy, as I stated in another comment, is that the child is left being forced to embrace parents who paid their biological mother and gestating mother to go away forever so that they could assume a full parental role.

It seems like that child is sort of compelled from birth to ignore the psychological and emotional implications of having two male parents who paid their mom to go away because they wanted to feel normal. That's why it's not the same as adoption, because the new family that you're supposed to embrace did not contractually obligate your biological parents to give you up.

Study whatever you want, but pursue as many networking opportunities as possible. Apply for internships in your field during the summers. Don't take rejection personally, but accept it gracefully. Find good reasons to go to your professors' office hours, like if you're having trouble finding internships. Prioritize homework and reading for class. Pursue productive social activities. Only drink on weekends, and only beer. Don't smoke marijuana ever. Shower and do your laundry frequently. Compliment people's strengths and be polite about their weaknesses.

If you do all that you'll be successful in any field. Pick something where you will enjoy doing those things.

Source: When I did those things I succeeded, when I didn't, I failed.

I see another clear difference between these two situations in regards to the child's experience. If a mother gives her baby up for adoption, for whatever reason, the child must accept that his or her mother was not in a position to raise them, and find solace in the fact that another family was. This is just a sad fact of life that is part of the child's experience.

However, in the case of surrogacy, the child must understand that its parents wanted the position of sole parenthood so much that they compensated the child's actual birth mother in order to make her go away forever. And that is a weird twisted possessive experience that the child is left with in relation to its family that it will be growing up with.

So the child is trapped trying to establish normal familial relations with someone who saw it more as a possession than another human being who has a right to a relationship with a mother. And this is especially the case for gay male couples, who have unilaterally decided that their child can and will be happy enough to grow up without a mother just because they want to feel more normal and like they haven't lost out on any important American suburban experiences by embracing their gay lifestyle.

This is similar for lesbian couples, but not quite, given the number of men who seem happy to donate their sperm for a little bit of cash and don't seem bothered by the idea that they have children out there who they'll never know or care for. That is more analogous to the adoption where the child just understands that their father wasn't interested, but they do have parents who are.

The act of gestating a child and giving birth almost always, if not completely always, changes a woman's body forever, and is traumatic, and takes a lifelong toll, which is supposedly compensated for by a lifelong benefit of having a child to care for. I don't see how any one-time payment can be equivalent. I would be interested in hearing from a surrogate who really felt like it was.

My apologies for mixing up all the pronouns when referring to the child.

If your OCF wakes up in the middle of the night to pee, will they have to walk into your room while you're sleeping to use the bathroom and possibly wake you up? Because I would not enjoy doing that.

The rest of the considerations rely mostly on local social culture, so they could be fine or they could be onerous.

It's actually not as easy to be selectively closeted as you seem to think. People ask you questions about your life, and you are then given the options to either refuse to answer, in which case you are unfriendly, lie, in which case you are untrustworthy, or tell the truth, in which case you are provocative.

You have no claim to blue collar professions nor the right to establish them as safe spaces for gay hatred.

I have a fourth option, which is to advocate against your arbitrary definition of deviancy, which conveniently includes being gay, but not premarital sex, drinking, swearing, and hostility towards gay and trans people.

The idea that gay hatred in blue collar professions is justified because of a fear of sexual harassment is silly. I am sure straight men sexually harass each other, and gay men, far more than gay men might sexually harass straight men. Your ability to dismiss the fear of harassment that gay men experience while at the same time demanding gay men deal with constant "low level" hostility is evidence I am correct and you are not.

I would guess you simply just sympathize more with a straight man who experiences the presence of a gay man as intrinsically sexual harassment, whereas you see low level hostility towards gay men as justified because you think gay men are deviants.

Nowadays many people feel a pressure to use time off from work to do something fun or leisurely. For some people, and I'm expecting this is particularly common to people who like this website, it can be helpful to accept that something fun might be something that other people consider work, like learning a new skill. Is there anything that you wish you knew how to do that you could start learning via YouTube tutorials? For me it was finally learning to code python.

I spent years trying to maximize my fun through various ways, but more recently trying to maximize my learning and challenging my brain has actually made me feel like I'm having a lot more fun on a day-to-day basis then when I was cramming as many leisure activities into one day as possible.

I don't particularly love most trans activism, and I'm deeply troubled by a lot of the medical interventionism on the youth.

However, there is a sense that certain factions or cultures of conservative men (of varying races and ethnicities) have created defensive silos of culture against the encroachment of gender non-conforming men. These places could be certain gyms, certain sales teams, certain blue collar unions, or certain bars. The shared sentiment is that there's enough spaces for gay or trans people (these men can't tell the difference) and so they need to batten down the hatches and keep their exclusionary spaces free from the taint of homo (no pun intended).

I think that there's a good proportion of younger straight men who are very into this, a la the andrew tate fans, and there's another group of younger straight men who are completely over it, and don't want to engage in long or endless discussions of masculinity and how important it is to pick a side.

If i were to entertain the idea of corporate advertisement as culture war, I'd say the point of this ad might be to demonstrate how hateful conservatives actually are against gay and trans people, no matter how much they pretend its about protecting children and women's sports. The liberals could be seen as responding to this "it's just about protecting children and women" rhetoric by saying "okay, here's a drag queen in her proper place, advertising beer in a funny commercial, joking about not knowing what March madness is"

Then the conservative men start literally shooting cases of beer, and it becomes apparent that it's not really about protecting women and children, it's about establishing cultural silos of hatred towards gay and trans people.

It's a good tactic for uniting the gay and trans factions that have started to schism lately. At the risk of being snide, I think the QT BIPOCS realize the white gay tops aren't coming to the club if they keep calling them "the nazis of the LGBT community" for going to the gym. Also that white wealthy gay men are the ones with the social capital and mental fortitude to penetrate these conservative cultural silos.

Is the rapid advancement in Machine Learning good or bad for society?

For the purposes of this comment, I will try to define good as "improving the quality of life for many people without decreasing the quality of life for another similarly sized group" an vice versa.

I enjoy trying to answer this question because the political discourse around it is too new to have widely accepted answers disseminated by the two American political parties being used to signify affiliation like many questions. However, any discussion of whether something is good or bad for society belongs in a Culture War threat because, even here on The Motte, most people will try to reduce every discussion to one along clear conservative/liberal lines because most people here are salty conservatives who were kicked out of reddit by liberals one way or another.

Now on to the question: Maybe the best way to discover if Machine learning is good or bad for society is to say what makes it essentially different from previous computing? The key difference in Machine Learning is that it changes computing from a process where you tell the computer what to do with data, and turns it into a process where you just tell the computer what you want it to be able to do. before machine learning, you would tell the computer specifically how to scan an image and decide if it is a picture of a dog. Whether the computer was good at identifying pictures of dogs relied on how good your instructions were. With machine learning, you give the computer millions of pictures of dogs and tell it to figure out how to determine if there's a dog in a picture.

So what can be essentialized from that difference? Well before Machine Learning, the owners of the biggest computers still had to be clever enough to use them to manipulate data properly, but with Machine Learning, the owners of the biggest computers can now simply specify a goal and get what they want. It seems therefore that Machine Learning will work as a tool for those with more capital to find ways to gain more capital. It will allow people with the money to create companies that can enhance the ability to make decisions purely based on profit potential, and remove the human element even more from the equation.

How about a few examples:

Recently a machine learning model was approved by the FDA to be used to identify cavities on X-rays. Eventually your dental insurance company will require a machine learning model to read your X-rays and report that you need a procedure in order for them to cover treatment from your dentist. The justification will be that the Machine Learning model is more accurate. It probably will be more accurate. Dentists will require subscriptions to a Machine Learning model to accept insurance, and perhaps dental treatment will become more expensive, but maybe not. It's hard to say for sure if this will be a bad or a good thing.

Machine learning models are getting very good at writing human text. This is currently reducing the value of human writers at a quick pace. Presumably with more advanced models, it will replace commercial human writing all together. Every current limitation of the leading natural language models will be removed in time, and they will become objectively superior to human writers. This also might be a good thing, or a bad thing. It's hard to say.

I think it's actually very hard to predict if Machine Learning will be good or bad for society. Certain industries might be disrupted, but the long term effects are hard to predict.

I've just started seriously studying machine learning, and I think the languages models are just the tip of the iceberg, and most of the powerful modern AI is hidden behind NDAs and less noticeable technologies. Many things quietly occurred without too many people noticing, for example:

Google tagged everyone's photos in Google photos with their contents. I have Google randomly displaying photos on my home screen when it's plugged in, and it knows not to show anything NSFW, and generally picks interesting photos. Google knows exactly what's in my thousands of photos.

Social media moderation also perfected AI filtering of NSFW content to any degree of precision the platform wants.

Every large marketing company or department has started to calculate someone called a "lifetime customer value" using machine learning to discovery and target the groups of customers predicted to spend the most over a lifetime. New marketing interventions will be measured for effectiveness in influencing consumer behavior. Eventually ad campaigns could be individualized and AI generated to a shocking degree, without even seeming personalized, because we don't look at each other's phones. It's possible in the future no one will ever see the same ad twice, or even be able to tell the difference between an AI generated advertisement and human generated content. The difference might even cease to be semantically intelligible. If it's trivial for an AI to generate an excellent exercise video with a small mention of a wellness product, is that an ad or a helpful wellness video?

What happens when AI can generate a new marvel movie just for you, subtly based on your consumer preferences and sense of humor? The experience of everyone seeing the same movie could disappear the same way the experience of everyone watching something like the seinfeld series finale at the same time did.

Have you ever written this out so comprehensively before? I find it can be really transformative to externalize things like this. I bet your dad never wrote anything so introspective and self aware. I bet you've changed a little just from writing this comment.

Iran is not a compelling example for me. In fact, I find it to be the opposite of a compelling example. It is interesting to know that about Iran, however, so thank you for sharing.

To give you a quick hit, bad for society is when your therapist can mention surrogacy as a legal way out of your poverty.

Speaking totally off the cuff, here are some thoughts about why banning tik tok has such wide consensus:

  1. A clear line between users and non users. Full disclosure: I refuse to download tik tok onto my phone, and therefore the only tik toks i see are the ones popular enough to make it onto other platforms. On the other hand, when i talk to people who use tik tok, that often appears to be the only, or primary, platform that they use for online interaction.

This leads to:

  1. A negative impression of tik tok's effects on its users and culture in general. From the non user perspective, tik tok pushes antisocial public behavior, both in terms of public antics and disengagement from social situations. I think there's definitely a bit of maliciousness in banning tik tok where the non users want to confiscate it from the people they perceive as allowing it to ruin society.

But i also thing a strong factor is:

  1. The obviousness of tik tok's product placement. I haven't actually heard anyone else remark on this as I have the above ideas, but for a very long time I have been put off by tik tok's constant marketing and product placement as "the place where everything important is happening" on the radio , on my favorite television shows, and every major website. I also feel like I've noticed that tik tok has no end of eloquent defenders available to push carefully focus-grouped talking points in its defense. For a while it was "tik tok just shows you what you want to see, my feed is just cooking videos" when people objected to the sexual exploitation of minors on the platform. When talk of regulating it emerged, it pivoted to "we need a law against all social media companies invasion of privacy!" And now it's "this bill is worse than the Patriot act and will put you in prison for using a VPN".

I think when you don't use it, it looks like a deliberate hypnotic assault on American society and feels like a platform thats designed to completely supplant the rest of the internet and capture and waste the attention of its users. Americans will embrace whatever tools they can to get rid of it, because its an app from a foreign adversary of America designed to weaken the next generation. The more you look into it, the more apparent that becomes.

To me it looks like the woman acting as s surrogate here gets a lot of social support and validation from being a surrogate. However, so do many prostitutes, and so would people paid to donate a lobe of their liver or a kidney. I think it should be the same thing. You can have sex for free, you can donate an organ, and you should be able to donate the act of surrogacy, but you shouldn't be able to do any of these things as a paid service because that's bad for society. And yes, for me that does include pornography where the actors are paid to have sex with each other on camera. Commercial pornography is causing a lot of problems. Labor laws (no pun intended) exist to prevent the rich from exploiting the working class beyond what is tolerable or humane, and requires society to create non-exploitive forms of work to continue functioning.

You could try going to more presentations, either in person or online, where you think the presenter might trigger this reaction in you. In a presentation, you're not usually in a position to act on this mood and you're not likely to say something dismissive and make someone feel bad. Then try to consciously observe how you feel these emotions, have this reactionary judgment response, and then also observe how a few minutes later the response might disappear as you return to the present moment. The more you can observe that these emotional reactions are temporary, and more about your and your past than the person in front of you, the more you can ignore them and let them come and go without affecting the rest of your behavior.

You might even make a worksheet where your mark the time of the reaction, make a note of your feelings, and then later mark the time when the feelings have faded. This can help keep you in an observational mode.

Maybe they'll show you ads for competitors, or content you enjoy with subtle product placement, like a cute dog with oreos in the background.

Did you try using the search function in the Google photos app?

I'm not transgender, and I never said I was.

In the spirit of AI, you're welcome to just plagiarize it haha

Maybe it would be helpful if you shared a specific story example of this happening. I understand if you'd prefer not to.

I see IVF as different because the child isn't denied a mother and the child's mother still gives birth to them, even if she's not the genetic mother. I'm not that worried about the perversion of nature, sacred or not.

I would not apply the same standard to women who use sperm banks or have absentee fathers. I don't see why you would think i would.

Giving up an egg or giving up sperm so a woman can gestate and give birth to a baby she will parent is not similar to being paid to go through the entire birth process and then leave forever.

Other users have made an excellent point as well, which is that every argument you can make for surrogacy can be made for legalizing selling your kidney, or a lobe of your liver, and kidneys aren't sentient, and your liver will eventually grow back. I'd appreciate if you could explain if you think people should be allowed to sell a kidney or a lobe of their liver if you think a woman should be able to rent out her womb.

I have been offered propranolol but exercise and dance are very important to me, and I'm worried about a medication that literally doesn't allow my heart to beat fast enough. Did your doctor tell you anything about exercising while on that drug?

No your assertions are false. At least you prove that your republican bitter reddit reject echo chamber is the same as the others: Fragile, insular, based primarily on a cult of personality and self-delusional double standards, and full of losers who don't go outside.

There's other places to learn basic sociology than a blog no one's heard of.

Are you unfamiliar with the common problems of hazing in fraternities and sports teams? If you are, I would suggest you google the phrase "sexual hazing" without quotes:

"Male hazing most common type of sexual assault, expert reveals":

https://www.army.mil/article/166188/male_hazing_most_common_type_of_sexual_assault_expert_reveals

"The brutal secret of school sport initiations":

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46282988

"How Hazing Escalates To Sexual Assault":

https://www.vice.com/en/article/pa53mm/st-mikes-college-school-how-hazing-escalates-to-sexual-assault-

A gay bar is not equivalent exchange for being unwelcome at your nearest health centers, entire professions, or the most well paying department at your corporation.

Are you saying that straight men have more to fear in regards to harassment from gay men than gay men have to fear from straight men? Because I think that's demonstrably false based on the history of gay men being beaten, sometimes to death, by groups of straight men, and the opposite never occurring at all.