@Amadan's banner p

Amadan

Letting the hate flow through me

10 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 00:23:21 UTC
Verified Email 

				
User ID: 297


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
Amadan


								

								

								
								
									
								
								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				
Letting the hate flow through me

				
				
				

				

					10 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					joined 2022 September 05 00:23:21 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 297


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
							
								Verified Email
							
						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 4, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
So look, I am admit I am skeptical of your story (men lie about sex too, especially in self-aggrandizing ways, and it's so convenient that it turns out every woman you've fucked turns out to be exactly the kind of shameless slutwhore you are constantly saying all women are), but let's say we take this all at face value, all the women you've tried it with turned out to love being slapped, spit on, and throatfucked without asking. I mean, yes, I believe there are a non-trivial percentage of women who are into that.


But there are also a non-trivial percentage of women who aren't. Even taking your "31% to 62% of women have rape fantasies at face value" (you do know that those "rape fantasies" are usually more like 50 Shades of Grey and not like Clockwork Orange, right? i.e.., they are fantasizing about being pleasurably dominated by an attractive man while abdicating responsibility for their own choices, not about some rando violently assaulting them) - that means 38% to 69% don't.


Serious question: if you tried that shit with some woman who turned out to be very much not into that, what would you do? Whine about how bitches lie and entrap men when you find yourself facing charges?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 4, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I obviously didn't mean that I thought Amadan and SnapDragon thought the colors of the trans women's clothes clashed, but I did mean to imply that they were, perhaps, being judgemental in taking it for granted that revealing clothing is always "sexual", let alone "off-puttingly" so.




Let's put it this way: there are situations and contexts where wearing tight/revealing clothing or sexually suggestive logos is appropriate, and situations where it is not. In my experience, trans women are much more likely to push the boundaries of appropriateness. They are also much more likely to try to, ah, flaunt their "assets" in a way that a non-trans woman wouldn't. By which I mean, fat women don't usually go to casual events with clingy bodywrap dresses showing off their every bulge and roll, and flat-chested women don't usually try to draw attention to their nonexistent cleavage down to their hairy navels. In fact, they will usually try very much not to show off such bodily defects. Why, then, do fat trans women (men) get it into their heads that they are so uWu sexy doing this? At, say, a baseball game? I have never seen a fat woman wear a tutu and a lycra blouse over unshaved legs to a casual event; I have seen more than one fat trans woman do this.


Yes, I think it is often a sex thing. I think they have a fetish and they are involuntarily making us play along with their fantasy. No, not all trans women. But a lot of them.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 4, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Thanks! Maybe I’m a bit oblivious but I don’t detect that much hostility towards me personally, in fact many times I’ve been disappointed that I can’t seem to get into a proper argument with a gender critical person.




Maybe you aren't trying hard enough! But seriously, it's probably partly that our rules prevent anyone who genuinely despises trans people (of whom I am sure there are some here who fit into that category) from really unloading on you, and partly because "gender critical" usually refers specifically to a particular brand of radical feminism, which is also not too popular here. Unless you are using it more broadly to mean the same thing as "trans critical." ("Gender critical" feminists are not just "anti-trans," though - they are critical of the entire concept of gender roles and innate "gender" which is distinct from biological sex.)




I’ve been happy to criticise them here I think, and I’m no different in real life.




That's cool, but like most people on the Motte, you are probably quite outside the norm. Now would you actually defend someone who is facing a cancel mob for expressing trans-critical views?




Like what are you saying when you say you don’t think I’m a woman? Is it “for me, women refers to adult female humans, and you’re not in that category”, is it “I can’t override the part of my brain that sees you as a guy”, is it “I will not behave towards you the way I behave towards women because that goes against my beliefs”?




It is mostly the first two. I realize "I can't override the part of my brain that sees you as a guy" is not a rational basis on its own to deny someone's identity, but it is certainly a rational basis to... not react to you the way I would to a woman, whether that be socially, sexually, in terms of threat perception, etc. And saying that I should because my brain does not get to overrule your self-identification is basically demanding that I ignore my instincts and evolutionary hardwiring and defer to something I have only your word for. To be clear, I am not claiming that you are asserting something ridiculous like "If I think I am a hot woman, you should perceive me as a hot woman." But it does to lead to situations like trans women accusing lesbians of transphobia if they can't override their brains and see trans women as women.


As for "adult female humans," yes, I do think a woman is basically an adult human female, and every edge case or exception you will offer is something I have heard already and does not convince me. The fact that there exists a tiny percentage of people who aren't easily classified into a sexual binary because of physical, chromosomal, or other abnormalities does not mean humans are not a sexually dimorphic species. Such arguments have always struck me as not unlike claiming that humans are not bipeds because some people are born without legs.


So, yes, if you were born with XY chromosomes and a penis, then I'm sorry, you're a dude. You can present as female as you like and live as a female and for social purposes, I'm happy to let you do that, but you're still a dude, and my internal mental state for you will always be "dude".


As for all the various combinations of sexual attraction you propose, I am also happy to concede some people might be more sexually fluid than they acknowledge, but again, a bunch of edge cases testing "But what if you're attracted to him? What if you're attracted to her?" does not prove anything about someone's actual sex.




“Hey, she’s an adult female human, still a woman even if she got phalloplasty, top surgery, has been on testosterone for 20 years and is in the top 1st percentile of height for women!”




Yes. Yes, she is. Even if she passes. Does it matter, if 99% of the people she meets never know she's not a man? Probably not to her. But she's still a female.




Well, what does it mean for you to be caught out? Is it them flat out asking questions, like “do you think trans women belong in men’s prisons” or “what did you think of Lia Thomas?” and waiting expectantly for you to say the politically correct answer? That’s shitty behaviour and I’m sorry if that’s been your primary kind of interaction with trans people.




Generally speaking, no, I have not had trans people ask me such obvious interrogatory questions. It's more like "Well, you know I won't be watching the new Harry Potter HBO series because I refuse to support a transphobe (looks around meaningfully)." Or an obese man in drag lecturing us (men, not including himself in that category of course) about sexual harassment and women's safety. Or casual assertions about trans genocide, how dangerous some red state is for trans people, how all their rights are being taken away (because some sports organization just banned trans women in women's sports), etc. And my choices are (1) Nod affirmatively, (2) Say nothing (slightly less cowardly, slight chance of being noticed), (3) Say "Well Actually..." and bang! You're a transphobe!


For the most part, my interactions with trans people have not been "dreadful" as @SnapDragon put it. As I said, they are usually chill. But it's a regular series of... can I say "micro-aggressions," only somewhat ironically? Sexual innuendos, constant reminders of how trans they are, something dropped about JK Rowling or Trump. Nothing that a non-trans person might not also say, but you just notice it comes from them with greater than average frequency and there is always a sense that they are watching to see who reacts and how.


And from a non-trans person, if someone is annoying me with their pet hobby horse, I might be free to say "Give it a rest, come on," or if that would be overly aggressive for the situation, I would at the very least only suffer a smirk and a snort if I were to roll my eyes. But with a trans person... Tag.


I'm being vague here because I don't want to be more specific, you know? But take my word for it: I know some trans people, and they are mostly okay, but sometimes they Do and Say Things that really make me want to Say Things in response, and I don't because there would be Consequences that aren't worth it to me.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 4, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I think you are being dishonest. Nowhere in his post (or mine) did we indicate that we are uncomfortable with trans people "existing in our vicinity."


See, this is exactly what I am talking about. You pretend that it's all about irrational "icks" and that trans people aren't actually doing anything. Are you seriously denying that to reveal an "ick" (and I don't mean by declaring something offensive, just revealing with a slip of the tongue that you don't really think of someone as female or that you aren't wholeheartedly onboard with Trans Rights Are Human Rights) has social consequences? Do you think someone deserves to lose their social circle for not being properly aligned?


You say we're imagining hypothetical scenarios. Come on. If you pay any attention to left leaning hobby spaces ( which is almost all hobby spaces) you know it's not hypothetical what happens to someone who says JK Rowling isn't a monster, actually.


As for being inappropriately sexual, I believe you that you know lots of asexual trans people. Do you believe me that most trans people I know dress or behave in off-puttingly sexual ways, at least occasionally, in a way that seems intended to test boundaries and tolerance? Do you think this common experience is something us "transphobes" make up?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of May 4, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
First let me obligatorily clear my throat and say I appreciate your willingness to participate here in what I know is a fairly hostile environment for you despite our rules.


For me, trans issues are not a big "thing" for me. They are not my hobby horse. In a sense, I push back on trans ideology for reasons similar to what @FtttG said, and similarly to why I keep getting into it with the annoying Joo-posters despite antisemitism not really being a big issue personally for me either: sometimes you see people saying offensively retarded shit that makes you feel like Roger Rabbit trying to keep it together while someone is tapping out Shave and a Haircut


"But," you protest, "most trans people aren't saying offensively retarded shit! We just want to be left alone!"


Well, yes. And no.


See, even the moderate, normal, well behaved trans people will generally be reluctant to criticize the strident activists,.the cancel mobs, the social censure that falls on anyone who clears their throat and says maybe trans women shouldn't be put in women's prisons. Sure, you might agree that Jessica Yaniv is crazy and acting in bad faith and maybe not even actually trans. But you still want us to take Caitlyn Jenner or Rachel Levine seriously.


In my personal experience, trans people I know are mostly chill. Most of the time.


Until you Ask Questions.
Until they sense Doubt.


Then you get the Side-Eye. The "friendly reminders." The questions that aren't really questions. And you find yourself having to make Decisions.


I have had to make advance Decisions, simply because I know trans people. If they break the detente, if they sniff heresy, if they sense my Wrongthink and decide to press me, what is my response and how will I deal with the social fallout? Which friends am I willing to lose? Which online groups will I be forced to abandon?


Since I won't lie, I mostly stay quiet and Avoid the Issue and hope they will maintain the unspoken detente. Most do. But I know some won't. So whenever I am interacting with a trans person, besides having to suppress the occasional eye rolls at the inevitable water-testing declarations to claim ideological space (never met a trans person who didn't do this at least once), I have to be prepared for what happens if I am caught out.


And I resent this. I really fucking resent this.


If I were allowed to just admit "Look, I don't really think you're a woman and we can disagree about trans women in sports and JK Rowling, but I'll respect your pronouns and I honestly do want you to live your best life however you wish to," that would be fine.


But too many trans people, having had a taste of power, will not accept that. Not when they can Punish you. Not when they can either make you bend the knee and say deer-horse, or have you (socially) executed.


I resent this. And it makes me less well disposed towards trans people in general, to the point where even though I wish no ill to any individual, yourself included, I begin to cheer when trans people take losses even under the clammy auspices of Trump.


I'm sorry, but I wish we could go back to the detente where everyone agreed it didn't matter what's in our hearts as long as we outwardly treat each other with respect and civility. Can we do that? I'd like to do that.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Accusing people of misrepresenting their own personal experiences while complaining that you think you are being misrepresented, followed by a huffy dismissal, is too antagonistic, and it seems you are only engaging to "win" an argument and score points.


More charity and courtesy, please.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Quality Contributions Report for April 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I think there's still an important difference. A Christian can read Lewis and interpret the book as a direct moral lesson, a form of guidance. An atheist steeped in Christianity will read the same book, understand that it's intended to provide moral guidance to Christians, but it won't affect him in the same way. The message for him is not "here's how you might turn away from God and here's how redemption and forgiveness might follow", it's "here's what Christians think turning away from God would look like". Which is useful knowledge if you have to deal with Christians, but not directly applicable to the reader himself.




I think it depends on how much you believe people are able to empathize with a mindset different from their own.


An atheist steeped in Christianity because he has an intellectual understanding of it but never believed probably will, as you say, only read it as a description of how Christians think. But an atheist who used to be Christian, especially an atheist who used to be devoutly Christian, will actually remember how it was to think that way. While obviously he's not going to read Lewis as a "direct moral lesson" since he no longer considers turning away from God to be something that requires redemption and forgiveness, he still knows what it is like to feel that way.


I think the same is probably true of atheists who become converts. Your Christian who used to be an atheist knows how an atheist deals with the unfairness of the world and what an atheist thinks about the Problem of Evil and what an atheist thinks is the reason to do good and not evil. And so will probably understand and even feel the satisfaction of Pratchett's lessons even if he thinks Pratchett got it wrong by excluding God.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for May 3, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
You and @TowardsPanna - stop this. Engage in the question, not in petty bickering with each other.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
When you are at the "Sure, whatever bro" stage of responding, it's best just not to respond. The reason low effort posts like this are discouraged is you're basically saying "I don't want to argue any more and don't have a meaningful rebuttal but I still want to express my disdain for you."


Don't "Nuh uh" people.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
This is a rather low-effort post. Are you referring to someone in particular? Are you subtweeting something? Is this a reference we are supposed to recognize? Or did you just come across a random person who has a random set of beliefs, which we are supposed to find interesting... why?


"Likes both Hitler and Netanyahu" is odd enough to be worth contrasting, I suppose, but not in such a vague way that it just reads like a drunken shitpost.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Your mod record shows otherwise. You have no purpose in this engagement except to be obnoxious.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
This is teetering right on the edge of a ban, but you're usually a decent poster when you aren't giving way to the impulse to post low-effort shitposts like this. A mix of AAQCs and a long record of warnings and tempbans means you are getting cut some slack, but if you abuse it again there will be a longer ban.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I explained my thinking adequately, and if I felt a need for deeper interrogation it wouldn't come from an anklebiter who's just trying to provoke. Now cease your anklebiting.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
We do it all for people like you.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 27, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Gonna be honest - I am approving this post despite severe misgivings.


    

  1. You are obviously a sockpuppet (account created today).
    2. 

  2. The thesis of this post is essentially "We should ban all political parties outside the centrist Overton window in order to protect democracy." Almost certainly bait.
    3. 

  3. The writing smells like AI. The style doesn't have obvious AI tells so possibly it's only AI-enhanced, but it still has the feel of something output by an LLM after careful prompting.
    4. 



So why am I allowing a post that I am more than half-convinced is trolling?


    

  1. We don't want to summarily ban every new account, even though most of them nowadays are people spinning up backup alts.
    2. 

  2. The post is interesting enough that I guess it's worth engaging on its merits, if anyone cares to.
    3. 

  3. I am wary of becoming too paranoid about AI, because there will inevitably be false positives.
    4. 



I am saying this so I can preregister my suspicions and see whether they are borne out, and also to give some transparency into why we let some posts get through and not others. (Quite often, someone appearing with a fresh-rolled account and a manifesto does not get out of the filter.)


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 20, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'm sorry, but I don't believe that you sincerely believed the OP was literally claiming that it's bad to celebrate any deaths ever and was being hypocritical because "his side" celebrated killing the Ayatollah, nor that you believed he was motte-and-baileying from "Don't celebrate the deaths of anyone ever" to "Don't celebrate political assassinations (of my side)."


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 20, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I do not think you are being ingenuous.


Here's why:




The leftists completely lost me once they started celebrating the deaths of people they don’t like




You would have us believe that what you thought he meant was "Leftists (specifically) began celebrating the deaths of any people they don't like-even criminals, pedophiles, war criminals, enemy militants, etc." And that he was arguing that this was different from non-leftists, who don't do that.


In other words, it was a new and specifically leftist thing to, say, cheer for the death of a Hitler or a Saddam or a Ted Bundy, or an Ayatollah.


He didn't mean that. You know he didn't mean that. You are pretending to believe he meant that. You do not believe he meant that.


What he meant, whether or not he expressed it inelegantly, and whether or not you agree with him, is that leftists begin celebrating the deaths of political opponents.


In other words, you are pretending to believe he meant "people they don't like" in its most literal and absolute sense.


I do not believe you actually believed that or were misunderstanding his point, which was talking about cases like celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk or attempted assassinations of Republican politicians.


There is probably a name for this specific rhetorical gambit, where someone says something imprecisely and their interlocutor interprets it in the most dumbass literal fashion possible and pretends to believe that is how they meant it and play gotcha, but it's very tiresome.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				When the Buddha Failed Me
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I try not to get hung up on debates over whether or not "atheism is a religion." I agree that literally atheism is simply a lack of belief, but in practice most atheists do have a set of beliefs or models of the universe that could be fairly said to constitute a belief system.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 20, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


The majority of everyone from the political center rightward was celebrating the repeated assassinations of Iranian leadership a month ago too, so I don't think the other camp gets to claim the moral high ground here.




Oh, come on. The equivalent would be celebrating an assassination/attempt on a Democrat, not an assassination of the leadership of a country we're at war with, and time was when even leftists would have celebrated the death of the Ayatollah, or at least wouldn't have been too upset about it.


You can object to assassinating Iranian leaders, and you can object to the celebration of it, but it's categorically different than assassinating members of your fellow countrymen in a rival political party.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				When the Buddha Failed Me
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
You aren't wrong, but as someone who was there (and is still bitter over it) and is still an atheist, I'd point out that you are speaking specifically of atheism as a movement - that "New Atheism" fell apart does not discredit atheism as a belief system. Not believing in any gods or metaphysical components of the universe does not require being wedded or opposed to SJ ideology.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 20, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I don't have citations because I am not a link collector, but while @burkeboi's framing is a little uncharitable, it's not really far off. When it's pointed out that most black victims of violence are victims of other black people, the leftist response is that this happens within a system of institutionalized racial oppression that created the conditions in which black people are killing each other- so yes, it's white people's fault, and critical theorists frame that as some variation of "white cisheteropatriarchy."


Similarly, when the "Stop Asian Hate Campaign" revealed that most assaults on Asians were being committed by blacks, I definitely remember some critical theorists literally saying that this was white supremacy in action. Essentially the same argument as above, that if anyone is doing violence inside a white cisheteropatriarchy system, it's the fault of the white cisheteropatriarchy system, even if none of the participants are white.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 20, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Trump being assassinated would be that, I think it's possible that even @Amadan would be ok with a low effort starter post if that happened.




Even for that we would prefer more than just someone rushing to be the first to post the news.


Total nuclear war? Sure, post your good-byes while you can.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 20, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
What you feel is not what we prefer.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 20, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Sigh. Once again, I am going to remind people that this is not Twitter or Reddit. Obviously this is a big news story and people will want to discuss it, but take the time to at least wait for some information and provide some links and maybe say something more interesting than "Wow did you see the news?"


You do not win by being F1rsT!!!


Low effort. You have multiple warnings for low effort posts so I'm tempted to give you a timeout just to make the message stick, but since the thread is off and running, fine, you got your little firsty in.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 20, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I think that this is what MLK argued for -- let everyone compete on equal footing, and let the outcome be what it may.




I have to correct you here- MLK was very much in favor of Affirmative Action and reparations. Yes, his ultimate goal was a "colorblind" world, but he was not in favor of institutional colorblindness until the scales were balanced. He wrote about this quite extensively.


A lot of people today, even conservatives, like to throw their arms around the shoulders of MLK's ghost and claim ideological kinship with him, but the fact is, if MLK were alive today, he'd be very much a SJ. Perhaps a more intellectual one than Ibram X Kendi, but I doubt he'd accept HBD as an explanation for why blacks aren't achieving equal outcomes.