domain:parrhesia.co
ToaKraka
Dislikes you
8m ago
A female football player (perhaps not literally in a pro league), a female programmer, and a female scrawny person, of course. I don't see the problem.
ActuallyATleilaxuGhola
Axolotl Tank Class of '24
10m ago
I'd subscribe.
rincer_of_wind
12m ago
I really like your explanation as to why individual components of IQ correlate so much. It makes a lot of intuitive sense that its partially a selection effect. Surprised ive never IQ seen truthers mention it.
ulyssessword
15m ago
Isn't the whole point of martial arts (at least some technical ones, like BJJ) to make this possible?
Same with sports, and yet regional U16 boys teams routinely beat world-class women's teams in hockey and soccer (at least).
Being better than every woman in the world at a physical activity isn't too outlandish for a man, and I'd bet that being better than every woman in a given city isn't uncommon among dedicated amateurs.
quiet_NaN
16m ago
I agree with your solution, but I’m going to push back a little- sex creates the expectation of romantic exclusivity, so these ladies are entitled to Chad’s undivided attention.
I think that both Chad and the women would agree on that, they just differ on the time frame. In most cases, the women are not starry-eyed virgins who believe that sleeping with a man they just met will create a relationship which will last until death doth part them. They likely had some previous sexual relationships which did not last, so they have enough data to establish a baseline. They might also have been wooed by a PUA before, in which case they would have excellent real world data on the long term prospects of a relationship beginning with sex on the first date. Chad's idea of the time horizon might be more like refraining from swiping on tinder until the post-coital cuddling.
And statistically, most average women are in a relationship with average men.
The problem here is selection bias. You might be correct that the average case is an average man and an average woman happily forever (or until the man replaces his wife with a younger model 15 years down the road, or the woman dumps her husband after he gets burnout). But this majority is unlikely to star in the drama described above very often.
or should I say higher, considering how much of it is driven by BMI
My ad-hoc model of partner selection would have two scales. One is a rather absolute scale, e.g. "Would your evolutionary programming tell you to forgo sex for years if this one was the only possible partner?"
The other is relative. "How does sleeping with that person affect your status in your group?"
Unsurprisingly, I think that men are mostly filtering on the absolute scale and women are mostly filtering on a relative scale.
As a thought experiment, consider a group of people of one gender partying. One of them is hitting it off with a person of the opposite gender who has a much lower SMV than the group, say overweight, and they leave the party together. The next day, they meet with their group, and are teased about the night. The group member says "oh yeah, we ended up banging, turns they are really great at oral sex".
If the group is male, my expectation of the response would be something like "congrats on getting laid, bro", with some more mild teasing.
If the group was female, my expectation of the response would be "that bottom-feeder will literally fuck any man with a pulse".
As a corollary, I think that giving all the overweight incels GLP-1 antagonists and bringing them to normal weight will not help them much getting into relationships. Their SMV is a result of their relative status, and while some fraction of women prefer (as in "revealed preference") to share a smaller group of hotter men, there will be an imbalance.
roche
21m ago
It's not to say that randomness can't get you all of those things, but the likelihood of it randomly doing this is so small that these options need to be deweighted in your world view. If it has a 1% chance of happening, it shouldn't occupy more than 1% of your mind.
BurdensomeCount
—Your em dash is showing...
24m ago
Agreed. If you want to own a gun to keep at home as you please you should be required to pass a certain standard of shooting exam at your local range. The test should be at a level that the average person would manage to pass after 3 months of training once a week, no different to how driving tests work.
PutAHelmetOn
Recovering Quokka
25m ago
It's not even clear to me how that fantasy is supposed to work. If I'm a pro football player, who is the female equivalent? If I'm a programmer, who is the female equivalent? If I'm scrawny, who is the female equivalent?
hydroacetylene
37m ago
Uh, I’m pretty sure women go into nursing because it pays very well and is female gendered:
hydroacetylene
38m ago
Not when you include fatness-related suffering. Obesity is essentially a disability, after all.
PutAHelmetOn
Recovering Quokka
40m ago
The purpose of inventing the term "emotional labor" is to justify why nurses etc. deserve more wages or more status. It would be strange for them not to be complaining about it
hydroacetylene
40m ago
And my point is mostly that the guy has been waiting for sex will get some on his wedding night and honeymoon, and if the woman doesn't give it to him in short order I'd say that's grounds for annulment
‘We never had sex’ is grounds for an annulment in the RCC. Famously came up in king Henry VIII’s case, where it had been used to posthumously annul Catherine of Aragon’s marriage to his older brother, which otherwise would have made the marriage invalid on incest grounds. The original annulment remained valid and thus Henry didn’t get his.
Coolguy1337
43m ago
I suffered from insane chronic pain for over 10 years. It's largely gone now by simply troubleshooting the problems the same way one would fix a computer/program (and not listening to moronic doctors and woo woo people. "oh man we can't figure out what's wrong, have you considered it might be a mental problem?").
Arthritis is caused by something. It's basically a sign that your body is breaking down in some way. Your body is probably just not producing enough lube for your joints. This causes pain. It has real causes, even if they are difficult to figure out.
Hypermobility is just a catch all term for the body failing to upkeep structures that depend of collagen. Might be purely a genetic defect with no known cure, but is more commonly (in-part) impacted by a broken methylation cycle. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10122021/
In case TMJ is still a problem this has a high probability of helping. https://www.ouh.nhs.uk/media/qcxidm43/69966tmj.pdf (case study) https://old.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1k11yw5/after_5_years_of_jaw_clicking_tmj_chatgpt_cured/
CPTSD is largely a fancy word for the mind being unable to cope with a stressful event. You need energy to deal with stress, lack of energy makes smaller problems overwhelming too.
The reason doctors have not been able to solve this is because their system is build on reducing symptoms. Not solving anything. Not understanding anything. This was fine 50 years ago, but now science has advanced without them. And they don't care because they are making the big bucks. Public knowledge advances a funeral at a time.
If you're eating the SAD, stop doing that. It's basically poison. Eat food that contains nutrients.
Try fasting for ~48 hours. Obviously don't start with 48 hours, but work yourself up. Maybe 18, 24, 36, 48. It's very possible that you are reacting to the food you're eating and this is an easy way to test that.
Try a mitochondrial cocktail. Tends to boost energy production short term. Good way to see if something global is broken.
Take bloodwork for common nutrient deficiencies. But also realize that this might not be enough to catch the problem. https://old.reddit.com/r/B12_Deficiency/comments/1lfyftj/the_problematic_philosophy_behind_b12_serum_tests/
However please note that none of these things are guaranteed to work, your body might just be unfixable, but the odds are high it might be improved somehow. So take your health in your own hands and start learning how the body works. Do some experiments, and see if anything has an impact.
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
44m ago
By noting that "childish" isn't "immature" and "gay" isn't "faggotry".
As the post demonstrates, things are just simpler when you're inherently on the same page, but it's also [weirdly] a conservative thing; either of you could have had a more conventionally attractive relationship, but instead you chose this.
It's why the childhood friend never wins in coming-of-age stories.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
45m ago
Nope converts only ;P heh. Just kidding of course.
fmaa
45m ago
The pretense is in ignoring compatibilism. The sole evidence against materialism isn't the experience of free will, which feels the same under materialism (and determinism, for that matter), it is the conscious experience and the hard problem. Which is why all the evidence that conscious experience is materially based is so interesting.
We can work mind-to-mind to communicate, teach or persuade. We cannot work mind-to-mind to read or control.
I am communicating with you right now, and from my perspective no part of this communication is based on assuming non-determinism.
And same as the last time we had this conversation, I genuinely do not care what other people did under the label of capital m Materialism before I was born. Like, you keep going on about this, both with me and other materialists in this thread (Perhaps because your conception of your own Christianity is so deeply based on you feeling like you're continuing millennia of tradition?), but this is not a motte-and-bailey on my part. I'm not trying to be part of a Movement here.
hydroacetylene
47m ago
You can look up traditional Catholic teachings on ‘the marital debt’ if you’d like, quite a bit more nuance than Jim portrays. Pre-Vatican II seminary textbooks are mostly in the library of congress.
That’s probably the closest to how this was supposed to work in practice.
hydroacetylene
51m ago
Thé traditional arrangement is that spouses don’t have the right to say no to each others’s sexual requests absent extenuating circumstances.
sun_the_second
53m ago
I am aware of your gripes about overly optimistic and/or liar proponents of Materialism that were alive a few hundred years ago, and I do not believe they are much relevant to the discourse today. Coincidentally I have not studied them. This appears to me to be a deflection/smear akin to "John Money who coined the term 'gender' was an icky pedo" if taken uncharitably, and if taken charitably it seems that you are arguing with dead wrong Materialists whereas I expect you to be arguing with me.
GBRK
58m ago
I feel like Aella unleashed a sort of Rule 34 for gimmicks: there is no niche so stupid that some e-thot won't try to exploit it.
In a weird way I kind of respect it. Blogging while being an e-thot is an argument from ethos-- it's the opposite of self-censorship, and presents you as someone with no need to tell reputation-preserving lies. Call it the Milo Yiannopoulos phenomenon: being visibly and openly a member of the "outgroup" of a particular ideology makes you that much more credible when speaking about it.
hydroacetylene
1hr ago
Yeah, maybe he was actually crazy?
TheThrowaway
1hr ago
Are cradle Orthodox accepted? Count me in if so.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
1hr ago
I genuinely can't tell what you mean by this, though I'm assuming it's part of your usual pretense that compatibilism doesn't exist and materialists deny the experience of free will.
I have had materialists very directly deny the existence of free will in extended argumentation with me. I have observed other materialists, here and elsewhere, insist that no evidence against Materialism exists, and also that we know free will cannot actually exist because otherwise it would break materialism. Noting these positions is not a "pretense".
But how can a method of action possibly operate off an untestable assumption?
Things can work without us knowing how they work on a mechanistic level. Starting a fire is mechanistic; people worked with fire long, long before they had a mechanistic explanation of how it worked.
We can work mind-to-mind to communicate, teach or persuade. We cannot work mind-to-mind to read or control.
But we've been over that before and, no, whatever new evidence has appeared since then will not meet your absurd standards (iirc, literally no connection between biochemical processes in the brain and observed or self-reported mindstates counts as evidence until people have fantasy story mind-control).
They are not my absurd standards, they were the absurd claims of the scientists and philosophers who built the paradigm of the material mind. These men claimed their axioms were empirical facts for more than a century, and used those claims to wield vast social, economic and political power while steadily retreating from every scrap of empirical evidence available. It is not my fault that much of the modern world was built by lying to people about empirical fact. I will not stop pointing that the lies were in fact lies, nor tracing the social consequences of those lies down to the present day. Nor will I cease to note the evidence of my own self-reported mind-states, and the ways in which simple observation entirely contradicts the materialist narrative.
Nor will I claim that I have knowledge that I do not, in fact, have. Determinism is a perfectly respectable axiom, and utility can be acquired through its use. but it is an axiom, the utility is acquired strictly through its use as an axiom, and it pays no direct rent at all.
sun_the_second
1hr ago
The problem is that people do not appear to understand the difference.
I do not believe this is the problem here - the problem is that your explanations for the current gap in Hard Determinism that is the lack of user-friendly brain interface are, in their structure, no different from explanations that had at various points been raised against other gaps that are resolved by now.
Resolved by you yourself, in the case of comparing LLMs to human brains! We know the building blocks of LLMs, and have the control capacity to inspect and manipulate their state in less complex iterations, but not in more complex ones. We know the building blocks of organic chemicals, which resolve to DNA, which resolve to live cells, some of which are neurons, and the earlier less complex iterations of those structures we can not only predict but manipulate and recreate. Nondeterminism simply does not make a convincing enough case that the latest iteration, the live human brain, is somehow so qualitatively different from a silicon-based neural network that hoping to grasp it with determinism is hopeless hubris.
Emotional labour for someone that appreciates it can definitely be one of the appeals of the job. Emotional labor for someone that's screaming obscenities at you is crap and probably the worst part of the job.
Activists complain about the latter and don't talk about the former because they're activists. If they thought "yeah, everything's okay actually" they wouldn't be activists. People tend to complain when their jobs are bad and not say anything when it's good anyways, so I'm not surprised you don't see much talk about good emotional labor.
More options
Context Copy link