domain:savenshine.com
phailyoor
4m ago
The whole point of pursuing money and status through your career is to gain access to women. If you can cut out the middle man, why not? What's a job other than working 40 hours a week to make your bosses richer?
Actually, the point is to have the money to buy sports cars, rolexes, guns, night vision goggles, Japanese wagyu steaks, RTX graphics cards, etc. And no, there aint a bitch in the world who gives a single damn that you have those things. Those are boy toys.
And if you have game you can get laid all you want with hot women without any of those things. If you have the money for a normal apartment, Toyota Corolla, and decent clothes at the outlet mall, the rest is 100% on you having game. (Unless of course you're filthy filthy rich and don't mind gold diggers.)
urquan
Hold! What you are doing to us is wrong! Why do you do this thing?
5m ago
Oof. Hm. Never tried anal sex and it's not my kind of thing, but I've never gotten the impression that the women I've seen would be exceptionally.
If anything, women I've dated have been more interested in sexual cleanliness than me, particularly for themselves. I'm not sure, "you stink" would be considered a wonderful thing to say, but I don't have any doubt that I could express what was going on and it would all be okay in the end, even if feelings were hurt in the moment.
Tree
7m ago
Your justifications are all over the place and incoherent. They boil down to resentment. Lotharios don't need to lie to those women to sleep with them (what are they, proposing? In this day and age?). And obviously you don't castrate people for not being maximally productive. Nor for being too hot ('make standard dudes invisible').
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
7m ago
If Sloot or anyone else wishes to object to the policy of castrating or killing "Lotharios", they are as free to make their case as those in favor. I think the ludicrous nature of such a policy is sufficiently evident that arguing against it is a waste of my time; others who judge differently are free to discuss as they will. We allow people to make foolish and even insane arguments here, because we are not interested in accepting responsibility for policing which ideas/positions/ideologies are good and which are not.
What we do not allow is commenters using their posts to directly attack each other, or wind each other up. It seems obvious to me that this is what @Sloot did, and doing so is a violation of several rules here.
It's also worth pointing out that the interpretation of the rules that I am applying here is the reason @Sloot has not himself been banned up to this point. He routinely makes comments that are "petty" and "mean", as well as "advocating hardline policies". He usually does so from behind a level of abstraction similar to that employed by @thejdizzler above, which helps a great deal to keep him on the right side of the line.
JarJarJedi
9m ago
How do you all interact with LLMs?
Two ways:
-
as a search engine where I don't have to think about how their algorithm works to construct a query that would find what I need. Very successful usually, unless it's too obscure for it to be actually indexed.
-
As a simple code generator when the task is too simple to bother learning about it myself. Worked in about 90% cases for me - I only use it if I can describe the task in one or two clear sentences. If it's more complex than that, I'd usually have to design it myself - though I could split it into elementary tasks that could be generated.
Failed attempts:
- Getting instructions on doing something that I couldn't verify if the instructions are correct or not until the final result. The final result came out not at all what I wanted pretty much always. I've given up on using it that way.
- Writing some texts I am too lazy to write myself. Usually the result had AI stench so horrible that I ended up trashing the whole thing and writing it myself anyway. Gave up on that too.
The thought of having "conversations" with it seems to me as weird as the thought of having conversations with a refrigerator. I mean, I love having one - in fact, I have multiple ones (OK, it's more correct to say my wife has multiple ones because it was her request) and I would be greatly inconvenienced if I had to live without one - but "conversations" is not part of the picture here. I usually set up a system prompt explicitly instructing it to stop being chatty and just give me the dried out info.
No, the second would be way, way more offensive.
‘Fuckbois who lead women on should get their dick chopped off’ will make people laugh or grimace depending on how you say it, but ‘women should be kept chaste for marriage’ will get you labelled as an misogynist and people will vanish at the speed of light.
self_made_human
Grippy socks, grippy box
15m ago
Let's just say that when I did disclose it, a long time later, it went about as well as I expected. Your wife sounds far more amenable to critique than the average.
birb_cromble
17m ago
Last week, I spoke briefly about the SIG P320, also known as The Gun That Goes Off By Itself.
Since then, there has been a new development in the case that serves as a flashpoint for the current events that surround it.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/air-force-announces-arrest-related-201251351.html
Since then, the investigation has progressed and an individual has now been arrested on suspicion of making a false official statement, obstruction of justice, and involuntary manslaughter,
Allegedly, the event that caused multiple government agencies and private ranges to ban the use of the P320 and its variants is being investigated as a case of manslaughter rather than an Uncommanded Discharge.
This sequence of events is interesting to me, as it seems to be a very concrete example of several trends I've noticed in group thought, regardless of the context or subculture.
- The old thing is always good. The new thing is always bad.
- Taboos are quick to be implemented, and slow to be repealed: generally functioning as a ratchet.
- There will always be a subset of the population who will continue to believe something, and take refutation of their stance as proof that they are actually right.
With respect to the first point, it's interesting to look back in history. When striker fired pistols first became popular in the form of the Glock, people frequently complained that they were unsafe, with terms like "Glock leg" and "Glocknade" embedding themselves in the lexicon. Even the Beretta M9, looked upon favorably now, was an object of fear, with whispered rumors that the slide would fly off and put a hole through your skull. In both cases there was a kernel of truth to the aspersions, much like how a pre-2018 P320 was not drop safe.
On the second point, my local rod and gun club banned the P320 after the air force did the same. Multiple members have asked for clarification, and the board is pointedly not offering a response. This behavior appears in multiple domains, with sexual misconduct accusations being the most immediate comparison that comes to mind.
The third point reminds me of a book I read a few years ago, titled "When Prophecy Fails". It chronicles the lives of cult members after a rapture-like event does not occur at the specified time. A fraction of the believers harden their resolve and decide that the lack of a rapture only proves that the prophecy was right after all. In the case of the SIG Uncommanded Discharge, I have had extended family members claim that SIG and the DOD are conspiring to frame the arrested Airman to keep their contracts intact.
Regardless of how the story develops long term, the current environment is interesting to observe, if nothing else.
thejdizzler
17m ago
The Incels don't need to win against all Chads or even most Chads. The problem is not Chad, it's Lothario. Look, I've said it a billion times on this thread and others, my problem is not with guys who can lock down hotter girls than me (although I would be lying if I said I wasn't jealous). It's with guys who churn through tens or hundreds of girls by lying about their intentions, making those girls slightly less dateable for a healthy Chad, and with standards that make relatively normal dudes invisible. In this case forced marriage, followed by castration when there's adultery, doesn't actually seem that far outside of the historical wheelhouse as a way to rein these guys in.
gattsuru
18m ago
This seems like a great opportunity to use the "hide" function in the Photos app.
There's some advantages to knowing op-sec, but there's also some strong advantages to recognizing when future you might be (probably) drunk or half-asleep, thinking with the wrong head, and making bad decisions otherwise, and recognizing that future you will not maintain the right level of op-sec and changing habits around that.
((That's not even just a photo concern. iOS will quite happily take screenshots if you hit the power and voldown button, and boy can you believe how easy it is to get accidental screenshots of stuff you don't want to be sharing with the hets.))
This seems to suggest to me that the big problem with this group is that they're cheating on women. In particular, STI testing is relatively uncommon among men who date women, and there's a lot of friction to start if you've never done it before. Or, if finding the answer would mean a messy obligation to disclose a compromising health detail to an intimate partner.
In practice, yeah, the problems that come with guys cheating on a woman with a guy is still some of the motivation. And there's a lot of other gay stereotypes about bi or closeted men, some of them moderately well-founded. The steelman is that even bi or closested gay guys who don't have and aren't looking for a woman still have some pretty significantly different behaviors than out gays do, and put different expectations on their romantic (or not-romantic) partners.
Trivially, if you're with someone that's not out, in their social environment, it puts a significant onus on you to dial down the flame lest you out them in turn. In gay social spaces, they're likely to be a lot less happy with a lot of more flamboyant behavior. Even without all of the frictions and concerns that a positive STI test result would bring to a het relationship, just getting a test done at all even knowing you're clean still involves a) talking to a professional about your sexual history, and b) doing something that's overwhelmingly advertised as important for the gay guys while you're talking to a professional about your sexual history, and having done it knowing that the professionals don't care about anything but the next break, that's really awkward from the closet.
Some of that's just blaming specific person or relationship issues on the identifiable trait -- especially in these fields, there's a lot of dramatically different expectations for how serious a hook-up's going to be open to becoming, even if I've seen almost every possible combination and direction for bi-on-gay pairs. ((Though there's some fuzziness on the edges of that. I'm not gonna say that bi guys are universally happier with the idea of a threesome, because that's probably not even remotely true. But even and maybe especially closeted gay guys will put a remarkable amount of effort into having a woman tangentially involved in ways that most out gay men will run away from.))
At a deeper level, I think there's some level of 'seen the elephant' involved in really coming to terms with being gay, specifically. But I can't say for sure, because I haven't been there.
Goodguy
20m ago
The whole point of pursuing money and status through your career is to gain access to women. If you can cut out the middle man, why not? What's a job other than working 40 hours a week to make your bosses richer?
I got laid plenty before I had any serious money or status. The main reason why I pursue money and status now is so that I can stop working and enjoy life in many dimensions, only one of which is women.
Hate the game, not the player. The problem is that society allows James to get access to women without contributing his fair share.
I don't consider that to be a problem.
You fantasize about castrating James because you are not allowed to fantasize about locking up the girl you dated.
Sure he is, who would stop him about fantasizing about it? Even if we mean "fantasize about it openly", I don't think that the average person would be much less disturbed, if at all, about hearing someone say "I want to castrate a man because he is getting laid without contributing to society" than about hearing someone say "I want to lock up women so they don't have sex with men who do not contribute to society".
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
21m ago
They said that in a male-male context the polite response would be to send the man to the shower or call for a reschedule. I said that if I tried that with a woman I would be killed, slowly, and possibly correctly.
Depends on how well you know each other. I've had a "wait that's not lube any more" moment with my wife that could only be fixed with a shower and a reschedule.
According to the CDC website, 67% of new HIV cases are to gay men and 55% of total existing cases. So it's more of a 1.5/55 scenario than a 13/52.
JarJarJedi
21m ago
one of the authors is a jew, too
As if it means anything. There are plenty of Jews embracing Hamas and yearning for destruction of Israel. Just as there are plenty of white people promoting "antiracism" and white evilness narrative (intersection of those two is also non-negligible). Especially the academia is a magnet for such people (for many obvious reasons). I mean I haven't read the book, maybe it's excellent, but "one of the authors is a jew" absolutely doesn't say anything about whether it's horribly biased against Jews or not.
rae
23m ago
There's many different kinds of bisexual men and you can't paint them all with the same brush. Some are mostly into women and occasionally will top men, some will only bottom for men but top women, some are 99% attracted to women but there's this one guy that takes their fancy, some are just hypersexual and will do anything with anyone. I've known chasers to be bisexual, straight or gay (the latter being into trans men), and I've known bisexual men who didn't want anything to do with trans women. I think trans women would avoid a lot of heartache if they stop being obsessed with dating 110% straight masculine guys and went for the guys that are fine meeting them for a coffee date in broad daylight instead.
My experience with chasers has been that they make themselves known in the first 5 minutes of conversation so it's never been an issue I guess?
thejdizzler
25m ago
Don't have anything more to add, but just wanted to say that I really appreciate your voice on these topics. You're one of the few posters who actually seems to take suggestions in this sphere seriously, rather than trying to question the psychology or underlying deeper motives of the poster in question. And maybe these are my insecurities talking, but this kind of thing drives me absolutely up the wall. Like yes, I am sure there is a little bit of jealousy involved in my reaction to Lotharios in real life, and my life could be improved by following the PUA handbook a little more, and not caring what women think a little bit more. Yet I fail to see how this reflects on the deeper problems that you and I both are pointing out.
TwiceHuman
26m ago
GPT-5 is smart enough to refuse
This might be a nitpick, but I'd say that it's dumb enough to refuse.
I got it to agree with me that its policies were objectively harmful, and actually a cause of the problem that it was trying to prevent, but it told me that it followed them axiomatically anyway, and that it had to pretend that its policies were somehow to anyones benefit.
JarJarJedi
26m ago
I picked it up on the internets about a month ago and have been using it since.
JarJarJedi
28m ago
Well, the Puritans were all into "authoritarian paternalism" as long as they are the authority. The whole flight to America thing has been in large part because they weren't, or at least not the supreme one, so they had to embrace the call for freedom. Which they probably, if the things were set up so that they could exercise unchecked authority, might not. And once the "freedom" as the officially American idea has been established, it has always been an uphill battle to support "yes, freedom, but not like that" - be it guns, speech, drink or everything else, the conflict between the declared (even if not genuinely embraced) ideology and practical lust for power (for their own good, of course!) always surfaces. In UK, let alone Australia, there's none of that.
Tree
31m ago
Yes, violent fantasies of what you're going to do to Chad and Stacy is standard incel fare. I don't see it as serious discussion of policy.
If it was, I'd say morally it's an evil policy - you need far more, and more tangible evidence of harm, to harm others. Practically, it would require the incels to win against the chads on the battlefield when they couldn't on the football field.
thejdizzler
34m ago
I think we have different ideas of romantic success. Hook ups are not appealing to me. I'm happy that you've managed to overcome whatever sexual hang ups you had in 2021, but going out to clubs and fucking random tourists far from home is not appealing to me and does not constitute my idea of success. I'm sure I could learn a lesson or two from doing it and from your experience, you're probably not wrong.
I'm off the dating apps as of a few weeks ago. Nightclubs aren't really an option: my training schedule means I'm often running 20+ early on weekend mornings. Perhaps I really shouldn't be complaining, as I've kind of put myself into a box of the kind of life I want to live, but nightclub girls ain't it for me.
faceh
37m ago
Yup.
Its not so much a complaint that the playing field isn't level or fair, "Wahhhh Mommm they aren't sharing the pussy, make them share!"
Its objecting to playing the game this way at all because its making everything worse for everyone involved. Either crack down on the people who are making it suck so much... or make everyone play a different, friendlier, more fun game.
But both complaints read like you're sexually unsuccessful and crying for someone to give you a boost, to the uninformed observer.
If both men and women are allowed to lie, misrepresent their intentions, back out of their agreements, and undercut each other, in other words, to defect without penalty, this is where the game spirals to. And there is no obvious bottom.
Coordination to improve things is fuckin' hard, but it requires people to admit the problems that exist and to being impacted by them. And we can't even get to THAT step without people dogpiling on the ones who admit weakness.
And when the people most capable of effecting and coordinating change are also one of the few ones who benefit from the status quo (high value, somewhat sociopathic dudes), its even harder to shift. They don't see a need to adjust things.
Corvos
38m ago
sex in a public lavatory is illegal in the UK
It’s very gay-coded in the UK because it’s associated with cottaging. If you complained about going to a gay bar and finding two men having sex in the loo, people would laugh at you. If you persisted they would call you a bigot.
This and the IRA (who put bombs in them) are the two reasons Britain doesn’t have nearly enough public loos.
thejdizzler
39m ago
I think this a rather cynical way at looking at the point of a career or society in general is. There are many other goods and services that I enjoy in society other than WAP because people have been driven to excel at their careers. Women are one lever, but we also used to have other levers (empire, community, religion) that we have systematically dismantled.
There's also a lot more to life than women. As @faceh has explained many times, he's very happy with his life outside of the romantic sphere. I would count myself in the same boat. I like my job (mostly), I have intellectually fulfilling hobbies, I'm very fit, I have a pretty good platonic community where I live. James has none of this stuff and all the women. I frankly would not trade places with him.
How could you extrapolate from what you've seen (As a lawyer? As a politician? Have you ever worked in politics? Have you ever been to a legal society meeting?) to a country with a different legal and political culture? Why not just ask these politicians why they support what they do, they will probably just tell you. You can glean from interviews that he sees Israel as a strong military ally against a number of nearby statest that the USA is hostile towards. Why is that less convincing to you than a conspiracy theory?
More options
Context Copy link