domain:streamable.com
What makes a Melania Trump performance worth so much
You get to advertise your movie to the maga or less-maga-but-conservative half the country thereabouts on "we have the presidents hot trophy wife in our movie."
You don't want to be sole breadwinner, to have to give up porn, etc. But that's what the old-school marriage contract that you say you want looked like.
Those arent the parts of the fundy tradeoff I have a problem with. Giving up porn is not a huge deal for most guys if theyre having sex, doing it in advance somewhat but propably not a dealbreaker for people otherwise interested in that kind of life, if they believe in the payoff. Sole breadwinner, propably is an issue but depends on how much you make - and rich people are less likely to be super religious, so thats propably not the driver either.
Yes, that's the problem; you've decided the result in advance and you're trying to find a way to reach it. That way the onus can properly be left on men and no burden at all placed on women. Which is what we've been doing for the better part of a century at least and has led us here.
It doesn't sound so much bitter as sarcastic.
This one yes. Theres another, which you dont see easily but she would know. I replied to this one because it was the second one I saw. Though I somehow thought that other one was in direct response to someone talking about the difficulties of children over 30.
It annihilates the illusion of a fair and lawful system, if I was insider trading the way they are the SEC would be setting up exploratory forward bases up my colon. Also it should be illegal for anyone in lawmaking or executive positions to retire and go work for the exact same companies they were supposed to make laws controlling. And it isn't, and everyone turns a blind eye, and if you bring that up with normies they don't even know wtf you're talking about. The media will not bring it up because they know how their bread gets buttered.
And then just knowing this is the state of play we're "supposed" to read the headlines in the Grand parent post and take it seriously. It's extremely aggravating.
These attitudes were handed down directly from a Christian moral understanding of sexual ethics so it certainly shouldn't be surprising even if you disagree with it. So the response of "Huh?? So strange!" is baffling to me in a forum where so many are otherwise eager to go to bat for Christianity if purely for the sake of argument.
Are you sure that the people who "bat for Christianity" are the same people saying it's not a big deal in this thread? I do the opposite of bat for any religion, so what's it to me?
Trump cannot seem to do anything at all without the corporate news media screaming that it is a sign of "scandals and corruption" and most of the time it turns out to be nothing. As a direct consequence, when it does look like something, I feel like the best response available to me is to wait and see. The news media has repeatedly turned out to be a bunch of shrill partisans who spread misinformation without hesitation and then run a retraction three months later at the bottom of page B17.
Correct. Of the things listed, the Sun story looks the worst -- except if you know that the Biden administration (in which Sun's investigation was started) was heavily into crushing crypto by regulatory means and the Trump administration is openly the opposite, so there's no definite quid-pro-quo here.
Has not had a divorce with a mother of a child of his before that child turned 16.
This seems largely redundant if restricting ourselves to men under 40. At that point you might as well say never divorced with kids at all.
This graph isnt about getting married in a certain timeframe, its about getting married to a certain partner. There could still be some effect of that... though I notice now that the IFS data doesnt have age, so bodycount isnt necessarily about relationship length, as it would be for someone evaluating the mostly-similarly-aged women he might date. Note also that their table 1 shows the odds of marrying partner #n continually decining (beware the pooled fields).
Zvi's claim:
China is competing in spite of this severe disadvantage. It is vital that we hold their feet to the fire on this. China has an acute chip shortage, because it physically cannot make more AI chips, so any chips it would ship to a place like UAE or KSA would each be one less chip available in China.
I don't think this is true, at all.
There's a gigantic amount of smuggling going on. A third of Nvidia GPU sales were in Singapore.
Mental illnesses aren't made alike. Someone with depression or anxiety is far less likely to make your life hell than a woman who is BPD or bipolar. A (high functioning) autistic woman? Some are really into that.
So much clueless discourse and blathering on here really makes me think that a lot of people here have rather interestingly false conceptions of the gap between them and an attractive man in terms of dating success. That's not to speak of the absolutely massive gap between the average man and the average woman that I think could do with some amount of rectification though the use of a couple particularly pertinent examples. In short-- the average man i.e a guy who would probably get rated a 6 or 7 by most people is virtually invisible to women online to a degree that's frankly quite horrific when you compare it to the experience of an attractive man. The average guy could probably expect to reasonably manage about 5 to 10 likes a day, probably dropping off to less than that after the first week, with maybe a couple matches a week and perhaps 1 out of 50 matches actually converting to a date and an even smaller proportion converting to anything more significant than that. That doesn't sound too bad, right?
The thing is, an attractive man isn't just getting say 10% more matches, or even just doubling their matches. The amount of attention they get from women usually dwarfs the average male by several orders of magnitude. The top profiles on Tinder, Hinge, Bumble, are maxing out the like counter in give or take under an hour, the rungs below that with ease in under a day and so on and so forth. There are plenty of men who are not rich, not famous, not exceptional in any way really other than the face God gave them and perhaps the muscles Trenbolone gave them (though if you're thinking steroids alone will make you one of these men, you're living in a world of delusion-- women want the complete package) breaking 20,000 matches in relatively modest sized metro areas like Copenhagen, Stockholm or Denver. I should probably note that these profiles are typically white men though, as funnily enough even here racial gaps manifest, though this is frankly a matter of degrees, as even these disadvantaged attractive men of color are usually not lacking for women-- but it's going to be generally significantly less attractive and desirable women and they'll have to be a point or two better than their white counterpart to compete. These men have such an abundance of choice and easy access to women that they effectively dwell in a completely separate reality when compared to the average man-- they are the pickers and choosers and have no desperate need to compromise or settle down with one woman. Think of the gap between a man with 70 IQ and a man with 160 IQ in terms of capacity for intellectual output and perhaps multiply that gap a few times and you'll have a somewhat decent grasp of the dynamic in play here.
No amount of game or self improvement will ever get you close to that if you lack the genetic basis for it. It's like thinking a 70 IQ man can become a world class physicist and win the Nobel prize if he just tried hard enough-- the world doesn't work that way.
It's well known that attractive women have their pick of the litter, but I'll just add in that a woman need not be particularly attractive to be bombarded with options. The average girl you see on the street could open any dating app and find literal thousands of men throwing themselves at her within a day, maybe two or three if she's a bit ungifted in the face. Though as with attractive men, there's a pretty big gap between the kinds and amount of attention that white women get, and every other race of woman, including Asian women (of the northeastern and southern varieties) and having blue or green eyes supercharges this a surprising amount.
Much of this problem exists because religious conservatives alienated young women with the abortion issue.
If a young woman can be alienated by being told she should not kill her child then that reflects a problem with her own character. No compromise on this is necessary or acceptable.
On 4chan, not real life.
Yeah hard to set a line for 'not noticeably promiscuous' but 5 sex partners feels a tad low for somebody who's 29.
On the market from 15, could do that with 6 2-year relationships or just say 3 4-year relationships and one extra 'body' in every dating period between whilst feeling things out.
I finished it about a week ago. I enjoyed it quite a bit, though I did find the heavy emphasis on real time elements annoying at times. But the gameplay was generally solid, the story was excellent, the music was excellent... the game really just fired on all cylinders. Similar to @naraburns I had the thought that I hope Square-Enix is taking notes, because this is what I wanted Final Fantasy to be like for the last 20 years instead of the hot mess it has been. I doubt it, but one can hope.
I suppose I count as defending Hanania - I don't particularly like him, but I think hate for him here is absurdly overblown.
The hate he gets is just a result of people putting him on a pedestal. If it wasn't for that, he'd be indistinguishable from the blur of faceless Substackers that no one cares about. I wouldn't even care that he's calling himself "elite human capital", it's the fact that others agree with his self-image that is absurd, and warrants the reaction to him.
My point is, the Republican Party as of 2015 was dead in the water. If you look at the 2012 election internal postmortem assessment, the Republican strategy was basically “give up, concede all cultural and immigration positions, become slightly more corporatist Democrats”. The landslide defeat of ¡Jeb! to Hillary Clinton in 2016 would have been the final loogie on the grave of American conservatism. People like @aqouta bemoan Donald Trump’s hijacking of the Republican Party and the demise of REAL TRVE CONSERVATISM, when Trump is only reason any kind of conservatism, or the Republican Party itself, still exists at all.
It's not a reason why OP is wrong. It's pointing out that OP's incorrect conclusion is shared with a significant number of other people who share in this flawed ideology.
The claim that the reason childbirth is dropping is because too many women are fat ugly whores who are not worth marrying has been thoroughly rebutted in my initial response as well as by nearly every other commenter in this thread, and it's not worth rehashing again.
Welcome to theMotte.
What proponents call "human biodiversity", and Wikipedia calls "scientific racism", is pretty commonly accepted here; I'd estimate that 85% or so of regulars here would answer "do you think there are statistical differences between races in relevant cognitive traits" with "yes". The blurb about welcoming diverse attitudes is true enough - even among that 85%, there's the full spectrum from "I think only a couple of outcome disparities look genetic, and support some degree of special treatment for those on the wrong side of those disparities, because it's not like they chose to have shitty genes; I just think that a failure to get equality of outcome does not, in fact, automatically imply rampant racism" all the way over to "literally has a username referencing the Schutzstaffel" - and due in part to that vast difference of opinion, and in part to this place simply being one of the few highbrow places in which it can be discussed, it's discussed, uh, quite a bit.
Why do I mention this? Well, because due to both of those things, the social justice thought police, if they notice your membership here, are likely to scream from the rooftops that you're a heinous racist. Of course, I deplore the tactic of cancellation and the ethos of guilt by association, and admire anyone willing to defy such would-be censors, but it would be improper not to let you make an informed decision, and my read on you is that you currently are not on track to make one.
I suppose I count as defending Hanania - I don't particularly like him, but I think hate for him here is absurdly overblown.
I will just straight-up defend Yglesias, though. I don't find him particularly annoying and he strikes me as effectively advocating for his preferred positions in a way that admits of rational argument and counter-argument. Well done him.
If in ${CurrentYear} due to hoeflation, a woman's Wonderfulness as a potential wife doesn't start losing its shine until she's been railed by enough men to field a full-court 5-on-5 basketball game, things are bleaker than I thought.
I grew up in a very different society and culture, even if I ended up Western-adjacent by preference. I don't think 5 partners is a big deal at all, at least for a girl who isn't like 16 years old and making her way through the entire football team. By the cutoff age of 30, that's less than a partner ever 2 years (counting from 18). Even at 25, that's just a string of serial monogamy, each relationship over a year. Of course, in an Indian context that would be a serious concern to most suitors, this is a sexually conservative country.
I also take "fairness" seriously. I have well over 5 sexual partners, and I'm only in my late 20s, and I spent most of the last decade in 3 committed relationships. I find it hard to condemn women for the same behavior I engage in. I don't condemn other men for seeking different things, but they're going to have to pay a very heavy tax on their preferences. If they hold them that strongly? Well, such is their lot.
I still ask if they consider carefully what they're asking for. If someone tells you they have seen individual people for years, and it didn't pan out, that is very different from "hoeing around" in a non-commital manner. Especially when the age of marriage has shot up, such that it's socially expected that high school and college flings don't necessarily end in matrimony.
Sure, trade-offs can hypothetically exist. However, men take what they can get, even if they'd prefer a chaste wife. The opportunity cost for 9+/10 men of an 8-body-count hot and filthy rich wife is not an almost-as-hot almost-as-rich chaste wife, but a plain, non-rich wife with ~8ish partners.
There are a significant number of "almost-as-hot almost-as-rich chaste wives" around in India. Less so in the West. And at least @2rafa, who probably mogs us in the net worth department, doesn't think that's a revealed preference.
Besides, unless they tell you, or you know them for a long time, how would you even know exactly or approximately how many men they slept with? It's the easiest thing in the world to lie about.
Yeah 5 as a hard cutoff feels a bit crazy for a 30 year old. If they've been on the market from 15 onwards, which is broadly typical, that's achievable with 5 3-year long-term monogamous relationships.
Crushed the universities with force and not allow the long march through the institutions to continue, slash and burn the administrative state.
More options
Context Copy link