site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 1667 results for

domain:amphobian.info

Literally just don’t make AI porn of your female classmates? Why is everyone on this site struggling with this so much?

Just doing my ethnic duty.

It's never absolutely too late, but the earlier the relatively better.

Sure they do, in that they sympathize with the victims as being misled.

Yeah, when the cult drives people towards self-destructive behavior. When it drives them to harm others, you see people's sympathy starting to wear thin.

And to the extent you're right you're only proving my point. This is a lot closer to how we treat real, actual, historical Nazis vs Nazism, and how I argue we should treat progressives vs. progressivism.

See how they react to people trying to deny blood products to their kids that will kill them. We don't arrest them for attempted murder, we generally just override their decision

Yeah, it's almost like we have a taboo against imposing medical procedures without informed consent, and we only override it in extreme circumstances, let alone imprison people for refusing it. If you didn't go with one of the most milquetoast examples of a cult causing harm, it would become obvious how faulty this logic is.

Yes, food isn't evenly distributed between population and polities.

If what you really wanted to say was that British food is kind of meh then I'm on board.

You have some degree of a point here. If it was phrased only as average, then maybe the math-inclined females answering the survey thought it meant mean and went from there. (Though again I think if you explicitly specified median you'd still get the exact same results).

Really though, and your post is valuable for having brought this to my attention, the appropriate criticism is that to call them "statistically illiterate" is simply an irrelevant dig that doesn't really cut to the actual heart of the issue: Men are fair (at least as regards this subject of evaluating the distribution of characteristics). Women are not.

And to add another perspective: I grew up with it (Polish family, we had so much of it) and I don't like it at all.

Only the top politicians get access to the high paying speaker opportunities. Even your average representative isn’t being paid $5,000 for a 20 minute speech, let alone $500k to show up to a conference.

Failure of your imagination to supply a steel man to your opposition.

Do I have to provide a steelman when it's obvious that nobody involved is thinking nearly as far ahead as that steelman? You think your average feminist or feminist-adjacent who takes a kneejerk reactionary stance against some "incel" generating AI loli waifu or whatever or some horny teen "nudifying" the girl from his Englsih class is thinking decades into the future? I mean decades into the future we're going to have actual sexbots anyway so the same argument then applies to real world conduct.

This is not a brave statement, but I'm gonna double down on "sexual urges that are focused on a 5 year old are abominable" and maybe "and should be to individuals of all sexes"

The problem is, to a lot of women, if you're not in the top 25% of men minimum, increasingly you having sexual urges that are focused on a 25 year old is also abominable to them, especially if you're gasp over 30 (or probably even 28 with some of these people nowadays). And specifically on the issue of underage girls, they'll also conflate 5 year olds and 15 year olds while simultaneously encouraging the sexualization of those same 15 year olds to a degree that would have been considered abominable for 25 year olds 25 years ago, then rage like it's unthinkable when the inevitable happens. It's a fucked up equation.

You’ve gotten it a little confused. You’re completely correct that politicians are largely motivated by power accumulation, but that isn’t the surprising thing. That a politician should want to achieve power should be no less surprising than that a corporate climber should want to be CEO or that a star athlete should want to win gold. The surprising thing is that most of these people are essentially ideologically neutral or ambivalent. At most, largely by osmosis, they have absorbed some version of the general views of their class and peer circle. What is surprising is that it’s power without real purpose.

Expelling someone is an extreme act. And given my rock-bottom opinion of public school administrators, we just can't trust them to make this kind of decision.

That last detail is quite the perfect cherry on top of a shit sundae; well (?) played, dramatic irony!

Yeah. The story sucks because it ends with me being dragged to a psychiatrist and medicated for OCD that I didn't actually have while instantly crying every time the song Away in a Manger played on the radio for years after, but it's hilarious because Mom got away with arson and insurance fraud because the local fire chief hated us due to an old feud with Mom so much that he let our house burn to the ground and half-assed the investigation at best. The punchline is golden, too. I was the favorite kid so of course my Christmas present was safe in the trunk of Mom's car. What was it? A remote-control fire truck!

For the whole Ferguson situation, my impression was that the shooting of Michael Brown was technically justified, but it might have been the only correct thing the cops had done there in a long time. Michael Brown's actions were technically wrong, but more understandable, and did succeed in shining a light onto lots of actual misconduct.

Technically, my ass. The only reason Wilson didn't get railroaded by a system that badly wanted to was because it wasn't remotely a close case. Wilson's actions were fully justified by large margins, and he had extensive physical evidence to prove it.

I believe that our society has a more general problem of militarization of the police and over-policing of many things that applies to all people. I think that the recent racial focus is misguided and serves to obscure the real problem by insisting on a false narrative and thereby causing people to take the opposite position of excessively defending the police when they see the lies.

And see, I would agree with all of this, except for the "excessively defending the police" claim in the same post where you seem to present the Michael Brown case as somehow borderline! Police misconduct absolutely exists, and absolutely should be punished, but you need to use valid examples.

Modern militaries are very good at delivering weapons to precise locations.

Jamming in Ukraine now sees less than 10% of some precision guided munitions reaching their target. The less impacted can hope for only 2/3s being jammed.

Stories I thought were funny...

My own family background was pretty different, but shit happens to everybody, and I can easily think of a personal story that's kinda funny in a black humor way now, but was nightmare fuel at the time and to most audiences.

...select company (Nurses, EMS workers, and lawyers...

Yeah, that's fair.

Can police departments launch effective complex investigations, or are they at a structural / organizational disadvantage here?

It varies, a lot, even within a single jurisdiction. I've seen indictments where police clearly spent hundreds of manhours chasing down every possible lead, and others where a slam-dunk case gets dropped cause no one could be arsed to handle all the court forms. Baltimore's probably (hopefully?) the most extreme example, where proximity to DC has gotten the police department a remarkable breadth of camera systems, license plate scanners, open-source intel analysts, and investigatory resources, and even for murders and just for those where the investigation has been publicly disclosed, there's a wide disparity that's clearly unrelated to the strength of the initial leads.

There's a reputation for 'missing white girl' syndrome to drive that, and it's not wrong, but elderly couples or young kids of any race can get sizable attention and interest, and even the prototypical gang banger on gang banger violence can (rarely) if there's something about the incident that drives political or local interest. There's a reputation for corruption driving a lot of that, it's it's not wrong. Baltimore's GTTF scandal was probably known by 10%+ of the force, which is appalling when they were shaking down civilians, and shocking when you remember that they were selling guns to people shooting at other cops.

((Sometimes "who" matters in a different way: I've seen grand theft on small businesses that were probably destined for the 'when we get to it' pile, except the business coordinated with other similar small businesses to demonstrate an interstate pattern with a clear direction and unique identifying characters, and while that 'only' gets the equivalent of a national wanted poster, it gets a lot of highway patrols looking for an easy to way make a big arrest.))

On the flip side, there's a problem with the world where you don't. It's very easy to come up with a plan where there's no witnesses and any physical evidence is destroyed! You end up with massive selection pressures toward the most dangerous criminal behaviors.

It's definitely and definitionally not possible to provide above-average effort for every case; there's far too much uncertainty to triage cases in a QALY-like manner; it's definitely possible to triage cases at all and find deep investigation still valuable.

Should they focus resources on the above capability beyond a small, dedicated "Major Crimes" unit (or some such) or, ought they double or triple down on basic patrol, fast response, and community intel work?

I've mixed feelings.

How effective community-oriented or 'broken windows' theory of policing is controversial, and not just for the normal crimonology versus social justice reasons: even the best evidence in favor has been hard to pull apart from normal economic impacts. But the extent that dangerous criminals routinely grow into violent crime from, act on, and rely on casual disruptive law-breaking make Pealian community-oriented boots-on-roads policing very hard to overlook, and it's just not compatible with the All Available Effort approach.

But in turn the overwhelming majority of successful boots-on-roads efforts come in communities with unsophisticated and disorganized criminals, in cultures not predisposed to escalatory violence. They seldom, if ever, can point to clear successes -- even short of actually reducing broad strokes of crime, even just in getting inroads with the civilian populace -- in low-trust societies.

I think, though, this ultimately missed the deeper question: "can they choose"?

A bloodless focus on the easiest-to-solve crimes will near-unavoidably leave cops focusing on trivial but simple-to-prove laws: it's what Sam Francis wanted to be talking about for anarchotyranny. In extreme cases, the knowledge that police will happily pass out tickets or throw someone in jail for selling lossies, but won't handle a serious theft or assault unless the offender is caught redhanded, is strong motivation to never include or cooperate with police at all. Hyperprioritization of serious crime leads to the mirror problem, where those massive investments chasing hard-to-solve crimes end up wasted not just because the crimes are hard, but because the police quickly looses the community relations, familiarity with the domain, and trial experience necessary to bring a case to conviction.

Do most serial killers spread social contagions, though? Obviously guys like the Unabomber who've actually communicated with the media are one thing, but it feels like a lot of serial killers targeting the margins of society will never get any meaningful engagement whilst conducting their business. It's only after their investigation, capture and public trials that the real visibility becomes a thing.

Consumers of true crime content focus on fascinating cases which happened to relatable victims: in other words, bizarre unsolved murders in which the victim was an (A)WF(L)*

The entire industry seems to focus on like the same 50-odd cases, though, since those are the ones that fit the heuristics of interest

Also, how many woke people are just utterly detached from the lives of black people who need police

IMO this is a lot of it. As an undergraduate at an SEC university in a roughly 50/50 black/white town I once took an Intro to Woke (aka. Women’s) Studies class and the level of detachment from lower-class life from my classmates and even instructor were high even by the standards of the student body and dare I say faculty as a whole (Oddly enough, or maybe not, my military history professor had the best perspective on it, more so than the therapist I was paying.).

As a 22 year old white guy from a background eerily similar to JD Vance’s (Move it to rural north Alabama, hit the shuffle button on the characters, subtract some drugs, add more domestic violence and dead pets, and you’re pretty much there. My Mamaw who half-raised me was named Bonnie and got married at 13 too and IMO Hillbilly Elegy is a mediocre political polemic trying to ape Dreams of My Father but it made me ugly cry because some of it hit way too close to home. I refuse to watch the movie and while Vance the politician can be cringeworthy I empathize deeply with his reactionary streak.) I was hardly street smart but relative to my classmates I’d at least seen the rest of the town thanks to my travels delivering pizza. I had a few refuse to believe me when I mentioned that the local pizza guys can be pretty racist (In that specific area the middle class black people live in suburbs further away, the local whites are fairly well off, the local black people are rather ghetto and generally stiff you/treat you like shit, and the white trash who would do the same live in rural areas elsewhere so we don’t have to deal with them. It’s easy to get jaded in that sort of context.) because ghetto black people don’t tip (I memorized every black regular in our area who tipped because the other driver I worked with was a Klan-tier racist and I could steal those runs all day and make him think I was doing him a favor. Ebony five blocks away was my favorite, easiest five bucks ever.).

Along the same vein, I learned that it’s no fun being able to easily win the “complain about your family/childhood” game Millennials are fond of playing (I’m not saying that all or even most lower class people are bad parents, but the sort of dysfunctions that make one an outright abusive or neglectful parent are likely to land them in the lower or working class.). Normie white people really don’t want to hear about murdered pets, guilty feelings from failure to protect siblings, or feeling like a collaborator because I was the abusive parent’s favorite. Stories I thought were funny (The time Mom burned our house down for the insurance money two weeks before Christmas is the example of this.) really weren’t and can only be shared for laughter purposes in select company (Nurses, EMS workers, and lawyers usually have sufficiently dark senses of humor.) while getting into really bad stuff would just make people shut down and either go overboard with the validation, tell me “You must be a very strong person for having survived that.”, or just outright ask me to stop talking about it (I’m not a dog person because I buried too many of them when I was a kid and even in an environment where sibling relations are akin to dedovshchina and you learn to ration or abandon empathy it deeply bothered me how Mom and Stepfather badly treated/neglected our dogs. At the same time it profoundly pisses me off that people seem to care more about the dogs’ suffering than that of my sisters.). As a 30-something instead of an early 20-something I genuinely try not to talk about it because it’s just not realistic to expect someone who hasn’t experienced something like that to relate any more than I can relate to having been raped (I have not.). That, and ruminating on suffering and guilt that I can’t change isn’t going to fix anything and is just going to ruin my night, make me drink far too much, and probably cry and I’ve done enough of that already.

This can be a problem with therapists/counselors as well. I don’t want you to go overboard and compare me to your combat veteran clients (My parents and stepfather were Marines and enough of that rubbed off that I laugh at Generation Kill but I haven’t been shot at, taken incoming artillery, or watched my friends die. My buddy Justin who did a few tours in the sandbox and gave me the Tumblr self-diagnosis holy grail of telling me that I had PTSD and needed to seek help has experienced that, and that’s not the same thing even if he cries more about his little brother who got beat every day and turned into a meth head than he does Afghanistan.) and I damned sure don’t want to hear about how smart or “gifted” I am as if that’s some sort of consolation prize. I know what I went through sucked, that my mother will never love me, my sisters will never really trust me because I was the favorite, and that I have no more power to save them as adults from their own bad decisions/dysfunctions (Body positivity ain’t a thing when you’re bordering on auditioning for my 600lb life and can’t fit in my Honda Civic.) than I did as a six year old who learned to run away and lock the door first because I was the oldest while my sister got the shit beaten out of her, and I’m doing my best to make my peace with that. I’m just tired of mommy issues ruining my romantic life.

Edit: Sorry for a lot of the last two "paragraphs" but I'll freely admit to using typing on the internet as a sort of free therapy, as the physical act of typing it out helps in some way.

What's your main concern about marriage?

I can't tell about the rest of Canada, but Quebec's cuisine is mostly a mix of french, british/irish and italian, with some new world innovations added to it (some unique to us, others we share with the rest of north eastern america).

France

Macron dissolved the national assembly and called a snap election after being clobbered by the National Front Rally in the EU parliament, which I didn't know until now was a thing he could do. Considering what's happening across the channel as well this is definitely shaping up to be a year of major political shakeups across Europe.

Gaza

Israel managed to rescue four hostages from Hamas. Thankfully they didn't shoot them by accident this time.

Iran

A list of candidates to replace the late President Raisi has been approved by Iranian religious authorities. None of them are familiar to me, but the claim is that they are sticking to religious conservatives as one might expect.

Burkina Faso

Russia's foreign minister Lavrov took a trip to Africa recently, pledging military support for anti-insurgency operations in several nations as part of the Wager Group's Russian Africa Corps' growing presence across the continent that is securing vital mineral and political (i.e. UN votes) resources and displacing western nations (France in particular) that used to fill this role.

I actually draw a distinction there. I have a greater level of sympathy and understanding towards actual black communities that are wary of trusting the police, since they've actually experienced historic oppression by them. For the whole Ferguson situation, my impression was that the shooting of Michael Brown was technically justified, but it might have been the only correct thing the cops had done there in a long time. Michael Brown's actions were technically wrong, but more understandable, and did succeed in shining a light onto lots of actual misconduct. I admit I don't have any great ideas on how to create law and order in black communities when the relationship with the police is already so poisoned in so many of them.

However, my impression is that I don't see a lot of those people or communities in the BLM movement. That, as far as I can tell, is mostly a wealthy white people movement. Whatever actual black people took part in it are mostly upper-class and already pretty disconnected from actual oppression, even if there may have been some history of it.

I believe that our society has a more general problem of militarization of the police and over-policing of many things that applies to all people. I think that the recent racial focus is misguided and serves to obscure the real problem by insisting on a false narrative and thereby causing people to take the opposite position of excessively defending the police when they see the lies.

Why are yours so different? A quick search for Black mortality causes clearly shows homicide

I have the same search results as you. They surprise me a little (insofar as Google hasn't algorithmically downranked the #1 result) but they don't change my picture of what the conversation looks like. If you hear of the fact that the rate of death by homicide rate for blacks started to climb sharply in 2015, and climbed by 50% by 2020 with most of the increase coming before COVID, you probably heard that from a conservative outlet. I have never heard it from a progressive outlet and I don't expect to. If your mileage varies on that I would like to know.