domain:parrhesia.co
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
2d ago
· Edited 1d ago
Male sexuality is a lot simpler than female sexuality. Jeff could have destroyed his marriage for a nubile twenty-something with naturally big assets, but he went for tawdry 'sexy' with the trout pout and plastic boobs
I have to be careful to distinguish here between how much of my experience is idiosyncratic and how much of it can generalize, because I find the Sanchez woman to be rather repulsive, but evidently there are many men who do not.
If you listen to TRP/manosphere content, you'll frequently hear them say "men have the biggest variety of preferences, men can fall in love with anything, but women only want one thing (and that thing is Chad)". This is one of their favorite talking points, they repeat it quite often. And women often react with incredulity when they hear this, and they claim that reality is in fact the exact opposite. "What? All men just want a 'hot' woman. But my hubby, he's got a bit of a potbelly and he isn't the tallest, but he's got a great smile and a heart of gold, so I love him all the same. Obviously women's preferences are more varied and less superficial."
I think the key to resolving the dilemma is that, although the secondary and tertiary traits can vary greatly, there are certain key traits that, if absent in a man, will make it very hard for a woman to be romantically attracted to him. As far as my observations can confirm anyway. Although, pinning down exactly what these traits are is a bit difficult. It's not stability per se, nor is it social dominance per se, nor is it social adeptness per se, but rather it's more like an abstract distilled commonality that forms a part of all these traits. We might call it "agency", or projecting a sense of "in-control-ness", if not over his external environment then at least over himself. If a man can't demonstrate at least a minimal amount of "put-together-ness", then he's not going to have much luck with women.
What the TRP guys are correctly intuiting is that men have no such minimal criteria. In spite of the fact that there are clear patterns, at the end of the day they really can go for absolutely anything. There's an active 4chan thread right now where guys are swapping stories about how much they love NEET girls. As in, "whoa, you're telling me she hasn't had a job since college, AND she never leaves her room, AND she has severe social anxiety? Now that's what I'm talkin' about, I want that". You'll have to take my word for it that they really are fetishizing the status of NEET-ness itself. And they can do this with anything, rich or poor women, fat or skinny, smart or dumb, socially successful or an anxious wreck, it don't matter. Could you imagine any woman saying "you know I really just want an unemployed loser, that's what really gets me going"? If there are any such women, they're a rare breed indeed.
hydroacetylene
2d ago
It tells us that accusations of antisemitism aren't enough to decide dem primaries. It doesn't tell us that racism isn't still a potent political accusation.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2d ago
The second half of the 20th century. Expansion of the welfare state and government programs are attacked as socialist.
Both sides are to blame here. Socialists were, and still are, marketing their economic system as "let's do what Denmark did".
Lizzardspawn
2d ago
In a free market the better product wins. In the last couple of decades the better marketed product wins. Which is not optimal for customers
when did our definition of socialism become so drowned-down?
The second half of the 20th century. Expansion of the welfare state and government programs are attacked as socialist. The meaning gets diluted through the 90's after the Cold War. In the 2000s-2010s the meaning continues to change rapidly as progressives claim much of socialism for themselves.
Is FoxNews blocking the term DemSoc from taking off in the US?
I doubt it. Mamdani has not, as far as I know, gone to any great lengths to explain what a democratic socialist is or why he is not a socialist. Did Bernie even bother with this in his 2016 bid? That kind of distinction does nothing for Mamdani's campaign. The public does not have that demand for accuracy or nuance if it actually matters or is real. Plus, I suspect the well off progressive base of NYC quite likes voting for a socialist more than they do not-really-a-socialist. A diffuse contempt for capitalism is a popular meme that can be harnessed. No reason to put a damper on that for the sake of centuries old ideological accuracy.
I think if you're going to demand consistency here, then you should do so consistently. Are these capitalist policies he is proposing?
hydroacetylene
2d ago
This might be another Anna-Nicole Smith case, in the end.
hydroacetylene
2d ago
Have we considered that he's in love? IDK, seems like the most plausible reason to me.
In general men on the internet have this level of paranoia about marriage that needs to be pushed back on as much as the 'OMG all men are rapists and abusers' tiktok feminism demoralizing women.
aldomilyar
2d ago
Yeah. If the results were marked objectively it'd be one thing, but combination of the media and some thinktanks declaring a resounding success on the topic will just perpetuate more silliness.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
2d ago
Brandon Johnson in Chicago
I've been meaning to read up on him. Sounds like he's a total fucking disaster.
My general vibe is Chicago has been on a pretty good hot streak of terrible mayors.
Jazzhands
2d ago
To be clear, you think it is unfair to apply the label "socialist" to a guy who spoke at the Democratic Socialists of America about the "end goal of seizing the means of production"?
HereAndGone
2d ago
Oh, this is the new Gilded Age. New money and self-made men, and breaking into the upper classes (elite or not, hard to tell) by sheer shedloads of wonga. It's very funny - if these weren't the guys also steering the direction of the global economy and society which affects all the rest of us, and they've got the tastes and inclinations of when they were seventeen and that hot girl in high school didn't even look twice at them. Now Jeff is living the dream of having that hot girl finally on his arm and in his bed.
Forty years too late, maybe, but he went through a transformation in his early fifties so he can afford to buy more than a sports car to fit his new buff image, and the hottie girlfriend and megayacht is all part of that.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
2d ago
He's at least said for the grocery stores that if they don't work they don't work, and he'll walk away
They won't work, so we'll see if he actually walks away
voters-eliot-azure
patently unbiased
2d ago
Close enough to socialism.
I guess this is the issue lol. Point-by-point, why none of this is particularly radical in most societies that people don't consider "socialist":
rent freeze
Rent freezes are controversial cart-before-the-horse band-aid solution to a problem that may or may not be caused NIMBYism. The proposed rent freeze is for rent-stabilized tenants, a specific class of asset. So hopefully you weren't trying to paint this as a city-wide rent freeze, which would never pass anyway. But also not specifically socialist, at all. Very much no means of production being seized.
state built housing
Hardly uniquely socialist. They used to be called "projects". Also controversial because it tends to have extremely high per-unit costs vs. market rent ROI, but that may or may not be attributable to not being able to just build housing, and more to needing to be state-of-the-art energy efficient, fully ADA compliant, up-to-code, etc. etc.
Better than "company towns" imo.
free public transport
Another exaggeration. The free part is for buses only. As someone who's taken a lot of public transit in many different cities, buses are frequently used by more blue collar / "barista" type workers, whereas light rail is more often used by professionals. It's a pragmatically progressive (in the sense of: tax those who can afford it) solution to the problem of rising fare prices, imo.
Also: no one bats an eye about free public roads. Damage to roads is quadratic to the weight of the load: we all subsidize the trailer truck shipping industry with our gas prices and taxes that build our roads. This lowers prices at every checkout, at the cost of an anemic rail system.
state owned grocery stores
Obviously an experimental / pilot project. Curious to see if there's a nice food distribution middle ground between "soup kitchen" and "Whole Foods" that a city government can occupy. An ideal implementation of this looks more like a 7-days-a-week farmer's market to me than a crumbling Aldi with yellowed fluorescent lights and grimey 90s tiles.
free childcare
Are grade school, middle school, and high school not "free childcare"?
The most ambitious and least achievable point in his agenda. To someone completely removed from the situation, I think expanding pre-K and early childhood programs is the more pragmatic way to go about effecting change - but that doesn't pop on a web page meant to excite people about an election campaign.
all of this paid by wishful thinking and unicorn dust.
Along with everything else the government has spent money on. At least these things are attempting to have a positive impact on working class families as opposed to ammunition for a genocide on the other side of the world.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
2d ago
"socialism" = "liberal policies I dislike, the more I dislike them, the more socialist they are"
"Far right" = "conservative groups I dislike, the more I dislike them, the more far right they are"
"Neoliberalism" = "things about capitalism I dislike, the more I dislike them, the more neoliberal they are"
Western political discourse is stupid and getting stupider, because we are becoming stupider
HaroldWilson
2d ago
commonly used modern definition of feminism that directly involves policing other women's choices regarding their own appearances
I mean you've put in a bit of an autistic way but the idea that women shouldn't indulge the male gaze is a very common feminist one across time. This is the whole idea that lies behind critiques of 'lipstick feminism'. It's by no means a consensus view, in fact there has been a lot of debate on whether fashion/beauty is liberatory and agentic, or infantilising, but either way it's definitely not an uncommon feminist position.
Jazzhands
2d ago
He was a speaker at the DSA, which stands for "Democratic Socialists of America."
Clip here: https://x.com/Osint613/status/1939657700553486380 Actual Quotes:
- "The purpose is about this entire project, it’s not simply to raise class consciousness, but to win socialism"
- "We have to continue to elect more socialists, and we have to ensure that we are unapologetic about our socialism"
- "There are also other issues that we firmly believe in, whether it’s BDS or whether it’s the end goal of seizing the means of production"
Full long video at https://youtube.com/live/9K7HDuoJ0MQ
HereAndGone
2d ago
compared to basically any non-obese 18 year old she looks awful
She's not bad for her age, but it's clear there's been a lot of work done and a lot of effort into looking like that, rather than going with her age and whatever natural assets she had. I'm not saying MacKenzie Bezos is a stunning beauty, but by comparison Sanchez really does look like "mid-life crisis girlfriend" (red carpet glamour shot MacKenzie here, Lauren here - that's the most restrained version I could find, there are more hotcha ones here and here at the White House).
That's the point of Tina Brown's barb: is Lauren Sanchez Bezos smart, funny, talented and great company? Well we don't know, but we do know she decided the road to a man's heart is load up on the lip filler, silicone, and a stint or two under the knife to freshen up the face, and that this works. Who needs brains when you have zeppelin boobs?
This may be very unfair to Sanchez herself, but she has also made the decision to go this road (very likely because she started out in the entertainment industry and that doesn't care if you're smart, it cares if you look pretty and don't show your age), so commentary based purely on her looks is the natural result of that.
And yes: men don't care if you're smart and fun (though that's nice), they care if you have the requisite sexy figure. Sorry guys if that treats you all as very shallow, but I do think male sexual and female sexual attraction work somewhat differently.
I'm trying my hand at public writing. Evaluating the potential actions of a unique geopolitical actor like Iran is an interesting challenge, and there are a lot of strange ideas about it out there. Read the whole thing for an attempt to apply rational actor theory to Iranian leaders.
https://ftsoa.substack.com/p/assessing-the-troubled-future-of
Selected excerpts:
This is I think an unprecedented occurrence in history—enforcing a neutralization of an adversary’s key military programs from the air after an unnegotiated ceasefire. Iran invested an immense amount into its “mostly peaceful” nuclear program, its missile industry and forces, and its proxies as part of its strategy for regional domination and ideological opposition to the U.S. and Israel. For Iran to accept this neutering would effectively be an unnegotiated surrender of several of the Islamic regime’s key objectives, and acceptance of domination by its bitterest adversary. It would be untenable to admit that publicly. It seems hardly tenable to concede it implicitly.
There are perhaps three broad courses of action for the Islamic regime:
Open Defiance: As soon as possible, directly confront the U.S. and Israel by restarting military/nuclear programs and aggression.
Tacit Acceptance: Maintain defiant rhetoric, but do nothing to actually aggravate Israel or the U.S. indefinitely and focus on maintaining domestic control.
Covert Defiance: Maintain defiant rhetoric and domestic control, and “secretly” hit back at the U.S. and Israel via “undetectable” means like cyber warfare and terrorism, and attempt to “covertly” rebuild military/nuclear capabilities in a way that will actually work next time, like managing to rapidly build a nuclear warhead or figuring out how to actually shoot down an F-35.
Anyone remotely sane would recognize (1) is suicide by IAF. The problem with (2) is that eventually it’s going to be obvious to at least the hardline military and security class—the regime’s key believers and protectors—that Iran has in fact implicitly surrendered. And (3) means hoping that Iran can, unlike every other time, “get away with it” and actually put up a real fight down the road. Additionally, Iran’s economy and the regime’s popularity were already on thin ice before all this. Not great! Historically, (3) is the obvious choice for Iran as it’s something of a compromise between the hardline and the pragmatist camps. But in what manner and on what timeline and with what level of risk acceptance? The ongoing work to uncover Fordo is evidence for (3) being the chosen course of action. How long will the IAF permit that activity?
Given the above considerations, here’s where my gut is on the blurry probability of broad outcomes:
Possible, but unlikely:
Neutered Islamic regime at least tacitly accepts defeat and survives indefinitely as a shadow of its former self.
Quite possible, even likely:
Defiant Iran and Israel go back to war in coming weeks/months; economic and/or regime collapse.
Very likely:
Israel mows the grass; a mostly neutered Islamic regime survives indefinitely.
Very likely:
Israel mows the grass; economic and/or regime collapse within a few years.
I think it’s almost certain that Israel will have cause to mow the Iranian grass because I have a hard time imagining the Iranian regime, or at least some rogue hardline element, will not try to cross Israel’s red lines (and be caught doing so). I also struggle to imagine that pragmatist and reformist camps will transition the regime into something more tolerable without hardliners reasserting control. I have much less certainty about the chances of economic and/or regime collapse, but it’s certainly a very real possibility. Probably more likely than not in the coming year or two.
The obvious cop out is that any number of curve balls could enter the scene such that I am shown to have been insufficiently imaginative or wise. In my defense, President Trump did a 180 from “total surrender” and “regime change” to “ceasefire now” in like 72 hours. The Israelis and Iranians, however, are more consistent in their underlying goals and behaviors. The Israelis have been openly advocating for regime change, in recognition that’s probably the only real solution to Iran as an enduring threat. The Iranians remain at least rhetorically defiant. Something has to give.
self_made_human
C'est la vie
2d ago
Thank you!
I think the study does a reasonable job at providing ongoing therapeutic support, but I, idiosyncratically, have never found that therapy worked well for me. I did the bare minimum to keep them content, and didn't notice much of a change. The doses caused immediate and lasting changes in mood, before any followup therapy.
I’m interested in how the results between 10 mg and 25 mg will vary in the trial. I suspect that the higher dose benefits would be more noticeable and would last longer.
Hopefully, once the results are out, we'll have a proper understanding of the dose response curve at play here.
self_made_human
C'est la vie
2d ago
Its getting "scientific" now that the taboo has weakened, but... no shit it looks promising, youre literally trying drugs for mood. If the researcher cant make that look promising, how on earth did he get a PhD?
Is this a serious critique? Like, do you think that psychiatry of all professions isn't aware of the difference between "feeling happy" and "not being depressed"??
The scientists and doctors performing the studies are well aware that many drugs cause temporary and transient elevations in mood. Far fewer cause lasting improvements.
Prescribing cocaine and heroin is, unfortunately, not a viable cure for depression. Just making someone feel euphoria shortly after taking a drug isn't a "cure" or even a treatment.
I thought the part about pharmacokinetics was double as well, only realised now that one is about the nausea and one the whole thing.
I don't blame you, because the psychopharmacology is a lot of receptor names and binding sites that sound almost the same and vary in the last few letters or numbers.
Lizzardspawn
2d ago
Not quite. The first part - selfishness is usually nudged to be somewhat aligned with the society's interests by the free market. Before Madison avenue takeover of the american economy companies were actually competing with producing better and cheaper items. We had similar boom with electronics in the 80s and 90s, game industry in 2000s. We have such with chinese phones and cars. All those people may have been passionate about their products, but they were passionate about money too.
The second part - yes there is also tragedy of the commons, but just by the nature of the system - the commons are smaller. So there is less tragedy to be had.
voters-eliot-azure
patently unbiased
2d ago
My theory: VHNWI are so disconnected from reality that they seek out proletariat experiences in order to feel human.
But the funny thing is they seem to fail so hard at it that it probably makes their valley feel even more uncanny: Bezos wedding, Musk trying comedy with Dave Chapelle, Musk trying to get into Berghain, etc.
Oh well, it's probably just cope for being a wage slave. At least I don't have to try to manufacture experiences for myself to feel human.
AnonymousActuary
2d ago
Nope just remembered I had saved it one reddit
Listening to Nickel Boys on audiobook and am reading The Fixer.
More options
Context Copy link