domain:moultano.wordpress.com
Lizzardspawn
2d ago
"Zendaya has good genes."
She hasn't. There is a rigorous scientific test for a good genes in a woman - is she hotter than a young cashier from the same race. I am afraid Zendaya fails it. But the black UFC ring girls pass it. I think that I have noted here that the beautiful black women are just hidden in the media.
Throwaway05
2d ago
At this point, I'm beginning to wonder if the medical definition of 'sanity' even exists anymore,
Well keep in mind that various lesser versions of psychiatric illness (depression, anxiety, cluster-b coping mechanisms) are expected in the community and healthy as long as they are not excessive.
On top of that you have various cultural problems like the whole anxiety thing, The Last Psychiatrist's idea of generational narcissism and so on.
One of the big things that happens now is that certain mental illness adjacent or maladaptive problems are supported by society (like anxiety and cluster-b behavioral patterns). The underlying sanity is there but the maturation and cultural PUSH isn't.
In any case the old school psychotherapists thought fucking the girl would clear out the BPD if you stuck with it soooooooo.
Also keep in mind "neurosis" and how it has been evicted from the DSM but is still behaviorally present. That is 90% of "bitches be crazy" alone.
Mantergeistmann
2d ago
Everyone knows (I say jokingly) that it's actually that JK Rowling expressed a bit of subtlety and restraint by not outright referring to them as gnomes instead.
I have seen people claim it's because the illustrations (which she approved) look like stereotypes of anti-Jewish propaganda (due largely to the noses), but I haven't done the comparisons myself.
Walterodim
Only equals speak the truth, that’s my thought on’t
2d ago
- Football and other spectator sports
- Running/lifting/biking and other participatory sports
- Beer/whiskey/cigars
- Grilling/meats/cooking
- Travel
Perhaps I am simply a normie.
ZanarkandAbesFan
2d ago
See also the rather contrived accusations of Sino- and Hiberno-phobia.
Hiberno-phobia? I can only remember one Irish character, and I don't remember them being portrayed particularly badly (apart from being bad at quidditch).
07mk
2d ago
Because we don't argue to change minds or win here we argue to understand. It's right there at the top of the page.
Understanding something that you didn't understand before means changing one's mind, though...
The rest of your comment is mostly just a just-so fictional narrative in hindsight you made up that appears to me as a rationalization for your committed belief. It's trivially easy to come up with any number of counterfactuals about how Blue Tribe's attitudes towards race would've developed with equal plausibility (and more generally, about how anything would've happened, with equal plausibility as what actually did happen), because of the nature of counterfactuals. E.g. one could respond to white guilt by just rejecting it as a concept and prioritizing individuality. Much of the Blue Tribe was on board with that in the 90s, of treating individuals as individuals who aren't tarnished with the guilt of their ancestors or people who happened to share their skin color in the case of recent immigrants. That this narrative being crushed in the Blue Tribe was destined is not proven or even supported by the fact that you can put together a narrative explaining the chain of logic.
In reality, what we do see is pretty well evidenced chain of causality of these ideas built and developed by academia spreading to society at large, often word-for-word, done with overt intent. Maybe the people intentionally doing this are mistaken. Almost certainly, they're mistaken about some of the impact they believe they have on society at large, like everyone. But to claim that they're completely mistaken and that they have zero influence in pulling Blue Tribe towards those ideas that were developed and crystalized in academia (largely based on feelings already within that Tribe), well, your arguments for such a claim seem mostly like motivated reasoning.
ZanarkandAbesFan
2d ago
Noice.
OracleOutlook
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
2d ago
One of them is a sort of deontological one, under which to be a meritocrat is to hold that it is morally right that boons go to the most meritorious
This is interesting! I do think I disagree with the deontological case for boons going to the most "meritorious." It's usually sheer luck and good external factors (genetics, environment) that puts people on the top. It's not always the "most diligent" person who gets the best compensation. And if we did sort society based on something that is within people's control, (like "works hardest") instead of things outside people's control (like "is smartest") then it would overall be a worse society.
People didn't actually do anything worthy of merit to be the smartest, best looking, most talented, etc. At best they worked hard to improve on something that was already there, but that doesn't mean they worked harder than someone who is disabled and works twice as hard to do half as much.
But if you want to incentivize the best to do their best, you need to give them the best rewards. And it is one of the jobs of society to incentivize the best to do their best, partly because a rising tide lifts all boats. In this regard I follow the utilitarian model it seems.
5434a
2d ago
Just look at the terminology. Cisheteronormativity. Anticarceralism. Cultural appropriation. Decolonisation. These are not words that Tumblr users, teens or their families create. Teens create words like "yeet" and Tumblr creates words like "otherkin".
I don't think high school teachers were sitting kids down and giving them college level sociology lectures directly. I think outside of school hours terminally online grad students were flexing their wordcel power level on Tumblr among impressionable teen girls, from whom it spread via a few more steps to clickbait columnists and their incestuous codependence with pre-Elon Twitter.
By the time the teens who were on Tumblr got to college they were fully marinated in progressive sociology shibboleths, only without any of the independent thought and critical analysis that university is supposed to encourage.
Academia was always the source, kids were just an influential and early stage vector with low intellectual immunity, especially for the kind of memes that can impart righteous social power to teenage girls (although the claims to righteousness were largely a mask and a multiplier for the underlying social power, without which the memeset would have languished in the obscurity of academia and the post grad blogosphere).
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2d ago
I tip my Amish hat to you, but no, I am nowhere near as disciplined as you are.
ChickenOverlord
2d ago
This doesn't belong in the Culture War thread, at least not with a lot more added to an and some attempt to make it relevant to the culture war
ZanarkandAbesFan
2d ago
The nuts are their staffers and their boots on the ground and so it seems keeping them happy is more important than being able to say, "sometimes its just a cute girl making a pun".
My guess, for whatever it's worth, is that it's not just a pun. I don't think for a second that AE is trying to usher in a new age of white supremacy but I feel they were being deliberately provocative because they figured this blowing up would be good for them. They're probably right - I wouldn't be surprised if a fair few people who previously wouldn't have thought twice about the ad now decide to buy there just to annoy the scolds.
FtSoA
3d ago
Right off the bat, let's see if you can admit a clear factual error or two. I really should have done this before writing the rest, but ah well.
Do you acknowledge that Iran's ballistic missile production facilities and launchers are not all underground? This is a very easy one.
Do you acknowledge that the volume of Iran's launches against Israel dropped off considerably? Here's a clue: https://jinsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Iranian-Ballistic-Missile-Estimates-6-26-2025-6.pdf
Frankly it's remarkable to see someone try to flip the script on one of the most one-sided wars in history, but then I suppose the Egyptians tried to pretend they had won the Yom Kippur War.
Also, both Israeli casualty reports and Qassam combat footage overwhelmingly shows the use of indigenous IEDs and other weapons that could only be manufactured locally. It would be silly for a cell based organization like Hamas to depend on imports.
Never did I say the majority of their stock was Iranian. But Iran has been a major supporter for decades.
The IDF very clearly tried to take Al-Khiam for a photo-op at the former detention center and failed.
That's not particularly relevant in evaluating the overall status at the end of the conflict, where Israel overwhelmingly kicked Hezbollah in the nuts by killing its leader, a bunch of its personnel, maimed a shit ton more of them, and also significantly reduced their missile stockpile, all while taking relatively light casualties and rendering the missile threat mostly ineffective.
Tellingly, they didn't do much to help out their pals in Tehran. Weird way to behave if actually they weren't hurting so badly. Kinda defeats the point of having an alliance.
If Iran were legitimately totally defenseless then why would Israel care about what Trump thinks?
Why would Israel care about what it's single most important ally thinks about a conflict it has been assisting with? Seriously? The stuff in Syria is small potatoes.
On the flipside, they had drones that were shot down so it's just as easy to imagine that Netanyahu simply didn't bother taking the risk. In this case the burden of proof that Israel was dropping bombs in Iranian airspace is on you, since basically all of the identified strikes look like the result of air launched missiles, not bombs.
The most retarded bit of logic here is that if we, for the sake of argument, grant that you're correct about only IAF drones poking around Iranian airspace then, wow, the IAF is really capable of doing a lot of damage to buildings using air-launched missiles at scale. Also, hitting the Mashhad airport at 1400 miles strongly implies operating within Iranian airspace even with ALBMs.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/israels-air-superiority-lets-strike-191600442.html
So all those photos of IAF aircraft loaded with bombs were just for propaganda purposes? Why? Who are they trying to convince? The U.S. and Iranian militaries know the reality regardless.
There's no good reason to believe the IAF is lying here, but you need it to fit your highly evidence-challenged view that actually Iran was the one winning this conflict. The real irony here is that the Iranians don't contest that the IAF was operating in Iranian airspace, they just pretended to shoot an F-35 or two down. You're doing more work than even the Iranian propagandists!
On the flipside, they had drones that were shot down so it's just as easy to imagine that Netanyahu simply didn't bother taking the risk. In this case the burden of proof that Israel was dropping bombs in Iranian airspace is on you, since basically all of the identified strikes look like the result of air launched missiles, not bombs.
Why send drones on obvious suicide missions if air defenses are not suppressed much at all?
The IAF demolished large buildings and took out at least one command bunker, we know. Hard and expensive to do that with merely missiles.
How many missiles do ya reckon this took? Would the IAF really use its fancy LORAs on a TV broadcaster?
Elbit Systems' share price rose by 5.43% in New York on Friday, and is currently up 5.94% on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange.
https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-israeli-us-weapons-prove-themselves-in-iran-strikes-1001512893
There's plenty of evidence Israel dropped bombs in Iran, just none you find compelling enough that you have to accept it. You resist the obvious because your narrative collapses if actually the IAF did have air dominance and you can pretend they were going to run out of ALBMs before Iran ran out of its ballistic missiles.
Every indication is that he had no problem with Israel one sidedly bombing Iran forever, it was only when Iran started landing counterpunches that he became interested in deescalation.
Trump's change in preference came right after the U.S. strikes on the nuclear facilities, obviously. The volume of Iranian missile strikes was going down and Israel was not taking meaningful damage relative to Iran.
On the first day Israel went for a decapitation strike followed by regime change
Israel did not expect to get regime change that easily. Come on now. As far as we know, the Supreme Leader was not targeted (whether by impossibility or choice I'm not sure).
they reorganized and proceeded to return fire in sufficient volume to break Israeli AD nearly every day. They hit strategic sites at will
No, they very much did not. All those missiles, so few strategic sites hit. Blowing up grandmas doesn't win wars, even when they were able to do that.
on day 12 they were reduced to hitting a giant clock in Tehran
This is backwards logic. The IAF could afford to start hitting secondary targets on day 12 because they had been so successful the previous 11 days. It's not like they suddenly couldn't hit Tehran, as you've pointed out.
Had the war continued it would have continued to get worse and worse for Israel. Fortunately Israel was able to leverage the threat of direct American offensive involvement beyond choreographed bombings that result in zero injuries, otherwise the Iranians would have had little reason to agree to a deal.
There was no "deal" here. It was just an unofficial ceasefire. If Iran was on the verge of really turning the tide against their main enemy who did a surprise attack and killed a bunch of its top leaders and destroyed a bunch of their military and nuclear sites, why would they have stopped instead of getting even? They knew the U.S. really did not want to get drawn in beyond the attack on the nuclear sites. Why would Iran let Israel get away with it?
PokerPirate
3d ago
Luddites unite! Anyone else here not own a cellphone?
I don't even own a dumb-phone. If someone wants to talk to me IRL, I insist there be no electrons involved. It goes without saying I'm not very popular :(
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
3d ago
I'm old enough to remember the Brooke Shields campaign, but I don't actually remember it. I suspect most of the people reacting aren't old enough or didn't remember it either. This suggests that the idea for the current ad originated from some old Boomer (or maybe Xer) admen, rather than a change of heart in the current generation.
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
3d ago
It should be noted that the Dissident Right also identifies it as white supremacist, eugenicist, and as a fascist advertisement.
The DR is always looking to conscript allies. It rarely works.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
3d ago
People claim that goblins in Harry Potter are an anti-Semitic caricature. Personally, I believe that if one looks at a fantasy race of bankers and their first thought is "they're Jews", that says more about them than it does about the author.
WhiningCoil
Ghost of Quokka's Future
3d ago
I'm not that cynical about BPD.
Yes. I agree. That is your problem. You should be.
SSCReader
3d ago
From what I can tell, you appear to have a near dogmatic belief in this. As long as you believe that arguments can't change someone's mind, I don't see why you would want to argue anything ever, such as in this comment thread.
Because we don't argue to change minds or win here we argue to understand. It's right there at the top of the page.
"Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds." "In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here."
And I would say that the realization is probably my fundamental takeaway from being part of the political culture war for near decades. Much of what is believed about how people operate and how politics and the culture war operate is untrue. The influence of academia and the media is vastly over-stated and the influence of the society and family is vastly under-stated. That people rationalize almost all their beliefs based upon their pre-existing feelings and that this leads to the fact that people very rarely can be argued out of or into a belief set. That our societies are much more bottom up than top down, and that people complaining about politicians, academia and the like are mistaken, because as long as we are as we are, we will get the academia and politicians we deserve. Trying to get better politicians or better academics is a fools errand, because what you really need is better people in general. That much of our academics (social sciences at least) is generated from the spontaneous transmission of belief sets at the bottom up level that then gets rationalized through academic thought.
So again yes I would suggest that those ideas would in fact have spread absent academia, because race particularly is a fundamental issue within America. The tension between slavery and America's founding mythos inevitably led to the Civil War, the abolishment of slavery, white guilt, which leads to white privilege which leads to affirmative action and so on and so forth. None of that needs academia in anyway. Jefferson was able to predict it was going to be America's albatross. The idea that previous oppression leads to guilt, leads to the simple concept that interactions today can be influenced by history does not need academia. I do indeed submit that even without academia, very little would have changed as to wokism and the like.
People look at the history of slavery in the US, look at their founding mythos, look at the Civil War, look at Jim Crow and segregation and feel bad and sad that their nation, the shining city on the hill did such things. So guilt. Guilt creates an impulse to make things right, to do better, so that you can feel better. You can't undo the past so you must impact the present. So that means black people now must get something. If you're cynical that clashes with peoples own selfishness, so instead of giving up large amounts of status and money they think about it every time they interact with a black person and so on and so forth and it makes you feel more guilty. You notice that your retail workers are almost exclusively black. That your neighbors are almost exclusively white. You notice. You absolutely do not need a high status institution for this. It's noticed because it is true. Previous actions have in fact shaped the present. It doesn't require high brow thinking to realise.
Now to be sure this isn't everyone in America clearly. But it is a throughline through Blue Tribe thought, academia or no. You're correct that not everyone would develop this spontaneously. They wouldn't need to, because their neighbor would, or their parents. Social mores were transmitted and taught and punished well before we had academia. There is no reason to think it is necessary at all.
I don't think I am going to change many people's minds, if any at all. But I enjoy the back and forth and sometimes I do learn new things from new people. If people think I am wrong that is more than ok.
hydroacetylene
3d ago
Exactly. Respect for elders and experience is a red tribe value.
hydroacetylene
3d ago
This also explains why remote workers moving out to rural areas doesn't help - the people who rise to the top in that world are still doing so based on Yankee ingenuity, and so Blue will be higher status than Red. The sales of North Face jackets and demographics of National Park guests make clear that the Blues aren't actually anti-rural or anti-outdoor.
On the other hand, everything about rural physicians.
self_made_human
Grippy socks, grippy box
3d ago
Thank you! Just got done with the attractions in Greenwich yesterday. I haven't been to Richmond yet, so I'll add it to the list.
I'm not that cynical about BPD. As cases go, hers is far from the worst I've seen or heard of. At just about the exact same time, my best friend was having his ex throw dishes at him and breaking his MacBook in fits of rage, all while doing regular self-harm.
Neither of us were telling the other quite how bad it was, because we knew, as best friends, that we'd be obliged to intervene.
She didn't attack me with a knife, didn't steal from me, didn't cheat on me or anything remotely as bad. If she didn't provoke the fucking stupid and seemingly interminable arguments, that alone would be enough for me to accept her other failings. I'm hardly perfect myself.
I ran into some characters shortly after the breakup. I talked two people out of suicide, which really makes me wonder if they found dating apps after autocorrect switched away from doctor.
Hell, here's a rather detailed breakdown.
I meet crazy chicks inside the hospital, and crazy women outside. At this point, I'm beginning to wonder if the medical definition of 'sanity' even exists anymore, or if the entire space of possible psyches has been claimed. I tell myself I've had really bad luck, and that I'm not Captain Save-A-Hoe.
(The ones who seem sane are all taken.)
VoxelVexillologist
Multidimensional Radical Centrist
3d ago
Honestly I've never been a fan of ones too large to look believable --- there's a reasonable range that adjusts with frame size.
Séamus Finnegan. I recently heard someone arguing in earnest that his name is a "reverse spoonerism" for Sinn Féin (I'm sorry, what?), and the running gag in the first book/movie of him accidentally causing small explosions is meant to make the reader think of the IRA.
I'm an Irish man who grew up when the Harry Potter books were all the rage. My friends and family literally queued up to buy them on publication day and devoured them over the course of a weekend. I don't recall ever hearing an Irish person contemporaneously suggesting that Séamus was a negative stereotype.
More options
Context Copy link