domain:amphobian.info
The necessity is in developing better pathways for young men to enter adulthood and develop a sense of self paired with durable external meaning. Some sort of religious or, at least, high-minded civic metaphysics is a necessary part of this
Historically, a decent number of those pathways ended up with the young man dead at the bottom of the ocean or under the hangman's axe or in a monastery somewhere.
Young men can't be given a pathway to manhood with no uncertainty in it. Some of them have to fail, otherwise success doesn't mean fuck all.
borders in general are basically unethical, but outright saying that is still a bit outside the Overton window of mainstream political discourse
I don't think this is a particularly common view among leftists, but I've definitely heard statements to that effect in far-left media spaces (i.e., from people publishing, not just random comments).
I think it's too early to tell. It's more acceptable now to criticise porn and masturbation, sure. But there are still many communities on the Internet where porn consumption is not shamed. Maybe you wouldn't talk about porn in polite society, but that's not a problem if you only socialize in these bubbles, and nobody can force you to talk to other people. Will the broader culture shift to be anti-porn enough for a porn ban to be successful? Hard to say.
“Not being a great dog trainer” is hardly grounds for vituperative opprobrium though, is it? Many people are not great dog trainers.
It's interesting to see how porn has become somewhat of an obsession not only at opposite sides of the political/cultural spectrum, but all across it.
To the extent that this is true, and I think it largely is, it mainly is so in my view because it's interpreted as another male problem in general. Take note that the female consumption of pornographic literature is reaching unprecedented levels at the same time but without inviting any negative reactions from the mainstream media.
Fact of the matter is, policing in Democrat controlled areas is fucked. When they aren't being ambushed and murdered, politicians are throwing them under the bus, or to the wolves, and recruitment has completely collapsed.
TLDR: recruitment in one local Democrat city police department does seem to be suffering from poor candidates but the department itself makes recruitment difficult and is likely to make it harder.
Personal story time. I live in a very blue city in a very blue state. You have seen my city in the news many a time regarding its police.
I am also in about month six of the hiring process for my city's police department. The below is only applicable to my experiences with a single department but from what I've heard it's broadly similar to other comparable departments*.
It's not fair to say that the process is broken necessarily because I think it's heavily constrained by the stakeholders as explained below, but it is awful. As I said, I'm in month six. Month six of how many? Haha haha, there is absolutely no way to know but I'd guess at least three more months before I would start the academy (if selected). This means that with the academy and field training it's around 18-24 months from application to a usable police officer.
This department is also about 10% below its previously approved staffing targets. One would assume that with the current numbers and the known recruitment issues, the department would at least keep standards the same if not be forced to lower them. Haha, haha. The physical standards - already way, way beyond the state's requirements - are changing to remove age/gender norming and adding another upper body event. They fully expect that the change will cause large numbers of candidates - I'd guess around 50% - who are currently well above passing to fail in the new system.
My interaction with the other candidates comes via boot camp style workouts that are technically optional but anyone not attending regularly (1-3 times a week for all those months you're in the process) will not have their application moved forward when it hits a certain point. They're better about communicating this now, previously they just silently let you wait. And wait. In a part where it's normal to wait two+ months before you're contacted to start the processing. There are probably people still expecting a call that is never going to come**.
Some of these are relatively relaxed. Others are extremely militaristic and difficult, much worse than anything I remember from actual boot camp from my prior service. 4-6 mile runs with other exercises sprinkled in are not uncommon.
But they do allow a good opportunity to meet and evaluate the other candidates. Now, I'm not a great one myself so I do not brag when I say that I'm probably in the top 25%. I don't know the quality of the people who applied in the past. I would not rate the average highly now.
So the obvious question: why? Why is it like this? Again, some of this is may be specific to my city but my impression is that it's because it benefits no one to fix it. The ACAB / Defund the Police chatter has quieted down nationally but is still very strong at the local level and they fight to reduce the budget for officers - and even previously budgeted spots that aren't filled represent money that can eventually be clawed back. The existing officers aren't really impacted yet outside of opportunities for additional overtime. Why not push for the highest standards possible? Don't we want the best of the best? The city has limited upside but massive downside possibilities when hiring. The benefits of a supercop are real but diffuse and difficult to measure. The price of a bad cop can be calculated in lawsuits - and this is a very litigant friendly state. Plus the more combustible risks. A couple of cops who set their mind to it could probably bankrupt the city and get part of it burned down in riots. Be as methodical and restrictive as you possibly can because the pain felt by residents through underpolicing is also more diffuse and the public will at least partially blame the cops anyway. Win/win.
My prediction is that things will not change unless there's a sufficiently horrifying event that gets recorded and can be directly blamed on understaffing (unlikely) or enough of a crime wave to elect a city government focused on the issue (possible but ACAB).
- This will likely be remedial for Americans but for the benefit of any non-US barbarians reading: Things vary so much because in the US there is no such entity as The Police. There's a marvelous constellation of departments at all kinds of levels of jurisdiction who are granted police powers by various authorities. We do not have something like the Garda in Ireland or Sweden's Police Authority. There are advantages and disadvantages to that model - data collection would be dramatically easier - but there's no chance that the US will be moving towards it any time soon so they don't really matter.
** Each step is like dealing with the DMV if the DMV was able to tell you to go away and they'll get back to you whenever. One regular at the workouts was rejected near the very end of his process and filed an appeal. In January. The appeal contains all the necessary information because all the relevant investigations have been completed, it's just waiting on yes/no.
If you argue that porn was banned in the USSR or is banned in Iran for example, than my cursory knowledge of the matter will compel me to agree with you, because in these cases state control of the media and the country’s borders was sufficiently thorough that whatever level of cultural presence illegal pornography had was bound to be marginal. If your argument is that it’s banned in South Korea, a late-stage capitalist cyberpunk hellscape where I imagine a large segment of the population is addicted to the internet, a society that is usually said to be overall conservative but where the cultural heritage of ancient Korea has zero significance, I’ll not assume that whatever law it is that is technically on the books regarding this matter will limit porn use to any significant degree.
I should have been more temperate, and I cranked up my, well, crank at the hagiography of the CP5. It's worth being temperate about these things, and I am willing to take the not-at-all extreme position that relatively routine death penalty is justice, but I'm too many posts deep for not enough forethought.
Hanging for thieves is not unknown, but I would consider harsh. If you want to advocate for the death penalty for copying files I'm willing to hear it. I don't think running Napster deserves death, but you might be able to convince me of Silk Road.
Hanging for beating people senseless is closer, especially given the disposition of the victim. If she had died then it would have been murder, even if she was breathing when they left her, and none of them raped her. I think he severity of her injuries given her complete innocence deserves death.
Muggers, yes again, especially if someone ends up dead or in a coma. Not if they are confronted and flee, but more likely if they prey on the women, (actual, prepubescent) children. Carjackers, too, while we're at it. The correct number of these criminals put to death is way higher than zero. It doesn't have to be every single one, but the more violent you are, and the more helpless, innocent, and vulnerable your victims, the more you deserve to die for the same crimes.
Does acting as a prowling gang make each member less culpable, or more? I don't think you can necessarily treat all thirty the same, but it speaks to coordinated action and opportunistic behavior, and neither are cause for leniency.
Does youth remove culpability? You clearly think so, and I'm inclined to agree, but the amount of grace I'm willing to extend does not get to 14, and just like before, the worse your crime the less leniency you deserve on all counts, including age.
For the 8 year old: not hanged but still punished severely. The 5 year old: no legal punishment makes sense but that doesn't mean faultless, blameless, or free from scrutiny. Who is shot matters a lot, as is what happens. That's also part of justice, as there are victims who matter, and everyone has an interest in deterrence of new criminals and prevention of new crime from known criminals.
Redemption should not dominate the discussion of justice to the extent that it has. It is less important than Consequences.
I started with a weak mea culpa but I'm ending with a stronger one. I was wrong on the details and ran my mouth off, then had to go back and justify myself. Had I any sense, I would have cancelled the first reply. I muddled through it, eventually, and I got to a decent thesis of my original reply, but I regret doing it and would take it back if I could.
I've edited, above, too.
Lying to your children isn't definitionally bad! We lie to children all the time.
Today I lied to my kids by telling them I was a pajama robot programmed with the mission of chasing down and pajamaing all the children. When I was a kid we played werewolf/mafia a lot in school.
There are all manner of imagination, pretenses, games, and kayfabes. If you don't teach your children that, you are not giving a key cognitive skill.
I use ChatGPT pretty much all day every day but as a replacement for Googling mostly. It's great at pinging a dozen news sources on a issue and giving me more information than I'd get from reading a single article (and it's usually not wrong).
If I have trivial code to write in an unfamiliar framework it's good for that too.
It's also good for teaching me entry level stuff in a new topic faster than anything else.
It's generally better at telling me what's wrong if I paste an error message than anything I'd get from Googling.
And that's about it. And this is awesome, don't get me wrong.
But everything else it kind of sucks at. And not just ChatGPT, but Claude (including Claude code as well).
If I ask for help in a mature codebase it will almost certainly waste my time. Ask it for more subtle plot details of a popular sci-fi book that you just read and you will see how hard it hallucinates.
I would be quite worried about doing science or medicine with it if I can't rapidly verify its information.
Colorado admitted a priest or a life coach could have the very conversations that it was banning therapists from partaking in; why would the difference in title suddenly change the classification of the act itself?
I think you are placing too much on the classification of the conduct rather than the social framing.
To diverge for a bit, there are plenty of personal trainers where the fundamentals of what they do (determine what is an appropriate exercise/stretch and teach it) is substantially the same as what physical therapists do. Same for diet consultants vs dietician. Or even massage artists as compared to chiros as compared to orthopedic surgeons.
What I think is fairly critical is not about what they do in practice but how it's held out to the public and whether that person gets the assurance the practitioner is notionally vetted and supervised in some fashion (I'm not taking a position on whether this training/vetting/supervision is worth anything).
It's also similar to the way society distinguishes between being a financial advisor vs being Jim Kramer giving advice and opinions on the market. Or Caleb for that matter when it's household finances. No one is going to jail for the conduct of recommending index funds (or 0DTE SPY calls) but you can't publicly portray that as professional financial advice.
So in that lens, restrictions on what the licensed folks can do aren't triggered by conduct, but who gets to publicly represent themselves as a specific kind of professional. When the restrictions are paired to that title but not otherwise applied to individuals doings substantially the same thing, it seems clear to me that the conduct itself isn't really what's targeted.
If people can make radio transmissions without a license from the state medical board and they would face no repercussions for doing that, the state medical board is not regulating radio transmissions.
Cops are liked in blue areas,
This is unnecessarily antagonistic.
Cops, federal or other, dont decide whether your license is fake. They run it through a system, typically known as LEADS. If you pop on the system and are an American citizen without an arrest warrant issued for you, you are in the minority, maybe 0.1% probably less. And in most of those cases it is because you had your identity stolen at one point.
Everything gets checked. Sometimes frustratingly slowly. But the slowness is because of the things that prevent people from being hanged the morning after arrest, not things working in the other direction in 99.99% of cases.
A decade ago everyone was saying more or less the same thing about autonomous vehicles, yet a true AV seems further away now than it did then
Waymos are already doing paid autonomous rides. They're not quite as adaptable as good human drivers but they're way way ahead of the SOTA of 2015.
The Motte world domination 2025.
Potentially, they groped her and left her with a mild concussion, and the rest was Reyes doing. Or they did everything except the rape.
Yeah I had forgotten about that part. The detectives knew she was hit with a big rock in the head as an attempted death blow finisher, so they were probing these 15 yr olds with questions around that, without giving it away. But consistently they all knew nothing about that (even when trying to come up with what the detectives were looking for, they never came close); they only knew about all the other injuries. So that was Reyes with the final attempted murder using the rock.
The ICE are wearing masks because if they dont they rationally think their children will be killed. That is it. If you think ATF agents have sustained prolonged sieges of major ATF buildings you want to compare these to, please do.
it's also a problem which can be solved through the approach of "deport illegals and other foreigners before they take over neighborhoods and fundamentally change it" bringing us back to the subject issue
Again, see Detroit, Birmingham, etc. Basically no immigrants and yet they are the way they are. Keep foreigners out before they change the neighborhood did not work in those cases. Why expect it will in others? Especially why expect that when the most desirable cities to live in are the ones with the most foreigners?
Wow, thanks for the scholarship. Amazing!
To actually fingerprint and process the defendant requires them to get him into the facility or a similar facility (which local municipalities won't let them use), and then he'd have to be taken back to the hospital.
This seems like it could plausibly be the thing I was missing. Although I don’t think they need to take fingerprints to issue a NTA. Could be wrong about that though, not a domain expert here. If that's the case, and if ICE mentioned it in the documents that are not available through PACER but the judge ignored it, then I no longer think ICE was egregiously in the wrong here. Two ifs though.
Anyway, I'm pretty baffled by this case, it'll be interesting to see how it develops.
Invisible fences exist and are common. They also are easy for the dog to understand. They are clearly defined boundaries with geographic markers at all times. You train the dog on them at what we think is mild discomfort levels of pain so they stay in the yard and dont get hit by a dump truck. But also they get to be in the freaking yard! Which toddlers (who are smarter than said dogs) dont get to do unsupervised.
Yes. I would rather be whipped a few times than deprived a $10 million dollar bonus. Hedons ARE fungible. Maybe not perfectly fungible, but if you tell me there is no amount of money that would convince you to take one stroke of the lash then… I just won’t believe you.
More options
Context Copy link