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

Showing 25 of 111560 results for

domain:nfinf.substack.com

Sure but youre not starving and your post nut clarity from constant procrasturbation is just introducing shame to the degeneracy you have devolved into, despite the objective chemical release from the momentary indulgence. As long as you get your satisfaction and dissatisfaction from your own life, you're not a "atheist" who needs to get their rocks off by being emotional vampires in empathetic secular humanist circlejerks.

The irony is that this age of sexual liberation has convinced many women that risky sex is more about getting involved with a needy long term stalker than having a no strings fling with a hot himbo. To be entirely fair I think thats actually a good risk reward proposition, but it also overstates the utility of a romp with a himbo. The emotional satisfaction of notching a himbo is downplayed by the fact he has a billion conquests for his name, and for all the professed sexual skills of whatever seducer exists I don't think anyone has ever matched Hitachi for total female satisfaction, let alone effort efficacy.

I do also think that men need to be more honest with their male friends about their deficiencies that stop them from successfully pairing, but honesty only goes so far. My own male peers are all hitched up, and the ones who aren't are genuinely addled in some form that makes introducing females to them a dead proposition for both parties even if successful. Shit, I just explained why girls introduce their single gals to the himbos instead of the Nice Guy. They can sniff out neediness and incompetence as well.

Has there been an exhaustive deep dive on this board on why the fuck Aella has so much traction in 'rationalist' spaces? Its like nerd porn except it reduces actual sexual activity to shit even Sheldon Cooper would find autistic. That there exists a client base of horny nerds who can afford any dubai portapotty slattern but instead choose to go for a mid tier data analyst who feeds her cock counter into excel spreadsheets and orgasms to the graphs instead of the act.

TPO was modded and there was outrage about his comments "abos like sniffing petrol because they're dumb", this is the same thing. So it's norm here to say racist jokes about Russians

the end result is going to be thongs becoming standard swimwear for women and that the hyper sexualization caused by a race to the bottom of who can get the most attention will be harmful

Not to personally attack you for this line, but every time I see this type of reasoning or worldview hypothesized I always think to my work partner who wore clothes she was 60 pounds and 30 years over to wear. People free to wear whatever they want face social sanction for visual pollution as much as for social defection, and visual pollution is often worse because it has concrete quality of life (and often hygiene) disadvantages. If what trannies wanted to wear was just normal dresses or blouses no one would give a shit, but they insist on wearing garish crap like its a deliberate exercise in hostile signalling.

I also agree about the incentive structures, and it is telling that the incentive structures for progressives brute-force the outcomes to fit the mechanism they create rather than adjusting to realities feedback. Body positivity was shoved down all our throats for 6 years, and while men are irrelevant to the Victorias Secret Fashion Show, women are the net buyers of that stuff and shoving trannies and fatties hardly brought in new customers. Women ultimately have working eyes and brains as well and they can tell that the products being pushed aren't actually going to make them happier. Whether its a function of the socialization matrix forcing bad behaviors onto society (the famous internalized misogyny) is a different issue, but women can tell that trigglypuff wasn't something they themselves wanted to be associated with, much less men.

Honestly though it could be a better society if people were socially incentivized to develop the beach body or an approximation therein. Being unashamed of your bikini bod (man or woman) is great, better if it came as a result of hard work put into achieving some level of healthiness. 8% body fat dehydrated veinpops are bad, but not worse than lard monsters rolling through the sands.

I had a feeling this was going to end up here when I first saw it. Really, this is just ‘gender black pill’ stuff from a vaguely femcel-adjacent perspective, but not structurally different to the male equivalents (Tony Tulathimutte etc). I think it would be a mistake to read into it too deeply. You can always find good reasons not to trust people. It’s no real surprise that someone who resents men in this way would embrace the transactional nature of ‘sex work’; this may be an advertising strategy, but it is probably not insincere.

And are you certain that young men will be turned off by that message?

FWIW, my comment wasn't intended to comment on the actual issue. I just wanted to point out that the DND topic was the least salient point raised by @AlexanderTurok, and that his remark on the othe other points still being relevant on the Motte had merit otherwise. A meta-comment, if you will. I don't know what discourse looks like inside the "Republican Coalition".

Now to comment on the issue itself.

Porn, vidya and DnD are all forms of escapism, and in my view escapism is clearly associated with the "weak men" phase of cyclical history and with the "wireheading ourselves to death" end of linear history. Maybe small doses of escapism can be used for good, but I reckon that most people will be compelled to describe as adequate whichever dose they currently allow for their addiction, going from "playing vidya for an hour a day helps me relax" to "of course I spend all my waking hours playing games, don't you know I'm disabled and thus can't be expected to do anything else, and also playing games is good for you here I cherry-picked a study for you, and also I'm an up-and-coming semi-professional gaming content creator (4 subscribers, one patreon patron who is his mom)". The justifications will scale to the addiction. Porn addicts will blame the feminists or structural androphobia or will just fling themselves off a figurative cliff of self-pity. So at least DnD is a social activity, right? No. If all that a social activity accomplishes is encysting you and a bunch of like-minded degenerates in a bubble of hedonism, then DnD is no better than being a striped-stockinged furry discord moderator on a vidya modding server.

And while we're bashing young (and not so young) men's bad habits, let's not let young (and not so young) women get off unscathed. There are also numerous technologically-enabled anti-social addictions that women dearly love. Infinitely scrolling web content. Social media. Pretending to be an "influencer" but actually just producing content nobody needs. Compulsive online shopping. Eating sweets until they grow so fat they dread leaving the house lest they be rightfully judged. Feeding their neuroticism with ever-new diagnoses and imaginary dangers. While we tell young men to cut the cooming and gaming, man up, make something of yourselves, flourish in actual society! we should also be telling young women to put the phone down, clean up the mess they've made of the house, actually pay undivided attention to the baby for once and stop stuffing their faces with sugary crap. Women can be degenerates entirely without onlyfans pages.

Having this diatribe out on the page, let's get back to your question.

And are you certain that young men will be turned off by that message?

Depends on how far down the rabbit hole they are.

The ones who can't muster the strength to pull themselves far enough out of their hedonism hole to even see the "real" world, the ones who have bought into their own justifications and rationalizations of their degenerate behavior, will probably react defensively to the message that actually, their behavior is bad, will feel "under attack" as you put it. But having those people on your side is bad optics anyways; they're nothing but sad sacks who happen to have a vote. A vote they will certainly use for whichever party promises more gibs for the unproductive - so why bother worrying about what message reaches them?

The more casual hedonists who still interact with society at large, who can hold down a job and can credibly claim that they have their addictions under control, those might be receptive to the message. But what will they do with it? I suppose these are the target audience, and the ones that might appreciate support and empowerment in their daily struggle to balance their addictions and their more pro-social activities.

Young men who do not spend every evening in pursuit of escapism, who aren't at risk, might still appreciate the message as validation.

But really now, for long-term political implications I think that unless you either

  1. go full Taliban, ban all the things and administer beatings to the deviants, or
  2. eliminate gibs so that checking out of society to sacrifice yourself to your addictions will actually kill you

the wireheading-ourselves-to-death future is pretty much unavoidable. As technology improves, its ability to put claws into our brains and promote our worst instincts grows faster than its ability to help us get ourselves under control. The last 100 years of rapid economic growth and unceasing social upheaval have seen too much happen in too short a span of time for societies and cultures to learn how to deal with these new situations in sustainable and productive ways. An enormous amount of wealth that keeps most people afloat regardless of their bad habits, public welfare to sustain even the worst wireheads, and multiple generations of atomization and globalization to ensure that people are increasingly left to their own devices with their horizon limited to their personal pleasure, and technology ever evolving to make addictions go harder and faster...well where can it go?

[American political implicaitons]

lol i dunno

Also, I play too much vidya lately. Yeah I'm tired in the evenings and I have a cold and I just want to switch off and relax so that I'll be sufficiently re-charged for the next day, but if I take a serious look at myself I have to admit that I could just as well cut this relaxation phase in half and just go to bed earlier, get up earlier, and do something useful in the morning instead. Ask me tomorrow whether I actually did that.

I’m not familiar with tarot but I’d like to be. I had a set somewhere - always wanted to learn how to do readings.

Bastiat is cursed to be forever relevant.

I think it really is a question of degree and immediateness. I had some problems with violence around elementary school, like many boys, but over time realised how destructive that was, adapted & looked for new friends, and by the time testosterone really hit in puberty I was already well-adjusted to dealing with it. I haven't had a brawl or anything similar in more than a decade by now, but I also know that I still very much enjoy violence, so it's not hard at all for me to imagine that if a person was suddenly hit with my level of testosterone without any time to adapt or critically reflect on it, they may struggle with their temper.

One of the greatest mistakes many progressives such as feminists make is using what they want as a starting point instead of thinking what incentive structures they are creating. The thinking easily becomes I want x while completely ignoring what incentive structures they are creating.

The reasoning becomes "I want to wear whatever I want". There is not enough thought put into that women are competitive and that the end result is going to be thongs becoming standard swimwear for women and that the hyper sexualization caused by a race to the bottom of who can get the most attention will be harmful.

Such modern women do exist but it's generally not that they refuse to act like that. It's that it never even occurs to them that they should act like that in certain contexts, have no concept of it at all in the first place, and don't know how to do it even if they consciously want to. It's generally something nobody ever explained to them, never talked with them about, and had no woman in their lives whom they ever had a chance to emulate in that regard.

I was thinking particularly of descriptions of impulsivity, immediacy, and emotional intensity. I read accounts by trans men saying that all their desires become both powerful and immediate, as if someone had switched caps lock on for their desires. They didn't get hungry, they got HUNGRY. NOW! And so on. Ironically, the emotional balance they described reminded me more of being a child, prior to puberty, so it was hard for me to associate that with puberty or testosterone.

For what it's worth, I myself had a quite gentle puberty - it was a gradual slope, rather than a wall breaking. As such I've never subjectively understood either why some kids fear it, or why some adults describe it as a very painful, tempestuous time of their lives. It just happened to me quite smoothly, and over a few years my voice dropped lower, I got more hair, and I experienced sexual attraction, but there was never a moment where I found it painful or disconcerting. I was even a little disappointed that nothing dramatic happened. Maybe sex ed at school had just hyped it up too much.

Anyway, their descriptions of getting very horny on testosterone didn't seem to match my experience of sexual desire. I had my sexual awakening just like anyone else, the phase where I hid pictures of sexy women underneath the bed and snuck guilty glances at bikini-clad models on magazine covers, and so on. But it was never a consuming fire for me. Maybe I'm just unusual and this is a universal experience I'm missing, but I don't think that's it? I got turned on by the hot girl sitting in front of me in class. All the basics seemed to happen to me. It just internally didn't feel like this overwhelmingly, uncontrollably powerful force. It felt like, "oh hey, that's happening to me, all right, deep breaths, focus on something else".

I'd be somewhat interested in other men's experiences of this. It's not something I really talk about with other people, since it's obviously a personal and embarrassing subject, and I suspect that the kinds of men who talk about it openly are self-selected for being uninhibited and horny.

I've always found it weird that that concept came out of feminism when women are the more neurotic sex. It's like someone took a bad comedy skit from the 50s about the husband complaining his wife is a battleaxe and just flipped it around.

But yeah it's a terrible idea that saps the fellowship between all humans. Treating the duties of a friend or lover as a form of labor is yet more unwholesome commodification of basic decency. It's evil, there's little else to call it.

I also said that there is a LGBTQ+ page.

I think that's called "burying the lede". "There being a LGBTQ+" page does not give full picture of what he supports and plans to do.

I'm not sure what the point you're striving to make here is? That he's not campaigning on lunchbucket stuff?

No, the thing you said just before that: "seems like a specific attempt to do what many class-first leftists have proposed doing"

The last person I'd trust on giving a honest estimation on what the particular place of importance of trans policies is in his current campaign is an one-issue anti-trans campaigner like Billboard Chris.

You know you can just listen to what the guy says himself in the clip, instead of relying on said campaigner's summary?

I also said that there is a LGBTQ+ page. The point is that the main trust of the campaign is the lunchbucket stuff, not the woke stuff.

I'm not sure what the point you're striving to make here is? That he's not campaigning on lunchbucket stuff? The last person I'd trust on giving a honest estimation on what the particular place of importance of trans policies is in his current campaign is an one-issue anti-trans campaigner like Billboard Chris.

Thanks for the detailed description. I assume these matters are relative in nature. Take the gas station on the corner, for example. Had it never been robbed before, as far as you can tell? Or yes, but only on occasions so rare that the whole neighborhood remembered afterwards for a long time? What about shootings and jogging women getting ambushed by rapists on the trails? Was it unheard of back in the days? And the loiterers and loud beggars?

No tinkering whatsoever this week. Family maintenance consumes all. Thanks for asking and please keep it up.

Nobody wants to admit that because the idea that madness is something you can catch is an extremely disturbing idea. Almost Lovecraftian.

I find it weird people don't have those qualms about PTSD. But then again we refused to believe it was a thing for a long time.

This is probably the most disturbing post I have ever made here. As a Southeast Asian, I need to talk about all the war crimes Adam Ragusea committed against pad thai in this video:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=puHSU9ZaZPY

  • too much sugar in recipe

  • advocates using worcestershire sauce in pad thai

  • puts soy sauce in pad thai

  • puts ketchup in pad thai

  • snaps rice noodles in half

  • boils rice noodles instead of soaking in warm water

  • uses what looks like extra virgin olive oil to cook everything

  • no tofu

  • puts green onions and cilantro in the dish (the only herb that goes into pad thai is garlic chives)

  • uses fresh chili instead of dried chili flakes

Every step is wrong. Every step.

I can't believe a certain orange-shirted YouTuber hasn't reviewed this yet, honestly.

nobody knows what a paraphilia is

Of course we do. It's obsessive sexual target error.

The exact causes or how alterable the phenomenon is is subject to lots of debate, but it's obscurantist nonsense to claim the category has no merit. It makes specific falsifiable claims.

For all of the issues with it, I'd like people to actually provide scientific arguments against Blanchardianism instead of "nuh-uh" and "my politics say this is badwrong".

I admit I can't explain why "feminist" in the public imagination is sex-positive.

Boomers' cultural worldview of feminism is stuck in the '70s, which is the last time that was true.

The side of feminism comprising the modern #fightfor25/Junior Anti-Sex League wouldn't get back to the same rent-seeking position on sex it had in the early 20th century until after AIDS.

Oh they exist alright. They become more noticeable 30s and onwards as all the loving people slowly select themselves into relationships.

Good news is that it's curable, I've seen people grow out of it. But not everyone does.

A large part of modern seduction theory involves redirecting any conversations about commitment during the early stages. This is so no promises need to be made while dangling an implied possibility of a relationship at least until after sex. No lying except perhaps by omission.

Not all men put the above into practice however. Some genuinely aren't sure if they want a relationship with the woman until things progress.

That's not even getting to the women that are very willing to (or even prefer to) have sex without commitment.