domain:questioner.substack.com
Walterodim
Only equals speak the truth, that’s my thought on’t
6m ago
And if they do, what does that say about migration more broadly?
Loquat
14m ago
The more snobbish PMC types might sneer at retail jobs in general, but a girl who works part-time at Target while she goes to college isn't going to get anywhere near the kind of lasting stigma her classmate with an OnlyFans is going to get.
sweet
15m ago
Overall, if in an intellectual debate space like this one somebody can unapologetically assert that he dislikes women when they argue with him, I'd say that's pretty suggestive that many men are uncomfortable facing the possibility of being intellectually bested by a girl.
Or rather that the experience of arguing with women is, among men, a universally recognized miserable time and bad idea.
hydroacetylene
17m ago
This lady isn’t a majority, as you note. And there’s simply not enough people in the voting public who are legitimately afraid of the ghosts of slaves to worry about it. I would suggest that those of these who do exist contact a priest, not an uninvolved geneological researcher.
The descendants of my ancestors’ slaves are mostly successful and bear us no ill will, although they don’t particularly want to live in the small town in Louisiana where our plantation was located(in fairness, no one else does either). Nor do they bring up that, uh, the connection is because our ancestors owned theirs. Everyone likes to believe they were kind to their slaves, but no one actually knows, and the best evidence that can be obtained is a few scattered mentions that Cajuns were known for treating their slaves somewhat better than average. That some members of my family are quite proud of the victories our confederate shock formation won isn’t much bother either. Everyone broadly understands they’re my ancestors, and I didn’t choose them, and to disown your ancestors would be a horrible thing. Family, the weight of generations, is fundamentally what it is, and demanding performative dissociation from it is the ultimate price of atomic individualism. It’s one I won’t give, and it’s one that hasn’t been asked.
Amadan
"I would put a screwdriver through your eyeballs if I could"
18m ago
I haven't tried SD 3 because it looks like an even bigger flop than SD 2.0, but 1.5 and SDXL are still out there.
That said, horny will find a way.
jeroboam
22m ago
And even the original inhabitants of the Americas have no great standing in my view. Does the first person to cross the land bridge get to claim the entire continent for themselves?
Amadan
"I would put a screwdriver through your eyeballs if I could"
28m ago
This is a weird compass, but okay, sure.
I'd probably put myself at X 8, Y 1 to 3, Z i. I can't imagine anything shifting me on the Z axis, and that being the case, I might be shifted on the X or Y axes with new evidence, but it ultimately wouldn't make much difference in my answer to Z.
ok-target-7361
32m ago
Shit, now I remember which demographic marker I had for you in my memory and misremembered. Hahaha.
sun_the_second
38m ago
Forgiveness denied, it's my second language too.
ok-target-7361
45m ago
Oh please forgive me for not being proficient with the article system of my second language. Articles are by far the most retarded part of English, and that's a tough competition. Anyway, I lost interest in this conversation, I only initially replied to you because I had a genuine false memory of you being female yourself.
Rov_Scam
48m ago
Remington settled, so there's really no deep dive to be had. From a litigator's perspective, 73 million divided by nine plaintiffs is about 8 million per, which is about in line with what I'd evaluate a case with a murdered child for, especially considering that the sympathy factor is high here, and especially since there have been a lot of ridiculously high verdicts lately in some jurisdictions (though I don't know about where the suit was filed). When you consider that a jury would have easily awarded at least 20 million per had the plaintiffs won, 8 million seems about in the ballpark for what I'd recommend if I were their attorney.
sun_the_second
53m ago
The female sex symbol? Come on now. Even a female sex symbol would be stretching it. How many admirers did he have, when compared to men of similar renown who weren't serial killers?
If you want to take tips from Ted Bundy you should consider that:
a) accepting Ted's view on what is revolting and not the general society's and acting on those values is likely to land you in prison, where it will be very hard to enjoy the company of all those flocks of hybristophilic admirers,
b) , which you likely won't have all that many anyway. Ted was hot and his face was well-known, while you, well, would be less likely to be having the problems you have if you could pull chicks with a mugshot.
c) Ted likely can't have a value judgment on what's revolting and what's not because he's a psychopath, the category does not exist for him. You may as well query a brick wall.
Ted is more of an incel sex symbol than he ever was a female sex symbol.
OliveTapenade
53m ago
Let's recap here:
Olive: "Is there a specific religious claim you'd like to debate?"
French: "The efficacy of prayer."
Olive: "I don't believe in the efficacy of prayer in the way you've described. I do believe in other potential effects it has, but those don't seem to be what you're interested in."
French: "That's cope!"
Olive: "...I'm sorry, is your position that I ought to defend a position that I don't believe is true?"
French: "Still cope!"
Look, I don't believe I'm obligated to defend a strawman or weak-man position just because you think I ought to.
I'm not arguing to you that prayer has effects on on the person praying (in part because that's so obviously true that it'd be pointless), and in fact I explicitly acknowledged that you don't care about that.
What I'm asking you is - do you want me to take a position I don't believe is true? Why? Moreover, why should prayer not having immediate empirical results matter? Christianity or indeed any other religion isn't built on the material efficacy of prayer.
But Native Americans seized land and ethnically cleansed each other. Any surviving Native Americans are descended from the victors of these myriad wars. The email sender referenced being haunted by spirits because only extinct bloodlines are innocent. The only way to be good is to go extinct in this doggy dog world.
ok-target-7361
58m ago
Everybody who has any reach: media, academics, politicians. The Cathedral, if that term means anything to you.
ThenElection
1hr ago
I'm a broken record on this, but Native Americans have no better standing. They ethnically cleansed the pre-Clovis peoples from North America, with the only difference being that they were smart enough not to leave any records of their existence (aside from traces left in their mtDNA).
Amadan
"I would put a screwdriver through your eyeballs if I could"
1hr ago
Dante Labs does a whole genome sequencing package with much more coverage and many more reports than 23andme or AncestryDNA, etc. It is considerably more pricey, of course.
ok-target-7361
1hr ago
I don't think OP posted it.
It's in your own link:
Not my image, SD3 with prompt, "a Swedish couple at a waterpark taking a selfie together, shot on iphone, social media post."
I'm willing to bet at very unfavorable odds what the model produced without inclusion of "Swedish" in the prompt.
urquan
The end desire of the system is Kubernetes for human beings
1hr ago
I personally think the causality goes the other way on that — Robert Putnam wrote Bowling Alone in 2000, based on a 1995 essay, and the forces of atomization were already incredibly strong by that point. In some ways, the internet has actually mollified some of the trends against human connection, even as its algorithmization of connection has made the quality much worse. I think people resort to the internet because of the atomization that has already occurred.
Before the internet, people were still disconnected and lonely, they were just disconnected and lonely watching TV or reading books instead of binging YouTube and reading tweets. If anything, I think the great gender disconnection that would lead to our present was well in place by the 90s. I Love Raymond was not exactly a positive depiction of marriage.
omfalos
1hr ago
netstack
Texas is freedom land
1hr ago
Fine. In your expert opinion, how much should he owe for punitive damages?
The law is clear that punitive damages are allowed. The legal system, from judges to jurors, has concluded that he should pay various eye-watering sums. If you think this is so unjust, where would you set the bar?
urquan
The end desire of the system is Kubernetes for human beings
1hr ago
Hm, I could definitely see how that could be the case. If that’s really going on, though, it sounds like the women in question would be the ones who need to change their behavior — unless the men are truly terrible people (which I doubt in most cases) I bet they’d appreciate either the more active interest of their partners with their own knowledge or a polite but clear indication that they’d like to change the subject. Like most things in relationships, communication is the solution.
My gf has definitely gotten bored of a discussion before, but I can usually tell. It’s also happened that she’s talked about something she’s passionate about and I got bored — I know a lot less about biology than she knows about politics and history, so there’s a greater disconnect. But honestly, I’m just excited that she’s excited and I love knowing she cares about what she’s doing.
So many of the relationship complaints I hear from people of both sexes just seem so petty to me. I respect that a lot of people have serious problems in relationships and I want everyone to be respected and appreciated by their partners. But so much just feels like a dark force just wants men and women to hate each other.
They're all just risk factors that should be considered.
You want to make the case that guys should marry and have kids, show them the odds they're facing.
More options
Context Copy link