domain:youtu.be
CrispyFriedBarnacles
12m ago
You know, a while ago, I remember Matt Yglesias noticing that elected Republican officials (this was pre-Trump) were MUCH more sensitive to conservatives being called "racists" than they were to conservatives being "racist". He said it in a way that made it clear the thought he was being cute, of course.
But the observation has stuck with me, because it's actually fully general. And I think there actually really serious consequences.
To a first approximation (and I'm aiming here to use the no-no word to good effect), by the end of the 70s, the more radical side of liberals came out of the civil rights movement with a stance that was something like, "It is your own racist standards and worldview that make you think you can put certain people in the category of "nigger", and the word "nigger" exists to keep people down, and to the extent that there are people actually behaving in bad ways that might make you want to label them as "nigger", that's actually a result of pre-existing systemic racist forces that produce the "nigger" in the first place. All of this is a stain on you, not them. That word is your original sin."
And then, at about the same time, the Reagan coalition and Reagan detente settled on something like, "Obviously there are a whole bunch of people that it would be reasonable to call "nigger", clearly they are incompatible with civilization, but it's rude and unhelpful to use that explicit language about the topic, and much more to the point, there are a bunch of American black people who can be trusted to live up to high standards like the rest of us, we don't need to lower our standards, and it would be a grave injustice to treat those Americans as though they were just "niggers" who, by the way, totally exist, but we're just going to throw up our hands and corral those types in inner city ghettos and then massive prisons and turn our heads and avoid acknowledging it because, honestly, there really is nothing to be done, and we're more interested in integrating the more upstanding black citizens anyway, which is a much more happy project that we'd like to have our names attached to". Which is to say, the conservatives of that era might well have said, "You know what's much, much worse that calling someone "nigger"? It's choosing to be a civilization destroying "nigger", obviously, or choosing to coddle and elevate such people like liberals insist on doing. Incentives matter, and you're making sure you get a lot more of that". There's actually some interesting personal anecdote from Glenn Loury, talking about a private conversation he had with William F Buckley during the heyday of the Reagan administration in the mid 80s, and the summary of what Buckley had to say was very much in that ballpark - do what you can for the redeemable half, throw your hands up and move on for the other half.
And then Obama came along, and he and his movement (and the collapse of George W. Bush conservatism) destroyed the Reagan detente, and we've been living with that liberal story about racism every since. But I think this has probably been a great example of arson being applied to Chesterton's fence - the older Reagan-era norm, with its insistence that "of course you can expect plenty of black people to live up to high standards" played a really important social role in encouraging everyone else to go along with integration. Despite all the word policing, the Emperors New Clothes is real, and I have to believe that anyone who has ever lived around a large enough variety of black people has some contact with some uniquely frustrating (or likely much, much worse) behavior. It's certainly been the case in every city I've ever lived in, and every good white liberal I know, if you can steer the conversation sensitively, will more or less acknowledge it and have their own stories, often said in sadness not anger. Just going off of basic human psychology, it would be the most natural thing in the world for lots of non-black people, given their actual life experiences, to hold significant grudges about black people in a tribal way. It really is, or I think it is, an act of civic virtue when someone says, "While all of that is obviously true, it is both wrong and unhelpful to tar other members of the larger group for the behavior of these particular people..." But that impulse really only works when you can follow that by saying "...because I know lots of people in this group both CAN and ARE living up to our high standards, and we are collectively capable of validating and affirming those high standards". Ever since the Obama years, this is no longer the narrative frame we exist in, I don't think.
I think this is why, at least for someone people, Chris Rock's old "Black People vs. Niggers" stand up bit feels so cathartic. Because the rules of the game, post-1980 was, you can behave as though you acknowledge those facts, you can vote with your feet and where you buy property, but you absolutely can't actually name those facts with your mouth. That was the trade off, the detente. And so hearing someone touch that nerve by actually naming it was electric at the time.
I've long expected that the Obama-era blowing up of those older norms, especially after a lot of the insane cancel culture language policing, was eventually going to force a deeper re-evaluation of these topics. In important ways, the Reagan-era settlement was a kind of social compromise between a bunch of different groups that had a lot of tension with each other, with different parties each getting half a loaf. The Obama era shift was not like that. I think it's always had a deep instability buried in its heart. A lot of groups didn't actually sign off on it, they just had it shoved down their throats while they were weak. And its norms (which have been unstable and have often been caught up in purity spirals) have proven to be simply way too far from reality to be stable, too.
All of this has been very much in the back of my mind as I watch the current kerfuffle about this crowdsourcing money stuff. I don't enjoy rudeness, but a lot of the progressive McCarthyism of the last 8 years or whatever has more or less guaranteed that we're going to see some new norms renegotiated, and it's bound to be messy and probably often unpleasant and shocking as it happens. But I don't think there's any switch we can hit that will just take us right back to 2008.
No_one
12m ago
I'm gobsmacked that Shiloh has managed to milk three quarters of a million dollars (and counting!) out of being accosted over a minor literal playground scuffle.
Remember the Zebra killings? The ones so deprioritised from history that back on Reddit Motte when I mentioned them that people raised in the San Francisco area had no clue ~20 to several scores of whites were killed in a sustained campaign of race murder?
These people -violent black nationalists haven't gone away. They still exist.
Insane random killings of white people are still a thing, of course the DoJ makes a point of making sure no one investigates 'senseless' violence too closely. What would be the point? There's nothing you can do thus ignorance is bliss.
This one, a double murder by rifle followed by a shootout involving an armored car made the local headlines briefly. How many cases won't because it looks like just another robbery gone awry?
It's practically certain that that video has led to her featuring in sadistic rape / murder fantasies of hundreds of black bigots and likely also some leftist activist ones - as I'm unaware of any data that indicates that sexual sadism does not occur in black men, or that they do not have a subpopulation that is itching for some violence.
And while yes, they're not the mob, the odds of someone availing themselves of an opportunity to rape or kill someone who truly deserves it are quite real.
roystgnr
16m ago
know for sure that your government will turn into Nazi Germany within a few years
I'm glad you're trying to steelman it, but isn't this a great counter-example to the "we don't need self-defense until it's almost too late" philosophy? Maybe 100k Jews got out of Germany to avoid the Nazis (peak Jewish-German population was in 1910, so many were surely leaving for other reasons too), and roughly another 350k got out after the Nazis took over but before they made emigration illegal and really started in on the mass murder of the remaining 150k ... but that didn't make as much difference as you'd think in the end, because the biggest single source of Holocaust deaths wasn't the victims who had failed to escape Nazi Germany, it was the 20 times as many Jews in Nazi-occupied Poland. When Poland was invaded it had still been trying to negotiate a day before and it was conquered a month afterward. If you're only ready to defend yourself against corrupt establishments that give you a few years' warning then their natural countermove is to just not give you that much warning.
yofuckreddit
21m ago
I did soylent for a bit, always found the original flavor ("Pancake Batter") to be my favorite. Would unflavored/sweetened be the closest there?
Did you replace real food with it?
And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...
We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.
Also, the same weapons and the same spirit that effectively precludes totalitarian domination also precludes domination by foreigners. Or in the vernacular, "welcome to the rice fields, motherfucker."
TIRM
31m ago
As Abraham Lincoln once said:
At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant to step the ocean and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia, and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest, with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force take a drink from the Ohio or make a track on the Blue Ridge in a trial of a thousand years.
At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer: If it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us; it cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide.
Rov_Scam
32m ago
Would you mind expanding on this a little? In Pittsburgh everybody is Catholic and the few who aren't are some kind of mainstream Protestant. Megachurches weren't really a thing here until the late '90s and even now I probably know more Jehovah's Witnesses (and a lot more Greek Orthodox) than Evangelicals. The upshot is that anything I know about what the actual "religious right" is getting across the pulpit is more my own interpolation based on media reports rather than the actual cultural experience of living among these people, so it's hard to figure out what's widely believed versus what's overhyped by the media.
TowardsPanna
36m ago
Amusing post if you think of the dirtier meaning of the word
GeneralElephant
38m ago
The most under discussed part of the saga seems to be that America has its own incipient Rotherham scandal where Somalis are given carte-blanche to rape at-risk American teenagers due to the authorities turning a blind eye to these crimes.
07mk
38m ago
Tbf to Amadan, the use of 'generative AI' as a description of use case rather than of design is a pretty common one from anti-AI artist and writers.
Hm, I was not aware of that. I'd thought most of such people at least ostensibly maintained a principled objection against generative AI for its training methods, rather than one based on pure protectionism.
TheBailey
soapy mop
39m ago
Sure, a hospital, and maybe my doctor, is going to put on this big show of paranoia when it comes to disclosing my PII to each other.
But if I have definitely "legally" given them "consent" to give my PII and PHI to 3rd-parties that I'm not even able to learn the names of, what reason do I have to think that those 3rd-parties will take similar "precautions"? The only thing those 3rd-parties have to do is make sure they don't literally have my legal name in the same CSV file as any specific diagnoses when they get hacked, and I'll be none the wiser.
My workplace offers as a benefit genetic cancer screening. I thought this would be a neat thing to check out, since I'm really unsure how much of the skin and breast cancer in my extended family is just due to their shitty lifestyle. But the screening company's privacy policy did not inspire confidence, so I sent them this e-mail:
How do I opt out of “Health Information Exchange” sharing?
How can I know when my information is used for “Research”?
How can I get copies of the IRB approval?
If the final research paper is paywalled, are the involved patients entitled to a free copy of it? 😁
I see that you share patient health information with an undeclared list of Service Providers, Medical Providers, Public Health Authorities, Other Parties, Business Partners, Affiliates, Subsidiaries, Advertising Partners, and various "API and SDK providers".
Assuming you maintain records of this sharing, how could I request a complete account of it, including:
- Exactly what information was shared;
- The legal name and address of the 3rd party the information was shared with;
- The date the information was shared;
- The specific purposes for which the information was shared;
- Any specific constraints on when the 3rd party must delete the information;
- A complete list of “4th parties” the 3rd party is authorized to share my information to, including legal name and address?
The reply I got back did not address most of my questions, and only claimed that
- they don't actually traffick information to HIEs at this time (that was just boilerplate from the privacy policy they blindly copy-pasted from a legal document repository);
- all their studies are done internally at this time; and
- "[Our company] does not sell or share any information ... with any advertising partners. We will be updating our Privacy Policy to ensure it accurately reflects our commitment to protecting your data and maintaining our trust."
(This was 3 months ago, but their posted privacy policy still explicitly states, "We may disclose your Personal Information with advertising partners.")
TheDemonRazgriz
49m ago
India does have conventional superiority through sheer force of numbers, yes, but I wouldn't call the margin gigantic necessarily -- a significant amount of Indian forces are located away from the Pakistani border, and Pakistan does have some technological advantages with modern Chinese and semi-modern American missiles and radars that can outrange Indian kit, at least under certain circumstances. This appears to have come into play already -- French intelligence has confirmed that one Rafale fighter was indeed shot down, and it's looking increasingly credible that at least one or two other Indian jets were shot down during the Indian strike mission and/or in air-to-air fighting over Kashmir, as well. Relatedly there is strong evidence that Pakistan deployed Chinese-made PL-15 missiles as part of their counter-air operation, the first use of the type in combat -- these are more or less state-of-the-art missiles, at least comparable to the American AMRAAM and quite possibly superior, including modern radar/seeker tech that is supposed to be more effective against countermeasures than older weapons. They are likely superior to anything India can field and, at least on paper, represent a qualitative jump from Pakistani capabilities in past conflicts.
So, I do think India would win pretty decisively in a truly full-scale war, but Pakistan may think they can bleed India enough on the way up the escalation ladder that India will get off the ladder before the war reaches the scale where India's numerical advantage comes fully into play. This is not a gamble I personally would bet my country on, but Pakistan's government is notably a dysfunctional autocracy and the public appears to be swept up in nationalistic war fever (and the same applies to India, albeit a bit less dysfunctional and a bit less autocratic); these are not conditions that lead to cautious decision making.
Notably, as of now Pakistan is still publicly vowing to retaliate for the Indian retaliation -- if they choose to escalate with a more deadly counterattack it is very hard for me to see India backing down absent a concerted effort from foreign countries (or perhaps the UN) to bring the two sides to the table. The US has halfheartedly warned India to "exercise restraint" but has been generally staying out of it; the UN has issued boilerplate calls for restraint and negotiation but nothing more; Chinese officials have been meeting with the Pakistani government in Islamabad, but it is not clear what they were discussing and China has not made overt public declarations of any formal stance on the war.
Throwaway05
49m ago
I think one of the kernels was that women are surprising consumers of lesbian and solo female porn for similar reasons that men are surprising consumers of big dick porn. Focus on aspirational anatomy and the pleasure of the specific genitals the viewer has.
Gay porn is often also produced with an aim towards the (gay) male gaze - women like gay male romance novels and such (at least Japanese ones do) but it is quite different to actually viewing the railing as it where.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
53m ago
That's excellent advice, thanks man. I was going to ask further questions, but I stumbled on the answer myself - I need therapy lol.
gattsuru
54m ago
Isopropyl alcohol's worth a shot first, before trying to use primer. Beyond that, depends a lot on the plastic and coating; most bicycle helmets are ABS that I'd expect it would bind fine, perhaps benefiting from a bit of heat. Higher-end ones that are using carbonfiber, or scratch-resistant polycarbonate, I'd expect you'd want the primer.
The higher ends of gorilla tape can handle those cases if you don't want to deal with (or can't get, thank you California) the primers, but I haven't gotten any experience with how weatherproof it gets.
hydroacetylene
55m ago
This brings up a bigger point about commercialization of society- people give money as a substitute for attention. Back in the day was she would have had to make appearances for her grift and the NAACP would have had to do some kind of in person activity to ‘raise awareness of hate speech’ or whatever. But you see it more and more, that investments of time and personal care get displaced by forking over cash.
pigeonburger
56m ago
That's an interesting way to frame it. So it's the vigilantism equivalent of financial punishment/reward: "I don't trust the institutions to deal with this properly so I will financially reward the side I believe should be winning here".
Mantergeistmann
59m ago
In a sort of "it isn't money that's the root of all evil, it's love of money" way?
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
59m ago
The American belief goes back to the Revolutionary period, long before the US was the most powerful country in the world.
The Finnish Armed Forces and the state they are embedded in, of course, cannot be trusted. They'd be happy to appease their big Eastern neighbor by oppressing their own people rather than fighting; they did it before, after all.
Bisexuality isn't required for a woman to be interested in two men having sex, as seen by (for instance) the market for yaoi.
You misunderstand- yaoi isn't quite a match for yuri since most of the appeal (and remember, that's why it's called yaoi) comes from self-inserting as the bottom.
So the attraction from an otherwise-straight woman seeing two dudes having sex would generally be that self-insertion. If her husband is the bottom, he's assuming her role, and women don't tend to like that very much -> "feels like you're not invited".
If that was another woman instead the dynamic is instantly and instinctively different, since she by definition isn't going to be topping the man and the "invitation" comes in the form of "watch his attractive might and dominance without being replaced". The distaff/mirror counterpart would be if a woman brings a boy home (as in: young/inexperienced enough to dominate [and not replace the man's role in the relationship], cute enough not to be aesthetically repellent), but the average age of such a participant quickly creates practical problems [it ain't the '70s no more].
Two women doing it, from the male perspective, extend the "invitation" by "come and watch the show" (and the other woman gets some variety out of it that the man himself cannot provide- women are generally more aesthetically pleasing than men are when naked), which is why MFF/MmF threesomes are inherently stable if all the participants are nominally straight, but MMF/MfF threesomes are not (the latter inherently replacing the woman's submissive role).
dr_analog
razorboy
1hr ago
The trick is figuring out what 'properly prepared' means -- 90% of the time just dunking in simple green and rinsing with water works, but heavily polished or painted and almost all rubberized materials can benefit a lot from primer, and I'd expect helmets will fall into this domain.
What about rubbing alcohol on the shiny (not foamy) parts of a bike helmet?
PutAHelmetOn
Recovering Quokka
1hr ago
I don't think people are giving money to her because she called someone nigger. I certainly don't get money when I do that. I think people are giving her money because she was put into the crosshairs of the Low Orbit Cancellation Cannon.
That is to say, the child isn't the antagonist, that would be Omar. I almost included a sentence here condemning what she did, but I realized that it would be off-topic.
Yes, mine is in fact a one-dimensional analysis that eschews any kind of nuance in favor of a simple protagonist-antagonist narrative. I am just following their lead!
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
1hr ago
I know it's not the same thing, I was just playing around with the literal meaning of the words.
It has always struck me that the American belief that the most likely chance to have to face down an oppressive government from the inside is a belief enabled by the fact of belonging to the most powerful country in the world without any conceivable external enemy that could defeat it in warfare; in a small nation with a powerful authoritarian neighbor, the threat matrix and the perceived ways to combat that threat are obviously different.
Shiloh is receiving money from whites (and some others) as a rebuke to the Karmelo fundraiser, because of a legitimate need for physical and legal security (check out tiktok or X for any number of posts/videos of blacks calling for, among other things, Shiloh's child to be beaten to brain damage), and as a form of populist protest against black's use of the word to psychologically dominate whites.
She herself is the smallest part of the story, a convenient flashpoint for whites to vent racial grievances. Crowdfunding is a new populist front in the proxy race war previously refereed by the elites through the courts.
I've never tried soylent, but had a coworker who switched to hule. He's the one that told me about it. I think Hule Original is probably the closest. It doesn't have a bunch of sugar like soylent but I think does have artificial sweeteners, if that matters to you.
I replaced lunch with Hule black. For sure saves time over meal prepping, and is very macro friendly.
More options
Context Copy link