domain:reddit.com
jkf
12m ago
In the past, where would you typically ask out a girl in person?
For many many years the main true answer was "the bar" -- zoomers are too scared to go in those either, and now they are dying.
jkf
18m ago
Work gave me one, and I'm kind of cavalier with it -- you have the 'bending over and spilling your shirt pocket' move down pat. Kind of a nice Mike Patton look going on in that segment!
yellowgreenred
20m ago
I was expecting it to be big news but apparently it didn't become a huge story.
It has become a big story. I remember it being covered in real-time on CNN, but they've also now published a story that puts the blame on the pro-Israel "counterprotestors". The New York Times has a similar story.
Again speculative:
-
I can't seem to remember the source, but very recently I saw a journal article speculating that our desire for spices had to do with anti-microbial properties? For example, I know historically salt and pepper were used as preservatives in addition to their flavor profile. Another possible explanation for seeking variety is that before food safety standards, every specific food item had some level of particular toxins. By varying diet, our ancestors could avoid building up too much of any one toxin. The fact that we can now make a variety of flavors and textures with the same ingredients using modern culinary knowledge could just be a workaround for what was a crude byproduct of certain organisms never eating enough of the same thing to hit LD50's in the past.
-
My guess here would be that our ancestors were selected for finding the set [not emaciated] attractive. Since there was no one obese in the past, preferences gradient descended into the most common body type that fell into that set, which would be what we might today call a "healthy weight". The reason for finding obesity less attractive would just be its distance from that body type (albeit, in the opposite direction).
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
43m ago
I was up late watching the unbelievable live footage of the UCLA encampment being violently attacked by a pro-Israel mob. At the time I was 100% certain that this was organized as some sort of op. The counter-protestors were clearly attacking the UCLA students in a coordinated manner, in a way that was so violent it must have been preplanned- for several hours while police did nothing. It was really shocking to watch, I was expecting it to be big news but apparently it didn't become a huge story.
There were several major injuries, the worst was a head injury that, according to CNN, (NSFW) required 14 staples and three stiches. It was actually an antifa account who identified the attacker caught on video here, who is an Israeli apparently associated with the IDF.
Another Israeli who was caught on video pepper spraying and attacking UCLA students was identified by an antifa account. The man is listed as CEO/CFO of five different nonprofit organizations which are all staffed by family, including "Black and Jewish Unity".
After an antifa account identified the second Israeli in a different violence incident, he received phone calls reading out his own address and SSN and threatening his credit score (?) as well as physical violence.
CNN also reported on some of the violent attackers, including an attacker who was revealed by his mother posting on Facebook:
The young man sporting the white mask and a white hoodie in widely shared video clips is Edan On, a local 18-year-old high school senior, his mother confirmed to CNN, though she later said he denies being at UCLA. Video shows On joining the counterprotesters while waving a long white pole. At one point, he strikes a pro-Palestinian protester with the pole, and appears to continue to strike him even when he was down, as fellow counterprotesters piled on.
“Edan went to bully the Palestinian students in the tents at UCLA and played the song that they played to the Nukhba terrorists in prison!” his mother boasted in Hebrew on Facebook, referencing Hamas. She circled an image of him that had been broadcast on the local news.
“He is all over the news channels,” his mother wrote in a now-deleted post.
No_one
44m ago
Africa is the exception, really. Sub-Saharan Africa has several attested cultures where being fat was seen as attractive, such also existed in Arab countries at times.
Even today, bigger body size is seen as desirable in US black culture, at least if we go by this NYT opinion piece where a woman is complaining how black men don't want them to lose weight..
Skulldrinker
45m ago
At this point, I don't think Wokeism is a revolution against the established order, certainly not to young people and definitely not college students. Wokeism IS the established Order. They're conforming to the social context around them.
No_one
49m ago
but when we look at potential mates we want the thin one
Not the thin one. The curvy one..
Link goes to one of the most stunning examples of 'autism' out there, and it's making everyone from arch-hater 0hp Lovecraft to bog standard SJWs and boomers mad.
There is every reason to believe that our collective ideas about these things is not particularly coherent either.
But the beauty of machine learning in general and LLMs specifically is that our ideas don’t have to be logically coherent. Which is just as well, because they never are.
You don’t have to spend ten years automatically coming up with a perfect definition of murder, you just collate a synopsis of all the people we charged for murder in the last 50 years and say, “These guys are murderers. Being like them is bad.”
cjet79
1hr ago
I know of one person that met their spouse on here: https://www.itsjustlunch.com/
Both of them weren't very attractive. The one I knew was a nice person and good conversationalist, but I imagine dating apps did not treat them kindly.
2D3D
1hr ago
Would you say that is because the physical presentation of the three archetypes are distinctly different? Physical presenteeism maps pretty cleanly into each archetype, moreso than behavior, and to pull off all three in the same body requires a sort of amorphous age presenteeism. The chief I mentioned and a few other women I know who pull that off all have a sort of 'maybe 20 maybe 40' look to them, mainly due to excellent skincare regimes (which was difficult enough). Matriarch seems to ironically be the easiest to pull off regardless of age, bossy women can be big sister or grandmother to her juniors. I've seen a tiny thai woman boss around girls older than them simply by force of will.
2D3D
1hr ago
You are 100% right that black men and women are in tension with each other, which is an interesting topic onto itself, but your point about requiring a black woman to start that conversation first is the key factor to note. White progressives do not care or consider that blacks are not a unified voice, and suborn black male interests to black female ones. The only vector I have seen progs be critical of black men is in the context of Trump, where increasing black male support for trump is viewed as black support of white supremacy.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
1hr ago
Back in my Peace Corps days, I was in Southern Africa. One curious compliment to a woman there (crude, to my way of thinking)° was O morago o motona which means "You have a big ass." Generally I believe the anthropological thinking is when a culture is in lean times, the big folks are attractive because that signals access to the eats. In the bountiful era, a slender frame rather suggests you have the resources to push away from the plate of Twinkies because you know there will be more if you want them, whenever.
°I also once heard a man say to a colleague of mine, a young woman new to the school: O mabele o montle, tla ke anye which means "You have nice tits, let me suck them." Of course this was a big dude and he could and did say whatever the hell he wanted most of the time in that world where brute strength ruled pretty much everything.
I don't know how accurate any of this is in terms of human psychology but it makes a certain amount of sense.
2D3D
1hr ago
True, men are largely more aware of what a real threat Russia poses. Women really seem to not give a shit about icky white people dying, and I maintain that progressives broadly hate Ukraine because it focuses support onto white people instead of blacks or gays: Jayapal pushing for Biden to force Ukraine to the negotiating table in Oct 2022 strikes me as what the social justice wing thinks of white people (even slavs): a distraction from the true cause. The only thing making progressives give a slight shit in favor of Ukraine is the fact that trump hates Ukraine, but the progressives hold their nose when decrying Russia because the beneficiary is white.
sliders1234
2hr ago
-
Does feel somewhat explainable. We want them both so eating both at once triggers both sensors. I feel like most will agree we have a preference for carbs and protein in one bite since every street/comfort food I can think of every where does that. Taste for spices and variety of food still seems a bit confusing. Like I get more pleasure out of eating different foods every day but they’re basically the same thing protein, carb, some sauce/seasoning. Like tacos, hamburgers, pizza. All three of those probably even have tomato and onions in them.
-
Perhaps no one had it is the answer. But why is there a fat girl is bad programming now. Where did that come from.
yellowgreenred
2hr ago
Wouldn't it be more appropriate to describe this as "Zionist power"? There are plenty of Jews on the pro-Palestine side.
(Yes I'm trotting out this meme again, I don't care: I was effectively shunned from an entire community and industry for the crime of politely asking a girl if she wanted to get coffee sometime and I'm still mad about it - anyone saying "just ask her bro, the worst she can say is no" is full of shit.)
Everyone knows women don’t care about looks, but it sounds like her feminine intuition and personality-detector correctly clocked you as the type of bigot who posts in a lair of racists, misogynists, and transphobes. So she bravely and rightfully got you excommunicated from a community and an industry to keep everyone safe *crosses arms and turns away indignantly*.
Yeah, women take it as an insult when a man she views as beneath her shoots his shot at her, as it offends their princess complex. “Ugh, you thought you had a chance with me? Gross.”
Usually (I hope) getting rejected by a girl doesn’t lead to immediate exile from community and industry, but realistically it at least means no other girl in her social circle will want you. And even the guys in your/her social circle will have their priors updated in the direction of you potentially being a social liability. A girl will eagerly spread the word and poison the well after rejecting you.
On the bright side, though, banging a chick greatly increases the chances you’ll bang other chicks in her social circle. Praise be the double-edged sword of female mate-choice copying.
I mentioned to several of the people I interviewed for this piece that I’d met my husband in an elevator, in 2001. (We worked on different floors of the same institution, and over the months that followed struck up many more conversations—in the elevator, in the break room, on the walk to the subway.) I was fascinated by the extent to which this prompted other women to sigh and say that they’d just love to meet someone that way. And yet quite a few of them suggested that if a random guy started talking to them in an elevator, they would be weirded out. “Creeper! Get away from me,” one woman imagined thinking. “Anytime we’re in silence, we look at our phones,” explained her friend, nodding. Another woman fantasized to me about what it would be like to have a man hit on her in a bookstore. (She’d be holding a copy of her favorite book. “What’s that book?” he’d say.) But then she seemed to snap out of her reverie, and changed the subject to Sex and the City reruns and how hopelessly dated they seem. “Miranda meets Steve at a bar,” she said, in a tone suggesting that the scenario might as well be out of a Jane Austen novel, for all the relevance it had to her life.
It amuses me that, even in the showerthoughts, daydreams, and fantasies of presumed PMC(-aspirant) #GirlBosses, such women are comically hypoagentic and can’t muster up a fraction of the courage and initiative that men regularly exhibit. The thought of themselves making The First Move is outside of their personal Overton Window. If a given man doesn’t read her mind and approach her after she performs the physical and emotional labor of sitting, standing, or existing near him…. okay fine whatevas, it’s his loss.
If a man does successfully pick her up in a bar, elevator, bookstore, breakroom, subway, or wherever and a long-term relationship ensues, it’s retrospectively revised on her part to be “omg it just so happened that we met” rather than “he assessed the costs/benefits, initiated the conversation, led the conversation, drove the interaction forward, and I just followed along” such that she can claim that she Did Her Part as an equal partner rather than being a bystander in her own narrative.
100ProofTollBooth
2hr ago
non nobis domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
2hr ago
I'm not sure what you mean by that, to be honest.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
2hr ago
US leadership has been behaving somewhat hysterically with this latest war, they've been going around threatening the ICC with the gravest consequences if they dare charge Netanyahu:
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000018f-4e0e-d759-a9ff-ff4ee9420000
Issuing arrest warrants for the leaders of Israel would not only be unjustified, it would expose your organization’s hypocrisy and double standards. Your office has not issued arrest warrants for Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei or any other Iranian official, Syrian President Bashar al Assad or any other Syrian official, or Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh or any other Hamas official. Nor have you issued an arrest warrant for the genocidal General Secretary of the People’s Republic of China, Xi Jinping, or any other Chinese official.
Finally, neither Israel nor the United States are members of the ICC and are therefore outside of your organization’s supposed jurisdiction. If you issue a warrant for the arrest of the Israeli leadership, we will interpret this not only as a threat to Israel’s sovereignty but to the sovereignty of the United States. Our country demonstrated in the American Service-Members' Protection Act [also known as the Hague Invasion Act] the lengths to which we will go to protect that sovereignty.
The United States will not tolerate politicized attacks by the ICC on our allies. Target Israel and we will target you. If you move forward with the measures indicated in the report, we will move to end all American support for the ICC, sanction your employees and associates, and bar you and your families from the United States. You have been warned.
How exactly a threat to Israel could be a threat to the sovereignty of the USA is hard to comprehend, though it does explain the stance of the Republican Party.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
2hr ago
It reminds me of women who say all men are rapists waiting to be rapey.
So you've got nothing but analogy to your headcanon?
plural
2hr ago
- It's faster, maybe? Though it's not really that strange for someone to have something like steak and potatoes and eat the steak and then the potatoes or vice versa. Or maybe it's just preferring more flavoring to less. I don't know how you'd measure that though. Is grilled chicken in a tortilla more or less flavorful than fried chicken?
bonsaii
2hr ago
Purely speculative answers:
-
Most food items don't individually have everything we need for survival, so a preference to have something high in protein/fat with something high in carbs makes sense. Having them at the same time probably has to do with hunger being a relatively non-specific signal (it usually doesn't induce cravings for foods high in specific nutrients), so someone who gorges on carbs in the afternoon without meat won't necessarily achieve the same balance throughout the day as someone who preferred their carbs with meat. There's no easily evolutionarily available mechanism to make the former crave compensatory meat when they're next hungry.
-
Excess fat simply wasn't a factor, since food scarcity was the natural state. Therefore, there were no pressures affecting our preferences for degree of optional adiposity (no one really had any).
That seems like a perfectly sensible statement to me. The ICC is looking to extend its reach beyond its remit, and is getting slapped down by the US (again). Nothing is new here.
The ICC (International Criminal Court) is a treaty-based organization created by the Rome Statute. The ratifying powers have agreed to submit to the authority of the Court in certain cases, specified by the Statute. Neither the US nor Israel are parties to the Rome Statute, which means that the ICC has no authority over their governments or citizens. The ICC is attempting (again) to go after non-parties, in order to create the precedent that it has powers beyond the text of its treaty--in essence, it's trying to create customary international law using Israel as a point of leverage. The real target is American officials in the future, so current American officials are quite interested in shutting down the ICC's overreach at the outset, as they have many times in the past.
(If you follow the wiki-link to the Rome Statute, you'll see a color-coded map that is less helpful than it appears. Only a state that has ratified a treaty, and not withdrawn that ratification, is a full party to a treaty. A "signatory" is not a party. In the US context, the American President may sign any treaty he likes, but the US is not bound to treat the treaty as law unless and until the Senate ratifies the treaty by a 2/3 vote--one of the very few supermajority votes required by the Constitution itself. Many other countries have similar mechanisms.)
More options
Context Copy link