The interesting thing about the deceased wife’s sister debate and the more recent same sex marriage debate is that they dragged on for ages as people told horror stories about the collapse of civilization that would ensue if they were recognised, then after the law was changed people immediately lost interest and never mentioned it again.
Like, seriously? No follow up? No re-evaluation of the argument after the law has been in place for a few years and the sky remains unfallen? We all just scoot on to the next flamewar about trans bathrooms or whatever the fuck.
Prediction: when bathrooms are all unisex, everyone will immediately forget that this once used to be intensely controversial.
Okay, but some practices are way more likely to cause complex damage than others, and unisex bathrooms are probably not one of the ones likely to cause (that much) complex damage.
No. Bathroom laws will be questioned for years after, if they are made coed, because shit like this will continue to happen now and then, because shit like that happens now and then https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Alexandra_Zapp
In this case I mean it won’t flip society patriarchal, like polygamy would.
“Male-dominated video games become spectator e-sports for predominantly male viewers because they sustain a different project than celebrating physical excellence. They don’t showcase a specific form of male-bodied performance so much as support a specific sort of male spectator: a straight middle-class boy full of resentment and patriarchal rage. This is and has been the sports fan par excellence.”—
The interesting thing about the deceased wife’s sister debate and the more recent same sex marriage debate is that they dragged on for ages as people told horror stories about the collapse of civilization that would ensue if they were recognised, then after the law was changed people immediately lost interest and never mentioned it again.
Like, seriously? No follow up? No re-evaluation of the argument after the law has been in place for a few years and the sky remains unfallen? We all just scoot on to the next flamewar about trans bathrooms or whatever the fuck.
Prediction: when bathrooms are all unisex, everyone will immediately forget that this once used to be intensely controversial.
Okay, but some practices are way more likely to cause complex damage than others, and unisex bathrooms are probably not one of the ones likely to cause (that much) complex damage.
Buzzfeed is an entertainment website that collects an enormous amount of information about its users. Much of the data comes from traditional Internet tracking, but Buzzfeed also has a lot of fun quizzes, some of which ask very personal questions. One of them – “How Privileged Are You?” – asks about financial details, job stability, recreational activities, and mental health. Over two million people have taken that quiz, not realizing that Buzzfeed saves data from its quizzes.
I read this in Bruce Schneier’s “Data and Goliath” and thought “oh my god, ‘Buzzfeed sells mental health information from privilege quizzes to insurance companies’ would be the most horribly believable 2010s internet thing,” but the source he cited was merely an article (see also here, here) saying that Buzzfeed could conceivably do this (of course they can) but there is no evidence they actually are
“Supporting Putin against imperialism is the best thing I can do for myself as an advocate of the working class” is one of the most nuclear hot takes in internet history and we owe Minisoc a lot of credit for making this website entertaining
horseshoe theory tho, this is what a lot of the alt-right actually believes
On the one hand, I am disappointed (but not necessarily surprised) that we’ve reached a point where expressing vitriol over an eleven-year-old unpublished first draft is, like, a fun weekend activity,
but on the other, nothing else has so elegantly illuminated that performative dragging is not actually about justice of any sort.
Remember when Republicans pretended they were fine with legal immigration
If they don’t do something, then there is no future for the Republican party.
But don’t worry. In about ten years I’m going to be asking “remember when the democrats made fun of marrying your cousin instead of calling all objections racist?”
Maybe Dems shouldn’t brag about Demographic Destiny™ next time.
“If they don’t do something, then there is no future for the Republican party”
We can hope!
Hey, we can also hope on the effects of inbreeding
Because I agree. Marrying your cousin is terrible, doing it for multiple generations is worse, not just with health risks, but also socially as support for extreme patriarchal norms. It doesn’t magically become good just because isolated, low-income, lower class white residents of rural Appalachia do it.
“Christianity went through a process of modernization during the 20th century. As new norms replaced old ones. But churches are emptying because of the loss of authentic faith.
The left will come to realize that Islam is not going to tow the line of homosexual acceptance nor will it promote feminist values. They’re valiant defenders of Islam now. But they won’t be if they become 30-40% of the religious population in the United States of America.”
“The soft populist-nationalism of Donald Trump is bulldozing through the neo-liberal headquarters. Illegal immigration is down. He’s pushing for merit-based immigration. He’s questioning affirmative action. He’s laying the foundation for a larger movement that is currently in it’s adolescence.
Capitalism and mass immigration have destroyed traditional norms, faith, and proper birthrates. A rejection of modern capitalism would do plenty for societies around the world. In terms of reviving older cultural and political norms. I’m quite fond of distributism, capitalist protectionism, and a rightist variant of Kropotkinism as alternatives to the current system.”
I have various disagreements, but the real biting one is this:
It fails to account for Transhumanism.
For many years, opponents of Transhumanism have described it as techno-utopian fantasy that will never come to pass, and maybe the brain uploading part and the Singularity are, but they’ve been getting a lot quieter about the rest of it recently.
These aren’t science fiction. Only their economic viability is - for now.
Recently mouse lifespans were increased by 10-15% with stem cells in the brain, and studies on blood health with mice have also been promising (inspiring all those jokes about Vampire Peter Thiel).
There is a point where lifespan begins to increase more quickly and healthcare costs start to come back down again, where screening out genetic diseases and selecting for higher performance first hits the wealthy and then everyone else. This starts to undermine the effects of lowered fertility on more left-wing social configurations.
It undermines race, it undermines social darwinism, it undermines demand for religion.
You can ban it in Europe, you can ban it in America, but if you do, then the research will merely continue in Asia.
You might get a shift rightwards socially, but I don’t think it will look like what you expect. It will probably be in the form of a more holistic view of society where it is acknowledged that we can only afford to be kind if we’re careful not to increase the situations that required us to be kind in the first place. All the bitching about gays is a sideshow.
I don’t know what policies Mark Zuckerberg is going to run on (well, I mean I kinda do) but I don’t really care, I am already very dedicated to not voting for him
I very much do not put it beyond the democratic party to nominate The Zuck for President. But I don’t think he’ll actually win if they do.
Remember when Republicans pretended they were fine with legal immigration
If they don’t do something, then there is no future for the Republican party.
But don’t worry. In about ten years I’m going to be asking “remember when the democrats made fun of marrying your cousin instead of calling all objections racist?”
Maybe Dems shouldn’t brag about Demographic Destiny™ next time.
“If they don’t do something, then there is no future for the Republican party”
We can hope!
I love when conservatives implicitly admit that too much of their ideology is racist or xenophobic to ever appeal to enough people of color to sustain them.
I’m not really a Conservative, or at least Conservatives would not consider me a Conservative, I voted for the Clintontron 3000 last election and I support the establishment of a national wage subsidy program for low-income workers.
Apparently it takes multiple generations for “desired level of government interference” (or whatever it was) to revert to the national mean, and apparently most incoming groups from most countries have a higher level of it than the current national mean.
So if you’re the “less government interference except for abortions and military spending” party, then, logically…
Remember when Republicans pretended they were fine with legal immigration
If they don’t do something, then there is no future for the Republican party.
But don’t worry. In about ten years I’m going to be asking “remember when the democrats made fun of marrying your cousin instead of calling all objections racist?”
Maybe Dems shouldn’t brag about Demographic Destiny™ next time.
“If they don’t do something, then there is no future for the Republican party”
We can hope!
#change their policies to attract different voters
Yes, yes, very funny.
The Republicans should clearly support expanded welfare, mass migration, and culture war against the country’s ethnic majority. That won’t upset their base at all and just make them a more sucky version of the Democrats.
Honestly, if they actually started changing policies to appeal outside their party in a way that wasn’t stupid… they’d be looking to pick up Asian voters by expanding the definition of white to include them. There are already risk factors for this in the current environment, it just remains to be seen if the visual difference is too much of a leap.
And if that happened, the democrats would quickly throw Asians under the bus. Socially, I mean. Apparently it isn’t mostly white people that are displaced by Affirmative Action, etc. There have been lawsuits about this.
Of course they won’t actually do this, because both the Republican and Democratic parties are never going to actually get smarter. Maybe if we didn’t have FPTP.
“Culture war against the country’s ethnic majority” is a fucking nuclear take. As if every poltical institution in this country doesn’t uphold white supremacy. what world are you living where the democrats pose a threat to whiteness?
Their goal seems to be:
“You can’t have oppression by an ethnic majority if you don’t have an ethnic majority.”
So not immediately, no. After all, Hillary Clinton was their presidential candidate. But it does seem like the plan is “let’s defeat white supremacy by making the whites a minority,” which might work, or might not work.
I live in a world where democrats periodically talk about how eventually all those darn old racist white redneck men will die off and America will be significantly more racially diverse, and the GOP needs to “get with the times, grampa”, so to speak. It’s also a world where the democrats describe opposition to immigration as fundamentally rooted in racism, and just last week I was arguing with someone I knew IRL that said America has an obligation to take in all peoples because it is on land stolen from Native Americans (and therefore not only can immigration not be decreased but we can’t even have limits on countries which lack functioning governments to vet newcomers).
This is, of course, ignoring all the various other progressive leftists grouped in with the democrats that are much less, hm, “gentle” and just looking at the mainstream of the party. (Again, Hillary “super predators” Clinton was their candidate, not their opinion columnists.)
Anyhow, “mass migration” is also a bit of an overstatement regarding current immigration policies, so “culture war against the country’s ethnic majority” is also a pull in the other direction for contrast with where they are right now, depending on just how you define culture war.
Though… once the demographics change, do you think they’ll actually stop trying to fight white supremacy? Or will they just change focus, like how women are the majority of undergraduate university students, but we mostly hear about how STEM needs more women (even though the fields of biology also flipped majority women recently, IIRC)?
And perhaps more importantly, do the Republican Party and their voters believe it will stop?
How do you feel about what is currently happening in Venezuela? I heard that a new communist dictatorship might be in power but am not sure how trustworthy any information about this is.
I think the sources on the effects of the last decade on Venezuela’s economic situation seem pretty reliable - that is, they are using statistics that existed long before the crisis, the statistics paint a consistent picture, that picture matches what I’ve seen written by people currently living there, and I haven’t seen them seriously contested. So, yeah, it looks like the last few socialist/communist governments of Venezuela have been steadily consolidating power by murder where necessary, have destroyed the country’s health system, access to food, and access to necessities, and are tightening their dictatorial death grip on the country they steered off a cliff.
The leftists I’ve seen defending this seem to fall back to ‘well, it’s this or allowing U.S. imperialism and U.S. imperialism is even worse’, but I find this amazingly callous and horrible - if the best alternative your ideology can offer to U.S. imperialism is ‘wait in line for ten hours for inadequate amounts of basic necessities, sham elections where even though people are shot for not voting turnout is basically nothing, massive human rights catastrophe and desperate poverty for everyone’, then your ideology is terrible and should die. And the thing is, I do not actually think that that is the best alternative the left can offer - so for the love of g-d offer a better one, instead of doubling down on the insistence that this is all you’ve got!
Remember when Republicans pretended they were fine with legal immigration
If they don’t do something, then there is no future for the Republican party.
But don’t worry. In about ten years I’m going to be asking “remember when the democrats made fun of marrying your cousin instead of calling all objections racist?”
Maybe Dems shouldn’t brag about Demographic Destiny™ next time.
“If they don’t do something, then there is no future for the Republican party”
We can hope!
#change their policies to attract different voters
Yes, yes, very funny.
The Republicans should clearly support expanded welfare, mass migration, and culture war against the country’s ethnic majority. That won’t upset their base at all and just make them a more sucky version of the Democrats.
Honestly, if they actually started changing policies to appeal outside their party in a way that wasn’t stupid… they’d be looking to pick up Asian voters by expanding the definition of white to include them. There are already risk factors for this in the current environment, it just remains to be seen if the visual difference is too much of a leap.
And if that happened, the democrats would quickly throw Asians under the bus. Socially, I mean. Apparently it isn’t mostly white people that are displaced by Affirmative Action, etc. There have been lawsuits about this.
Of course they won’t actually do this, because both the Republican and Democratic parties are never going to actually get smarter. Maybe if we didn’t have FPTP.
Remember when Republicans pretended they were fine with legal immigration
If they don’t do something, then there is no future for the Republican party.
But don’t worry. In about ten years I’m going to be asking “remember when the democrats made fun of marrying your cousin instead of calling all objections racist?”
Maybe Dems shouldn’t brag about Demographic Destiny™ next time.
Gentle reminder that I don’t think that men are bad or that women are bad, but the discourse around them dating is bad:
Some women often hold other men and women to patriarchial gender standards
Other people act like nobody adheres to rigid gender roles any more and there is no cost to breaking them
Straight women suck at understanding what dating a woman is like
People don’t grow up right when they turn 18
Most people gradually do grow up around 22-25
Dating experiences carry over from your time as a teenager or a self-conscious adult, even though they don’t apply any more
Dating advice is dependent on lots of context, but if you are the kind of person who needs advice, you likely cannot tell what is relevant and which kind of advice applies to you
surely human relationships are the most difficult thing people ever attempt.
Hot take: making human procreation depend on human relationships was a bad idea.
Ice cold take! You are like 85 years late at least!
I was gesturing towards arranged marriages more than eugenics and artificial wombs, but either way I was hoping that this take was so cold it became hot again.
Sterilize everyone and have the State raise all children from embryos!
… h-hey! p-put down those torches and pitchforks!
Ice cold take! You are like 85 years late at least!
You’re talking about a right-wing blogger and a blogger that synthesizes right-wing ideas. Maybe we just like our takes Traditional™ and Culturally Authentic™*. How could you not have considered this?
What if we turned facile pop culture comparisons back onto shallow centrist ideology, much like Harry killing Voldemort by deflecting his own Killing Curse?
To rely on elections alone is to use a powerful magical spell to seal away the ancient evil; it will inevitably break loose and terrorize the people again. Only a sustained campaign against the roots of evil ideology will allow us to “gather and level up our party” so we can use Omnislash on - hgk - [swallows the bile rising in my throat] ugh - on the Dark Lord Chee'toragas.
*reblogs disapprovingly*
Have you even looked at popular media?
Villains are the only ones with the ambition, the will, and the plans to drive the world forward.
Villains act, heroes react. It is only by the actions of villains that the plot is driven forward. Heroes are nothing more than abominable tools of the status quo and every hierarchy that exists within it.
What has fighting for democracy gotten us in the past fifty years? Nothing but more pointless wars. The vain idealism of this country is nothing more than hollow self-gratification. It must be eliminated or transformed into something far greater.
We must immediately instate mandatory National Military Service for the nation’s youth. An assault rifle and a kukri for every able-bodied-and-minded American citizen. War production levels. Total national mobilization.
It’s time for America to go heel for real.
We will abolish the legislature and replace it with personnel from the RAND Corporation betting on outcomes of their new legislation, with a twenty billion dollar machine learning project at their fingertips intercepting information from all over the world. The cruelest and most frighteningly competent tech CEO will be chosen as the new Central Director for the North American Union, real identity concealed, and tasked with world dominion. The vast majority of Canadians live within 100 miles of the border. It will not be difficult to sweep them into the new project.
A reformed DARPA will be issued megaproject funding levels for geoengineering, exoskeletal powered armor, and cybernetic enhancement projects. The North American fleet will be outfitted with new hypervelocity railguns that cannot be stopped by mere Chinese missile intercept systems. The government will fund mass selective IVF to screen out genetic defects, and then full-on genetic engineering. “Naturals” will be made a special, separate insurance category so as not to drag on the state’s new unified military service based insurance program.
The power of eminent domain will be expanded dramatically. Old slums will be torn down and replaced with defensible, militarized housing complexes with dense public transportation and on-site commercial and light industrial complexes. Cities will be designed for high survivability in the event of nuclear war, and civil defense stations will be positioned throughout the country with multiple months of freeze-dried reserve foods in addition to water filtration systems and heavier weaponry required foreign land-based counter-invasion.
All convicted of murder, sex trafficking of minors, or unlawful sale of hard drugs will be summarily executed. Corporal punishment will be reintroduced and prison sentences will be halved or reduced to a third. The punishments for repeated offenses will square.
No longer will America engage in the half-hearted “regime change” of knocking over some pathetic middle eastern country with an illiteracy rate approaching 60% and then imagining that Liberal Democracy will instantly take root. Now, we play for keeps. Any country invaded will be subjected to a 20 year military governorship overwriting whatever aspects of the culture must be overwritten for the territory to be permanently held in the American sphere. No international apologies will ever be made. For anything.
New full-body armor with face-concealing helmets will be designed for our new heavy infantry units, including built-in augmented reality battlespace software. It is important that we provide a unique look to the faceless wall of power.
Then, and only then, having become a true sci-fi empire, can the 21st Century Protagonist emerge to instill real Freedomocracy™.
I wish I could enjoy Rick and Morty more but it’s just so incredibly mean-spirited it makes me sad
it thinks it’s about the “happy, liberating” sort of nihilism but it’s not, it’s about the sort of nihilism where you spread nothing but ruin and death and sorrow because if nothing matters that means it’s okay to hurt people endlessly
I watched a good chunk of it…
But that was always there, underneath. I do not share the morality of the creators, and I would not show this show to children.
Nah. It's usually fairly offensive and coming from the sort of people who say things like "the blacks" or call all latinxs "hispanics". Personally, I'll only accept it from older trans people since that (and transexual) was what was used during their youth).
(re: “transgendered”)
I don’t know. The events of the last few weeks are starting to make me really feel like I’d much rather have “I support the transgenders! Transgendereds are just people trying to live their lives!” over the sort of people who use absolutely perfect up-to-the-minute gender studies terminology but don’t actually like anyone.
(I mean, not that those are the only two groups, obviously someone can use correct terminology and be supportive and that’s great, but if they’re not willfully misgendering an individual, terminology is like 0.5% of someone’s Trans-Friendliness Score in my book.)
Maybe the difference is whether someone’s just unfamiliar, or whether they’ve been told “transgender is an adjective” and doubled down on “I’ll call you what I want to call you!” But I see the mere-unfamiliarity more often, and I don’t have a problem with that–it means they’re a new supporter, and new supporters are good and valuable to have.
I’ve seen some quips like “TERFs claiming that ‘TERF’ is a slur is a hilarious self-own,” which is true and all, but I think it’s a bad idea to ignore how plenty of literally-true descriptors can be caustic insults
“chinaman” always baffled me
well done, these sure are two words
slurs are ordinary words, you just curl your lip when you say them.
(if you read the wrong blogs, you’ll see them use “Mexican” as a slur)
that’s quite a thing for an avian to say. maybe you should think before opening your beak. wouldn’t want to ruffle any feathers would you?
reading up on the Ethereum / DAO hack and good lord is there some bad code out there in the world
“But what if there’s a bug and my code doesn’t do what I intended, letting someone take my money via means I didn’t expect?”
“Well, then you deserve to lose your money for your poor decision-making. Plus all the benefits of a process beyond human influence are worth making it so human judges and laws and fuzzy ideas of fairness can’t fix things. Besides, those fuzzy ideas do more harm than good.”
“There’s a bug in your code.”
”Okay, so let’s do a soft fork of the network in the short term to prevent the money from being spent, get the exchanges to freeze withdrawals, and then review what code changes we can make to give the money back to its proper owners.”
(This is a Plato’s chicken thing; if they truly deferred to the concept of ownership they’ve encoded into the software, the reaction would be “Yes, it’s the hacker’s money now, what of it?”)
Good ol’ fiat currency with fiat decision making remains the most reliable way for anyone with any grasp of the bounds of their own rationality, anyone who thinks the concept of an “unconscionable” contract has some value to them, to keep a balance.
Geeks love technology problems and hate people problems, so they try and convert every people problem into a technology problem.
Money is inherently social, because it’s merely a system for keeping track of how much you owe each other. Taking people out of the equation renders it absolutely useless, as the whole system only works by mutual agreement.
"environmental extremist, notorious hacker, and tumblr teen Argumate is taking the meaning of 'going green' literally with this exciting new genetic modification" - HuffBuzz, 2032
in the transhuman future, everyone will be a Teen!
tbh I suspect that TriggeredMedia is stuck in a loop that unless they defend literally every action done by American cops, the Anarchists are right and the state must be dismantled. they simply cannot conceive that "make better policies for better cops" could even be an option. (partly this 'contradiction' relates to other ideological policy constraints on e.g. welfare spending as alternative methods of crime reduction, most likely)
Like I said, this is what smoking pure ideology looks like. Memorize a few phrases and then think of ways to reduce everything to these phrases.
I know I sound like a broken record when I say this, but tumblr is really shockingly sex-negative. Yes, there are lots of teenagers here, but when I was a teen I recall being much more fascinated by the positive possibilities of sex than freaked out by the wrong turns, and all I see is people 1) fretting about sex as though it’s a minefield of horrors or 2) mocking people who are outspoken about enjoying sex. We spent all of the 80s and 90s fostering open dialogue, and… now I don’t know, it’s like everyone’s uncomfortable again.
I hate to be that person, but…
Maybe cybersex can be this light, airy, fun thing, but real sex, unless it’s in a monogamous, committed relationship, has characteristics that are actively against that.
When hetero, it always has the risk of babies. It always has the risk of incurable disease. It always has the risk of either causing or surfacing trauma. It’s extremely vulnerable and sensitive. It exposes our bodies with all the underlying concerns we have about them.
And it’s part of pair bonding.
A committed monogamous relationship
Ensures greater resources for parenting, should it come to that, rather than single parent destitution
Limits exposure to disease
Allows longer-term discussion and working through trauma with up to the maximum share of attention one person can provide, rather than having to open up about it repeatedly to strangers
Incentivizes mutual, reciprocal understanding as beneficial tit-for-tat
Requires opening up deep vulnerability about ourselves and our bodies to only one person, which many find less emotionally difficult
Promotes emotional bonding with someone who will emotionally bond back and still be there, regularly in one’s life
In that environment, sex can be fun, experimental, or exploratory, without having to worry so much about secondary consequences, straight, gay, or somewhere in-between.
My post didn’t opine about monogamy, so I’m not going to touch that. With regard to risk, of course sex with many partners is higher-risk than monogamy; no one questions that.
What I object to is how it seems like when sex is discussed on tumblr it’s usually in the context of risk avoidance, or with distinct distaste. When motorcycle enthusiasts or gun enthusiasts discuss their hobbies, they do it with a strong understanding of the major risks involved (if they’re smart). They sometimes even discuss the risks. But they also express excitement and enthusiasm for motorcycles and guns, and they aren’t uncomfortable about talking in detail on those subjects. In that context, the risks don’t render the activity shameful or wrong; they’re just known risks which any hobbyist should take into account. Sex is, or will become, an entertaining pastime for most of us, so I sometimes wish we could discuss it openly in that light.
But I’ve now spent too much time doing exactly what I dislike - discussing sex in a theoretical, detached way instead of talking about my own sex life / reliving good experiences / exploring fantasies - so I’ll stop here.
Fair enough.
But also I’d rather not talk too much about my sex life because of, uh, let’s call it gender hangups prevalent in both the feminist and traditionalist discourse.
Absolutely nothing could justify doing this to another person.
This article doesn’t mention that this teenager was arrested for marijuana possession. He’s being tortured over a victimless crime.
There are not victims of the drugs? I’ll let mexico and so many people here killed by gangs know that.
There are victims of drugs, but pot isn’t some sort of cyberpunk drug that turns dudes into hunter-killer zombies, and
1) Stun guns are “less than lethal” weapons, not non-lethal weapons. If you’re a gun enthusiast you should know this.
2) This isn’t the law. The law does not indicate electrical torture for pot, not even in spirit. In doing this, these men are undermining the faith of the people in the justice system and, indirectly, the very legitimacy of the state.
3) If corporal punishment were indicated (which it isn’t), some other method less likely to cause a heart attack would be a better option.
You don’t have to defend every single thing or else the anarchists win, dude. You only have to support changes to policies that would reduce this behavior in the future, such as independent prosecutorial boards for police misconduct at the state level which are not beholden to the police for their ordinary duties. America doesn’t lose anything by making its police better.
I was joking. Artificial wombs are predominantly owned by private fertility companies, especially in Europe and North America, which lease them out as part of their designer baby packages.
For the most part, the only state-owned artificial wombs are in Japan, Korea, and China, and in China they’re purely for military concerns. Though the ten thousand blossoms program in Japan has performed about as well as can be expected.
Gentle reminder that I don’t think that men are bad or that women are bad, but the discourse around them dating is bad:
Some women often hold other men and women to patriarchial gender standards
Other people act like nobody adheres to rigid gender roles any more and there is no cost to breaking them
Straight women suck at understanding what dating a woman is like
People don’t grow up right when they turn 18
Most people gradually do grow up around 22-25
Dating experiences carry over from your time as a teenager or a self-conscious adult, even though they don’t apply any more
Dating advice is dependent on lots of context, but if you are the kind of person who needs advice, you likely cannot tell what is relevant and which kind of advice applies to you
surely human relationships are the most difficult thing people ever attempt.
Hot take: making human procreation depend on human relationships was a bad idea.
Ice cold take! You are like 85 years late at least!
I was gesturing towards arranged marriages more than eugenics and artificial wombs, but either way I was hoping that this take was so cold it became hot again.
Sterilize everyone and have the State raise all children from embryos!
The rapes in Rotherham were a horrifying crime that could have been prevented
A combination of a liberal immigration policy, official adoption of multicultural value systems, and in particular a strong fear of offending Muslims allowed the travesty of Rotherham to continue
The value systems of many in the West and in particular in the United States are consistent with and likely to lead to similar horrible lapses like Rotherham again
There is generally insufficient awareness of what happened in Rotherham
It is bad tactics, extraordinarily obnoxious, and harmful to your ability properly consider all relevant factors* if you choose to bring up Rotherham at every possible relevant point, and many irrelevant points as well.
* Including, FWIW, factors that if ignored can lead to even worse sins than Rotherham itself.
There are a few different matters that I’m frequently accused of bringing up more often than is necessary. I don’t see it that way. People didn’t want to bring this up back when it mattered. I see my one-trackedness as making up lost ground. And there’s a lot of ground to make up.
Well you see, IME liberal multiculturalists tend to think that anyone to the right of them worrying about this sort of thing is a paranoid bigot that is hallucinating things because they are huffing racism, and that the only possible reasons anyone would worry are unjustified xenophobia and anti-brown-people racism. (Rationalists are kind enough to give a much greater benefit of the doubt than twitter liberals, because they are Rationalists. Which is good.)
So unfortunately, from time to time, it must be shoved into their faces that no, these concerns are not paranoid bigot hallucinations, because if it happened in one place and was covered up, then there are good odds it’s still happening in other places and being covered up.
I think once you properly incorporate that information into your worldview, what you have doesn’t count as Liberalism anymore. It could be reasonably close, but it’s a certain… cultural consciousness that was deemed morally reprehensible at the end of the last century, because it was considered dangerous and oppressive.
when i bring up the disabled, it’s not an epic gotcha, it’s a “hey, the natural order genuinely culls the disabled on a scale that would make Nazis look liberal”
Just gotta be careful so we don’t run out of fuel for the exoskeletal powersuit that is technology.
I know I sound like a broken record when I say this, but tumblr is really shockingly sex-negative. Yes, there are lots of teenagers here, but when I was a teen I recall being much more fascinated by the positive possibilities of sex than freaked out by the wrong turns, and all I see is people 1) fretting about sex as though it’s a minefield of horrors or 2) mocking people who are outspoken about enjoying sex. We spent all of the 80s and 90s fostering open dialogue, and… now I don’t know, it’s like everyone’s uncomfortable again.
I hate to be that person, but…
Maybe cybersex can be this light, airy, fun thing, but real sex, unless it’s in a monogamous, committed relationship, has characteristics that are actively against that.
When hetero, it always has the risk of babies. It always has the risk of incurable disease. It always has the risk of either causing or surfacing trauma. It’s extremely vulnerable and sensitive. It exposes our bodies with all the underlying concerns we have about them.
And it’s part of pair bonding.
A committed monogamous relationship
Ensures greater resources for parenting, should it come to that, rather than single parent destitution
Limits exposure to disease
Allows longer-term discussion and working through trauma with up to the maximum share of attention one person can provide, rather than having to open up about it repeatedly to strangers
Incentivizes mutual, reciprocal understanding as beneficial tit-for-tat
Requires opening up deep vulnerability about ourselves and our bodies to only one person, which many find less emotionally difficult
Promotes emotional bonding with someone who will emotionally bond back and still be there, regularly in one’s life
In that environment, sex can be fun, experimental, or exploratory, without having to worry so much about secondary consequences, straight, gay, or somewhere in-between.
“The people in this city looked hollow, like shitlibs. They’d broken their backs lifting Moloch up to heaven, and now they were down here in the gutter, fornicating dysgenically. The whole town stank of high time preference.”
– No Enemies to the Right (an Alexei Codeski novel)
She walked hypergamously into my office. Tall, blonde and Nordic subtype. On average, the best ones always are.
I looked up and took a hard pull from my flask. It was filled with contraband gin, held up in the FDA approval process for years by demotic regulators. It burned like the core of a chronically mis-managed city in my bold, truth-telling throat.
“I need a PI” she said, sizing me up for long-term investment potential.
“A predictive index for what?” I asked, passing her shit-test with ease. “Don’t you know that noticing is illegal nowadays? I don’t do that kind of stuff any more.” I tossed my dog-eared copy of The Bell Curve into the wastebasket with a sigh and set it on fire.
“No, silly, a private investigator. I have a case.”The hamster was spinning furiously.
“I know. I was just ironically voicing outrageous opinions to ward off the uninitiated.”
She smiled in-groupically. “I like a man who can countersignal competence.”
It’s not obvious if you should have MORE affirmative action or LESS affirmative action depending on Charles Murray’s hypothesis form The Bell Curve and Coming Apart of an emerging cognitive elite.
Won’t merit-plus-class-based affirmative action increase social stratification in the long run?
The solution is clearly to create some kind of rich kid quota for menial jobs.
> not choosing a government voucher for genetic engineering and selection technologies
Get with the times, brah. Those IQ points aren’t going to enhance themselves. Directly, anyway.
For my part, I note that the Rightful Caliph of our community pointed out that American non-gun homicides are almost as high as total homicides in Western European countries, before you even add in the gun crime.
We have a lot of work to do in this country. I have some ideas, which some of you know if you’ve been reading this blog.
Guns laws themselves often seem relatively uncorrelated with crime.
And, over time, I’ve been shifting in favor of the second amendment, whereas in the past I wasn’t so sure about it.
The reason the conservatives do not support a gun registry, which would otherwise be an entirely sane idea, is that it’s the first step in “round up all the guns.”
There is no “round up all the guns” without first knowing their locations. Going house to house doing a deep search is prohibitively expensive.
They’ll just hide them. There are so many guns in this country, the round-up won’t even get half of them.
Any event dramatic enough to make the current crop of conservatives agree to round up all the guns isn’t going to be small, either, and most of them would involve said conservatives not wanting to give up their guns.
Mass shootings? Mass shootings by Muslims? Not enough. The response has been to want guns even more in order to shoot back.
You’d need something bordering on an ethnic armed insurrection, at which point many of them would want guns to fight against the ethnic armed insurrection.
It’s true that this hasn’t always been the case in the past, that previous gun control laws were deliberately racist.
However, the clock ticks Democrat, Republican, Democrat, Republican. Do the GOPpers trust that the following Democratic President will have their best interests in mind once the guns are gone? I’m guessing no.
So the kind of event we’re talking about, the one that convinces the current conservatives in this country to yield their firearms (and not bury them in boxes in their back yards) is likely one where Leftists start talking about how they need guns…
I rather doubt we’ve exhausted the limits for improving the abilities of the poor of our nation when it comes to lead removal, and poverty in this country is not evenly distributed.
The reason the conservatives do not support a gun registry, which would otherwise be an entirely sane idea, is that it’s the first step in “round up all the guns.”
There is no “round up all the guns” without first knowing their locations. Going house to house doing a deep search is prohibitively expensive.
They’ll just hide them. There are so many guns in this country, the round-up won’t even get half of them.
Any event dramatic enough to make the current crop of conservatives agree to round up all the guns isn’t going to be small, either, and most of them would involve said conservatives not wanting to give up their guns.
Mass shootings? Mass shootings by Muslims? Not enough. The response has been to want guns even more in order to shoot back.
You’d need something bordering on an ethnic armed insurrection, at which point many of them would want guns to fight against the ethnic armed insurrection.
even BLM discourse typically strays into ethnic nationalism, either by advocating to supplant the white minority, or by black separatist nationalism.
Legit: I think the Liberal plan is implicitly “you can’t have oppression by an ethnic majority if you don’t have an ethnic majority,” but I don’t think they realize just how badly that can backfire.
The sad part is, once that little ideology-huffing guy leaves my image like the Anon asked, it will one day end up as part of a boomerpost on Twitter, where the ideology label is replaced with “DEMOCRAT PROPAGNDA”.
Its true use as a memetic ordnance does intend the first panel as a key part of the payload, but it lacks the full subtext without the rest of it:
The idea that Liberal Democracy is the natural moral order of the universe enables the very imperialism that people complain about, fucks up the countries that could have been made into real liberal democracies by that very imperialism, and gets people killed.
Against truth, we spread this idea of liberal democracy and human rights as the end of history, the final triumph of the Enlightenment ideals that reshaped our civilizations, out of fear that to do otherwise would result in a war of all against all. But this, too, had its consequences.
