plot twist: three different women with different value sets
plot twist: all hypocritical feminists are just one really, really busy woman named Marcy
Anonymous asked:
bloodandhedonism answered:
Annex everything down to Tierra Del Fuego and turn it all into US states and give everyone living there, or who comes from there, US citizenship. I’m serious.
(Annex Canada too at this rate because screw Canada, Canada is evil.)
It’s a defacto empire as is and formalizing this stuff is always good, but the genuine benefit is that as citizens, they get more legal protections and have to be paid proper wages, they can’t be screwed over and underpaid like a lot of immigrant workers currently are – presuming they actually stay here and aren’t temp workers that is. I have noticed Trump’s administration going after H2-B visas lately, that’s interesting.
Have you ever actually met immigrant and temp workers? I have, lots due to where I live. It’s a worst-of-both-worlds situation, for them and for citizens due to labor pressure being undone.
Also, if there are still people who want cheap labor that badly, we’ll see literal boatloads of people coming in from Africa, and boy howdy that’s been a familiar sight before in American history that just about everyone here won’t want to see repeated again, and rightfully so.
Well, it’s not called the United States of One-Third of North America, after all.
With the right conditions, I could be convinced to add the entirety of Mexico to the North American Union United States of America.
ironically the recycling plants catch fire so frequently that they are essentially just incinerating the waste instead of recycling it.
Post-consumer recycling of most non-metallic resources is just pointless.
There is a point, but it’s not obvious. There’s a good article on this on Cato Unbound here. The unseen benefit of recycling is to divert material away from landfills, which are expensive. So expensive, in fact, that if we charged people the true cost of landfill disposal, they would resort to illegal dumping. We don’t want that, so we subsidize garbage disposal at the consumer level, and post-consumer recycling programs are an attempt to mitigate the cost of that subsidy.
It’s putting the charge at the wrong end of the system. Put a landfill deposit on new products based on their rough contents, use the principal to buy the land and the interest to operate the landfills. Pay out money from the fund when recycling firms permanently recover waste from the landfill, based on rough contents.
Efficient land and resource usage, recycling, purchasing of used goods thereby incentivized.
Is this going to be the new thing now? “Baizuo”?
*groans*
The year is 2064. Having given up on America and Europe, the last remaining members of the Alt Right undergo racial alteration surgery and genetic splicing to join Chairman Liu’s Neo-Chinese Empire, a governmental franchise operating seven megacities on the Asia-Pacific rim.
As a security officer at the front of the Empire’s fight against the Pan-Islamic Caliphate, a sort of distributed theocratic government with enclaves throughout Africa, the Middle East, and Europe, Victor Fang (born Richard Spencer, many years ago) is returned to Hong Kong after being injured by an IED, but he’s about to find out just how deep the Caliph’s conspiracies run…
Discourse Questions
Write a 5-page call-out blog post based on answering one of these six topics and submit it to Tumblr Dot Com.
The submission form for your callout post can be found at http://argumate.tumblr.com. For full credit, please address your callout to a hypothetical Tumblr user named “Argumate” for disagreeing with whatever your opinion may be. Remember to refuse to read or respond to any counter-arguments, and instead double down on refuted positions and behave like someone with zero reading comprehension, becoming increasingly irate as it turns out the callout subject did not say what you claimed they did.
person who literally forgot about the sun and the water cycle: uhhhh we need to go back to nature. back to our roots, is where we need to go to. the basics
I can’t wait to have a powered rolling metal box carry me 100km closer to where I want to go in 60 minutes. Maybe it will happen one day, in convenience and comfort.
it’s intriguing to imagine the myths you could tell an Iron Age tribe that would actually be correct as well as sounding awesome, like:
humans and apes share a common ancestor, and further back share an ancestor with all mammals, bird, reptiles, fish, and ultimately all living things.
the Earth is over four billion years old.
each of the fixed stars in the sky is another sun like our own.
This is actually something I think about periodically. If religion is true, why doesn’t it contain some scientific fact that couldn’t be proved for another 1,000-2,000 years? Why push only the faith element so hard in a world where spiritual experiences aren’t limited to your religion?
I think that’s yet another unanswerable objection to religion - it would be very simple for anyone in the ancient world who was actually omniscient to demonstrate that they knew things that couldn’t possibly be known by people of that time and place, and since they are already trying to provide direct proof of the supernatural to a limited audience with miracles it doesn’t really make sense for them not to do it in an effective way that’d silence the skeptics everywhere.
Imagine if Muhammad had carved a map of the dark side of the Moon into the Kaaba
Imagine if we sequenced the human genome and discovered that what we thought was junk DNA was actually the text of the Book of Mormon
Actually what if both of those things happened would that be fucked up or what
Ancient people: “I’ll believe in your god if you can show me the miracles.”
Modern people: “If we had evidence, it wouldn’t be true faith.”
muhammad supposedly did do a bunch of stuff like that, and you occasionally see muslim articles like ‘look at all these scientific miracles in the qur’an that we didn’t know about til recently!‘ or prophecies etc.
when you look into it it turns almost always turns out either it WAS known by people at the time, or it’s not true, but a lot of people just believe it without looking into it.
(e.g. muhammad supposedly split the moon and reattached it at one point, and theres a thing going ‘when they went to the moon they found a massive crack running through it’ or stuff about stages of fetal development).
Lots of people in the Christian world believe that women have one more rib than men.
i believed that for ages even after i stopped believing. i assumed people had noticed women have an extra rib and included that in the creation story as an explanation way back when, rather than just ‘no one bothered to check and count the number of ribs in x thousand years’. it’s not like rib counting technology is super advanced.
Does it even explicitly say in the Bible that all men since Adam have one fewer rib?
I don’t really know one way or the other. Just that it says God took one of Adam’s ribs to create Eve. Unless you believe in Lamarckian inheritance, I’m not sure why that implies all his descendants have one fewer as well.
I wonder where that belief originated…
The story I saw on here about that a while back was that what gets translated as ‘rib’ actually is a euphemism for baculum (penis bone!) and that bit of Genesis is a just-so story explaining why humans don’t have one, unlike the herd animals Bronze Age shepherds would be familiar with, who were created male and female to begin with
Oh, spare me the argumentum ad baculum!
Reblogged for Crom’s comments and also “Actually what if both of those things happened would that be fucked up or what”
Last year, two of my friends were falsely accused of rape.
One of them was lucky enough to have evidence - texts from the girl expressing enthusiasm about the experience and agreeing that she had initiated and expressed implicit consent (like getting a condom, putting it on him, and asking him to fuck her harder) - but that didn’t stop rumors spreading. It turns out she had a boyfriend, and probably fed him a different story in order to prevent him being mad at her.
My friend got uninvited from parties and had people warning his friends about his sexual offense. Eventually the story morphed into the rumor that he had assaulted two people, but when he asked the supposed second person, she had no idea what he was talking about.
My other friend wasn’t lucky enough to have direct evidence. He never found out who was accusing him - an image began circulating virally with his face, name, where he lived, and a long description of his supposed ‘violent assault.’ People he didn’t know started contacting all his facebook friends and warning them that he was a violent rapist. He received threats and hate mail.
He didn’t have any absolute proof that he was innocent, but his reputation was solid. I saw messages from previous casual sexual partners (who’d been contacted by friends of the accuser) saying the accusations were strange because he’d only ever been respectful and they couldn’t imagine him doing something like that. He lived in a house with roommates, and his roommates had met all his sexual partners, and they said all of them had seemed happy to be there and fine when they left. Everyone who knew him was confused by the accusations. He was a close, old friend of mine. I’d had seen him interact with many casual sexual partners during our friendship, and he had always been consent-oriented and not pushy. He refused to have sex with people who were intoxicated.
I suspect it might have been a similar circumstance to my first friend - he had sex with someone who had a boyfriend, and then she’d lied about it in order to avoid telling her boyfriend that she’d cheated.
It’s also possible that it wasn’t even anyone who had sex with him, but just anyone who disliked him and wanted to hurt him.
–
Neither of the accusers went to the police, probably because their claims were false. They stayed out of the legal system and proceeded to destroy my friends’ reputations on a social scale. I suspect false rape accusations are more common than we think, mainly because false accusers have a special incentive not to report to the police.
And even if they are rare, the power to destroy lives is incredibly serious. One of my friends became suicidal and went on medication to keep himself from self harming. The mental distress he underwent from the false accusation seemed comparable to that of a rape victim.
The problem is that people have the power to do this to each other, and we don’t have any social system in place for preventing this. I don’t think we should believe all victims absolutely - we should ascribe probability to their stories, and be far more cautious before we take actions to socially punish the accused.
I want to help rape victims, but I can’t justify it when it’s at the expense of other victims.
–
Also, there are shitty people in the world, shitty enough to hurt other people for any reason - feelings of power, personal gain, revenge - and if a woman can ruin a man’s life by falsely accusing him of rape, without having to go to the police - shitty women will absolutely take this route. They have nothing to lose if they’re in a culture of ‘never question a rape victim.’
There are people out there that have the capacity to do it and the motivation, much as is the same with actual rapists. I don’t really understand the argument that false accusations are implausible or extremely rare. “Someone shitty has something to gain by hurting another person” is not exactly a rare scenario.
Too often the response is to blame any system with exploitable reporting on the people who abuse that, as if a gun should be left lying around a crowded room because only bad people would misuse it. It’s the system, not the “bad apples.”
(And it must be kept in mind, despite agreement with the above, harassment and stalking of women who have no idea how to respond because official channels are not proportionate to the offense are also still serious problems. I know victims of stalking. I know targets of witch hunts. Yes, in our cosmopolitan social bubble, yes in the very recent past. It’s a messy, complicated world out there.)
I’ll just note that “if you find yourself alone in on a room with a really bad person in a sexual context they can seriously mess up your life and get away with it because there were no witnesses” was the status quo for women before circa 1990. Rape is a crime that almost always happens in a situation where there is no convincing physical evidence, where it is plausible that no crime occurred at all, where a material part of the crime is the effective communication of an inner mental state of the victim.
Given all that, a system that only relied on the legal system with its high burdens of proof, particularly when combined with rampant misogyny, means that rape accusations succeeded in only the most brazen and obvious circumstances. It meant men could hurt women with impunity.
I’m not saying the right answer is jus to flip things around and make men as vulnerable as women used to be, but honestly unless you start fucking in semi-public spaces like responsible degenerates I have no idea how to make this not zero sum.
Attention to the truth is not zero-sum. People should act on what they truly believe is accurate.
What we see in these accusations, and most crimes tied to ideology (ie, the belief that rape is part of rape culture is part of the patriarchy is part of conservatism, and thus that fighting sexual assault has a political component) is the desire to disavow your own judgment. You may personally be unsure a rape did not take place, but for the sake of the political project you must act as if you did.
(Additionally in these social witch hunts, the problem is rarely disagreement over the facts of what happened. It’s more about the interpretation of those facts, and things like, as you say, someone’s internal mental state.)
In the past we had the reverse of this, where you might believe a man did something heinous, but were pressured to pretend nothing bad happened so the town could continue on in peaceful harmony. So you keep him away from your daughters, but otherwise ignore the victim. That too was disavowal.
You must take responsibility for your own judgment. This includes what you think of the accused, and of the victim, and of the context, and their other relationships with people, and of moral questions like forgiveness and justice. (Very, very often in the modern context that conclusion will be: I think the accused did not mean to hurt anyone and is safe for others to be around, but the victim is hurt and needs space to feel safe now.)
It’s terrifying because people will call you all sorts of terms coded with political betrayal. But to give in and claim what you do not believe is true, is the cowardice that condemns people to silence and lies.
The good news here is that we’ve enjoyed so much social progress that Ourobouros is starting to eat his own tail, and we’ll soon be back to the symmetrical, Victorian-era standard of “never be alone in a room with someone of the opposite sex unless they’re your spouse, because it will cause Rumor and Scandal.”
aka, you won’t get accused because she cheated on her boyfriend if you are the boyfriend
Yes, this is by no means foolproof, but it is wise to reduce one’s potential attack surface.
The risk of false accusation is probably weighted more heavily on a per-partner basis, longer dating makes hiding two-timing proportionally more difficult, allows better anticipation of hangups and other risk factors, etc.
I’ve never really been a “social model of disability” kind of person but boy howdy am I becoming one
I could get along just fine without all the neurotypicals constantly going “just remember: you’ll never actually be normal!”
@faeline said: Honestly, I’d be a lot more okay with that model if it allowed for my actual problems functioning. People are shitty but that doesn’t explain why sometimes I don’t eat until 3PM.
Agreed. It’s not society’s fault that my brain sometimes short-circuits. I dislike the idea that you can just handwave away the actual symptoms. But my internal symptoms don’t have to inhibit my getting along in the world as much as they currently do. When a not-autistic person and I have a problem communicating, I wish the fault weren’t automatically assumed to be mine. I wish they were encouraged to speak my language a little bit, given that I spend 99% of the time trying to speak theirs.
The City of Autismburg, founded in 2022 as a haven for autistic individuals,
And before anyone knew it, Autistic Nationalism had become a movement,
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.
