no gf we die like gamers
Okay but like seriously I expect double digit % mass defection from being male when transhumanism hits.
In other words, the gamers will realize they were the gfs all along.
Anonymous asked:
Dearest Anon-kun,
My representation is a bit more dire than how I actually interpret the situation, in part because it’s intended as a counter-balance to mainstream feminism, which strips women of their agency and refuses to critically examine their role in the social dynamics which create these situations.
“Women are powerless” is really quite deeply normalized almost everywhere! It’s very insidious.
Comments regarding even cishet neurotypical women should be regarded as generalizations that do not uniformly apply to the population, and many subgroups don’t necessarily fit them. Additionally, low-status women also exist. In fact, women that don’t fit this mold are more common in my subcultures!
Additionally,
1) I have a reasonable shot at making it to the Transhuman era.
2) I have a close relationship to my ex WRT expressed vulnerability & female companionship, though not sexually.
3) Have you observed the number of self-identified “traps” and other such individuals among the Alt Right? I believe this represents a sign of an impending Male Gender Meltdown, the consequences of which are hard to predict. Overall, I do think progress is being made, as indicated by the appearance of multiple male gender movements.
Also,
All my exes are bisexual (and therefore have no set reason to behave in a certain pattern of attraction), and this blog will continue to not disclose my sex/gender.
Kind Regards,
Miti
P.S. If you are secretly the tumblr user known as BA, this blog hopes for your swift recovery regardless of whether that is low in probability. If you are secretly tumblr user RO, this blog hopes for an increase in your available useful energy.
SSC’s latest seems like a classic case of letting gender politics obfuscate power and class issues that cut across gender.
He quotes some PUA:
Polyamory — multiple and simultaneous sexual relationships — means, in practice, a few high value dudes hording all the pussy.
And then he uses both his intuitive experience and his LW survey data to show that men and women in polyamory date about the same number of people. There’s at least no clear cut numerical advantage to men. My experience also agrees.
But what if we neuter that sentence, and look at it again:
Polyamory — multiple and simultaneous sexual relationships — means, in practice, a few high value people dudes hording all the dates.
Which is to say, charismatic and confident people of either gender, dating a lot of people, and awkward and introverted people of both genders dating no one, only one person, or being a hanger on in a larger polycule that doesn’t get a lot of attention from the partner regardless.
That sounds… less implausible. It doesn’t exactly match my observed experience, but it’s not super far from it either. I’ve certainly seen in nerdy groups a Queen Bee that is dating half the men, in a way that seems parallel to the alpha-males that PUA’s fear/worship.
It’s not at all clear that this is bad. This seems just as likely to be the result of “some people want more partners, and are more socially outgoing to find them, while some people want less or are less willing to put themselves out there to meet them,” which would be fine. Or it could be this high-value thing. (I detest rat-tumb’s focus on high-status-males as the evil beneficiary of social engineering, which seems both empirically and ontologically unsound, but from a capitalist-critical perspective, “liberalizing trade regimes” often means “the rich people get more stuff and poor people somehow have less.”)
But, I’m also not going to be surprised by the subjective perspective of people low on the social totem pole. Before, they had hope in this pigeon-hole thing, where each person could get at most one partner, so eventually the people as attractive as them would realize their best chance for a life long relationship was with fellow low-class dates like themselves. It was a bad model, but I’m aware people believed in it. Now they worry no one will be left waiting for them, and they’ll be entirely alone forever. So there’s some people who seem to be having a lot of sex (stealing their jouissance) and they aren’t reaping the benefits.
The answers they come up with are usually dumb, but they are at least seeing/feeling a thing.
Bambam honey darling kun, and also @slatestarscratchpad friend,
I love weird nerds but weird nerds aren’t a representative sample for the behavior of typical relationship norms.
A better example for normies applying this would be all the other countries, territories and communities where polygamy is practiced, as well as communities within the US where one man will have 11 kids by 8 different women.
No full poly until Tranhumanism makes it possible to ‘defect’ from both your sex and sexual orientation, pls.
Now, more seriously, online, gender presentation is a sign of social intent. Under Transhumanism, it can become a sign of social intent as well, but that will change what it means into something new. Fascinating, tbh.
this would be a better thread if it had less occurrences of the word “dudebro”
but the disagreement over death is really the central issue here.
meh. I agree that the not dealing well with the source material and smugness are issues, and for sure it did have a sense of ‘i’m gonna pick HP because it’s popular’ and the treatment of ron and hermione did kinda suck. I really liked HPMOR overall but it certainly had a ton of flaws. for example, it started out doing stuff like investigating the system of magic and there were allusions to atlantis or the source of magic etc. and then it just…stopped. And that was one of my favourite bits.
but i can’t get over the ‘death is a part of life and thinking death is bad is the REAL bad thing uwu’ stuff here. death is bad and sucks, we can work on improving quality of life sure, but improving quantity of life is not bad because ‘then we don’t appreciate how special the tiny bit of life we actually do have is’. and yeah fuck off with the dudebro bullshit.
I didn’t read all of that but I seriously doubt it could contain anything more insufferable than just being in long-form Twitter.
manverbing is the new manshaming
Anonymous asked:
cyberpunkpixeljunk answered:
Nah, just make sure the women in the setting fit the setting. Plus, what do we know about this game? It could be just fine.
Ugh…
Transhumanism destroys gender/sex binaries by enabling mass alteration of bodies, sex, and gender.
Done properly it will be “Post-Feminist” because Transhumanism massively weakens the boundaries around what the term “woman” even means, and fundamentally alters the mechanics of human reproduction. (I mean, just take the idea of artificial wombs by itself and you’ll get big changes.)
Feminism itself is already struggling to adapt to the world it has created with only modern technology levels. The “Feminists” of 2065 (or whatever) will likely be very different from the ones of 2017.
WE USED TO HAVE A GENDER BINARY
This assumes that the gender binary isn’t something many people want (on some level or another). Considering that clothes often up being gendered, it wouldn’t be surprising to me if bodies become even more gendered among a significant portion of the population. We already have this to a certain extent. After all, men don’t get breast implants even though (unless you count transwomen or related things). Even if you could trans people, then number of ciswomen getting breast implants and cismen getting breast reduction out-numbers them (I think, I am not sure where to look for stats about this.)
Even women shaving legs while men generally don’t could be seen as a evidence that give the opportunity to make the gender differences even greater, people will.
Absolutely. Go on Second Life and you’ll see muscle mountains posing as men.
What I’m expecting however, is mass defection from a significant contingent of men, and a smaller counter-part group among women, into something new.
“Women Less Responsible,” the headline read.
“For what?” She asked, looking over the newspaper.
“Black People More Likely,” the newspaper headlines continued.
tagging myself i’m also “memeplex” used completely unironically
we can’t say memeplex now? what do you think Patriarchy even is
My Little Discourse: Patriarchy is Magic
Wonder Woman strikes a blow against the patriarchy by having the male lead be only 4 years older than the female lead instead of 40 years older.
MRAs might see it as a victory against “female hypergamy” when the woman is actually older and slightly wealthier. Not sure how to be woke in that case.
Oh, this one is obvious. By the laws of vague internet liberal feminism, any activity can be transmuted into female empowerment if it’s done by a woman. Easy! Next question, please.
@digging-holes-in-the-river reminded me of a form of sexism, or at least huge wrongness, that I sometimes suffer from, although I think I’m improving.
Logical belief: as reported by reliable statisticians, women are 52% of the population
Alief: women are a small minority, like 5% or something. They don’t really take part in society.
I think I get this from working in a very male dominated profession, and, to the extent I ever socialise, socialising with people from that profession.
I don’t often seem women complaining about this kind of view, presumably on the view it’s too ludicrous to occur to them, although I think complaints like “why are you treating all women as a uniform special case” are a sort of second-order effect.
I mean you’d feel like that in some industries, business, politics.
On the other hand: primary school teachers, nurses, dental hygienists (apparently 98% female, in Australia at least).
It’s interesting when you see a particular field pass 50% female intake because you know there’s going to be a shake up coming when all the old guys hit retirement age and society recodes whatever it is as a ‘girl thing’.
Victoria Police has got their female representation up from 8% to 26% and I’m really curious to see how people react if it ever gets to 50% or above, that’ll be totes fun.
Some Normie: as reported by reliable statisticians, women are 52% of the population
A Nerd: women are a small minority, like 5% or something. they don’t really take part in society.
Enlightened Discourse Master: there are no women, only men and traps
SAN FRANCISCO—In an effort to reduce the number of unprovoked hostile communications on the social media platform, Twitter announced Monday that it had added a red X-mark feature verifying users who are in fact perfectly okay to harass. “This new verification system offers users a simple, efficient way to determine which accounts belong to total pieces of shit whom you should have no qualms about tormenting to your heart’s desire,” said spokesperson Elizabeth James, adding that the small red symbol signifies that Twitter has officially confirmed the identity of a loathsome person who deserves the worst abuse imaginable and who will deliberately have their Mute, Block, and Report options disabled. “When a user sees this symbol, they know they’re dealing with a real asshole who has richly earned whatever mistreatment they receive, including profanity, body-shaming, leaking of personal information, and relentless goading to commit suicide. It’s really just a helpful way of saying to our users, ‘This fuck has it coming, so do your worst with a clear conscience and without fear of having your account suspended.’” At press time, Twitter reassuredly clarified that the red X was just a suggestion and that all users could still be bullied with as little recourse as they are now.
