PATREON EXCLUSIVE (Full Video): Is it ok for men to expect sex in a marriage?
Added 2024-09-25 03:02:32 +0000 UTC
Comments
@RhodiumMaiden - Sorry you didn't like the show (never read the book myself), but a bit surprised to hear the REASON: It was based solely on "multiculturalism & miscegenation"? Seems as if story and plot were minor issues for you (or were somehow clouded by your desire for "Ethnocentrism")? That's disappointing. Why did you call the multiculturalism (and miscegenation?) forced and unbelievable? I would think you would've agreed (based on your own expressed fears for the diminution of "Western European Whites"), that this future was instead, EXACTLY where you thought things were headed. I too am annoyed by tokenism in the media, but only because it is ham-fisted, not because it simply EXISTS. For me, a good story trumps all else (including politics and ideology). "The wealthy and highly skilled will have the best choices to stay or to go". As I mentioned to @Cezary Skoczek earlier, the likelihood is that the vast bulk of the settlers in outer space will be the poor, the "dispossessed" and the desperate/greedy, just as it was during any migration into the unknown on Earth. The Darwins, the Lewis and Clarks and the slew of upper-class dilettantes were just the early gentlemen-scientists and scholars whose names go on the plaques besides their graves. The nameless "poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free -- the wretched refuse of our teeming shores" will form the TRUE homesteaders. If there are any more of "your kin" still around, I'm sure "Space" can be made for them too. đ
Joseph Omega
2024-11-28 06:09:27 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - "Most wars are fundamentally over resources". Correct: "OVER resources", not "BECAUSE OF resources". Wars result FROM differences, and are FOR "stuff", both by definition: "I DESERVE this 'stuff' more than you do." "I deserve it more because MY needs are greater (or more worthy) than YOURS." And I'm not just talking about "adversity", I'm talking about full-scale "wars" that involve (or precipitate) "atrocities". And, as to horrors of this magnitude occurring "among those who are ethnically very similar if not the same", it's only because, at the time of the conflict, those, who an outsider would call "ethnically similar", did not feel this way about their adversary -- Germans have LONG believed themselves to be RACIALLY SUPERIOR to the Slavs (or the French or the English, etc.) even BEFORE the concept of "race" in the modern sense was ever a thing ... before "White" was even a thing. And Romans had little problem slaughtering Huns and Prussians alike, as they were CLEARLY little more than savage animals. "Anti-blackness is far less destructive" seems to contradict the realities of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade or the European "Scramble for Africa". "Countries should be ethnically homogenous" also contradicts the European Union countries where Celts are now free to mix with Germanic people and Scandinavians and Iberians and ... dare I say it the IRISH and ITALIANS! "As for colonialism, itâs a fact of life." Even IF this were true, it actually created MORE heterogeneity than just about ANY other cultural practice. As for Israel, one can say that it is a COLONY of America, just as Palestine is theirs. Go figure. "I think all races have their advantages and disadvantages. It would be difficult to objectively evaluate them hierarchically, so I can only tell you that I do strongly prefer my own people." But WHO are "your people" exactly? I suspect they aren't the Germans -- you called yourself a "WASP". And you certainly LOOK like you COULD be SĂĄmi (Laplander?) - don't hold me to that, as much of my knowledge of these phenotypes comes via National Geographic. đ˘ "... but I donât necessarily view others as inferior." Why the euphemistic qualifier "necessarily"? Either you do, or you don't. I will not judge. "I think everyone has biases, but most are simply not honest about them." Indeed. "Not a fan of AI summaries." Neither am I, if by "summary" you mean using a Chatbot as search engine for "facts" and "source material". I use it almost exclusively as someone (something) to interact will logically and intellectually -- if you read my conversations, you may notice how I normally begin with an innocent enough question, then through probing and interactions, clarify and refine my OWN ideas. Of course one COULD get ChatGPT to cite references for everything it says or position it takes, but that just slows down my own thought processes -- in keeping with my admitted distractibility. "If you canât see how miscegenation (at least en masse) leads to ethnic and thus cultural genocide we will have to just agree to disagree." Do I SOUND as if I am not open to being convinced of logical arguments? One can only "see" what one is "shown". "Surely you can see that it would lead to a decline in rare recessive phenotypes, which could lead to a decline in those alleles themselves." I'm no geneticist, but specifically WHICH alleles are you most concerned with diluting in the population? Are they ones that somehow IMPROVE genetic fitness? Or is this more a nostalgic concern, such as for freckles, green eyes or red hair? How do you feel about the frequency of albinism or even hemophilia (the so-called "royal disease")? Here in America there is an unkind joke concerning in-breeding among "White Trash" in the Appalachian mountains. All I can say is "Be careful what you wish for". Again, without judgement or criticism, these concerns sound suspiciously close to ones I've long heard in Progressive circles that strive to save the habitat of the "Spotted Owl", or to preserve native speakers of Navajo or Quechua languages. Your views otherwise sound more Conservative to me. "Occasional admixture is inevitable and likely beneficial." I hope you saw my dialogue with ChatGPT on that specific topic. "The fact that we can trace our ancestral heritage to such specific locations ... shows how little outbreeding has generally occurred for most of the past several millennia at least." I would not be surprised but, except for the occasional periods of mass migration of peoples over vast distances (most notably the Golden Horde of Genghis Khan and the uncounted millions he drove ahead of his armies into the European subcontinent from Asia), humans VERY RARELY migrated that far away from their ancestral homelands -- certainly not like nowadays. "European whiteness is obviously a spectrum, but specific clusters still exist within it." This may be time again for another definitional interlude. I get the impression that "Whiteness" is defined QUITE differently in different parts of the world and at different times. How do YOU define it? Here in the US, Arabs (not one of your favorite peoples, I know) are occasionally included, but maybe not so in YOUR current neck of the woods? I'm not quite sure of the point you were last trying to make concerning the relative segregation of "White" people in the Americas and elsewhere. If in support of "Ethnocentrism", can you more explicitly articulate your argument?
Joseph Omega
2024-11-28 05:34:23 +0000 UTC@JO Btw, I tried to read the expanse after I found out that it was based on a book series. But the multiculturalism (& miscegenation) is even worse in the books than in show (plus the writing sucked), and I have no tolerance for that level of forced, unbelievable multiculturalism. Iâm still annoyed by token characters in older media too. That is the one downside of my enhanced racial awareness. If I didnât want children Iâd like working for SG-1, and Iâd probably risk raising a family on SG Atlantis. I always did ship Weir & Sheppard. SoâŚit depends I guess. But Mars prior to terraforming, no. Also the wealthy and highly skilled will have the best choices to stay or to go, and hopefully my kin will continue that heritage. I have to say that this future seems possible: https://br.ifunny.co/meme/races-of-the-usa-2120-judeo-hapas-races-coastal-whites-un0fg3FX8
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-28 03:11:16 +0000 UTC@JO Itâs complicated to explain and I am not sure that itâs fully understood enough yet but my assessment at this point is that while itâs good to have a mix of schizotypal and autistic traits and they do help to balance the person overall, they donât actually cancel each other out. Perhaps an example would help. I have extreme hyperfocus and can do highly repetitive manual tasks or read up on a specific subject for many hours with no breaks except to drink water & urinate. The fact that I also have an extremely vivid imagination and can be wildly creative completely off the cuff does not detract from my ability to hyper focus. Iâm either in one mode or the other. Of course there are circumstances where Iâm tapping into both schizotypal and autistic traits simultaneously (a good example would be doing an astrology reading) but again itâs not as if the traits are tempering each other so much as complementing. Btw, did I mention that Malcolm and JREG also came up with this schizotypal versus autism theory and both have made videos on the topic? Perhaps they will explain it better than I have. They certainly go into more depth. Though only JREG talks about a blend of traits.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-28 02:26:16 +0000 UTC@JO That only reinforces my prior point.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-28 02:14:47 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Adaptation to technological charge involves the evolution of CULTURAL replicators (i.e. "memes"), the product of our BIOLOGICAL replicatiors (i.e. "genes"). You can't escape NATURE that easy.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-28 01:56:13 +0000 UTC@JO Ethnocentrism does NOT necessarily equate to âdifferences in values, opinions, perspectives and perceptionsâ. Furthermore, I would argue that most wars are fundamentally over resources although they may CLAIM other reasons. Which is why there is plenty of adversity among those who are ethnically very similar if not the same. Anti-blackness is far less destructive imo. But this is why countries should be ethnically homogenous; then there is no added friction or competition, or concerns about equity and inclusion etc. As for colonialism, itâs a fact of life. And apparently itâs still allowed, if youâre Israel. I think all races have their advantages and disadvantages. It would be difficult to objectively evaluate them hierarchically, so I can only tell you that I do strongly prefer my own people, but I donât necessarily view others as inferior. I think everyone has biases, but most are simply not honest about them. Not a fan of AI summaries, especially on these types of topics. I much prefer to look at the source material myself. If you canât see how miscegenation (at least en masse) leads to ethnic and thus cultural genocide we will have to just agree to disagree. Surely you can see that it would lead to a decline in rare recessive phenotypes, which could lead to a decline in those alleles themselves. As with all things there are degrees to outbreeding. Ideally we marry our third cousins (or the genetic equivalent), but sometimes someone marries someone from a neighbouring country, or even another continent. Occasional admixture is inevitable and likely beneficial. But the fact that we can trace our ancestral heritage to such specific locations (at least within Europe; I am not as familiar with the non-European data) shows how little outbreeding has generally occurred for most of the past several millennia at least. It would have occurred FAR less often too were it not for the Catholic church banning consanguineal marriage. European whiteness is obviously a spectrum, but specific clusters still exist within it. Even in the US, which has had much more mixing, there are still relatively distinct white subgroups. Itâs really only in Latin America that there has been substantial mixing and even there there have always been groups which have remained quite segregated.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-28 01:51:36 +0000 UTC@JO Yes, but evolution, at least on a biological level does not occur as quickly as technological advancement and so we cannot adapt to technological progress quickly enough. Thus, I think the preeminent human challenge is to learn how to use technology wisely.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-28 01:41:03 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Is not "Evolution", by defintion, a "progress" (based upon adaptation to changing circumstances)? Even our brains are products of Nature, even (or especially) when they generate "memes", that in turn evolve.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-28 01:19:45 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Wars and mass atrocities result, by definition, from INTENSE "differences in values, opinions, perspectives and perceptions", the very HALLMARKS of the focus on one's own importances. "Ethnocentrism" is ONLY a force -- one of MANY. The fact of your thinking that "there is POSITIVE ethnocentrism ... and NEGATIVE ethnocentrism" bears this out SPLENDIDLY. "Anti-whiteism is destructive" certainly to "Whites", but I suspect "NON-whites" may thrive, regardless, just as they had prior to the last 500 years of their "discovery". Similarly, to think that "Anti-blackness is destructive to Whites" is a common trope of the Progressive mind, and certainly SOUNDS nice and "Canadian", but seems to bear little concrete relation to cognitive reality. We SHOULD get a couple of our definitions straight, however. To ME, "Racism" is the perception that one "race" possesses IMMUTABLE traits INHERENTLY SUPERIOR to another. If your definition of "Ethnocentrism" has this as a primary tenet, then it possesses "racism" at its core. Not a value judgement, just a derived observation. Personally, I don't see "pride in oneâs ancestry" as inherently "positive". But I'm not really a particularly insecure person sufficient to require infusions of "pride", one way or the other. Similarly, I don't see "being wary of other ethnicities" as necessarily "negative" -- after all, healthy skepticism of the unknown or unfamiliar is what greatly helped separate our ancestors who survived from those who did not. Remember the cat whom curiosity killed. Here is yet another interesting conversation (to me at least) on the topic of "Racism": https://chatgpt.com/share/6747bdf3-a314-800a-9123-6a7bfba0ef34 You said: "Some people would argue that ANY ethnocentrism on a white persons part is racist." I too disagree, but only because it could just as easily be the result of "pride" or "preference" without any effective trace of "immutable inherent superiority". But, unlike you, I have and will continue to "tolerate" perceived ignorance and mindless prejudice long enough to facilitate education. I don't follow how "miscegenation" automatically leads to the "dying out" of anything (save perhaps "pride" itself). Again (and please let me know if these conversations are of any interest or usefulness to you whatsoever) here is another interesting exchange on the topic of "Genetic Diversity and Political Ideology": https://chatgpt.com/share/67284c73-2370-800a-8daf-06aac53ac59b It also delves briefly into the issues surrounding any "thousands of years of specialised evolution" you believe exists. "Variety is the spice of life" I agree with, but to say it will be "essentially lost if we all become one homoglobo beige mixed race blob" sounds to contradict the mixing of say, Germans with Celts with Norse with Saami with Basques with Slavs with Italians and Greeks with Huns, etc. into "one homoglobo blob" in the first place. Depending on your definition of "White", are suggesting that your apparent Eastern European/Central Asian phenotype is genetically unvaried from Scandinavians or Iberians or Turks? I LOVE your knowledge of SciFi details! Still, my perspective may converge with yours, especially as you appear to have a dystopian view already of future human flourishing: You may not have a CHOICE as to a movement to the "High Frontier" just to escape the future you fear. Think "The Expanse", especially the final season.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-28 01:14:06 +0000 UTC@JO Yet part of nature is the human desire to âprogressââ. Restraining that aspect of our nature seems very difficult, especially when technological change becomes so rapid and extreme. A large part of me would love for us to be thrown back to pre-agricultural tribal times, but it would not solve this existential problem. It would just be a reset.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-28 00:34:09 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - One rather obvious way would be to just let Nature take its course, as it may apt to do ANYWAY. Trump is one such "Force of Nature", is he not? Evolution seems to work on "memes" (in Dawkins' originally intended sense) just as assuredly as it does on "genes".
Joseph Omega
2024-11-28 00:05:58 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - I smile at "people say things for a reason". Though we ALL do, I suspect I ought to translate your comment as "WOMEN say things for a reason". Men say things for the reason that they want to mean the things they say. As a decidedly NON-gay man, I'm afraid I may be unable to contribute much to your understanding of other female's motivations, if YOU cannot. This should not be that much of a surprise, seeing as this very Patreon is dedicated to fathoming this seemingly bottomless chasm of the "feminine mystique".
Joseph Omega
2024-11-28 00:00:08 +0000 UTC@JO I am far from any type of expert on war but I find it very unlikely that tribalism is the source of ALL conflict and atrocities. Regardless, ethnocentrism can be & has been a powerful force for good. I agree that it can be taken too far like any healthy trait. Anti-whiteism is destructive to non-whites because the success of white people leads to the success of all people. Ethnocentrism is not a euphemism for racism. I generally avoid the term racism or racist because it is such a loaded term at this point and has almost become meaningless because of how itâs thrown around. Ethnocentrism is a much more broad & accurate term. There is positive ethnocentrism, like pride in oneâs ancestry and negative ethnocentricism, like being wary of other ethnicities. Generally, racism is merely extreme negative ethnocentrism I would argue. But some people would argue that any ethnocentrism on a white persons part is racist, and I do not tolerate that. I am very much in support of true diversity, i.e. all peoples continuing to exist and improving themselves as much as possible without dying out via miscegenation. Variety is the spice of life and will be essentially lost if we all become one homoglobo, brown mixed-race, identity-less blob. It also undoes thousands of years of specialised evolution, which I find tragic. I am really only Canadian by citizenship because my parents moved back to the US when I was six weeks old and other than a year I spent there when I was 13 I havenât really been back, nor do I intend to move there given all their problems. The US is better off, legally, geographically and spiritually, but still degrading due to multiculturalism, like all countries/civilisations which have been infected by multiculturalism. I donât think that technology is THE solution. Not to our human problems. Likely to things like cleaning up the plastic pollution, but not things like low birth rates. I think that humanity is always progressing long-term, although there are steps backwards at times and it is a slow process. I think cultural innovation is whatâs necessary, most especially how to perpetuate essential tradition. I greatly enjoy science-fiction media but it doesnât generally speak to my soul - though being a Bene Gesserit on Caledonia wouldnât be too bad. Battlestar Galactica on the other hand, while a fantastic show at least up until season two of the reboot, is far too dystopian for me. Same with Elysium, or the nomadic lifestyle depicted in Firefly. I think Iâd only want to be on the high frontier if it were the right place, like a nice temperate earthlike planet, and I didnât constantly have to move. I care A LOT about climate & geography. Iâm not interested in living on a dry planet with no atmosphere, or a settler ship. Unless of course it was my only choice, my best chance at survival. I care more about optimising life on earth, though I would like to see us expand into the universe. Itâs just not something I have a strong desire to personally do, nor do I think it will be possible in my lifetime. I think Iâd have enjoyed being a frontier woman in some parts of the new world though. Ideally, some of my future kin will maintain a stronghold on earth while others will populate myriad planets.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 23:54:40 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - I would guage my "neuroticism" as maybe a "1", while my "autism" (adhering to what I believe to be your definition) as maybe a "9" or "10". I don't understand how you would consider your "schizotypal traits" as NOT "counteracting your autistic traits", seeing as you seem to consider them as lying along a spectrum. Or perhaps I DO misunderstand your definitions.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 23:48:15 +0000 UTCđŻ But how does one enforce that in our modern world?
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 23:46:37 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - The "ideal system" ought logically not to veer that far from our evolutionailly honed natures.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 23:38:48 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Tribalism is obviously the source of ALL major wars and atrocities, so I would hesitate to call it "healthy". It may well be innate to the human condition AND may never be capable of complete eradication, but to give it the euphemistic title "ethnocentrism", suggesting that it needs no mitigation at all, seems more than a little eccentric. And why you would think that the lack of "modern white ethnocentrism" is destructive to "NON-white" people escapes me. The phrasings you often employ makes me wonder if you make any practical distinction between "ethnocentrism" and "racism" -- or is this another euphemistic choice? That "there can be no true diversity without ethnocentrism & segregation" ironically seems to argue FOR "diversity", suggesting that it is necessarily a GOOD thing, while simultaneously advocating AGAINST the "inclusion" that would have it make any practical sense -- it's like the famous question "Does a tree make a sound in the forest if there is no one around to hear it?" What is the meaning of "contrast" if there is only "homogeneity"? "White Nationalists" and "Black Nationalists" ironically both argue AGAINST "diversity"? Not denying it, but why do YOU consider it important? You say you are Canadian, and so I presume you are familiar with that country's ostensible self-definition as a "Multicultural Society", along with its ethnic animosities hiding under the thin veneer of its stereotypical "politeness" and superficially enforced "diversity, equity and inclusion". Perhaps those early experiences have helped color your perception of the benefits of integration and "Cultural Pluralism" which values diversity but stresses interaction and mutual influence among groups, creating a cohesive society enriched by its differences. The United States seems different from Canada in this respect -- far less "polite", yet far more organically diverse. While the two concepts overlap, Multiculturalism focuses on coexistence with preservation, whereas Cultural Pluralism emphasizes coexistence with interaction. I tend to prefer the latter, but then again I have my obvious biases. Still, I DO tend to agree that "Cultural Marxism", with its emphasis on "Critical Theory" seems an inherently self-defeating ideology. Your pessimistic belief that "global civilisation will collapse well before weâre off planet, or have AGI" seems to suggest your hope in the potential for these technologies to save us from ourselves, given the opportunity to do so. I agree. What do you think of the "High Frontier" paradigm for humanity? Would YOU look forward to being a "Frontier Woman"?
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 23:21:10 +0000 UTC@JO And 20 years ago I would have been very confused by her reply - I still donât claim to fully understand it either, but people say things for a reason. Not understanding why people behave the way they do, I have put brute force into observation & questioning so that I can reasonably guess at motivations. Itâs not a big deal, & though I was truly annoyed by my inability to understand things in the past, itâs just mysterious behaviour to me now. I would love to know how my current understanding compares to that of a man who is interested in such things as some gay men are in my experience, who has also pursued comprehension over decades. Do I have some innate edge due to feminine intuition, even online, or no? Looks ALWAYS matter to some extent but especially within female hierarchies, & I canât help but notice because I care so much about beauty, as an absolute value.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 22:29:38 +0000 UTC@JO Definitely agree. I am overall pretty low in neuroticism (3/10), although there are certain areas in which I can be particularly neurotic, but that is because I have chosen to keep those aspects of myself. I used to be substantially more neurotic, though still not more neurotic than the average woman, and it was making me miserable, thus the change. Some neuroticism I find both enjoyable and useful. Iâm quite autistic, especially if you donât consider my schizotypal traits as counteracting from my autistic traits, so 8/10 without including my schizotypal traits and maybe 6/10 if you include them. How about you?
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 21:43:55 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - What's delightfully fascinating is that you yourself seemingly appear to consider this issue of SUCH significance sufficient for retelling and advice, where I (like MANY men) would wonder what the big deal about all this is. And your implication that this individual was likely young AND "not particularly attractive" is another curiously recurring theme in your assessments of people. That you think a person's "looks" does (or should?) significantly influence the quality of their behavior, appears to be a hyper-developed largely female trait that, in my personal experience, often accompanies either insecurity or narcissism. Male and females are TRULY different creatures.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 21:03:50 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - I've never heard anyone actually refer to them as "autists" -- like "artists", where "U-R" overrepresented. OK, ok, I'll keep my day job. Yes, @E C seemed IMMENSELY sensitive to what people thought of her, but somehow could not help putting her foot in her mouth and "hating herself in the morning". A fascinating Female contradictory trait taken near to the extreme. I agree that "autists" generally DO tend to not care what people THINK, but tend to care what they DO, however: The PHYSICAL CONSEQUENCES of actions. On the other hand, "neurotics" seem oblivious to the actions of both themselves and others (consequences be damned), while hypersensitve to the perceived thoughts, emotions and intentions. How would you rate yourself (1-10) on either scale? Here is an interesting short talk by Jordan Peterson shedding light on the general topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWs_vAwgZwU
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 20:46:22 +0000 UTC@JO Sounds a lot like one of the recent Collinsesâs video on their ideal system. Looking forward to reading their book on governance.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 20:37:19 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - An intruiging position. You MAY be interested in this conversation with ChatGPT, where I explored this very premise nearing the end: https://chatgpt.com/share/67477ce0-be94-800a-89fd-ef38f21adc58 You can just scroll to the end for a summary of the development of the thread. Here is ChatGPT's summary conclusion: "This conversation calls for a more nuanced understanding of gender dynamics, challenging traditional narratives and emphasizing the interplay between soft and hard power. By recognizing and valuing these different forms of influence, society can move towards a more balanced and equitable approach to governance and representation. The introduction of innovative systems, such as couple-based representation or fixed voting multipliers for parents, highlights the importance of rethinking existing frameworks to reflect the complexities of gender, power, and societal evolution."
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 20:14:47 +0000 UTC@JO Yes, women are much more likely to speak without thinking, due to emotionalism, and yet they are also more concerned about what others think. I guess those things just clash at times and emotion overrides the desire to maintain social harmony. Which is interesting because autism and lack of filter correlate, but that is not due to emotionalism. And autists often donât care what (most) other people think.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 19:03:55 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - I think it is more that men are more afraid of making sweeping judgements, lest they be judged. Women seem to possess much less a compunction. There is also their known propensity for emotional ... uh ... "spontaneity", shall we say.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 18:39:58 +0000 UTC@JO Tribalism (or as I call it, ethnocentrism) is an essential and healthy human trait. It will never (& should never) be eradicated. Observe how destructive the lack of modern white ethnocentrism has been, not just for white people but everyone. And there can be no true diversity without ethnocentrism & segregation. Thatâs the whole point of cultural Marxism - to eradicate meaningful differences, culture & identity. My point is that I believe global civilisation will collapse well before weâre off planet, or have AGI. If not by a solar flare, then by collapsing birth rates & declining IQ.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 18:31:46 +0000 UTC@JO As I see it there are several aspects at play here. Itâs interesting that she feels the need to defend him even though obviously he is welcome to ignore my question (he never promised to answer all the questions) and I did provide a less-invasive option (just birthdate alone especially without year would not be very useful, which obviously sheâs unaware of because she doesnât know anything about proper astrology). And I think itâs offensive to suggest that I shouldâve asked something silly instead as if astrology is silly which it very much is not & implying that I would be interested in asking such a trivial question. Basically this is the type of reply that would only ever come from a woman. Especially a young, not particularly attractive woman. Schizotypal is a term that I use that has its own meaning when I use it. If you recall what I said about schizophrenia and autism being opposite ends of a spectrum, I prefer to use the term schizotypality, which encompasses a wide variety of traits from hyper sociality to creativity to ADD type traits (being scatterbrained, but also much better at multitasking). Most interesting people have schizotypal and/or autistic traits, which are generally both positive and negative and not necessarily dysfunctional or disordered. And then the most interesting people have a mix of both schizotypal and autistic traits although usually there is a significant lean in one direction. I have a mix, but I am still primarily autistic. I would guess that you are the same, and the lack of hyperfocus is a schizotypal trait.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 18:08:34 +0000 UTC@JO Not sure saying what most are afraid to is a feminine let alone gendered trait. I think women are more judgemental but men are more honest & direct.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 18:05:02 +0000 UTC@Eric I was around when Seinfeld was on air. I was born in 1981. So, itâs not a matter of age.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 18:02:39 +0000 UTC@Cezary Skoczek - Likely because many humans will continue, at least for a while, to be much cheaper and resourceful ... and maybe more importantly, much more desperate/greedy.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 08:26:27 +0000 UTCYeah, but why humans and not robots. No advantage to doing it manually.
Cezary Skoczek
2024-11-27 08:05:30 +0000 UTC@Cezary Skoczek - Because, besides the obvious call to adventure and bragging rights, there are TRILLIONS to be made.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 08:04:40 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Is your analysis the part that says: "Wouldnât it be better to ask a silly question like 'what do you do first: brush your teeth or wash your face?' or 'whatâs your favorite fruit?'â I'm not completely sure I follow what the issue is. đ¤ PS. I'm also not sure exactly what "schizotypal" means, but when I say that "I am easily distracted by long tracts of singular media", I mean doing any ONE passive thing for a long time (like reading a non-speculative article or watching a non-speculative documentary) often causes my mind to wander off.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 07:47:28 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden - I suspect that equating irony with humor may have been a 90's thing.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 07:35:59 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - "Most people donât have good taste" What many males would only dare to think, women just come right out and say! đ
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 07:33:58 +0000 UTCDidn't expect such a conversation in my thread xD After Trump win I'm less cynical and apocalyptic as I use to be. So for thee hogh frontier. Why do you think people will participate physically in this scramble?
Cezary Skoczek
2024-11-27 06:07:18 +0000 UTC@RM & @JO - Seinfeld broke many taboos. Many things we commonly talk about now were unspoken back then. Since you are both younger than me or Seinfeld, you never experienced them as unspoken.
Eric Linden
2024-11-27 03:57:44 +0000 UTCI think a household vote is best, if we must have elections. Itâs not like women didnât influence the way men voted before. Whatâs needed are high standards of qualifications for voting. But then again, I think itâs a bad system to begin with.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 02:40:04 +0000 UTC@JO I think itâs too popular to be considered that. I am very suspicious of popular media; most people donât have good taste. I waited several years to read Harry Potter because it was so popular initially. đ
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 02:28:36 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Neither have I -- he DOES appear to be an acquired taste.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 02:22:57 +0000 UTC@JO Iâve never understood the popularity of Seinfeld.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 02:17:48 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - "MY people", "YOUR people", "THEIR people" are just handles for TRIBALISM, that politicians will ALWAYS exploit. That there are "White Nationalists" that BELIEVE in Trump or "Radical Feminists" and "Queer Activists" that BELIEVE in Harris just shows how utterly GULLABLE people can be on the basis of their pathetic insecurities, either as "Sheeple" OR as "Scattle". Consider, did you know this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=053z7zd4pmc ALL politicians are opportunists. Also, "Why We Lost" (from a "Transwoman"): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6fR0bhZJi0 Here is a potgnant excerpt: "I really see this election as very straightforward, and I've had so many conversations with people -- they don't like Trump, but they don't like the Democratic elitists more. They hate us more. They hate progressives more. They hate the people that announce their pronouns more; they hate the people that do land acknowledgements more; they hate the people that derail every single conversation into racial grievance more. They are so sick of that, and until the Democratic party can like back away from the abyss and turn into something that normal people are going to vote for again ... yeah Trump and the Republicans will stay in power. That's just a fact." And, I think you misunderstand the point I was trying to make about the impending Space Race: It is NOT about the "technological innovation", but about the HORRIFIC CHALLENGES that WILL be posed when this new "Scramble for Resources" takes place. It is called the "High Frontier" because of what will be required from settlers, and from "Frontier Women" especially -- the whiny, petulant, coddled, self-absorbed and entitled WILL be left behind. The following short film was based on a famous SciFi short story called "The Cold Equations" by Tom Goodwin that illustrates it eloquently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VkUjGQuSuA
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 01:44:40 +0000 UTCItâs a Patreon comment interaction. Iâll just paste the comments but I wish I could post her picture as well. The comments are in reply to a philosophy content creator who is asking for questions for a Q&A/ask me anything type video. I asked: âYour birth date, place & time (as exact as possible) if possible, so I can take a look at your natal chart. Or, if that is too personal, your Ascendant, Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter & Saturn (i.e. what signs they are in). You could enter the data on astro-seek.com & just show the chart too. Thanks!â Reply from another fan: âHey, donât you think thatâs unsolicited and invasive to ask an internet stranger? I love astrology as much as most people, but Joe isâŚjust a guy. At best, he owes us nothing. At worst, he could just give us his birthday and maybe the year if he feels comfortable with that. Wouldnât it be better to ask a silly question like âwhat do you do first: brush your teeth or wash your face?â or âwhatâs your favorite fruit?â
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 00:58:30 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Well, I'm more engineer than artist, so the aesthetics of lip-syncing seem more like minutiae to me -- but I DO have a limit when it interrupts "suspension of disbelief". If your other Patreon features links to a YouTube version of their video like Alexander does, then you SHOULD be able to share THAT with non-members, for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65HSExq_-zk
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 00:42:35 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden & @RhodiumMaiden - Sienfield's humor seems very "funny curious" to me anyway -- does he even have a "laugh-track"? I certainly CAN see why women would more view the use of a handicap stall as "fair game" for more than one reason: 1) Doing #1 and #2 require the very same set of preparatory actions; 2) Women tend more to view themselves as "handicapped" anyway; and 3) OCD for them tends to be more a feature than a bug.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 00:34:29 +0000 UTCANY dubbing. It alters the artistâs original creation, the words donât match the facial movements, and the voices donât match the people. It should be outlawed. Well, if I believed in authoritarianism it should be outlawed. đ You donât really sound like someone who is easily distracted. I get more of a Aspie vibe than a schizotypal vibe from you. I wish that I could share images here because I have a screencap of an interaction on another Patreon page that I wish I could show you and get your take as to whether my analysis of the situation is correct. Patreon really needs to upgrade its interface properly.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 00:29:51 +0000 UTC@Hyperion - Perhaps he can be coaxed into featuring her for a month as he did for his namesake, Christine Grace Smith, a few months ago.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 00:26:20 +0000 UTC@AngMori - A bit unnecessarily harsh and judgemental I think, but largely correct. Feminsim has been based on a flawed premise (of "Historically Oppressive Patriarchy") from inception, and has been fed by chivilrous do-gooders ("simps"?) with a suscptibility to "shrewing".
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 00:23:50 +0000 UTC@JO Iâm glad that Trump was elected but I still donât believe that he or any politician truly cares about the masses let alone my people i.e. white (European) people. Basically, I think he is controlled opposition as all supposedly populist and far right politicians are. The two things Iâm most cynical about are human nature and politics, which is basically just a complicated extension of the former. That said, it does indeed seem like at least some aspects of the modern mind virus have peaked. Iâm just not sure that it will be enough and I often feel like one step back is taken so that they can be seen to pacify those on the right even though they eventually end up continuing their progressive agenda. In short, Conservative politicians are just delayed progressive politicians. The space race along with all the other technological innovation seems very overhyped to me. Progressives have always believed that technology will save us and yet it generally only complicates matters at best.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 00:20:31 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Certainly BAD dubbing IS demonic. I guess you could say that I may have the inverse disorder, in that I am easily distracted by long tracts of singular media -- hence my preference for 2x speeds and for closed captioning to feed my attention.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-27 00:14:53 +0000 UTC@JO I would love captions if they didnât interfere with my ability to fully appreciate the visuals - but I do like them for YouTube type content. I try not to use them however because I suspect I have a very mild auditory processing disorder - basically that my discrimination is not fantastic - and Iâm trying to improve it. Captions are always preferable to dubbing which is outright demonic.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-27 00:06:50 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - In a sense, the recent election of Trump as the proverbial "Bull in the China shop" may reflect the social equivalent of your physical phenomenon. Still, there is also the "High Frontier" of this new Space Race, with its uncompromising "Cold Equations" to cull the herd of the coddled and complacent.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-26 23:56:45 +0000 UTC@Hyperion - I agree that she is certainly one in a million, but I have hope in the evolution of Cultural Feminism to spawn a new generation of female champions of reason and balance.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-26 23:48:25 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Well, the optimum to me would be BOTH media simultaneously -- I ALWAYS turn on CLOSED CAPTIONING whenever available for any video (article OR movie, whether watching at normal OR multi-speed). Still, I tend to have neither the patience nor the time to wade through hours of irrelevant or pretentious "context". This COULD be a male thing as well.
Joseph Omega
2024-11-26 23:43:58 +0000 UTCI think a big solar flare Ă la Carrington Event will destroy the global electric grid long before AI and robots become a viable solution. Fortunately, that will rectify society; unfortunately, many people will die in the process.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-26 23:38:49 +0000 UTC@JO I vastly prefer reading to recorded speech of any type (though I enjoy a really great movie or TV series on occasion). I also absorb textual info so much better visually. But Iâve never much enjoyed articles or short stories. They donât have enough depth, gravitas and closure to them.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-11-26 23:29:59 +0000 UTCSounds to me like you are completely glossing over the actual argument for WHY women 'shouldn't be allowed to vote', or you are choosing to address strawman arguments instead of the real one. The REAL argument is because men ARE second class citizens NOW, and some of us want to return to actual equality. The point isn't to just arbitrarily take away women's right to vote, it's to apply the law equally to both genders. Men got the right to vote in exchange for conscription/being eligible for the draft. Women got it from nagging. Women get the privilege without the duty, and that's why feminism has been inherently sexist since DAY ONE. That's why women argued AGAINST universal sufferage, because they didn't want to be eligible to be drafted. And yes, it will make women adversarial. So what? First of all, they already are anyway, and second of all, slavers were pretty fucking adversarial to abolition. Normies are adversarial towards veganism. Are you going to compromise your morals just because you'll get pushback? That's fucking weak. So it sounds to me like you are either disingenous, ignorant or weak here.
AngMori
2024-11-22 17:58:07 +0000 UTCThere will never be another Karen Straughan. At least I have yet to find another who was as stoutly empathetic to men's sufferings. I'm grateful to her as a man, in knowing that there are still women like her out there, who sees us for all our glory and our frailties, and still choose to love and respect us for everything that we are.
Hyperion
2024-10-24 23:10:39 +0000 UTCI just saw this video by Melanie King, who is, by my estimation, among the very few based and genuine women who call out modern women's poor behaviors and are empathetic to men's sufferings. Those who are in a marriage or are contemplating on marriage should find it enlightening. Perhaps @AG has something to say about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP5NaryxRBE
Hyperion
2024-10-24 22:54:04 +0000 UTC@RM - It IS funny, but it is no joke that men try to leave a urinal between them. It is an unspoken kind of etiquette between men. The funny thing is that this man does videos pointing it out. Itâs kind of like an episode of Seinfeld, revealing an unspoken aspect of human nature. As for using the handicapped stall, it is true that men avoid it unless it is the last stall left. But, unlike Joseph, I totally get why women would see this differently. Women can be quick if they are just peeing. Men only use the stall if they are doing #2.
Eric Linden
2024-10-22 03:22:03 +0000 UTCEric said it was a joke so I took him at his word. Men donât have as much stuff and are not as cleanliness obsessed. Although the few men I know who are OCD, do also go for a handicapped stall if one is available.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-10-22 00:48:56 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - I suspect @Eric Linden was just being rhetorical -- maybe "funny curious" (rather than "funnt ha-ha") if anything. Interesting about the handicap stall -- I can't imagine many men choosing that under ANY circumstances if an alternative was available.
Joseph Omega
2024-10-19 01:52:00 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Ah. I'm the same way in that respect: I also listen to podcasts and audio books at either 1.5 to 2x speeds. And I have a text-to-speech app that reads online articles for me as well.
Joseph Omega
2024-10-18 18:03:54 +0000 UTC@JO I donât greatly enjoy reading articles, though that one was fine. I mostly just read studies and books and chat with people online. The reason I said at max speed is because I donât like being read to and I absorb lectured info better when it is faster.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-10-18 13:59:43 +0000 UTC@JO But Eric thought it was funny. I was responding to him. With very close friends there can sometimes be clustering but itâs not super common. Iâve really only seen that when women are drunk. If I saw that a handicapped person was remotely nearby, I would take that into account but otherwise no and I am very fast in the bathroom. The handicapped stall is usually the most in use by the way for the reasons I described.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-10-18 13:53:19 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - I did not get the impression that the creator was attempting to be particularly funny -- just investigating a particular dilemma. I have a couple questions though: If multiple women (say best friends) were to use the facilities simultaneously, would they STILL do their utmost to spread out, or would they tend to cluster (perhaps so they could chat with each other across the separators)? Also, I personally would avoid using any dedicated handicapped stalls if others are available, regardless of proximity considerations. Do you give any pause given similar conditions?
Joseph Omega
2024-10-17 16:48:46 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - No, I meant the article that Karen referenced -- the link is in the video description (the other two links have expired unfortunately). Still, it appeared you needed to add "at max speed" to your response -- I was curious if there were specific points of disagreement? đ¤
Joseph Omega
2024-10-17 14:43:01 +0000 UTCI listened to it all, yes, at max speed.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-10-17 14:37:55 +0000 UTC@RhodiumMaiden - Have you yet? It's pretty short.
Joseph Omega
2024-10-16 16:49:13 +0000 UTCGreat points but Iâd much rather read it than hear HER read whatâs obviously a prewritten essay.
RhodiumMaiden
2024-10-16 15:57:21 +0000 UTCLinked me to a urinal thing?
RhodiumMaiden
2024-10-16 15:44:52 +0000 UTCMy daily dilemma. https://youtube.com/shorts/ixe5SzlfWRk?si=e2K68Dd4Iz2_WXyU Any of you ladies want to chime in?
Eric Linden
2024-10-01 07:49:15 +0000 UTCIncrementalism is the best choice and has the best chance of ultimately achieving Alexanderâs goal. Lincoln would agree. That was his original aim, and his aim throughout the civil war, until in the end it could not happen. It is what has been so successful in all other endeavors in the US, which still has the longest surviving Constitution in history.
Eric Linden
2024-09-30 15:47:11 +0000 UTC@noleenole - Nice! đđ I found another quote, this time by Abraham Lincoln: "Human nature will not change. In any future great national trial, compared with the men of this, we shall have as weak and as strong, as silly and as wise, as bad and as good."
Joseph Omega
2024-09-30 00:11:26 +0000 UTCShe says so much in this video. Her videos are a decade old, but have such timeless wisdom. I find it so interesting that women automatically relate to each other, but men donât - unless they have a common role (soldier, career, father, husband).
Eric Linden
2024-09-29 16:54:50 +0000 UTCEric Linden - Do you mean "Feminism" and "Femininity"? YES!
Joseph Omega
2024-09-29 02:51:09 +0000 UTCWe need to head in the direction of Alexanderâs position but also understand that not all will attain it or can attain it. We have to leave room for the least of us to act like animals while not suffering their foolishness. We must elevate the best of us so the example is shown for those that can see its wisdom. Hierarchy is natural. We cannot let those at the bottom drag us down with but we canât lose our humanity by not leaving a rope for those capable of climbing up as well. The responsibility and grace required to live at a higher level is exhausting and a thankless task đ¤Ł
noleenole
2024-09-29 00:08:03 +0000 UTC@Joseph - Yes! The problem is that too many women get the two terms mixed up.
Eric Linden
2024-09-28 23:40:37 +0000 UTCAmazing to think how Karen Straughan got it SO right SO long ago now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlvMAS_20K4
Joseph Omega
2024-09-28 21:15:20 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden & @Mark Inconnue - I think you are BOTH correct: In the beginning each person is only LEARNING each others desires, but afterwards, "ignorance of the laws (of the relationship) is no excuse".
Joseph Omega
2024-09-28 21:12:57 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden - ... thereby shooting themsleves in the foot. Correct.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-28 21:07:40 +0000 UTC@noleenole - I don't think I have EVER heard this FUNDAMENTAL question asked with such adroit pithiness. đ I too have a lot of skepticism as to the practically of Alexander's position on all this.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-28 19:35:28 +0000 UTCAgreed. Robert Moore has some very enlightening lectures and books on the subject.
Jer A
2024-09-27 23:58:24 +0000 UTCCan you nurture the nature out of humans? For the record I hope youâre right and share your views but maybe not your optimism.
noleenole
2024-09-27 19:09:09 +0000 UTCI 100% agree with you, Alexander! Good words, all of them!
Robert
2024-09-27 14:33:20 +0000 UTC@Mark - In the beginning you do have to ask. When it becomes a real relationship, you can often just start pulling the stagecoach in one direction, and she will turn and start pulling with you.
Eric Linden
2024-09-27 14:19:54 +0000 UTCThe culture takes some things too far. In the quest to eliminate hazing, which most of us agree with, many important and necessary initiation processes have been eliminated or ignored.
Eric Linden
2024-09-27 14:01:41 +0000 UTCPart of femininity is knowing that you canât control men. One of the main tenets of feminism is that women can tell men what to think, feel, say, and do.
Eric Linden
2024-09-27 13:54:01 +0000 UTCGood onya bloke, glad to hear about it working out for someone.... Enjoy your unicorn of a partner
John McGuinness
2024-09-27 12:30:26 +0000 UTCEvery boy goes through a stage where they foolishly claim manhood by right. There is a process of initiation that I would say many of age males have not yet endured. There are droves of females who also claim manhood. There are no shortcuts. Only lessons that must either be learned or retried. Masculinity is like wealth. One who has truly achieved it by blood and sweat will have lost the compulsion to exemplify it.
Jer A
2024-09-27 12:25:56 +0000 UTCI've decided that it's just a reflection of a relationship and a person. Motivated people work on stuff,and entitled people expect stuff. You don't have to expect anything. If you have to ask and beg that's not a partnership. Two horses have to pull the stage coach in the same direction for it to move.
Mark Inconnue
2024-09-27 03:37:44 +0000 UTCPartners have each other's backs. Sex is a part of that. If there's an issue it's OK to be concerned. If there is no concern then there is a failing partnership.
Mark Inconnue
2024-09-27 03:24:02 +0000 UTC@Quentin Raphaneau - As individuals, that is true enough. But their capacity for cooperation is NOTORIOUS under a charismatic and competent/inspirational leadership that they can believe in and rally around.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-26 20:19:56 +0000 UTCI had a similar situation, two marriages, two divorces, but got it right on the third marriage. Wasnât looking though. Was never lonely either. I was content. Thereâs plenty to do and itâs nice to have your freedom.
Eric Linden
2024-09-26 15:05:44 +0000 UTCAlexander, your last 6 minutes said it really well. You're modeling for me what I want to say. I think I'll steal it! And John, my experience matches yours. Hang in there bro.
Paul Christensen
2024-09-26 14:24:01 +0000 UTCit's definitly a hard situation to resolve. To a collective problem is required a collective solution but men are more incline to competition than cooperation.
Quentin Raphaneau
2024-09-26 06:57:01 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden - "Those are NOT the needs I'm looking for." đ¤đľâđŤ
Joseph Omega
2024-09-26 05:42:50 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden - What a remarkably POIGNANT, SUCCINCT yet ACCURATE way to express this! đ
Joseph Omega
2024-09-26 05:18:11 +0000 UTCAnother way to look at it: 1st and 2nd wave - making women masculine. 3rd and 4th wave - making men feminine.
Eric Linden
2024-09-26 04:47:06 +0000 UTC@Cezary and @Joseph - Joseph is correct. He has taught me that ChatGPT and can give you unbiased objective answers when you ask enough questions. And it will only improve. Also, there is always a new normal whenever technology and innovation happen. The assembly line and the computer are two obvious examples. New jobs pop up. Sometimes it takes a while, but it eventually happens. The opposite problem was feared (not enough workers) when the workweek was reduced to five days, and again when it was reduced to 40 hours. We still have two states where you canât pump your own gas because those jobs were eliminated in the other 48 in the 70s and 80s. There are occasional jolts to the system, but it always bounces back.
Eric Linden
2024-09-26 04:36:12 +0000 UTC@Robert Does Wrestling - Robert Rosello & @Eric Linden - Actually I suspect ALL of the waves were fueled by the DISASTROUSLY misleading assumption of "historical victimhood and oppression". Nature RARELY evolves such intra-species power imbalances over its MILLIONS of years of careful and methodical genetic adaptation (ESPECIALLY within a DIMORPHIC species such as our own). We need to PERMANENTLY retire this "equality" word, for it CONTINUES to be read as "the same" by almost ALL "Westerners", despite ALL the best nuanced explanations to the contrary. Remember that in the 60's women were "burning their bras" to show their liberation from being ... well ... women. Yes, it IS "just a strategy to gain [hard] power" in addition to what natural selection already granted [in SOFT power]. And in the presence of the WELL KNOWN female propensity for "meta-messaging", it seems to me that, as males, "dont believe what they say, only believe what they do" appears to be a VERY prudent course of action in almost ALL cases.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-26 04:13:20 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden - This makes perfect sense and I agree, but this doesn't change the fact of the almost INSURMOUNTABLE barrier (and Herculean discipline required) that the many MANY desperate men have to overcome to NOT effectively BEG for female attention and intimacy -- and I'm not even talking about by TRULY "beautiful or attractive women" either, but by ANYTHING with a PULSE and WARM BLOOD. Isn't it true that 3/5 of ALL men will NEVER reproduce (while 2/3 of ALL females EASILY could)? I can't see how such a system with this STAGGERING an imbalance between DEMAND and SUPPLY could possibly EVER respond to rational arguments.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-26 04:00:47 +0000 UTC@Cezary Skoczek - I hope so, but fear not -- keep in mind that the VAST MAJORITY of publicly consumed content (media, research, products and services) are currently of PHENOMENALLY poor quality and talent compared to just a few short decades ago. AI should have VERY little trouble satisfying and being accepted by the majority of humankind. But no, I'm not predicting "system failure", as human civiilizations are remarkably resilitent -- I believe the system will adapt to a new "normal" as it always has.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-26 03:43:23 +0000 UTC1st and 2nd wave feminism are about equality. 3rd and 4th wave feminism are about female superiority.
Eric Linden
2024-09-26 02:32:30 +0000 UTC"Do not ever come across to your woman that you are expecting sex from them." Bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha bwahaha !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Eric Linden
2024-09-26 02:06:09 +0000 UTC@Joseph - No. I'm saying being a simp will backfire. Ask any honest beautiful woman what she thinks about all the guys who tell her how hot she is on social media. She will tell you they are weird or lonely, and she has no interest in them. But she enjoys all the "likes" and "loves" on her post. If a woman is attractive and she knows it, telling her will make her LESS attracted to you.
Eric Linden
2024-09-26 01:34:59 +0000 UTCFeminism is just a strategy to gain power. I still dont get why Alexander is taking their word for it, dont believe what they say , only believe what they do.
Robert Does Wrestling - Robert Rosello
2024-09-25 22:17:30 +0000 UTCI know where you are coming from, but this only applies to the lower-level jobs in said sectors. Neural Network AI doesn't think or even compute in the classical sense. It just provides something that has to feel authentic, not necessarily work. Every AI output needs manual cleaning to be useful. Yes, that does mean that a lot of initial work can be done by computers now, and you don't need juniors. And I agree this will be disruptive, but not to the point of system failure. Just a strong recession.
Cezary Skoczek
2024-09-25 20:48:40 +0000 UTC@Karol Bednarczyk - I understand completely. That is why I so often EXPLICITLY use the word "West" in "inverted commas". It is shorthand, I imagine, for "Western European Civilization" -- which is where Alexander and many of our Patreon contributers live, including myself. You may be living in an "Eastern European" context. But with the sheer speed of the proliferation of the former via the Internet's social media juggernaut of late, it may be only just a matter of time.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-25 20:32:53 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden - In a "Seller's Market" are you asking buyers to NOT buy "houses", that is, go HOMELESS? It seems to me an EASY ask for any EXISTING homeowner to make. đââď¸
Joseph Omega
2024-09-25 20:24:33 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden - Again, the crucial need for "full prenuptial clarification". If there are "driver's licences" required BEFORE being allowed to get on the road alone, where are the commensurate "marriage licenses", if that is their name? There are often "Baby on Board" caveats in either case. And don't get me started on "Registrations" or "Proof of Ownership" for paternity "Titles". I expect the metaphor can be extended even FURTHER without much effort.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-25 19:28:20 +0000 UTC@Cezary Skoczek - Very sector-dependent, I think. Huge swaths of lower and mid-range white collar workers are already being displaced -- who would've thought that IT jobs would be so quickly targeted. It will also soon wash away all those artificially created Feminist-Proud service sector jobs, like in HR, bureaucratic Social Services Support and "Media Arts" as low hanging fruit. I predict LOTS of unprepared housewives again very soon. Male-heavy blue collar jobs may ironically be some of the last to go because of the difficultly of creating truly versatile, safe and dependable robot replacements. Software is easy -- hardware is hard.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-25 18:57:06 +0000 UTCHi Alexander. You said "I can't see me changing the strategy anytime soon..." Interesting choice of words. I see a lot of strategizing in the world which hurts us and others. By strategizing I mean preparing for the possible situations or outcomes. I see people using this for finding a partner, for finding a job, for making life choices and although preparing for a career or a job interview seems like a good idea, looking for love or building a relationship by strategizing can cause a lot of harm. This harm comes from expectations. When I interpret someone's behaviour as the one I expected I respond In a prepared earlier way. It has nothing to do with an actual behaviour of the other person. So if I watch a lot of your videos I'm more preprogrammed to look for entitled women's behaviours I saw in your videos even if I live in Poland where there is a marginal amount of this phenomena. In the same time I admire your knowledge and that you follow your heart and fulfill your mission. I try to treat each person individually without preconceived expectations. And for me that's the way to build a healthy relationship. Because if I constantly wore mask and were to present myself in a certain light I wouldn't be able to create an authentic bond with someone. Without authenticity I can only get so far, and my relationship would probably end right after a honeymoon phase.
Karol Bednarczyk
2024-09-25 18:12:34 +0000 UTCPerception. I use the 2/3 rule (or the 66.6% rule). If I feel like Iâm giving 66% or less to our relationship, and getting back more than 33%, I feel like itâs a win. She probably feels the same; like sheâs giving 66% and getting back 33%. Itâs just human nature. I use the same rule in my work. If Iâm determined (when paired with a coworker or a spouse) to never give any more than 50%, I will always lose. I will never be fulfilled. If I feel like Iâm giving more than 66%, itâs time to move on.
Eric Linden
2024-09-25 18:11:58 +0000 UTC@Joseph - Agree 100%. Be cordial. Not rude. Being a perfect gentleman or worrying about offending sensibilities is a waste of time. AGâs first couple clips say it all. Treating your wife and family to dinner is reasonable. The $700 check for the friends who tag along expecting a free meal is not. The woman expecting her man to never ask for sex is not acceptable. Expect your spouse to say yes at least 90% of the time. However, donât request it three times a day. Test it out and talk about it before making the relationship permanent. If the terms agreed upon are not met, thereâs no explanation, and cognitive dissonance is evident, itâs time to move on.
Eric Linden
2024-09-25 18:00:56 +0000 UTCThe men you speak of are simps. They flood womenâs social media with compliments, telling them how wonderful, beautiful, and right they are. These women love the attention, but ignore the man. If you want one of these women, donât compliment her; sheâs heard it all before. Instead, engage her in intelligent conversation. If she doesnât respond, move on; sheâs not for you. If she does respond, follow up with more real conversation. Avoid the compliments. Donât be a simp.
Eric Linden
2024-09-25 17:22:40 +0000 UTCI am a 59 yo man. My testosterone levels are low and my 'physical' needs are few. 3 marriages and 3 divorces have left me feeling that relationships with women are simply not worth it. 'The juice is definatly NOT worth the squeeze'. Been on my own for the last 8 years and I am loving my peace. The only ones I feel sorry for are my 2 twenty something boys. The absolute crap men have to put up with in dating these days is shocking. Sorry guys I'm out *micdrop*
John McGuinness
2024-09-25 16:27:33 +0000 UTCSadly true. The reason women feel so worthy of those attention is because MENS act collectively dumb and selfishly. MENS with the arrival of remote communication applications can´t help themselves but to flood every women they can try in the hope to get sex with one of them. The results is that even an under average women get so much possibility that they finish by believe they deserve it. In the real world the average man fear the rejection so he doesnt try that much. Does the feminist, encourage those behaviour, certainly, but if the men collectively were not those dumb and coward beast, the feminist would have no foundation to build those ideologies.
Quentin Raphaneau
2024-09-25 16:24:44 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden - Perhaps, but my fear is, unless it is EXPLICITLY said, due to the remarkable capacity for Cognitive Dissonance, the majority of people (ESPECIALLY women) will never hear it. It's very similar to using diplomatic language, like "equal", to describe the difference between the sexes. It's time to stop mincing words in a misguided effort to avoid "offending sensibilities", or to be "perfect gentlemen".
Joseph Omega
2024-09-25 15:50:41 +0000 UTCIn so many words. If youâre giving her what she wants (attention, love, resources, etc.), she should give you what you want (sex, love, etc.). It really is transactional. If you fulfill only 10% of her expectations, she should fulfill only 10% of yours. If you support her in tough times, she needs to reciprocate.
Eric Linden
2024-09-25 15:13:23 +0000 UTCDid Alexander actually ANSWER the titled question? đ¤
Joseph Omega
2024-09-25 06:54:49 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden - I think I MUCH prefer the term "mate" to "partner", without sacricifing the essential "teamwork" aspect -- but with the basis in SEXUALITY (as in GENDERALITY).
Joseph Omega
2024-09-25 06:48:21 +0000 UTCIn reality, there are three castes. The elite men (the actual quantile of men's population is debatable), women, and the remaining mass of men, whose toils, sweat, blood, and tears build the society. Women in general are apathetic, or even at times have disdain, for the mass of men; they always have and always will. Bloody revolution happens when elite men became overtly self-serving and ignored the welfare of the masses; history is full of examples of it. E.g. French revolution, Bolshevik revolution, etc. War has always been a tool for elite men to thin the herd, so to speak, of masses of men. E.g., the crusade. Ever wonder why the political elites are always such war hawks?
Hyperion
2024-09-25 06:30:46 +0000 UTC1. Women are NOT and have NEVER been a "marginalized", "oppressed" or "minority" group. https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxGDmxENqk_C-hsbv57BRdClydb0MDpRNt?si=-HYcfBaY5Zpxy47_ Stop feeding their delusion. 2. MEN built the PHYSICAL and LEGAL INFRASTRUCTURE of ANY and ALL civilizations largely FOR the BENEFIT of WOMEN (and other dependents), and they KNOW it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BD9xK9dz6H4 Stop feeding their petulance. It is not just that "women need to know their place", but "men need to know their place" as well. Without such knowledge, our EDGE as a functioning DIMORPHIC SPECIES is lost.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-25 06:24:17 +0000 UTC@Eric Linden - It seems this very same argument for "manning up and walking away" is ironically what is used by WOMEN these days, go figure. đââď¸ These are strange times.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-25 06:14:29 +0000 UTC@Hyperion - 110% AGREE! Alexander's contention that "equality does not mean sameness" makes LITTLE sense to the VAST majority of people. Men and women are and have NEVER been "equal". It is a GRAND misnomer that only complicates any resolution. Men and women are EQUIVALENT ("complements" in your terminology) -- "equal in VALUE". And the suggestion that "men had the upper hand before" just adds to the mishapen Feminist narrative of this "historically oppressive Patriarchy" nonsense. It does not matter whether men THOUGHT that they were the "superior sex" in the past, because, during the same period, WOMEN thought PRECISELY the same thing about themselves -- "sugar and spice and everthing nice" is a representation of MORAL and SPIRITUAL SUPERIORITY, just as delusionally misguided as MENTAL and EMOTIONAL SUPERIORITY. We are a DIMORPHIC SPECIES, designed to operate by DIVISION OF LABOR based on "Hard Power" in balance with "Soft Power". The ONLY reason that women are in ascendency is PRECISELY because men, via their weakness to nagging, petulance, unrequited chivalry and sexual desire, have CONCEDED "Hard Power" to them, so that now they have BOTH "Hard Power" AND "Soft Power". "Nature has given women so much [soft] power that the law has very wisely given them little [hard power]." -- 19th-century English philosopher and historian Samuel Johnson PS. And I can't understand this weird obsession in the "West" with going out of one's way to replace the words "wife" or "husband" with "partner". When the marriage between a man and a woman becomes a "Business Partnership", then expect all manner of external legal and politcal complications to undermine the institution.
Joseph Omega
2024-09-25 06:04:25 +0000 UTCMen and women come together to be partners. Not adversaries. Not competitors. Equals. A team.
Eric Linden
2024-09-25 05:46:01 +0000 UTCWhat men ultimately want is to be respected and be treated fairly. If that isnât happening, we need to man up and walk away.
Eric Linden
2024-09-25 05:23:25 +0000 UTCIf women expect and feel entitled to: - Financial security before during and well after courtship, BF/GF relationship and marriage, from you, even thou as a strong independent empowered woman, they don't need you and can do it all themselves. - Sexual liberation and no strings attached promiscuity and immunity from prosecution of character because of said actions, even thou she's in a relationship with you - Exercising their ability to exploit infinite double standards and social immunity for toxic misandrist words, actions and ideologies, especially when you aren't allowed to reciprocate in kind or defend yourself for fear of damnation and defamation by society. - Eliminating safe spaces for men to be men, because any exclusion of the female collective is toxic misogyny of the highest order, yet men are completely excluded when it suits women just fine. If they feel entitled and expect all these things to be ingrained in unspoken law, then gentlemen, anything you expect and feel entitled to is just as valid. I'm sorry. I love you AG, but modern women today have shouted to the high heavens that they don't want to be on level ground with men ever again. Yes, there are exceptions to the rule, but exceptions are not and don't make the rule. Most Modern Women want selective equality and female supremacy and sadly, if it were ever to get better, it's gonna take too many generations from now for it to happen.
MarkGauci85
2024-09-25 05:22:19 +0000 UTCSadly, I'm not sure if I share AG's optimism. Privilege, like power, is not something that can be rescinded once given. After losing so much cultural and civic ground to feminism, I'm not sure if it can ever be reverted without a revolution of some sort. The greatest inequality is to make unequal things equal. Men and women aren't and will never be equal. We are complements. We are at our best when we work together, only then can society prosper. Patriarchy, in its inception, was that men has 100% authority, but 100% responsibility as well. Coverture laws gave men the authority, but they are fully responsibility for those whom they oversaw. If a man's wife or child commits a crime, the man is responsible. The feminist agenda was never about equality. They were after privilege and power from the get-go, and set out to destroy men's role in society through the dissolution of the nuclear family. Gynocentrism is where women have all the authority but none of the responsibility. If men have no authority but all the responsibility, it is the very definition of slavery. Look up Janice Fiamengo to understand the dark history of feminism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fS_zNQB1D1I Case in point, do you see the most strident feminists screaming injustice against the under-representation of men in universities or the lop-sided grants and scholarships favoring women? Do you see feminists rushing to sign up for military conscription? Do they argue for men's wellfare with the disproportion of men in homelessness and drug additions and suicides? Do you see them rushing to take on back-breaking off-shore oil rig posts or sewage/sanitation/lumber/construction jobs with the highest mortality rates? They only scream bloody oppression when it comes to under-representation in comfy high profile positions or societal simulacra of power. Where is the indignity in areas where female athletes are paid far more then men, such as gymnastics and ice stating, or in service or porn industry? At the end of the day, feminists want 100% authority with zero responsibility, and we still have a huge portion of men -- the so called "white knights" of liberalism -- unwitting to the perils of the feminist agenda and misguidedly pedestalizing women.
Hyperion
2024-09-25 04:46:34 +0000 UTCI'm one of the guys who think you are wrong, but not because I wouldn't like that world to come to fruition. It's because there is ideology and hope and there is a reality. And reality is a nasty place. For my part, I genuinely believe women and the top 20% of men are on opposite sides to the other 80% of men. And it was such from the dawn of humankind. Now that women and top men get the upper hand in negotiations, they are pressing their advantage. The deal is starting to be unacceptable for the 80% of men, and they gonna withdraw, letting it all crumble. Because that's their chip. The majority of real work is done by 80%, and if they collectively do only the bare minimum and start gooning (a new word for me as well xD) in their homes, then all our modern systems and institutions will collapse. From what I see, this is precisely where we are heading. Not because I like it. But because social forces are beyond control.
Cezary Skoczek
2024-09-25 03:56:38 +0000 UTC
