Random Thought of the Day

[Nyctophilia]

"No one's concerned about your future hybrid goose babies and no one read your journal either so just chill out." - Gene

"Why the heck is there a goose in here?" - Mr Frond

"If you have to ask, then you don't get it." - Louise

[Nyctophilia]

Sorry to bring what I am sure is a newbie question, but exactly what is "non-binary"? What is it like?

First off I want to apologize to anyone I offend with the title of this post. I am a firmly cis straight male looking to understand things better due to both the experiences of my personal friends and those of content creators that I greatly value.

I understand being gay, it is the same as I would be if I was attracted to other men. I am learning about being transgender, and while I've always had a "live and let live" mentality it is only recently that I have been making a somewhat successful effort at understanding what it means to be a trans individual. ContraPoints was the first trans content creator I followed, and with Abigail of PhilosophyTube recently coming out as trans after knowing her as a man for so long I have been educating myself and trying to come to a better understanding of how trans individuals feel.

However what is it like to be non-binary? I was most recently introduced to the concept when Jim Sterling seemingly came out as non-binary. I say seemingly not because I doubt them, but because I do not know what non-binary "looks like" if that makes sense. While I can appreciate an attractive man I feel no attraction towards them and feel firmly regarding both my gender identity and sexuality. Because of these things I feel like I have an inherently difficult time trying to understand both trans individuals and non-binary individuals. In the case of Jim Sterling I am not even sure of the proper nomenclature to talk about what they have presented, other than it would be inappropriate to use gendered pronouns when talking about their experience.

To be honest I am truly not even sure what I am asking. If anyone here is comfortable sharing their experiences personally about being non-binary or if you are close to someone who is non-binary I would be incredibly thankful for an education of the subject.

as someone who is non-binary, being non-binary is very confusing. (especially given the context of 21st century America generally being terrible)

I was assigned male at birth, but as i listened to other people's experiences i realized that i wasn't really a guy and realized i was actually feeling a lot of dysphoria. But trying to be a binary girl is also wrong. I definitively like somethings but its also got the same sort of dysphoria feelings in some areas. This is a semi common experience with enbies.

I really don't think it's confusing it's just that most people explain it in a really annoying way that I personally often don't relate to and that makes it sound like they're reading from some textbook and like they're just talking about gender expression and roles... Drives me up the wall.

But then in order for people to understand they'd have to listen to a bunch of people's stories. The kind of thing that happens with men and women automatically because you hear those stories all the time. Even then often people don't understand each other which is why there's a huge gender war between men and women lol. In this case it's just because it's a minority group (a really tiny one too if you look at UK statistics from the last census.) We're not exposed to those stories. And a lot of people can't be bothered and don't want to learn in the first place. It's like they're being put out by doing that and they wish everyone would just disappear and 'stop talking about this topic,' and also even if you are interested it's harder to find them in the first place. Like I am non-binary and I feel alienated due to the lack of people who I can relate to who talk about this topic.

You can even see it in the comment section where someone who is non-binary says they're non-binary because they don't want people to apply male or female gender expectations/roles to them. That's a common desire for non-binary people but not exclusive to non-binary people, some cis people can also feel that way. They then bring up dysphoria but don't discuss that much.

I think it has more to do with how you see yourself internally and categorise yourself (and the disconnect between that and others' perception,) your perception of your body, and competition (who you're competing with in a gender/sexuality sense.) These contribute to your gender identity. So basically non-binary people are like binary trans people except what they experience is more mild or less exclusively male/female. So they get dysphoric about being categorised as male or female or exclusively male or female and have some conflict about it where neither fits 100% it's about being male or female though not just roles.

So as I aged I realised that most of the time when there was some fictional character etc I 'wanted to be' they were usually male. Like 90% of the time or something. I was also attracted to a lot of them so a bit more confusing. Probably because of that I developed a kind of androgynous self image. Also identify a lot with characters who are written to be androgynous in sex/gender terms like Slaanesh or Loki. As a teenager a lot of characters I wrote about would be male because when it came to romantic and sexual content I was almost exclusively reading m/m erotica and slash fanfiction etc. But I also wrote a lot of female characters especially in non sexual/romantic stories.

Other people seem to have picked up on this occasionally and commented on it as I aged despite presenting mostly femininely and with one of those people who did it was during a period of our lives where we all knew several other women who were tomboyish, nerdy, one cosplayed as Sailor Uranus from Sailor Moon and would crossdress for cosplay, one had short hair... He didn't seem to have any opinions about them, actually he started dating the one with short hair. We were sort of dating at one point too but I think my androgyny bothered him (but spoke about that a lot already.) One time he compared our forearm hair as well lol...

My brother also made weird comments before I even came out as non-binary (not in a negative sense more just his perception.)

I think most people interpret my lack of adopting 'female-ness' or a certain kind of femininity especially in a sexual and romantic context as being childish or immature and socially awkward. Which it is technically. I'm very socially anxious and I can't flirt. These things aren't mutually exclusive lol. Where as others perceive some things as 'maleness' I think that's mostly what they're picking up on based on various comments and also conversations people have had about me that I've read on social media etc... I can read what you're saying about me when you tag me yes lol....

Lots of insecurity about being short and neotenous over the years. Don't like being 'cute,' don't like feeling intantlised or protective attitudes from others. Seems to bother most people who are trans masc or non-conforming. I'd guess that's just how afab people who don't fit in neatly are perceived most of the time. I've also noticed a lot of less masculine cis men seem to have similar issues and complexes which they then politicise. *cough* Jordan Peterson *cough*

But this didn't happen when I was a child at all and I think I was a lot more feminine as a child and more female identified overall. Like wanting to be a mermaid very gender typical for a female child. Wanting to be Tomb Raider still fine. Roleplaying as a librarian etc. Favourite colour was pink until I was age 7, then became purple. I liked Beetlejuice a lot and my aunt thought that was weird but that's just because the character was creepy in the film. Any interest I had in male characters was interpreted as being a crush so not a big deal. And I liked playing with dolls. So I also liked video games a lot, and computers but it was the 90s so I think that was seen as fairly normal for kids. I wanted to be a game developer but either I wasn't that vocal about things and/or nobody gave a shit. I played video games with a female cousin I hung out with a lot. Everyone was into Pokemon cards etc. Lots of gender neutral hobbies. Climbing trees wasn't seen as weird. Other active stuff. Skateboarding also fine and so on. I grew up in a reasonably liberal environment so while it can be a huge issue in Brazil if you're hanging out with boys:

"I grew up in the street playing sports all the time. We didn't have computers, no smartphones. All of the kids started skating, so I did too."[6]

"My dad broke my board so I wouldn't skate anymore. I started to skateboard when I was nine years old; I was skating with all the guys in my neighborhood, and he was mad at me because I was the only girl in the middle of 10 guys. He smashed my board in front of me and said; You're not skating anymore, ever again."[7] Her father eventually relented.[6]

It wasn't really for me. Played skateboarding video games, watched TV shows about it. Avril Lavigne existed no big deal. I've gotten more push back as an adult about certain things so I broadly agree with the argument that girls can get away with more when it comes to being gender non-conforming assuming they're in a reasonably liberal environment and that things get worse with age cause that matches my experiences. It wasn't until I was an adult that my dad felt the need to tell me not to get too muscular when he heard I wanted to work out more. Bear in mind there was a period when I was 15 (? or 16 one or the other,) and went to the gym (which I disliked but that's a whole other topic,) and I don't remember him saying anything about that, but it's possible he didn't even know about that lol. He was not overly observant of a lot of things I did outside the house back then.

The issue where other people were concerned I think was during my teen years I didn't wear makeup or try to compete with other girls so there was an occasion where they all forced me into having a makeover lol when I was 14 as I've said before. They wanted me to be more attractive than the other girl who abused me 'for once.' Basically wasted potential from their pov. She got really annoyed about that too lol. But this wasn't a competition I cared about.

I had an interest in fashion etc like alternative stuff. I was just doing my own thing. This was very controversial because alternative fashion was seen a really weird and devil worshiping in my town even though most people had moved on from that image globally by that point I think (based on conversations about this I've heard online.) I mean this was the early-mid 2000s and most people had that perception in the 80s and 90s though there was still a backlash to the whole emo thing so maybe some people are overstating the extent to which people had moved on by that point. But you know this was also the town that created Andrew Tate and he's only a few years older than me so you know. I think the only person who thought I looked cool in school was this one guy who listened to metal music and told me. That's all I remember it was very unpopular.

When I got to sixth form in 2007 I was asked by a teacher if I was studying fashion design and if I was in the right place because I was studying a software development course. It's quite inappropriate for people to say things like that, but also pretty funny. There's a character on Criminal Minds who kind of reminds me of that period of my life:



People think she's on drugs and she has that pink resume paper. I mean that teacher was really deadpan and serious like Hotch's exact personality type too and he was quite old (much older than Hotch.) And I think perplexed by most of his students who were these young guys with a significant cultural and generational gap, and actually didn't want to be there for the most part a lot of them. At one point most of them cheated on some test in a really blatant way which he noticed lol. That was the only class I think I've ever been in where people kept asking me for help. A bunch of them were there to get money because most of them were being paid. I was not. Then when I went to uni he was confused by what I chose to study cause I'm really dumb so I didn't study computer science and instead decided to study games art. I wanted to do something creative and also had my long term love of video games, but that's not really a sensible choice for anyone to make.

I guess it's like Legally Blond a bit too but my personality is not really like either of theirs. Like they're bubbly, friendly, extroverted and popular (in the case of Legally Blonde,) my personality is more like Spencer Reid's I guess (if limiting to the cast of this show lol,) introverted and socially awkward, and I infodump a lot but I had a kooky aesthetic back then.

And to be clear I didn't do things like this to be edgy. Initially it was very much the other way around. I just adopted things because I thought they were cool and then overtime learnt to be edgy and to enjoy other people's reactions for my own entertainment probably as a coping mechanism. Not just their reactions to me I now just in general enjoy things that trigger horror/freaked out/that's weird reactions from people. Sometimes I've posted things online without thinking about it and gotten reactions like that in reference to whatever I posted and then thought 'huh' and enjoyed their reactions. I also started doing that with my YouTube channel. I assume this is something a lot of horror writers enjoy too. A form of sadism I think.

As I said before I think this wasn't controversial really in the wider culture when I was 11/12 in most places but my school was very anti alternative culture so mildly gothish and metalish aesthetics were a huge deal. It wasn't necessary to link this I just really like these live performances lol:





And at the time I liked her first two albums but wasn't a huge fan but I think most people were familiar with her because she was huge so it was a bit like Marilyn Manson. He doesn't represent the entirety of alternative culture really but normies know of him. Also though I think I seemed a lot weirder than her to people I mean I'd get compared to Wednesday Addams and Samara from the horror movie The Ring so.





There was this weird contrast where on the one hand Avril was this huge pop star but on the other hand if I dressed somewhat similarly to her with long brown hair (never wore eyeliner or ties with casual wear though. I mean I had to wear one as part of my school uniform lol but wasn't wearing it on non-uniform days. When I think about it that was kind of an interesting choice because everyone had to wear a tie but in society in general women rarely wear ties lol,) it was a huge deal and a bad thing. Weird.

I dunno I'm trying to find a video with a style that was closest to me. My style was basically mall goth + pop punk type stuff not that close to Avril. Lots of red and black and purple and black stripy stuff though, including knee length striped socks (which have weirdly become a femboy thing now lol but I guess moreso pink ones,) those sweat bands everyone would wear, studded belts, other studded/spiked stuff. Wallet chains with jeans and those 'bondage pants' trousers. Fake knock off converses and similar shoes. Black t-shirts. Nirvana hoody and Green Day hoody + t-shirt. Sometimes wearing this like tartan skirt I had over jeans and also had this black gothish skirt with like metal skull and chains attached. That kind of thing. Blazers + goth-ish skirt. Close enough to her style that the contrast in reactions is weird lol. I look back on some of that stuff and think how mundane and low-level most of what I was wearing was (though I sometimes got more creative,) when you consider how a lot of alternative people dress(ed) with the makeup and contact lenses and everything. I wasn't rocking up like this lol:



I did have some of those fake plastic vampire fangs at one point lol but they were uncomfortable to wear and didn't wear them to school lol.

I should say obviously Marilyn Manson wasn't getting away with it at all lol. But Avril seemed to be as far as I remember. They were all hating on Britney in the media.

Also some stuff I wore was a bit like the video below. It's part of why I find this video hilarious it's like she merged my old wardrobe with some kind of 70s rockstar look (the glasses + hair,) and then the lyrics (because actually everyone in my school was into hip hop and pop music lol):



I don't like the increasing lack of musical diversity (in the mainstream anyway,) but I do appreciate how gradually certain people and messages kind of 'invaded' hip hop tbh.















I don't think most people my age really have this lens with this music so they find it annoying but from my pov hip hop used to be this really normative, hegemonically masculine, homophobic, sexist music genre. And those weren't the roots of hip hop per se but that was most of the mainstream/commodified stuff. Kanye once said 'the opposite of hip hop is gay.'



The only person who had lyrics I could relate to in mainstream hip hop was Eminem and obviously he had a lot of material like that too but he also had other stuff, and now it's still not great (mostly because nothing has materially improved and some things have materially gotten worse for most people over time in Western countries I should say. Right now the mental health of teenagers is worse than it was when I was young so there's that,) but it's full of edgy women and [BEEP] people and feminine aesthetics. Lil Peep was openly bisexual before he died, Kid Cudi wearing a dress and rapping about mental illness etc.

So that's the part that I think most mildly non-conforming people will be able to relate to (minus possibly the wanting to be male characters part.) I actually think really masculine afab people have an even tougher time because people start to perceive them as being male and they get chucked out of and harassed in female spaces from time to time.

This could be coincidental and I've allowed for that possibility but I'm instinctively weirded out by my primary and secondary sex characteristics especially when looking at them in the mirror. Well in the case of primary I can only look at them in the mirror. And it's not just that I find vaginas weird because I've looked at other people's vaginas. I'm not going to look again to see though lol at this point my memory of the first experience will probably colour my perception anyway making it useless.

I'm used to having breasts now obviously because that can't be avoided but I'm pretty much constantly ignoring them and suppressing some kind of negative reaction at their existence/dissociated from them. But I know this isn't good because you're supposed to be observing them consciously for health reasons and such. Not forgetting they exist because you're just a brain in a body.

I also don't think I feel the same way about that all the time. Sometimes I feel dysphoric about them through clothing and suddenly become conscious of their existence and wish they were flatter. Other times I don't care because wearing baggy/loose tops mostly hides them. Also sometimes don't care if wearing bra and in certain state of mind. So it's not fixed. The physical dysphoria might be sometimes tied to social stuff like the last time it happened I was visiting my dad and he called me his daughter and expressed a kind of protective feeling towards me. But it doesn't happen every time he does that. I just noticed that both things occured on that particular evening. I'm not out to him either because I don't think he'd understand at all.

At the same time I don't really care if I'm listening to some porn thing and imagining having sex with someone with a dick (or a strap on that's called a dick which in fantasy amounts to about the same cause I'm not picturing the difference much and the language is the same,) and getting them pregnant or something like that (even if they're a guy, my brain just ignores sex rules entirely lol,) if they use female terms to refer to me that's usually fine? (Or I guess the 'listener.') Might even be preferable sometimes because I sometimes need some way to distinguish myself from binary guys and emphasise the female aspect of my identity as well. But these desires and thoughts etc make me feel disgusting a bit. So I think to some extent that's a way to try and reduce that disgust as well but at the same time it's still there but I don't like to think about myself sexually in general. Like if I do that too long I just get freaked out and it's unpleasant that's why I prefer to focus on other people. There's complicated layers of conflicted thought.

I get pretty envious of cis guys as well so that factors into my avoidance of stuff that's aimed at cis men at this point though I didn't use to avoid it at all (I also still can't avoid it entirely because sexual preferences.) I think it's comforting to have stuff that emphasises that the character is afab because that kind of hegemonically masculine cis man that you get in porn well even like a lot of cis guys struggle with this like RE: black men but for me it's like most cis guys. And then I have some kinks that make it kind of worse like straight to gay conversion fetish which is very ironic I know because I'm afab - why do you have this kink? My sexuality is an argument against intelligent design btw. I've always said.

Also what this video is talking about:



What a time to be alive. Also to be clear I wouldn't want to look really masculine etc that's not my aesthetic ideal at all.

I started consuming more stuff at one point with women that had mindcontrol and transformation themes like bimbofication (which I'd liked for a long time anyway. I go through phases with gendered stuff and then some periods it's been more 50/50,) because even if there was a cis guy in it it made me less envious for some weird reason? Like I could just enjoy it voyeuristically I guess. Maybe it's because I'm less romantically attracted to women? I also think though that the stuff with women focuses on the woman and her body etc more and less on like her attraction to masculinity and male body parts (which I like but also makes me dysphoric and envious.) I also don't think anything I've read with women emphasised a change in sexuality ever (if it did it was towards becoming a lesbian,) and often there would be a bunch of bisexual stuff happening in the stuff I read. So that coupled with the fact that our culture sort of simultaneously does this weird thing where it treats all women as bisexual but also says bisexual women don't exist (I don't know how it's managed this it's quite a spectacular paradox,) like on the one hand 'of course all women want to have sex with women but also no bisexual women are just doing it for attention.' ??? but because of all of that I don't really feel as threatened I think. And also the feelings with male stuff only started happening over the past several years so it's obviously somewhat sociological imo.

There are certain kinds of guys who are easier to identify with I think too. In particular non-Human characters or like they're part human, androgynous guys as well. So there seems to be some weird like balancing act. Hate the terms mummy/daddy though which are common now... But that's because I hate ageplay related stuff.

And if this sounds like some kind of psychological nightmare that is correct lol. On paper it is like that. You kind of get used to it though sort of. "It can't rain all the time." Or something.

Also this post:

Problem is, all I want, all I crave for, all I always daydream about is to be the part who penetrate. It's not because I want to dominate -- I have sweet, caring, romantic fantasies as much as rougher and wilder. [...] I hate the fact that my mind and my sexuality are stuck on this role, but it's always been like that, since I was 6 and I was fond of my Snoopie and I dreamt to date "him" and be "his man" (heh).

I had a decent number of partners, had lots of sex, tried my best to enjoy PIV, always felt like shit. It's not painful, but I gain no pleasure, just a strong sense of dissatisfaction because that it's not what I need sexually and I hate every moment of it. In the long run, I start to develop angry feelings, since my partners never return the favor.

If it was me, pegging would be the center of my sexual activity with an ideal partner. I would give in reversing the roles, sometimes, because it's fair, but the idea of being on the receiving end is not arousing for me (maybe I'd learn to get aroused by it, in this kind of relationship, who knows?).

I don't think I'll ever find such a person. Assuming that there actually are men who like women and like to be pegged 90% of the times, sexual compatibility is not everything. Among this extra tiny pool, I should find someone who I like as a person... and who likes me back! Sounds almost impossible.

I want to add that I'm not lesbian. I've tried with women and... eww. Worst experiences in my life. Speaking of my look, I'm rather feminine, I'm small and thin, I have super extra long hair and usually I receive tons of attention from men. I don't look like a butch, but I'm male in my head, even if I prefer to stay as I am and not transition.

People were saying in the comments 'you can just be dominant and bottom' but that's not what it's relating to. It's related to wanting a dick.

I thought it was clear. I don't (only) want to be in charge. It's not an attitude. I'd be equally enthusiastic if he pinned me down and rode me or if he acted all bossy ordering me what to do and how he want it.

Maybe I used a wrong expression (I'm not a native English speaker, as you can tell). "Being in the receiving end" seemed to me a plain, neutral way to describe the partner who's penetrated, without any implied submissiveness.

It may be like that. Every case is different. For me, it's a gender related issue, since I hate to have a [BEEP] and I need to pretend my clit is a penis in order to get off.

At a certain point you might just consider yourself non-binary. But it's a label so not everyone adopts it obviously. It's possible they're not from a Western country, and so just described it like the above... I also feel reading papers about non-binary dysphoria is probably useful in getting a wider view:

"There Is Nothing to Do About It": Nonbinary Individuals' Experience of Gender Dysphoria

Conclusion: Results of this study suggest that nonbinary trans individuals experience gender dysphoria in unique ways. These findings highlight the need to develop clinical assessments of gender dysphoria that reflect nonbinary experience, and to outline explicit medical protocols for interventions tailored to achieve a desired outcome of physical androgyny.

When I look in the mirror and I'm naked, I notice my broad shoulders, ribcage, and neck. I get depressed by it because I know there is nothing to do about it. (White nonbinary person, 31)

I get depressed because there's no answer. (White man, 26)

I feel uncomfortable and disgusted with (my breasts) and being called a woman, but being a man never sat right either. (Biracial/Multiracial androgyne, 27)

Crying about inability to change my body as I want to (I only desire about half the effects hormones would provide) (White gender nonconforming woman, 28 )

My ideal body is one assigned male at birth i.e., flat chest, penis. I was born AFAB. I always wear baggy shirts/jackets to hide my breasts when possible. I have also had breakdowns over the fact that it is most likely medically impossible for me to obtain a normally functioning penis. (Asian/Asian American agender person, 18 )

It's just really confusing and I feel crazy/fake/whatever because it's frustrating not knowing what I want and constantly thinking I've gotten to what I wanted and then feeling like that's not right either; thinking I should've stuck as something else or trying to find something else new. (Biracial/Multiracial nonbinary woman, 33)

My chest feels wrong, unnatural, like it's not supposed to be there. I feel gross and wrong and if I look in the mirror it makes me even more dysphoric. The pronouns she/her and he/him (the latter less so) feel foreign. I want my primary sex characteristics to be gone, but I don't want a penis, either. (White nonbinary person, 18 )

Wearing very feminine clothes is uncomfortable because I feel like I'm pretending to be someone I'm not and that I'm accentuating things I would rather hide. But wearing very masculine clothes can also be uncomfortable because I become self-conscious about the fact that I don't look like a man despite making these efforts. (White nonbinary person, 29)

Likewise, social or medical transition was presented as a no-win situation where addressing some aspects of gender dysphoria only exacerbated other concerning aspects:

Due to my fluid gender, I have some shifting dysphoria, especially as I progress on testosterone treatment and have to deal with my voice changing--something I did not want but accepted I'd have to deal with in exchange for relief of other dysphorias. (White nonbinary person, 22)

No matter what, it's a reminder of what I have. Thing is, I would hate the opposite even more. (White agender person, 32)

Thematic analysis revealed the unique way gender dysphoria is experienced by nonbinary individuals. When describing their gender dysphoria, the majority of our participants did so by referencing androgyny or fluidity. Sometimes this was articulated as desiring an androgynous body or gender presentation to better reflect their nonbinary identities. To attain the desired androgyny, participants described specific feminine and masculine traits that they either wanted to keep or desired to obtain. This conceptualization stands in contrast to the classic clinical conceptualization of gender dysphoria as based on rejecting one set of (binary) features in favor of the "opposite." These findings also help explain why nonbinary individuals are the least likely among transindividuals to feel that traditional measures of gender dysphoria reflect their experience.11

The majority of our participants described a sense of profound hopelessness surrounding their dysphoria, and expressed that there is no apparent solution to their distress. For many, hormone treatment or other gender affirmative treatments that are traditionally seen as providing necessary and lifesaving treatment for those with gender dysphoria14 were not seen as viable options for our nonbinary participants.

[...]

Our nonbinary participants expressed that while these options may address some aspects of their gender dysphoria, they would necessarily give rise to other troubling aspects of distress.

In addition to their focus on the body, participants' descriptions of their gender dysphoria highlighted aspects of their gender expression or appearance as inducing their gender dysphoria. At times, participants described altering their gender expression and appearance in ways to offset their gender dysphoria. Finally, participants described their gender dysphoria as shifting and often attributed this to the shifting way that nonbinary individuals experience their gender.4

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8363999/

Could also consider a lot of non-binary people to be pessimistic/ambivalent trans people I guess... But I think it's mostly more comparable to bisexuality or asexuality in sex/gender terms.

You're going to get a bunch of different stories too if you ask different people. Some people don't experience dysphoria at all and people experience it to varying degrees.

Here's someone else's (they have a bunch of videos though which go into things. Dunno if this is the best one):





Initially they came out as a trans woman I think years ago, and then felt non-binary fit more. I actually think they went from coming out as a gay man to non-binary person who is mostly into women over a period of several years. From what I remember I also relate to a bunch of things they said but not 100%

And I want people to know this because if I have to read one more person reducing everything down to 'gender roles' I will explode. All over everyone just an explosion of blood, organs, bones and sinew. It will be very graphic. 18+ rated.

It's annoying because no one really does this publically and I don't blame them (I certainly couldn't be open in a non anonymous way. I can't talk about this stuff irl either. I think I would really struggle to open up to a therapist even - especially since some are transphobic,) and if they do on YouTube or whatever they never have many subscribers/not getting any attention. But it just means that most people give the same repetitive sentence long answers to questions that require a autobiography and that's all that most people here. It's like what Contrapoints said about how people repeat 'trans women are women' it's kind of useless.

Of course transphobes want to create this culture where people don't feel comfortable talking about themselves in detail and where people disappear from society (like me though this isn't the only reason why I have it certainly hasn't helped,) because they want people to not exist. If you accuse them of that they'll purposefully start talking about death as though stopping people from being able to medically transition, and forcing them to be closeted and to avoid people in general and ghettoising people isn't a part of genocide. Cultural genocide perhaps. I mean I think at the point where you have a man who grew up in a concentration camp during world war 2 saying 'there is no doubt in my mind that what's happening to trans people [in America I think] is a genocide' it's a tad concerning.

But if someone is genuinely looking for info to understand other people this culture makes it difficult for people to get info. It also makes it difficult - by design - for questioning people to learn about other's experience and psychological reality which ironically is counterproductive as some people will make choices that transphobes would dislike because of the lack of info and because things are so politicised.

In the US LGBT+ rights are a left/right struggle. They're not in the UK, it's kind of a mixed bag. A bunch of the far left here in particular is pretty transphobic. You get conservative politicians who get chucked out of conservative conferences for disagreeing:



^ the weird part of this video is who's idea was it to even chuck him out of that conference? Even Suella Braverman didn't seem to want him to be removed.

There's a conservative guy running for mayor of London who is pro legalisation of weed and self ID for trans people...

And then the general conservative party is transphobic and also homophobic with Suella Braverman etc:

Fearing discrimination for being gay or a woman should not be enough to qualify for international refugee protection, the UK home secretary has said.

Do you know what it's like in most of the world Suella? No let's just send the gay men to Rwanda. It could be a lot worse when considering most of Africa but still not a picnic.

Not that you have to look outside the UK to get an idea of what it's like:

"Do you think LGBTQ+ asylum seekers are unsafe even here, in the UK?” I ask. Daly becomes animated as he discusses the accommodation provided by the Home Office. Asylum seekers are often placed in over-crowded housing. Large, multinational groups of traumatised people are forced together, with LGBTQ+ individuals alongside those with homophobic and transphobic views. LGBTQ+ refugees have reported hate crimes and threats: one man reports being chased with a knife, another being told "I'm going to kill you because you are gay."

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/bra...st-be-stopped/

That being said I'd still suggest LGBT+ refugees try go to New Zealand. Like as a first choice lol (not sure which country would actually be best but that one is presumably better than the UK.) On the basis of a trans woman in the UK being granted asylum in New Zealand because of transphobia in the UK. Also the backlash to Posie Parker lol:

Anti-trans activist Posie Parker leaves New Zealand after chaotic protests

She's fascistic and based on things she's said I think she has psychopathic traits. But she's tolerated to some degree here and has more supporters here in the UK.



Whereas the Labour party often tries to avoid the question/acts ambivalent but some labour politicians are transphobic as well. Labour is trying to appeal to a more centre right audience these days in order to attract people back from the conservative party. Need more political parties here. This system is a joke.

At the same time there are just too many disagreements about so many topics and too much is politicised. A lot of people will talk about how some imaginary group behind the scenes are manipulating people to be divided but it's not quite that. People are really different and people who are very different in terms of values and preferences probably can't spend much time together especially if their needs conflict with each others.

What we really need is more control on an individual level and more ability to find like minded people and form small scale cultures that work for people. The internet was a really great experiment and testing ground for that like the early internet had smaller communities where there was more cohesion and now everyone's on the same 5 or so websites and everything is terrible. By doing this people will feel less alienated and find the people who are like them. So to that end we need futuristic transportation technology like the kind where you could hypothetically go on a day trip to Japan or something and cheaply and an economic system that dissuades people from moving for purely economic reasons.

Though even then there's some kind of psychological block in places like the UK where people just never go anywhere lol and feel like there are great distances within just England alone. Like that meme lol:



Tbf if you don't have a car/don't drive public transport here is insanely expensive so goes back to the cost thing.

But so that's another issue in America since we all know how people are with the right/left brain thing and how irrational they get over it. Well done guys lol.

[Nyctophilia]

I like how it's the exact opposite of the stereotypes associated with both countries.

I like how the UK Parliament has the same energy as their local pubs

The UK does government like a bunch of high school kids choose a project to work on, and the US does government like debate club at a nursing home

😂

Initially I was like, "The U.S. look to be professional compared to the hooligans." But as it went on, I thought, "The U.K. know how to have a good time compared to the boring U.S. method".

Yeah, both do nothing, but one is clearly having a good time at least

There are some hilarious moments but that's bound to happen if you clip it out of context like:





This bizarre ongoing fixation with food. Make a sandwich. No don't make me a sandwich make one for yourself.

And I'm sure you can do this with American politicians too.



This is painful to watch. Some people are arguing this is respectful and that 'some homeless people had a successful life before being homeless they're not all junkies' but it's not respectful to just pretend someone isn't homeless because 'it's awkward.' Or to pretend that most homeless people are what society views as successful since a huge part of the issue is people looking at certain types of people with contempt. His questions are delusional. 80% of homeless people are mentally ill in the UK with 45% being diagnosed because our mental health services are very useless, 62.5% have substance abuse issues, one study found that 77% of (homeless) households in temporary accommodation are unemployed.

Bear in mind this is where the guy says he's trying to find temporary accommodation during his 'weekend' at the end of the video though this was written in 2007:

St Mungo's (in England) surveyed 100 homeless people (in hostels or supported housing) to identify the problems they face getting a job. Twenty years ago (1986) St Mungo's conducted a survey of homeless people, and revealed that 83% had some form of paid employment. St Mungo's reveals, 9 September 2005, that less than 5% have paid employment.

OSW estimates that no more than 5-10% of the single homeless population in England is in any kind of paid employment and that figure may well be going down. A number of the agencies OSW works with say that they are getting fewer people into jobs, despite skills shortages and job openings, because they are increasingly working with individuals who have more and greater needs; and who face multiple barriers and disadvantage in the labour market.

Homeless people face stigma and other obstacles that means they find it harder to find employment. If you have large gaps where you've been unemployed or you've worked unconventional jobs like sex work, it becomes a lot more difficult or impossible to find regular employment. On one site I read that 40% of employers admit they'd terminate someone's contract if they found out they were homeless. I've also read that 1 in 3 in the UK wouldn't hire a trans person if they know they're trans. Just some 'fun' facts about UK employers. Homeless people are generally people who society view as failures or outcasts and have no supportive family members to help them since in spite of what people say it's very hard to get benefits for mental health issues in the UK.

There's a huge issue with getting data on homelessness and poverty. One issue in the UK is this:

English homelessness statistics categorise people as "straight" or "homosexual". I mention this to the chief executive of one major LGBT charity. Their response? A long, weary sigh. Because while the word homosexual is not exactly a slur, it is a medicalised term that most people working in the area know not to use. The wording in the official statistics also specified "gay" and "lesbian", but there is no mention of bisexual.

This is a big issue I think because bisexual people are more likely to suffer from mental health issues, substance abuse issues, and according to one study I found in the US before are more likely to be homeless.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6980764/

Prior studies characterizing sexual minority substance use disparities have primarily compared lesbian/gay and bisexual individuals, respectively or in combination, to heterosexual individuals. In light of emerging evidence that bisexual individuals may have particularly elevated substance use risk, we examine differences in recent substance use between bisexual and lesbian/gay individuals using national survey data.

Bisexual women were at significantly greater risk for multiple substance use behaviors relative to lesbian/gay women. We did not observe any substance use behaviors for which bisexual individuals had significantly lower risk than their lesbian/gay peers. These disparities may be explained, in part, by unique risk factors for substance use experienced by bisexual individuals, particularly bisexual women.

Obviously there's a whole thing going on with ethnic background too. It intersects very weirdly in the UK where on a group level British Indians are one of the most economically successful groups (and more so than some white groups. I think more than white British people but I think since 2019 white Irish people have overtaken them as a group.) A larger percentage of British Indian people own a home than white British people I think:

https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures....nership/latest

68% of White British households owned their own homes, compared with 74% of Indian households

households in the Black African (20% ) and Arab (17% ) ethnic groups had the lowest rates of home ownership

For many millennials the concept of home ownership is purely academic though:

Recent figures suggest that up to 1/3 of millennials (people aged 23-38 as of 2019) may never be able to own their own home and have no other option aside from renting property their entire lives while 1/2 will rent well into their forties.

Not on this island lol. Have you thought about making your car your home? :')

More successful in school:

British Indians, quite simply, are among the most industrious, accomplished and creditable among us the best of British, if you like. This starts at school. More than 75 per cent of British Indian students in England get five or more "good" GCSEs, compared to 61 per cent of white British students.

etc.

But British Pakistani and Bangladeshi people are the least economically successful, or among the least - probably the least going off memory. So there are huge disparities within racial groups.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentand...atbritain/2019

Focusing on 2019, the Bangladeshi (?10.58 per hour) and Pakistani (?10.55 per hour) ethnic groups had some of the widest positive pay gaps, respectively earning 15.3% and 15.5% less than White British employees (?12.49 per hour). Those found to earn more included: White Irish by 40.5% (?17.55 per hour), Chinese by 23.1% (?15.38 per hour) and Indian by 15.5% (?14.43 per hour).

So yeah White Irish people and Chinese people earn more hourly than British Indian people who earn more than White British people we're a very average people (technically one of my grandparents wasn't born/raised in the UK so I dunno at what point you technically stop being White British. I'm starting to think Luton should just be an ethnicity in and of itself. No but. Maybe.)

It's getting worse:

46% of children in Luton are now living in poverty, up from 33% in 2015.

And it's not even the worst here:

This is the seventh highest rate of any local authority in the country

Also:

Outside of London, Luton is the area with the highest rate of homelessness with one in 66 people homeless.

This is also an issue:

One clue may be found in the English statistics, which suggest that just 2% of those identified as homeless are lesbian, gay or bisexual (remember: it does not count trans homelessness). However, when asked about sexual orientation, almost 30% of those surveyed were classed as "prefer not to say" or "not known".

This is not at all surprising to those working in this sector. AKT has warned of serious disconnects between housing services and potential clients, with young LGBTQ+ homeless people not applying to councils ? and are wary of disclosing their identity when they do.

So is this:

There are other limitations: you can look at the extent to which ethnicity has impacted homelessness status. Or sexuality. But there is not any interaction between these categories, even though there is plenty of evidence that there is an intersectional dimension to this issue.

And not just this intersection but numerous others. I've struggled recently to find data about the intersection of racial + gender groups when it comes to voting patterns etc. Cause that's something I've been looking into a lot recently in the US and the UK. A lot of the issue for me is just that it takes a long time to dig up stuff using Google.

Reverend Jide Macaulay, founding pastor of House of Rainbow Fellowship, a safe space for the spiritual growth and inclusion for Black LGBTQ+ people, explains: "Black and people of colour [often] face homelessness because of the families' emphasis of their religious beliefs that homosexuality is wrong and an abomination against God. This is particularly the case for many LGBTIQ Christians, or those raised in a religious household."

According to a tweet from Billie, "Android" was inspired from when he saw a homeless man while he drank coffee with Tre.[1] However the song was named after the album producer Andy Ernst.[2]

Hey old man in woman's shoes
I wonder if he knows I think he's crazy
When he was young did he have dreams
Of wearing woman's shoes and being crazy?

It makes me wonder when I grow to be that age
Will I be walking down the street begging for your spare change

Or will I grow that old?
Will I still be around?
The way I carry on I'll end up
Six feet underground
And waste away...

When the old man was in school
Did the golden rule make him go crazy
Or did he hide away from hopes
Behind a smile and smoking dope
It's crazy

It seems so frightening
Time passes by like lightning
Before you know it you're struck down
I always waste my time on my chemical emotions
It keeps my head spinning around.

Meanwhile:

https://www.oecd-forum.org/posts/how...an-do-about-it

On the whole, the early evidence suggests that high-skilled workers are likely to benefit from AI because it makes them more productive, while low-skilled workers still face the highest risk of automation. Without the right safeguards and policies in place, AI risks further increasing disparities in the labour market.

https://assets.publishing.service.go...ai-on-jobs.pdf

While headline estimates vary widely, however, there is more consensus across these studies on the fact that jobs involving higher levels of skills, and typically performed by more educated workers, will face lower potential probabilities of automation in the medium to long term than those requiring lower skill levels. This is a topic that we also consider further in the present study, with broadly consistent general conclusions.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tracybr...h=57e246963b65

Fully 70% of people don't feel prepared for the future of work, according to a study of 3,000 people conducted by Amazon and Workplace Intelligence. In addition, research by Adobe involving almost 10,000 people across eight global markets found 80% of people are concerned by at least one global issue, upsetting them enough to impact negatively on their productivity and job satisfaction.

In the Adobe study, concerns tend to cluster along generational lines. Younger workers tend to be more affected than older workers, with 93% of Gen Zs, 87% of Millennials, 79% of Gen X and 71% of Boomers reporting negative impacts. And 44% of employees across age groups feel more anxious and more discouraged than ever before.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-d...es-says-report

Despite the positive responses from businesses, the report said the pace at which automation was spreading through the labour market could ? if not properly addressed ? exacerbate regional inequalities across the UK and lead to "serious erosions in job quality".

"This technology will spread broadly and rapidly through the economy, and therefore we would expect an equally rapid impact on some jobs," Hayton said. ?Society will have to adjust quickly to these issues, quicker than we've ever had to adjust before."

https://committees.parliament.uk/wri...ce/93425/html/

Overview. This new work paints a positive picture: while technology has potentially contributed to the loss of approximately 800,000 lower-skilled jobs, there is equally strong evidence to suggest that it has helped to create nearly 3.5 million new higher-skilled ones in their place.

This isn't good news. You have to create lower skilled jobs for the people who cannot do higher skilled jobs.

It's like watching this slow, agonising death.



It's like a birth, but it is in reverse
Never gets better, always gets worse

[Nyctophilia]

So yeah White Irish people and Chinese people earn more hourly than British Indian people who earn more than White British people we're a very average people (technically one of my grandparents wasn't born/raised in the UK so I dunno at what point you technically stop being White British. I'm starting to think Luton should just be an ethnicity in and of itself. No but. Maybe.)

As I was saying (from a year ago):

https://www.ft.com/content/ef265420-...8-c951baa68945

Britain is a different story. While the top earners rank fifth, the average household ranks 12th and the poorest 5 per cent rank 15th. Far from simply losing touch with their western European peers, last year the lowest-earning bracket of British households had a standard of living that was 20 per cent weaker than their counterparts in Slovenia.

It's a similar story in the middle. In 2007, the average UK household was 8 per cent worse off than its peers in north-western Europe, but the deficit has since ballooned to a record 20 per cent. On present trends, the average Slovenian household will be better off than its British counterpart by 2024, and the average Polish family will move ahead before the end of the decade. A country in desperate need of migrant labour may soon have to ask new arrivals to take a pay cut.

A Swedish PhD friend of mine commented the other day about the UK being such an unequal hellhole. He was talking about how to him much of his experience of the UK is of it as more of a country with the standard of living of Southern Europe (minus the nice weather). However, there's a class of people who get to live effectively in a different country owing to their class position - they don't deal with the state bureaucracies designed to make you give up, the awful public transport, the crumbling NHS, the awful schools for their kids. They just don't interact with any of that stuff.

Meanwhile we're all living somewhere more like Croatia or Greece.

Britain was described to me years ago as a very expensive third world country and that has always stuck with me.

No, but we are terrible for a European country. And the weather certainly doesn't help psychologically. All the grey. Then again I'd assume Swedish winters are hard.



I woke up at 9:30
Thinking I had already missed
The daylight
But it won't be here for
Another two hours
It doesn't matter
I'll probably sleep through it anyway
I drift through my days like a zombie
Looking for reflections of her
In the grayness of it all
The daylight only lasts for
A couple of hours
So I haven't seen any colors
For a couple of weeks
It doesn't matter
I've always been into bleakness
Even my dreams are in black and white
But maybe that is just because so are
The photos of her
The last evidence that she
Happiness really did exist

OK this band are from Iceland but still. Also I've done something similar before lol where I wake up thinking it's night. Probably vice versa too. I still don't know if this is real:



I mean put it this way I've contemplated moving to Poland or somewhere in Eastern Europe because there's a lower cost of living and the UK is insane in this regard and you get less for your money. However I don't like the anti LGBT culture there which is slightly more pronounced than here, though the gap has shrunk over time. I wouldn't choose to live in Uganda though lol. Ever. It's an objectively worse country imo.

I discovered this band below while looking up something for my previous post (because they're also from Luton and tweeted about it):







^ I love how the weather has made an appearance lyrically.

They're not bad. Definitely inspired by post punk. I don't always stumble on a band from Luton but when I do it's a post punk/postpunk-adj band (that last track is also reminding me of some video game soundtrack but can't quite think what right now. It's probably something from one of the Spyro games):







Lol not really. UK Decay were part of the original post punk/punk wave. I like how they sometimes sound like post punk Dead Kennedys (actually some of their early music was punk and I think they were supporting them on some tour.)



^ Apparently that track is actually called Rising from The Dead but the EP is called Rising from the Dread.



But also the lead singer on this track always reminded me of the professor from Back to the Future and I have no idea why.

In our never ending Russian and Belarusian era (because that's the only music I hear from Russia and Belarus lol.) Also I guess post punk is big there because a lot of other newer post punk and coldwave artists or those inspired by these genres generally do well over there and in Eastern Europe more generally. I think it's also the same with IAMX in Russia and Ukraine, though they're not post punk but dark vibes.



They slowed it down because the original wasn't doomer enough:



Even the synth pop is a bit:



OK well that's enough doomer posting I guess. At least about this for now.

Well it's either that or:

[Nyctophilia]

Oh my God the quality of this video:



Oi policeman stop blocking the camera. I'm trying to watch this in 2023 because the Luton carnival isn't as cool now. At least the times I went lol.

Some of us were in the right place at the wrong time:



I was also in Blackpool at the wrong time (for this concert, and for Blackpool Illuminations lol.)

She's a really good drummer ... because she's both minimalistic and effective. She has broken the code.

😀😃😄😁😆😅😂🤣 Jack White did the drums for most songs in the studio because she couldn't do 💩.
The drum tracks give AC/DC a run for the money for bland nothingness.

ahaha she can barely play my guy. she didnt even record this song

Regardless I want to say the peak of his career so far was with The White Stripes but I haven't listened to enough of his work to say that. He seems to have had the most hit singles with that band like the above and:









Only one I can think of with Raconteurs is this:



He was in a supergroup and I don't remember anything from them off the top of my head. Checking them out now of the first two tracks the first one I listened to Impossible Winner was technically good but maybe too polished or something to appeal to me that much on first listen. This is better though:

to the "she just plays what jack white tells her" comment its not true jacks talked about being inspired by her simplicity she also had a thing for peppermint patterns and thats where their name came from she was his muse

Yeah I was going to say lol he basically said that and it's kind of easy to hear lol.. I think limitations help people to be more creative sometimes and I think at the time they were doing that the music they were making wasn't like anything else in the mainstream at that time. Obviously it drew on past music a lot as does everything now, but still was really good.

Trying to remember this one live performance I listened to once that was pretty great... Oh yeah:



Oh for fucks sake guys:

Neal Pert was so far beyond whoever boring White Stripes is. Danny Carey and Martin Lopez are far better than boring White Stripes is as well.

Whoever brought Neal Peart into the conversation is ridiculous. Beyond unrelated..

Lol it really is. It's like comparing The Sex Pistols to Mozart and people have to stop doing this in general. Why does everyone have to be compared to the members of Rush?

Oh wait lmfao:

"I never thought 'God, I wish Neil Peart was in this band.' It's kind of funny: When people critique hip hop, they're scared to open up, for fear of being called racist. But they're not scared to open up on female musicians, out of pure sexism. Meg is the best part of this band. It never would have worked with anybody else, because it would have been too complicated... It was my doorway to playing the blues."

He's been having to do this for decades now lol it seems. I think it's sweet that he still bothers (this is from 2023 and on that note it's kind of weird that this conversation is still happening they have been broken up since 2011 and he's been in several other bands during and afterwards but nobody cares they just want to rant about Meg I guess. It's literally The Simpsons he's already dead meme at this point):

Jack White has responded to the recent controversy surrounding The White Stripes drummer Meg White's playing ability.

Jack and Meg White formed the band in 1997 and went on to become one of the most successful bands of the 21st century, but the latter has often been criticised for her drumming style.

The discourse was revived again recently when journalist Lachlan Markay tweeted: "The tragedy of the White Stripes is how great they would've been with a half decent drummer.

"Yeah yeah I've heard all the 'but it's a carefully crafted sound mannnn!' takes. I'm sorry Meg White was terrible and no band is better for having sh*tty percussion." Markay has since deleted the tweet.

A number of musicians have defended Meg White, including The Roots?' Questlove and Portishead's Geoff Barrow. Unknown Mortal Orchestra's Ruban Nielson also said "there's no one like meg white", and recalled that "kids would lose their mind to her drumming".

Now, Jack White himself has stepped in to celebrate the drummer, posting a photo of Meg at her drum kit on social media yesterday (March 15) along with a poem that read: "To be born in another time, any era but our own would've been fine. 100 years from now, 1000 years from now, some other distant, different, time.

"One without demons, cowards and vampires out for blood, one with the positive inspiration to foster what is good."

You can see the full post below.

To be born in another time,
any era but our own would've been fine.
100 years from now,
1000 years from now,
some other distant, different, time.
one without demons, cowards and vampires out for blood,
one with the positive inspiration to foster what is good.
an empty field where no tall red poppies are cut down,
where we could lay all day, every day, on the warm and subtle ground,
and know just what to say and what to play to conjure our own sounds.
and be one with the others all around us,
and even still the ones who came before,
and help ourselves to all their love,
and pass it on again once more.
to have bliss upon bliss upon bliss,
to be without fear, negativity or pain,
and to get up every morning, and be happy to do it all again.

III

This is funny too:

Singer Karen Elson, who was married to Jack White from 2005 to 2013, wrote that "Not only is Meg White a fantastic drummer, Jack also said the White Stripes would be nothing without her. To the journalist who dissed her, keep my ex husband's ex wife name out of your f*cking mouth."

I can see why she stopped wanting to play though given her severe anxiety and being compared to Neil Peart for some bizarre reason.... And there's comments like this on every video:

best man of our times*, you know he taught his missus how to play drums so she could be in the "band", its a one man band and the name of the band is JACK WHITE!

And yet they mysteriously no longer play.

I miss the rawness of these 2. I love Jack white, but his live stuff is sometimes just not the same as this magic.

I guess because Jack White is very talented and they also became very famous. But I can think of other female drummers that just didn't get any particular attention. Like Kitty from Mindless Self Indulgence.

People seem to also compare her to Moe Tucker a lot too:



^ I doubt this is the best example I just really like this song lol.

Oh lol Amanda Palmer commented on that too:

If Meg had been male, her sound would have been hailed as "stripped-down, distinct and powerful".

Someday.

I'm 50/50 on this tbh. I don't think that helped because people (straight men mostly,) get really bitter like the whole Yoko thing where's she's seen as Satan incarnate. (edit: Lol even when the rest of the Beatles so to speak didn't exist. He got famous off this band not his other projects.) And then they ruin the TV show Friends by not making them end game because they left it too long and everyone loved whathisname the actor Paul Rudd and gave David a crap ending too which seemed unnecessary but OK:



What was I talking about oh right? Heterophobic hate crimes. Actually Phoebe is obviously bisexual but I digress.

No whenever a band reaches a certain level of ability + gains a certain audience (classic rock fans,) they get opened up to this weird kind of anal 'there can only be one' level of criticism. I see it often with male musicians. (edit: obviously this isn't exclusive to male musicians check out stan twitter lol.) Like the other day when I was reading reddit threads about Cliff Burton. Don't care bass was great.



And tbh, she was never really trying to be in that league. It seems like she got roped into his project initially while messing about with him.

edit: OK so I was reading their wikipedia pages and noticed this about his current wife:

At 19 years old in 2009, after hearing that Jack White's supergroup, the Dead Weather, was going to be playing a show in Detroit, Jean headed to the venue and laid a path of her demos from the band's tour bus to the side door they used to enter the venue.[3] A couple of weeks later, after listening to the demo, Jack White called Jean and invited her to his Nashville studio, Third Man Records, to record her songs with him. Jean would stay in Nashville to work on Third Man projects and then go home to Detroit during her down time. She moved to Nashville permanently in 2011.

[...]

Jean suffers with social anxiety. She stated in a 2014 interview with Elle, "I'm still kind of getting the hang of it even though I've been doing it for a long time," Jean, who is diagnosed with social phobia, explains of performing. "I'm very shy so it's difficult for me to perform. But I really enjoy doing it. Having social anxiety makes it a lot different than for the majority of musicians out there. So every show is an accomplishment."[39] Jean stated to Northern Transmissions in July 2019, ?I am introverted and obsessed with art. I live every day with a lot of anxiety, guilt, doubt, and depression. I get completely obsessed with projects or completely imprisoned by fear of judgment."

Jean has been the subject of online criticism with people often questioning her authenticity, talent and relationship with Jack White. It took a toll on Jean causing her to lash out at naysayers publicly on her social media, something she regrets doing.[40] "When you work so hard it's absolutely heartbreaking and uninspiring. I was like, 'if people aren't even going to listen to the music, and insult me before listening to it, why am I pouring my soul into something?' I was bummed out for a long time."[40]

Public confirmation of Jean's relationship with White first occurred in August 2021 when White posted about Jean on the Third Man Upholstery Instagram page calling her his, "wonderful girlfriend and enchanting muse of many years."

I'm definitely sensing a weird pattern here lol...

[Doseone]

If brain activity produces consciousness, there is no reason why I have to be a product of this brain and not another or neither. It is perfectly conceivable that my brain produce consciousness, but "me" not be present. Why is there a me that persists through time?

[Nyctophilia]

These bathroom bills are bizarre...



Making it so trans people who have medically transitioned can only go to the toilet in 18+ spaces since I'd imagine it's pretty awkward to go into women's toilets when everyone will think you look like a man but then at the same time risk being arrested for going into the men's...

The people who are creating these laws need to gtfo of politics.

[Doseone]

I have a crush.



I like the way they talk.

[Nyctophilia]

I'm still confused by how the cultural discussion about AI and robot partners has been framed as a men vs women issue. It's really odd. It's like the new version of 'there are no girls on the internet' except there's been tons of women and everyone on the internet for over a decade now. Even in the early 2000s in fact. If there was a group that was smaller it was older people but over time more and more older people got online too. I don't think Jordan Peterson really used the internet in the early 2000s (and it shows lol with his quest against anonymity.)

But anyway back in 2003, a full decade before the film Her, there was a manga series called Zettai Kareshi (or Absolute Boyfriend.) Where a young flat chested woman is rejected by every guy she meets so she mentions wanting a boyfriend to this salesman who directs her to his website and she buys a robot boyfriend. I didn't read this at the time but I did later watch the live action drama based on the manga that was released in Japan in 2008 (I don't know remember if I finished watching it though now lol I definitely watched a bunch of it.)

Now for some reason there's this constant one sided emphasis especially in conservative spaces on male loneliness and how men are going to buy sex robots and have AI girlfriends and collapse society. Maybe because the gender role is that men pursue women so if they can just 'fix men' everything will work out. But nobody cares (or has considered,) about the possibility of women rejecting every man who approaches them (or why,) about women refusing to date men, about women who would prefer an AI or robot partner, or just reading fanfiction etc. Nobody (except furious incels perhaps lol,) have considered women at all in this conversation.

The stereotypes about women are stuck in the 1980s catwomen? Who the [BEEP] are they? [BEEP] they live in rented accommodation where pets aren't allowed (but it's OK because Japan solved that problem and now we have neko/cat cafes in London lol. Now you can rent your home and your pets,) and they're writing and reading creepy sadistic fanfics about AM and Ted from I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream. No they're really not there's only like 20 or something fanfics and most of them written in recent years since I became intrigued by that pairing. I think there were 4 when I first looked which was I dunno some time in between 2018 and 2020. That was just an aesthetically appropriate example for dramatic effect but they are definitely writing and reading fanfiction in general.

Anyway they do talk about women when they want to complain about the birth rate, women not having kids, and women not having kids and then that causing the collapse of civilisation or at least political issues because 'women without kids don't vote for conservative political parties or positions.' 😏

This is like the reverse of what the left does btw where they only care about men's happiness etc because they want to win them over politically or get votes from them. (Actually they rarely even try in credit to them lol but when they do.) Not just politicians though anyone who discusses politics online has this attitude now. Really toxic.

But conservatives only care to talk about women as mothers they don't care about any other issues women might be dealing with like mental health issues, struggling with employment, substance abuse issues, or even just finding romantic relationships lol... (Unless being unmarried effects their voting patterns of course lol.) They also don't have any advice for women in general. What they do is tell women to have kids and then complain when those kids are born in less than ideal circumstances like to single mothers which is rich coming from them because they have no advice or focus on women ever. They're anti abortion but also anti helping people when they're born. Unless they're men and they can get votes from them lol.

People take conservatives perfectionist attitudes seriously and don't have kids (which is responsible) and then they complain about collapsing birth rates.

You know like how Meg White stopped drumming probably at least partly because everyone kept complaining about how unskilled she was, and now rock music doesn't exist? Lol it's not that direct but it doesn't really exist now does it? It seems part of the reason Jack formed a band with her was because of his own perfectionism and fear of criticism compounding the irony:

This tall, deathly pale white boy could be found after school strumming blues guitar on his parents' porch like a cotton-picker after chores, to the violent derision of his peers. The idea that such a nerdy outsider could be a bluesman despite his mojo not noticeably working would broaden the music's scope when the monomaniac White forced the world to listen.

No. I never thought, "God, I wish Neil Peart was in this band." It's kind of funny: When people critique hip-hop, they're scared to open up, for fear of being called racist. But they're not scared to open up on female musicians, out of pure sexism.

Meg is the best part of this band. It never would have worked with anybody else, because it would have been too complicated. When she started to play drums with me, just on a lark, it felt liberating and refreshing. There was something in it that opened me up. It was my doorway to playing the blues, without anyone over my shoulder going, "Oh, white-boy blues, white-boy bar band." I could really get down to something

And they just keep complaining about her drumming even 12 years after they broke up. And then 'the journalist is sexist,' and he's 'being cancelled' because people are calling him sexist for saying his 'opinion.' But you're all really missing the interesting point here. Because why was it necessary 12 years after when the ENTIRE GENRE IS DEAD? (But this is old news anyway lol. Happened last March.)

And people rarely form bands at all anymore because they don't socialise because of their crippling anxiety and over reliance on social media. A lot of older bands relied on not only musical ability but also the ability to get along so they could work together. Part of the reason Rush were around for such an insanely long amount of time compared to other bands was because they were also close friends. Also even if someone did find some close friends to make music with today they'll never be Rush. So they form solo projects and it's mostly electronic and they're not playing instruments as often, and they're not making music at all anymore most of the time because there's not much money in it, and their job kills what was left of their soul after the education system killed the rest. (Art and music education in school is also really bad btw, not that that necessarily matters, but it was when I was at school anyway.) They don't have any energy after working and they don't have any energy + hate themselves if they're unemployed. They have no attention span, and they have no motivation, and no one's going to listen to people experimenting or failing anyway - they only want really crisp perfect formulated music that's soulless but effective made by the same few music producers over and over. And then they complain about that too! Haha.

There is no pleasing people in general, but of course conservatives more than anyone. I'd say you used to tolerate punk music. (This isn't exactly Mozart is it?):



But no they didn't tolerate it. They complained about that a lot too! But people actually care now:

When I was in my mid-teens, I wanted to be a writer, and showed my dad something I'd written. He didn't like it very much, and I've struggled to write since. You started at a very young age did you ever have a moment like that?


Bret: I've noticed that millennials have a huge sense of shame, which my generation simply didn?t have. I did not care what my parents thought about my books. I do know that my parents were not happy with some of my books. I found out after my father died that he described Less Than Zero to my mother as ?that dirty little book that our son wrote?. My mother is proud of me, but I don't think I write the kind of books that my mother particularly likes. That's fine. They weren?t written for her.

Wanting to be liked was not part of Gen X. But I do think it's a major -- and crushing -- part of my boyfriend [musician Todd Michael Schultz]'s millennial generation. He wants to be liked. He wants to be followed. He wants likes on Instagram, a lot of views on his YouTube video. He is exhibiting himself. He's not a typical millennial -- he is very critical of his generation, which might be one of the reasons why we've gotten along, and been together for as long as we have. But he wants to be accepted in ways that I just never did, and my generation never did.

A teacher reading something I wrote and slamming it made no difference to me. At college, my professor read one of the first stories I had turned in, and said, why all the brand names? Why are you mentioning the songs people are listening to, or what's playing on TV? And my reaction was, well, this is part of the wallpaper, the background noise of their lives. That's life. And he took me to task and said: "You're going to end up on the ash heap of literature. If you keep writing books like this, you're going to date yourself." And I really didn't care.

Coupled with social media which makes it impossible to get away from it and you can't self promote your work without it... You're expected to have a parasocial relationship with your fans. Especially if you start off on YouTube. You get people like Doja Cat and her insane relationship with her audience on twitter. You got what you wanted I guess. Most people aren't doing anything.

"What is millennial culture? There's no writing. None of them read books."

Millennial culture is video games btw.

Two things you should understand about millenials:

https://hotelconcierge.tumblr.com/po...gender-nullary

Trigger warning for everything that follows: the coddled, over-sensitive, "triggered" millennial crybaby does not exist. Hold your applause--the COSTMC is an oxymoron because coddling does not sensitize, it scleroses. Have you met these people? They can?t feel an emotion without an audience and a week to rehearse. The performative offense of this group results from high emotional tolerance, not low; sad-rage is heroin to everything else?s Motrin, and no matter how vast the safe space, some kids are gonna hang at the outskirts hoping to score.

https://hotelconcierge.tumblr.com/po...adult-fictions

Unfortunately, the ability to parrot accepted opinions is often taken for the ability to derive judgments of one's own. I?m thinking of a homestuck 13 year old who is constantly told that he/she is "so mature" for getting straight A's and being well-spoken with the dinner guests and not ditching class to smoke brick weed with Devin. Whether or not those behaviors are good, the kid isn't mature, he or she is well-trained, and if you keep claiming maturity then you are going to stunt development. Sorry: not having an adolescent rebellion means you didn't complete adolescence. The result is neotenous adults who are not overly sensitive--as conservative media would claim--but rather overly dependent on external rules. Cards Against Humanity is so funny, right? You get to say bad words, but it's only a game.

The consequences are predictable. Imposter syndrome. Scrupulosity. Sexual fetishes suffixed with -play. Gushing compassion ruined by the inability to picture how one appears to the outside world. Neediness. Ill-fitting jeans. Trouble with romance, and not because they don?t know how--deep down they do--but because they cling to a rulebook ("milady") instead of trusting instinct. They were never allowed to have instincts. For that matter they?ve never really wanted, never felt a desire that wasn?t assigned, which is why: open relationships, switched majors, medicated anxiety, and ambivalence, ambivalence, ambivalence.

You don't know what love is
You do as you're told

Also related:



A lot of Gen Z is similar but worse. Current teenagers are even more mentally ill (lonely, anxious and depressed,) than my generation. They have less sex, do less drugs etc. As a younger millennial I was sort of in between there. Never really had sex besides giving hand jobs and fooling around, found my partners during the pre-online dating app era, drank alcohol a lot during uni but didn't do other drugs didn't do any of this until 18. Then stopped dating, dropped out of society etc. The age that people are giving up is getting lower over time imo.

I remember my friend judging me when I got drunk a decade ago and at the time we'd just started dating we were both 19. I'm not complaining about this it was a long time ago I'm just commentating on what I've noticed. He never drank and didn't enjoy clubbing etc, a very introverted guy. Over the past year or so he's developed anxiety issues and finds the idea of going to work every day of his life depressing. He went on a couple of dates after we broke up but never found another relationship. He was never that into sex either which worked for me because I was having issues sexually anyway and trying to figure myself out. He says that most people who messaged him on dating apps either had peculiar fetishes or were asexual. There was also a woman who had dogs and he didn't like the idea of dating her partly because of the dogs but not sure if there were other reasons.

My brother also has never drunk alcohol. He hasn't had a relationship or tried dating anyone since the early 2010s. A lot of the culture is quite puritanical and anxious.

Most of my cousins are married with kids although some of them on my dad's side were older and didn't have kids till their 30s (now in 40s.) On my mum's side a few had kids in their late 20s. One cousin wasn't married I think when she had a kid. I don't keep up with the specifics we're not in contact now. I last saw her at my granddad's funeral in 2016 when she had a young kid (like toddler age I guess,) she was supposed to be getting married during the pandemic not sure if with that guy or not. Another I think is married and has a kid with him (at least one, I think just one.)

I have another male older cousin on that side who I've not heard anything about I don't think he was with anyone at my grandad's funeral and didn't have kids then. None of my family members who had kids went to university (none of my six older cousins went to university at all.) My brother dropped out of university in his second year (he was studying a very ironic subject but I already write in far too much detail about certain things so I'll keep that to myself lol.) I don't know about their partners though I know at least one cousin's husband didn't he used to work with my dad, uncle. Lots of my family members have worked for the same one company.

One of my male cousins on my dad's side had kids (I think two,) another didn't have kids and is diagnosed schizophrenic (he was only diagnosed because he threatened to stab his sister during a delusional episode or something like that. It's very difficult to get diagnosed with mental health issues here besides social phobia, depression and generalised anxiety - even then it's not really a diagnoses you'll just be referred for cognitive behavioural therapy, but that seems like a diagnosis of sorts.)

Some of my cousins grew up in my hometown (or are growing up still,) some grew up in Liverpool. Sociologically speaking it would be interesting to know what happens with my gen Z cousins (that sounds very clinical/psychopathic lol, actually it's weird because the older gen z cousin I only saw a few times growing up and mostly saw as a baby so he's the only baby I've ever held lol,) but I'm not in contact with them only hear stuff through my mum now. One recently graduated from university I think. The other is still a teenager in school. Their mum is a lot younger than my mum and is gen x and she had her first kid in her late 20s I think? Or early 30s but her second in her late 30s. But my mum also had kids fairly late probably for her generation + class background. Like she'd been married for a decade but my dad told us he didn't want kids until we were born also suggested once that my mum essentially just tricked him into having kids. Lots of men don't want kids which is another thing conservatives don't factor into discussions.

A couple of women I had on facebook from my hometown before I stopped using it ended up pregnant at a very young age. In one case the dad wasn't involved at all. One woman I went to uni with was in a relationship before she started uni, and then got married when she was 21 I think and he was like 19. Then sometime around 2014 probably? They had a kid so in their mid + early 20s. Very mixed bag actually but that's only because I've known a lot of working class and lower middle class people. I think if most people I knew weren't, including in my own family, that would have been a very different picture.

Even so my mum had/has (because one is dead now,) 4 siblings and my dad had/has 2 (one is dead now.) On my dad's side his sister didn't have kids because she couldn't but wanted them apparently, but both he and his brother (now dead,) had kids though my dad didn't want them. On my mum's side everyone had kids except one of her brother's (not the one who is now dead,) and he seems to be pretty introverted and have anxiety issues too from what I've heard. Finds hanging out with family members difficult etc. Travelled around alone a lot.

My dad recently brought up some story about him (I guess because he noticed how similar me and my brother are or something and because he used to hang out with and work with him.) About how one time he borrowed my parents washing machine and then just disappeared with his laundry still in it. And then later they found out he was halfway across the country because he just went on a random trip. He also used to drive around to random music festivals and stuff in a van and was unemployed a lot because of anxiety and schizoid-like tendencies I assume. My dad then said that he felt my mum never really sympathised with him and didn't really get it. Because my dad likes to criticise my mum lol.

But yeah so more of my generation in my family aren't having kids than my parents generation I guess so far, but it's not a huge difference yet, unless both of my younger cousins don't have kids. I don't think this is the biggest issue either it's like a symptom of the other underlying issues which are making people unhappy and incapable of living well.

I think some conservatives underestimate how much of a trainwreck many people's lives are too. Somehow... Because they're the judgy political team. Some of them don't underestimate that though they just don't give a shit.

Bret: I'm nothing. I'm not a conservative or a liberal. At least in the US, I can't agree with either of them. I think they're both completely bonkers. I don't watch the news anymore. We have the Food Network on all of our TV screens, or video games. I'm done.

So that's what you get right? You get video games and politics. They both trigger emotions more easily which is the younger generations drug of choice, and are more absorbing for ADHD-like minds, and when you're fed up with the politics you can chill out with video games or video game content on YouTube + twitch.

"But I criticise the people making video game content and playing video games too because I want them to go back to doing other things."

Oh I know. I agree. I think if we really work at it we can collectively get people to just stare at the walls and/or kill themselves.



https://hotelconcierge.tumblr.com/po...gender-nullary

There's a practical argument to be made against fractalized gender: it's confusing. With 3^^^3 possible sex-gender-orientation combos, how are kids supposed to know how to grow up? Aren't imperfect gender roles better than 24-year-old otherkin? I hear you, guy wearing a Harley-Davidson jacket and listening to Motley Crue, but Tumblr semantics are a consequence of twenty-teen spirit, not the cause. If we weren't arguing about the gender binary (and before we were) we'd be arguing about the range of femininity or masculinity; the crusade would be for pixie cuts and stick-and-poke tattoos to be considered as feminine as Brazilian butt lifts. Don't be fooled by words--do you really want society to have one idealized template per gender? How would that ideal be decided? Majority rule?

^ Parts of this are actually very funny.

There's a hilarious overlap between the people who get mad about preferred pronouns and those who call for a return to "traditional masculinity." The idealization of some Hollywood-ified tradition isn't the problem; if you want to roleplay a fursona, go ahead. No, what?s pathetic is the begging. Rather than be a man, in spite of the system, you demand validation from the system for aspiring to be a man. Being against identity politics is the new identity politics. That?s why right-wing culture warriors are so into the idea of crybaby millennials?it?s comforting to believe that you?re actually strong (since you don?t drink from plastic water bottles) and that anyone getting laid is actually xeno-estrogenized. Even if this was true, obsessing over it, masturbating to it, using it as an excuse for self-pity and inaction?that makes you a _ _ _ _. Four-letters. Multiple choice. Maybe hangman will teach you something.

I'm seeing this a lot honestly. Also from 'reactionary feminists' which - the fact that this a group that even exists is damning in itself. But because it's so unclear what a lot of conservatives are complaining about in regards to men and what they want from other people... I mostly just get the impression that they want people to cheerlead for masculinity. Not just conservatives but people who discuss masculinity and men in general.

But the excessive criticism is a problem conservatives created really. Because 'the left (tm)' (not the left in any meaningful sense where you're talking about economics lol but you know what people online call the left. 'the woke (tm)' maybe,) adopted their kind of moralistic attitudes and puritanical hen pecking but just directed it at the things they didn't like. It's not much different than the clips below in rhetorical style just the buzzwords and focus of certain things change a bit:





And now everyone has decided universally that they should critique video games and AI (but for different reasons,) which is amusing. It's some kind of equaliser I guess. And they're really trying hard to make it as political as possible but since most people dislike video games and have contempt for gamers there's been no solid, fixed position even though most things in the Anglosphere - especially in America have been assigned to one tribe or the other. Just an endless back and forth of:

"These characters are all white men and that is bad."

"Games are making everyone violent and causing school shootings we need to ban video games for under 18s."

"Video games are sexist."

"Woke opinions are ruining the video game industry. Game journalists can't speak their mind without being yelled at or fired."

"Right-Wing Hate Groups Are Recruiting Video Gamers"

"All these gamer's are soy. Video games are for unmasculine woke men."

"This video game character doesn't look sexually attractive."

"This video game character looks too sexually attractive."



^ this is the best argument I've ever seen for playing video games. Oh god if you stop playing you might turn into Sneako, Andrew or Tristan Tate lmfao. Good point.

Edit: Actually it's funny:



"Yeah but Tristan it doesn't matter does it?" Because you're both being destroyed by women now. 😏 (Well not just women lol but the part where women are destroying them is more fun.) Should have stuck to Call of Duty.





^ it's weird that he thinks men were supposed to be the main audience for everything he brings up. Consumerism has always been associated more with women so it makes sense that the target audience for spending $$$ would be women where possible. If the people who spend money hate straight white men, then you'll get content that hates straight white men. That's assuming they're prioritising profit over their own creative preferences of course. Also I don't understand his complaint about gay male Shepard. I mean because he seems specifically bothered about that and less bothered about lesbian female Shepard. If you're going to have one, you obviously have to have both or it just extends the backwards attitude towards homosexuality that most of the world shares where they violently hate male homosexuality and ignore/begrudgingly tolerate female homosexuality most of the time when they don't feel like raping them.

Technically speaking the characters would be bisexual I guess. Consider it pay back for all the bisexual characters from the 90s and 2000s who were made either straight or gay. And I know of many btw. (Willow why is she a lesbian when she's obviously bisexual... Spencer Reid on Criminal Minds couldn't be bisexual even though the writer was gay and wanted to make him bisexual so he had to be straight, Phoebe on Friends is singing a song about bisexuals kidding themselves but keeps talking about how hot various women are and is attracted to Ross and Monica's cousin. She's straight though!) Some were also turned into cousins haha (in the US dub of Sailor Moon.) Who knows maybe when you stop talking about 'gay Shepherd' and 'lesbian Shepherd' maybe people will stop. Probably not though because Velma is a lesbian except when the writers find Glenn Howerton attractive and so have to make her have a crush on Fred. Also she briefly dated Shaggy and kissed Daphne and a lot of guys sure do seem attracted to Velma... Huh. And also that straight white male WoW dev who likes Sylvanas so hooked her up with a self insert character. And game devs spend all their time working (overtime often,) in an industry with few women, not often the most socially adept people in the first place, and can't get a girlfriend. Or boyfriend hypothetically.

I don't think you've fully recognised how much of a dystopia we live in so your lens is a bit skewed by your own optimism about the world.

Also guys like this just sound like reverse Anita Sarkeesians and mostly it just seems to reveal how much straight men (tm) and women (tm) are at complete odds in terms of preferences and don't like each other. Also straight men (tm) and LGBT+ people (tm.) (tm) because these are all just stereotypical loud voices.

At least among people who are very vocal the kinds of characters most men aspire to be are not the kind of characters women find attractive (especially the kind of women who play video games,) and vice versa with the characters women find inspirational generally speaking men aren't into them and find them annoying and unattractive. So you have two competing audiences with entirely different preferences (well at least two.) Not to mention the various preferences of the designers themselves. I wish everyone would understand that and stop coming up with bizarre conspiracy theories to explain this away but alas.

A lot of the audience seem to be disagreeing with him though which is odd for YouTube. Generally speaking comments sections are predominantly filled with people agreeing, and then a minority disagreeing especially if you sort by 'top comments.'

Ah yes, the two sexualities: Straight and Political

A video essay on how wokeness is ruining the video game industry. Woke bugmen game journalists are in a liberal bubble and can't stand the majority of their own audience, and game developers have largely given in to leftist cancel mobs. This has turned games into woke corporate trash. Examples: Unlikable female protagonists in Forspoken and Horizon Zero Dawn, gay and lesbian characters in the Last of Us, the innumerable gay flags in Call of Duty.

^ bear in mind that in the UK at least 21% of game developers are LGBT+ (still a minority but like insanely overrepresented.) I also noticed a lot at my uni studying a related topic so this has increasingly been the case over the years and so you will start to see that reflected in the type of video games that are created. Not many women in general though and probably not many cis straight women, just lots of LGBT+ people.

The Last of Us Part 2 is a neverending nightmare of discourse, and the outrage hasn't stopped. By far the most absurdly controversial aspect remains Abby, a character whose existence has been offered up for debate by weirdos.

Abby's swole build has been called into question by a bunch of boys desperate to erase anybody who doesn't fit into their tiny idea of what "real" women should look like. To do this, they've gone to amazing lengths to argue why Abby shouldn't be muscular.

It's an absolute roller coaster of nonsense, let me tell you.

"nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you're a hit man or a video gamer."

"We've always had guns, always had evil, but I see a video game industry that teaches young people to kill."

My own contentious relationship with gaming continued through high school and college: I still enjoyed playing games from time to time, but I always found myself pushed away by the sexism that permeated gaming culture. There were constant reminders that I didn't really belong.

^ tbf she also once said that she didn't play video games at all so.

A good 80% of video games are built around the same premise, "murder a bunch of stuff!? It severely limits the medium?s potential. #E32017

Imagine all the stories we're missing out on because game developers insist on building worlds we experience through the barrel of a gun.

Imagine player interactions inside game worlds that aren't forged through combat but are instead based on shared creative endeavors. #E32017

I've used The Sims to kill Sims in unique and weird ways outside of the general bounds of what the game allows even modding the game to do that. I once [redacted] I also carry out other weird experiments. The Sims is a game that encourages creativity.

Also if you make chaotic videos like that, it will generally get more attention than those which don't. From majority female audiences.





I discovered his channel because people in my comments section compared me to his channel at one point. His channel is very popular but he doesn't just make Sims videos but he still gets millions of views on his Sims content. I see him get brought up the most when people are asking for suggestions for people to watch.

Just noticed this video title is actually referencing one of Kevin's lol:





A lot of channels are like cutesy Saw film series. Some people make this kind of thing in The Sims 4 as well:





I really want to hammer that point home though. Because you can't just stop people enjoying fictional violence by changing the genre of game or increasing the capacity for creativity.

In focus groups for simulation games they found that men would lie about what they were doing in the game and pretend they were having sex and committing violent acts, when they were actually just cooking because a large part of playing the game is also mundane stuff like that and 'that's girly.' (I don't know why they lied because they were being watched and I assume knew that.) But that's not what most people want to watch.

Don't get me wrong though there's also lots of gay stuff happening and 'male character gets pregnant' and various videos that are blatantly catering to someone's fetish whether they realise or not. 'Pregnant with wolves' 'mermaid barbie birth underwater sims 4' I think someone made a video critiquing that segment before lol. Like from outside The Sims community 'uh so what's going on here guys?' LOL. I can't find that video now.

One day someone will get the balance between violence and gay stuff just right and everyone will be happy. Or we could just go back to playing Spyro. I mean it's still violent but unrealistic violence.

We just saw a packed auditorium full of adults cheering at seeing bodies cut in half with a chainsaw. Really think about that for a moment.

Think about it without getting defensive. No one wants to ban DOOM. But what message does that send to the world about the gaming community?

Lots of sadists. It's better to enjoy that virtually than irl.

Some YouTube comment:

Quitting partying, doing drugs and alcohol, fake friends, being lazy and unproductive was the best decision of my life. Now after 3 years of working on my personality and working out...I realized something which was on my mind a long time ago. I need to cold turkey quit gaming. Thank you for these uplifting Videos. More people need to see this, look in the mirror and face their inner demons. God bless everyone who started the journey of not wasting any more of their precious time on Earth! <3

Puritanical again.

Just moved from one thing to another lol. Perhaps before you stop thinking about stopping some behaviour you should think about what you're going to replace that behaviour with and be realistic. Do I think Tristan Tate is better than someone who does nothing but plays video games no I don't but I think a lot of people do so that's why Tristan Tate exists. And honestly I think he might be worse than his brother Andrew in some ways. At least as bad and some things I've heard him say are worse. Also he's living in Andrew's shadow which is sad for a different reason.

So in conclusion I guess technically doing anything related to video games is the most edgy thing you can do right now. Sad but essentially true. The people have spoken lol.

If this was a video essay I'd just end with like some clip of someone (myself I guess) doing this:

Long time viewers of my channel they shouldn't be too terribly surprised that hey I like dragons so let's get some dragons up in here. This particular series I've liked it ever since the first time I had the chance to play one of them. My first experience with this series I think goes back to when there was the official playstation magazine. They'd occasionally release demo discs and this was on one of them. So I played the demo and I just instantly fell in love with it. I thought it was charming and fun and as soon as I had access to get the main game I went for it. So let's play Spyro the Dragon.

I just found this channel and his voice is actually really cute what was I doing again?

It's just the juxtaposition of all this [BEEP] oh my God. But that's why I started contemplating making gaming videos again in 2020. Initially it was just because some people seemed friendly/wholesome and not a nightmare like most of the internet and in 2019 my friend sent me this clip of this YouTuber expressing like pure undiluted joy and excitement to the point of crying about something in a game. And I was like 'yes. I remember that.' But obviously it can satisfy multiple needs simultaneously (sadism, attention, creative outlet, money etc.)

Actually I do want to make a video essay about something (I had a concept + title for one video but it wasn't quite speaking to me + editing another video atm,) but I don't have all the pieces yet. The main thing is I don't want to do what I do in my posts here where I keep posting the same kind of thing but with slight variations because I had another thought. So not making it yet (I see this happening a lot on YouTube.) Though that's ironic because my main channel is already in a super specific niche and if I upload anything even slightly outside of it it gets less attention because that's how YouTube works for most people. Basically the only reason I spend so much time writing these posts is because it's cathartic and I'm mostly invisible and I'm getting no money so I'm annoying the least amount of people possible while still posting online haha.

[Nyctophilia]

Sounds like the ocean. Also Aphex Twin, Brian Eno, etc obviously.

https://soundcloud.com/orchid_mantis...=orchid_mantis

anyone unable to read the bio this isn't her music. her stuff doesn't sound like this and this cannot compare. we don't know if it's somehow hinting to a new era or if it's random but i'd be surprised if ethel did anything randomly, especially posted by her from her youtube channel. we shall see

Also isn't clear at all that it's not her music. She really needs to specify in the title as well as bio (but I guess why she didn't, because of the aesthetic.) I mean I read the bio and realised but lots of people aren't noticing in the comments. Even after reading that it wasn't clear to me whether this was her music and just under a different name. Cause her real name isn't Ethel Cain obviously, and Ethel Cain isn't the first name she's posted music under. She also posts ambient music under אשמדא:

https://soundcloud.com/ashmedaiii/003a



So no. Not clear lol. I'd say the biggest clue it might not be her music is most of her music is dark in theme. And also that soundcloud account has the name Thomas Howard and Atlanta United States.

The shitposting is sending me though:

I love the commitment of mother spending the last 6 months to teach herself bioengineering so she could produce these orchid mantis larvae that never pupate in order to teach them the choreography for this video. As usual, mother makes it seem near effortless. Bioengineer, siren, muse, pupa blocker, choreographer, singer, songwriter, producer, mantis herder, and absolute icon.

spreading misinformation or legit

^ this made it even funnier.

Much appreciated. I just want to bring attention to mother's groundbreaking work in the fields of biogenetics, quantum mechanics, human cloning, the Goetia relating to the Keys of Solomon, and especially mother's work on marriage and trauma counseling for the Tulpa community.
I just feel that sometimes these aspects are overlooked because of mother's musical career, which is understandable considering what absolute bangers are in mother's catalogue.

Whenever her fans call her mother I just think of this Sims 4 game pack (which is definitely referencing other things in cinema but yeah):

why is everyone freaking out about the sim speaking english? in my house we stan a bilingual king

Dead.

I don't often play The Sims 4 (no I really don't lol,) but when I do I usually hook my Sims up with the red headed Sim with glasses Erwin Pries, or Morgyn Ember from the Realm of Magic pack or the androgynous mersim from Island Living who's name I always forget. Paka'a Uha yeah.

Actually when I first discovered that mer Sim I was purposefully trying not to let my preferences influence my Sim's dating decisions (which I usually do or at least factor in their preferences chemistry wise, but The Sims 4 gives you more control than the previous games in a sense because your sims just don't have much in the way of personality or desires or even dating preferences, even after reintroducing the concept of wants and fears they still didn't work well at all which is really sad because they worked better in The Sims 2, and now they have sexual orientations but I think they still don't have preferences beyond that which is weird. Which is one of many reasons it's my least favourite game in the series.) But I'd downloaded a mod which randomises preferences for your Sims because that way I'm not making all the decisions and it's more interesting. But the Sim just wasn't having that she was like 'No I want to date the hot androgynous guy (? gender unclear) stop trying to hook me up with bearded guys.' I tried.

Anyway The Strangerville pack was really fun to play and I also really like desert aesthetics and always liked Strangetown from The Sims 2 which it's vaguely a nod to. I always liked The Sims console games because of the quest/scripted element as well. For some reasons aliens are actually a huge ongoing element of most of the Sims console games. (I mean the subtext of The Sims games especially the early ones is actually quite dark and the whole thing is kind of dystopian so kind of makes sense.) Even ones where it's not obvious at all like oh my god the ending of this one game but I won't spoil by saying which one. It's like that Itchy and Scratchy thing in The Simpsons where he's like 'I have to go now. My planet needs me.'



But I still liked it because it's whimsical and looking back it's like playing an indie game.

But the replay value of that gamepack isn't brilliant, and it also doesn't take that long to complete. But if it did have greater replay value, I'd probably like more packs like that but that's really because The Sims 4 isn't a great Sims game so it's like you try and find redeeming qualities in the packs that exist.

The main selling point of The Sims 4 is it has the hottest Sims and the best create a sim from the pov of modifying physical features. Not personality obviously.

Someone asked this on tumblr recently and this was her response:

LOOKINGFORMADS ASKED:
why are all of ethels boyfriends twinks.

only willoughby. logan was a hunk and isaiah was too, kinda. both taller than her also. willoughby is the same height as her.

That's very female gaze of her. Also I guess this means Isaiah isn't a hot serial killer because he's not a twink and I don't make the rules for Western civilisation Tumblr does (Tumblr also decides on the definition of twink):



Also I love how they're just telling on themselves. They imagined them as twinks :')

Lol reminds me of this video why is there so much discussion about this:



WE HAVE TO KNOW PRECISELY HOW SKINNY THESE CHARACTERS ARE. #SANE.

I love how they're all arguing about what this fictional character should look like. I mean it's her character but still.

"Cal Robertson"

Yeah that's not bad I guess.

Just reading the chat:

"Will you ever write a song about scissoring?"

Asking the real questions.

"That answers my question there's no elf bars in 1991"

Are there elf bars now? (And what do they mean by elf bar? I'm going to pretend they mean elf themed bars.) I'm doing life wrong. But I already knew that.

Edit: The chat in that video is so funny like:

"Ethel's grandma better be a lesbian."

"Willoughby is actually a lesbian what do you mean."

I was wondering before if Willoughby was the character in the camo jacket in this video. Because I just headcannon'd that character as being a non-binary lesbian lol. I don't think it is that character though. I can't find clarification.



Also:

'God bless Crush, it was a fun song, but I honestly reject ever making that song. Because people are obsessed with pop music, and if they hear you do even a shred of anything pop-tinted, they're like 'we only want this from you.'

At about 3 minutes into this video for a very brief second there's someone who looks a lot like that person or is that person, maybe they're still playing him in this music video I dunno:

[Doseone]

It would be nice to just cuddle with someone.

edit:
God would be very dumb to give people freedom and then be mad when they use it to do things he doesn't want (especially since he is supposed to know what they're going to do beforehand). It's honestly such a silly belief system.

[Nyctophilia]

I ended up editing that post so many times. At this point just making a new post I guess lol because I came back to this video a couple of times and I hadn't watched all of it when posting but wanted an example of that group in the debate. The funny thing is I find people like Anita Sarkeesian quite annoying but the men who do the reverse just sound even more retarded and annoying these days probably because of the incredibly petulant way they try to argue all their points. The only people agreeing with that YouTuber are people who are commenting things like this:

heterosexuality is normal and being normal is good

Which is fine because according to all of you we're winning and also most women prefer gay 'twinks' now. Enjoy being normal.

I'm so glad that you're bringing attention to this problem, last night i was playing celeste when madeline came out of the screen and injected me with estrogen while i struggled and begged her not to trans my gender but she said "I am going to give you gender pronounce and communism" and killed me. true story.

I hate it when that happens.

my favorite part of modern video games is when they say "it's wokin time" and woke all over the straight white males

Fun Fact: You can kiss other guys in this game, making the protagonist LGBT. It heals you just the same as kissing girls.

You're getting a lot of [BEEP] for this take dude. But I agree with you, I?m tired of people forcing Portugal on me.

I almost feel bad for him. But not quite.

bro trying to sound like he's making an anime villain monologue crying about stuff like "gay flags in Call of Duty"

He went all in on the mummy issues and forgot the rest of the recipe:



Yes this isn't anime but whatever he's talking about video games anyway.

none of the people they're trying to appeal to care about video games and they never will.

pls what? literally every gay person i know (and i doubt you've ever even met one) loves video games.

No they don't.

Lol this guy is obviously trolling.

i love this video bc it shows that you can consume a ton of media and never develop a lick of media literacy.
i love that, i think that's neat. like a dehydrated horse who refuses to drink on principle.

For me it's the part where they always have to invent conspiracy theories like 'gay people don't enjoy video games,' 'almost everyone really agrees with me' and 'I'm the only target audience that could possibly exist' when basically every millenial has played video games at some point... They also often conflate poor writing and game design with the inclusion of minority characters and the option to romance whoever you want in a game every time they do this. They're so bad at getting their point across that they just come across as sexist, homophobic and transphobic, even if that wasn't the intent but tbf it's often part of it. They often are irritated by the inclusion of eg: muscular female characters.

I'll never buy woke videogames again. Last month i was half asleep at 3am and heard some glass shattering, so i went and checked what was going on and i found my copy of The last of us Part 2 stabbing my dog with broken glass. With tears in my eyes, i said: "The woke mob can't get away with this anymore" so i grabbed the game by the throat, and before ripping it in two pieces i whispered: "We are out here, we are hidden, waiting to strike. No matter how many of you there are or how much politics you shove down our throat, we are going to take you down and stop this madness. We are... Conservatives". After going through that trauma i decided i needed to relax with some tranquil and non political videogame so i booted up Fallout 4

Someone should make a video game about this and send it to him.

This actually isn't as far down that rabbit hole as you can get. The most far gone people are convinced that they're going to basically build concentration camps soon for straight white men. This doesn't bother them as much as the idea of black men and Muslim men having sex with white women though.

As I say he's pretty far gone:

Peterson has more red flags than a communist parade

It's pretty colonial to spend more time criticising countries that aren't your own but I often do anyway lol. I still ultimately feel that the women in those countries should be dealing with the men there though because if they don't learn how to do that Western women can't try to fix their men for them forever... Quite patronising too.

Also men all across the world might even have agency (in theory,) but it seems they just don't and are facing a 'crisis of Masculinity' in most countries that aren't aggressively Islamic... From China to the United States. Mysterious.

Edit: I mean it goes back to this quote again:

https://hotelconcierge.tumblr.com/po...gender-nullary

There's a hilarious overlap between the people who get mad about preferred pronouns and those who call for a return to "traditional masculinity." The idealization of some Hollywood-ified tradition isn't the problem; if you want to roleplay a fursona, go ahead. No, what's pathetic is the begging. Rather than be a man, in spite of the system, you demand validation from the system for aspiring to be a man. Being against identity politics is the new identity politics. That's why right-wing culture warriors are so into the idea of crybaby millennials it's comforting to believe that you're actually strong (since you don't drink from plastic water bottles) and that anyone getting laid is actually xeno-estrogenized. Even if this was true, obsessing over it, masturbating to it, using it as an excuse for self-pity and inaction that makes you a _ _ _ _. Four-letters. Multiple choice. Maybe hangman will teach you something.

It's paradoxical. But I guess when those kind of men stop caring about what other people think they just turn into annoying Islamists and fascists (and other hypermasculine ideologies,) in theory anyway. So do I prefer the whining to that? I guess I prefer the whining tbh.

Meanwhile in Fascist Italy [some crap Evola said about women.] Still lots of Western fascists around online now. Occupies more attention because of proximity.

I think they can do it, people in the Middle East did it before anyway. They won't get any thanks for it though:

https://cbmw.org/2000/09/01/androgyny/

Like the ancient pagan Sodomites pounding on the door of Lot's house millennia ago, the modern gay movement is gathering at the doors of our churches, our academies, and our once traditionally "Christian" culture, demanding entrance and full recognition.

Throughout time and across space, the pagan cultus consistently, though not exclusively, holds out as its sexual representative the emasculated, androgynous priest. Mircea Eliade, a respected expert in comparative religions, argues that androgyny as a religious universal or archetype appears virtually everywhere and at all times in the world's religions. Much evidence exists to support his judgment.24

The clearest textual testimony in ancient times comes from nineteenth-century BC Mesopotamia. Androgynous priests were associated with the worship of the goddess Istar from the Sumerian age (1800 BC).25

Their condition was due to their "devotion to Istar who herself had 'transformed their masculinity into femininity.' "26 They functioned as occult shamans, who released the sick from the power of the demons just as, according to the cult myth, they had saved Istar from the devil's lair. "... as human beings," says a contemporary scholar, "... they seem to have engendered demonic abhorrence in others; ... the fearful respect they provoked is to be sought in their otherness, their position between myth and reality, and their divine-demonic ability to transgress boundaries."27

I don't think religion is the only factor though... This isn't a spiritual thing no matter how much you try to argue it is:

Nisu, literally meaning "mud-sculpting," is a homophone of nisu 逆苏, which could be translated as "reversed su." In examples of nisu, the gender of the celebrities or fictional characters are altered, with the majority of nisu creators being young women who imagine their male idols to be female. There are a variety of ways to engage in the culture of nisu, mainly through creating and circulating fan-created pictures, videos, and fanfiction on social media platforms like Weibo.

In a way, the trend is a response to China's crackdown on effeminate men in the entertainment industry, a campaign launched in 2021 as officials believed that the nation's overprotected teenage boys were becoming physically and emotionally weak, leaving China with a "crisis of masculinity." For some Chinese fans, nisu's radical feminization of male idols offers them a comparatively free space where they can negotiate their understandings of gender and express their own (usually sexual) fantasy.

I've said all this before though.

I mean it's stupid that you have to roleplay this stuff with Christians and that includes Jordan Peterson really because he does believe a lot of this stuff:

https://cbmw.org/2000/09/01/androgyny/

The physico-theological mechanism seems to function as follows: androgynous persons, whether homosexual or bi-sexual, are able to express within themselves both sexual roles and identities. In the sex act they engage both as male and female, equally as penetrator and penetrated, the "hard" and the "soft"129-and thus taste in some form or other both physical and spiritual androgyny.130 As in classic monistic spirituality, they have, on the physical plane, joined the opposites, proving and experiencing that there are no distinctions. Just as the distinctions inherent in heterosexuality point to the fundamental theistic notion of the Creator/creature distinction, so androgyny in its various forms eradicates distinction and elevates the spiritual blending of all things, including the idolatrous confusion of the human and the divine.131 This seems to be the very same logic that brings Paul to a similar conclusion already in Romans 1:18-27.132

^ I mean no? Being bisexual or homosexual or even androgynous doesn't automatically mean you're a switch with those sexual positions.

The deconstruction of the Biblical God and Biblical sexuality as a philosophical and ideological programme is already deeply embedded in our collective unconscious. Some powerful leaders see the future as the brave new global world of sexual and spiritual pluralism, where liberty of self-expression in these areas is the essence of human progress.151 One could even imagine a society of pagan religious syncretism where bi-sexuality and homosexual androgyny would be the spiritual and social ideal, the sexuality of choice for those in power, while heterosexuality would be tolerated, considered inferior, and strictly controlled-for it has happened before.152

Clearly God is interested in sex, or Satan would not be so passionately committed to its deconstruction. To destroy God's created structures, the Evil One rips from the body politic the sexual distinctions hard-wired into creation to recall the deep truth about existence-the absolute distinction between the Creator and creation.

It seems to just be a really magical-thinking-adj way of saying that some people are androgynous and also narcissistic (so view themselves as some kind of God.)

Though promoted as an issue of civil rights, the homosexual/androgy-nous revival is not merely contemporary civics or chic theory. The close connection between pagan esoteric spirituality and androgynous sexuality, evident across time and space,91 demands that we not ignore the spiritual dimensions underlying the contemporary scene. In the light of the above evidence, it should not be surprising to note that the revival of pagan religion in our day is accompanied by a powerful reappearance of pagan sexuality. In other words, homosexuality may be less a modern question of biological destiny or civil rights than a necessary practical outworking of age-old pagan spirituality.92 It is becoming more and more manifest that a particular religious commitment is always accompanied by a particular sexual theory and practice. But this is not to suggest some scarlet, conspiratorial thread connecting the dots. The connection is logical, theological, and inevitable. A monistic view of existence will work itself out in all the domains of human life, and especially in the domain of sexuality.93

You might as well argue that heterosexuality stems from Christianity. Oh they might argue that lol. It reminds me of this guy on twitter who was arguing with Christians and then he realised and said something like (paraphrasing because I don't fully remember) "I assumed that Christians were atheists about most other Gods/religions that existed, but I'm now beginning to realise that they actually do believe in all the other Gods but just think they're evil demons which is more absurd than I thought."

Also the bolded part is ridiculous considering there are pagan fascists and some neo-Pagan religions are pretty dimorphic like Wicca. I think LGBT+ people are drawn to those religions because they often identify with magic/shamanism/witches etc but a lot of neo-pagan European religions aren't especially tolerant of LGBT+ or androgynous people and it's not exactly built into most of these religions from what I've seen. Often people go digging further to try and distance themselves from Christianity which is hegemonic in Western countries. A lot of people have some drive towards spirituality and ideally want one that doesn't demonise them for existing.

edit: Really it's just this scene except most of these guys are in their 20s or 30s I think:

Progressive liberal cities are the ones where you can make the most money. They are also higher-crime, dirty, crowded, full of homeless junkies and the nice "enclaves" are insanely expensive. Conservative-leaning cities are cleaner, quieter, more affordable, more decent places to live and especially raise a family, but you won't make much money there. And the nightlife may not be nearly as "hip and buzzing" as Los Angeles, San Fran or NYC.

Extremely conservative cities have tons of violence, too. Memphis is terrible, the entire state Louisiana has tons of violent crime, Mobile, Alabama is dangerous, too. This idea from the Right that conservative areas are sanctuaries is ridiculous. There are terrible liberal cities, and there are wonderful liberal cities.

I doubt political ideology is the most important factor in violent crime. I think it can correlate but it's not the underlying cause. It seems to be mostly down to population density, diversity and poverty/class background of the people living there. All these things contribute to atomisation and desperation which fuels crime.

I also think it's difficult to socialise people into social norms when they deviate too much from said norms. This can be based on a variety of traits like race and ethnicity, and neurodivergence, and gender + sexuality which is probably why non-binary people are more antisocial than trans people who are more antisocial than cis people (at least they found that in teenagers, but it's a bit early to say for sure across age groups,) likewise there's been little attempt to acknowledge bisexual people even exist and they're more antisocial and have more substance abuse issues than homosexual people, who have a higher rate than straight people afaik but I think it gets complicated and varies between studies especially regarding homosexual men.

Seems like class and income is more important than race too in predicting criminal behaviour. Gay men seem better integrated in Western society? Earn more and better educated etc and seem to have a lower rate of antisocial behaviour in a bunch of studies, but not all studies. Also varies in terms of personality traits.

Bisexuals seem to be consistently shown to be more antisocial in personality...:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...91886921004177

Bisexuals were more psychopathic and narcissistic than heterosexuals. The only significant findings in within-sex comparisons showed that self-identified bisexual women scored higher on all Dark Triad traits than heterosexual women. The findings support the gender shift hypothesis of same-sex sexual attraction in bisexual women, but not in lesbians nor in men.

I think it's sometimes worse for bisexual women so that's 'fun.' Except I'm non-binary (though that doesn't suggest anything positive based on that one paper...) And I don't really identify as bisexual so it's OK. I mean I'm definitely not monosexual but the whole who is and isn't bisexual discourse game is annoying especially in afab people where it seems like almost everyone is just aroused by both sexes anyway. Plus it's only elevated compared to cishet women (how do they even measure that group besides identification then?) But I've seen other studies where they base it on factors other than self identification and still find deviations from the norm and then others where things like this only apply to people who are mostly straight if you use the 'kinsey scale.'

An additional concern might be social desirability. Those who are members of sexual minority groups may under-report information about their health relative to heterosexuals (Savin-Williams & Joyner, 2014). However, the Dark Triad traits are not known to be particularly linked with socially desirable responding, with narcissism having only a weak link (e.g., Raskin et al., 1991). Indeed, the very nature of psychopathy might lead to a greater willingness to endorse and report socially undesirable behaviors given psychopathic individuals tendency to violate social norms (e.g., Jonason, Koehn, et al., 2020)

I am pretty edgy lol.

Besides these results in women, we are unaware of any studies that have analyzed the Dark Triad traits across the sexual orientation spectrum (i.e., including bisexual men, and ideally also "mostly heterosexual" individuals). In one study, homosexual men scored lower on Machiavellianism (d = 0.11), narcissism (d = 0.17), and psychopathy (d = 0.42) relative to heterosexual men (Barelds et al., 2017). In women, the only difference of note was the slightly higher psychopathy scores in homosexual women (d = 0.15) relative to heterosexual women (Barelds et al., 2017).1 Overall, these results support the gender shift hypothesis of homosexuality.

Oh no. They're almost onto me. Still non-binary/don't id as heterosexual either though. You can't figure me out. (There actually is already a study that shows something like this that separates bisexual women by kinsey scale lol. I'm too lazy to dig it up though. I read that paper a while ago.)

In conclusion, our study improves what researchers know about dark personality manifestations as a function of sexual orientation. With data from over 40 countries including three self-reported labels for sexual orientation, we showed in sex-aggregated analyses that bisexuals had higher Dark Triad traits than heterosexuals. Differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals were limited to Machiavellianism, which was more pronounced in homosexuals. These results directly contradict the prosociality hypothesis for the evolution of homosexuality and support the gender shift hypothesis only in women. In contrast, the results may be more consistent with a life history model (Luoto et al., 2019a,b; Xu et al., 2019) and/or with observations about minority stress, suggesting that with greater experienced harshness of sexual minorities (i.e., non-heterosexuals), engaging in Dark Triad trait approaches to life might help non-heterosexual people stay safe, avoid detection, and get what they want from their lives

Why does no one do research on non-binary people? I need to know how 'evil' I am!

Role models for people like me:



And every female batman villain is bisexual. Are they doing this on purpose lol?

Oh god and I'm English. It's really adding up.

At least I'm not The Joker. Mild evil themes. Like mild science fiction themes (that's my favourite rating of all time) Australia is so funny:



If I was willing to commit to a tattoo (or a gender, or a sexuality,) I think that would be funny.

*buzzfeed how evil am I quiz*

Lol.

Should probably take a buzzfeed quiz for neuroticism too. But I already know the answer to that one.

This is biphobic:





Lol no but. I actually don't know how they define left wing authoritarianism in that study because casually I'm pretty sure he considers 'supports trans kids' and 'is non-binary' counts for him lol.

By the way I just need to highlight that that paper I posted is titled this:

The dark side of the rainbow: Homosexuals and bisexuals have higher Dark Triad traits than heterosexuals

Well if you're not going to take this seriously...

Like a gay Pink Floyd tribute band. I haven't watched this video but what:



I don't like that film. Return to Oz is better.

Can you imagine if I spent as much time working as I do on posting [BEEP] here?

[Nyctophilia]

This is biphobic:





Lol no but. I actually don't know how they define left wing authoritarianism in that study because casually I'm pretty sure he considers 'supports trans kids' and 'is non-binary' counts for him lol.

^ lol I just realised at one point the guy responds to what he's saying and is like 'there's nothing wrong with that' :')

He's trying to build the case that left wing people are feminine psychopaths. I'm wondering in what directions he's going to take this in coming years.

He's also brought up people who are sociosexually less restricted have higher degrees of dark triad traits.

I don't think he'll ever explicitly make this connection because it's too outside the overton window for him but for now he's happy to make the connection with sociosexual orientation instead.

From wikipedia:

Individuals who are sociosexually unrestricted tend to score higher on openness to experience,[7] and be more extraverted,[8] less agreeable,[8] lower on honesty-humility,[9] more erotophilic,[10] more impulsive,[11] more likely to take risks,[11] more likely to have an avoidant attachment style,[12] less likely to have a secure attachment style,[13] and score higher on the Dark Triad traits (i.e. narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy).[14][15] Higher masculinity[16] and eveningness[17] in women is related to unrestricted sociosexuality. High self-monitoring is also associated with unrestricted sociosexuality, regardless of gender or sexual orientation.[18]

Individuals with an intrinsic religious orientation (i.e., religion as an end) tend to be sociosexually restricted, while those with an extrinsic religious orientation (i.e., religion as a means to achieve non-religious goals) tend to be unrestricted.[19]

Bisexual women are significantly less restricted in their sociosexual attitudes than both lesbian and heterosexual women. Bisexual women are also the most unrestricted in sociosexual behavior, followed by lesbians and then, heterosexual women.[4] Gay and bisexual men are similar to heterosexual men in sociosexual attitudes, in that they express relatively unrestricted attitudes relative to women. However, gay men are the most unrestricted in sociosexual behavior, followed by bisexual men and then, heterosexual men. This may be because gay men have more potential partners who prefer short-term, casual sexual encounters.[4]

So here's another viewpoint he seems to have. From this link but I've heard him discussing this before in videos but I stumbled on this link while writing this post:

https://podcastdisclosed.com/harming...n-podcast-366/

�� Key Takeaways

Liberal individuals enforced lockdowns while conservative individuals rejected mandates, as fear brought out left-wing authoritarianism more prevalent in those with low verbal intelligence, female gender, feminine temperament, and dark tetrad traits.

^ most people in the UK agreed with lockdowns and there was no political divide in agreement vs disagreement whatsoever so ???

There are a lot of things that are less divided in the UK that others seem to take for granted in the US. Jordan Peterson is very America brained because Canada differs from the US in various ways too.

I was wondering if anyone in his audience were discussing any of these things. Found this thread but it's a few years old:

J Peterson stops making sense if youre bisexual

But then they didn't expand on that at all haha but that's great.

Found some demonisation of poly relationships which is more recent and more typical (not so much this thread as the responses):

Dr. Peterson, I've lately started looking for a serious partner, want to establish a committed relationship with a person I trust and love, but have come to a challenge. I'm a bisexual man, mainly dating men, and most people I meet seem to be in some sort of polygamous or polyamorous relationships. I'm a monogamous person, it turns my stomach to think my significant other having intimate relationships with someone else (with or without my presence. The problem is that whenever I try to explain this to someone I meet, saying that I'm not into "sharing", so to speak, they always seem to have a better argument of why it's rational and why we shouldn't restrict ourselves whenever we want to have something. I'm an intelligent person, but this topic is very hard for me to conceptualize, as to why should someone say no to their desires.

I cannot speak of the family, as it's too early in dating so it doesn't make sense at such an early stage. I tried talking about trust, but it's disregarded as the other person would say I look down on people and that's the reason I can't trust them or that I have trust issues. There's the argument that I don't want to be with someone else, but I can't say this in full honesty, because there have been times whilst being in a relatuonship, that I've been drawn to someone else sexually. They [my argument opponents] would say - if you have the desire that's basically cheating, so you shouldn't tell yourself no.

I still feel like it's not right for me, that's not how it should be in my relatuonships. But not having it properly conceptualized makes me feel like a dinosaur in these sorts of arguments.


P.S. - I talked with my psychoanalyst about this and she disagrees with the notion that people can be happy in polyamorous relationships, however, I'm not entirely convinced that NOBODY can be happy in these sort of relationships. I've met people with years on their belt in such relationships and this makes it specifically hard to argue through.

Could you please shed some light into this argument?

Huge fan, thanks in advance!

I don't think this is something you can debate with people you might have to just accept being alone unfortunately if you can't find anyone who is monogamous.

Personally not interested in open relationships. I might be OK with a poly relationship but it would have to be like some weird impossible situation where we just are all into each other and it's still not an open relationship. Also fine with monogamous relationships. This is assuming I was trying to date and found someone I was compatible with lol... Impossible for different reasons.

Then there was this response:

You talk too much about stupid shit. Polygamy does not work well for society at large because what happens is you get child brides and discarded sons.

This leads to roving bands of young men with no prospects and no stability. This leads to gangs and terrorists as well as young women getting raped by older family members they are forced into marriage with. It does this every time. IT DOES THIS EVERY TIME.

As for the personal relationship, if you think getting cuckholded is good for your psyche, you're already too far gone. If you're in fact a woman then your man is just avoiding commitment to which end you're a fucking idiot.

Polyamory is just fucking around with a fancy name. Those people are not sane. They're psychopathic, and you would do well to stay the [BEEP] away from them.

They are ACTUALLY psychopaths. They tend to USE people in ways that are dangerous and unhealthy. REALLY:

STAY THE [BEEP] AWAY FROM THOSE PEOPLE.

Roving bands of young men lol. I don't see the child bride thing happening tbh if anything the opposite moreso over time people just putting off marriage indefinitely or getting married later in general. Age gap relationships are less and less accepted too even among adults. I don't like ageplay as a kink but I think the reason it's popular recently is because age gap relationships have become increasingly taboo in the mainstream and a lot of fetishes are based on things that are taboo.

Also their post is really intense and emotional. And everyone in the thread seemed to forget he's talking about the gay male community basically lol.....

Lol:

Real helpful stuff here. Top notch. Truly mind-opening.

But tbh that's what Jordan Peterson sounds like to me most of the time like very similar to this just one step less emotional.

Some dichotomies are in fact black and white. Some slopes are in fact slippery. Some things are just a bad idea.

Fucking around is all of those. Calling it "Polyamory" does not change that. Calling it Ethical Non-Monogamy (or ENM) does not change that. The name of the thing does not change the reality of the thing and calling it "Ethical" does not mean that it is.

Some things are not complicated. This is not complicated. It is bad. They are psychopaths in the most clinical sense. They are dangerous and everyone should avoid this like a PLAGUE because in the long run it IS.

I don't think so it's on a spectrum. I don't have much interest in casual sex for a number of reasons. I don't think my lack of interest in pursuing that is a sexual preference I have though. I think it's because of my anxiety/awkwardness/insecurities, dysphoria surrounding sex, and not finding most people attractive, also concern about stds... Like under different circumstances I could probably find it fun with people I'm actually attracted to on occasion. I don't think I need an emotional attachment, especially with women. If I was in an environment where attractive women were magically into me I guess I'd be interested. I guess it's the same with guys but there are way less I could find sexually attractive (I think? I don't get that impression irl but I do online. I mean at this point I barely go anywhere or pay that much attention to people. Maybe I'll try and do that next week at the very anxiety inducing thing I'm supposed to be going to,) and I'm more likely to be romantically into men if I'm sexually into them. Also maybe might prefer an fwb thing with women sometimes if they have a really hot voice. I dunno a lot of stuff could be appealing in an ideal, safe imagination sense. Like threesomes are probably way more awkward in reality. You know maybe I just don't know what I want :') "they were right" [BEEP] you. No but it is really complicated by my feelings about gender and other factors. It's not that important to me though so I wouldn't prioritise that over a committed relationship. Also it's all very hypothetical because of all the other crap.

I'm not opposed to poly relationships in theory either. Just seems unlikely I would find a poly relationship dynamic I was happy with but I liked shipping 3 characters together in fiction or reading fanfiction like that from time to time over the years (multiple men and one woman mostly.) Also... No one really wants to hear this but there does seem to be a gender difference in that sense at least with straight men (but gay men have less sexual jealousy and seem to deviate in multiple ways so wouldn't automatically assume this applies or even that it applies to all heterosexual men because there are specific traits I think that are required in combination):

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/...24490609552311

An unrestricted sociosexual orientation (the endorsement of casual sex) has been found to correlate with undesirable behaviors and personality characteristics more so in men than in women.

There were a number of indications that an unrestricted sociosexuality is associated with problematic and potentially dangerous attitudes and characteristics in men, but not in women. First, we found that relatively unrestricted men believe that relations between the two genders are hostile and adversarial and believe inaccurate and often victim-blaming myths about rape; these attitudes have consistently been shown to relate to aggressive sexual behaviors (Dean & Malamuth, 1997; Osland et al., 1996; Spence et al., 1991; Truman et al., 1996). Relatively unrestricted women did not hold these problematic attitudes.

completed self‐report measures of sociosexual orientation, sexual conservatism, rape myth acceptance, adversarial sexual beliefs, attitudes toward women, sexual behaviors, and perpetration of sexual aggression. Participants also wrote five brief stories that were scored for power and affiliation‐intimacy motives and two sexual fantasies that were coded for the theme of dominance. For both men and women, an unrestricted sociosexual orientation was correlated with behavioral items indicating earlier life experiences with sex, a greater number of lifetime sex partners, and more frequent sexual activity. For men, an unrestricted sociosexual orientation was linked with higher levels of rape myth acceptance and adversarial sexual beliefs; more conservative attitudes toward women; higher levels of power motivation and lower levels of affiliation‐intimacy motivation; and past use of sexual aggression. For women, an unrestricted sociosexual orientation was associated with sexual fantasies of dominance and lower levels of sexual conservatism.

I've definitely come across people anecdotally with this personality type (I mean obviously, Andrew Tate is an example that's right there.)

Some of these negative traits seem to be mediated by beliefs about gender. Fancy that:

The most distressing finding in this study was that an unrestricted sociosexual orientation was strongly related to a greater use of aggression in sexual relationships for men. Unrestricted men reported a history of using aggression in their sexual relationships to a greater extent than did restricted men. However, the relationship between sociosexuality and sexual aggression was moderated by coercive attitudes. For men who rejected coercive and stereotypical statements about women and sexuality, sociosexuality was unrelated to sexual aggression, but for men who endorsed these beliefs, an unrestricted sociosexual orientation was related to increased sexual aggression perpetration.

Apparently sociosexually unrestricted women are more likely to have fantasies about dominance but I haven't anecdotally noticed that as a trend. There seem to be sexually submissive women who are into having sex with lots of men and things like that (like casual group sex with lots of men also.) There aren't a lot of women who talk about dominant fantasies in general and I think a bunch who do online are more inhibited irl. But I guess there probably are a bunch who are more extroverted and have more sex as well around. I mean it's not going to fucking annoy me like the Andrew Tate's of the world lol so I wouldn't notice as much.

This paper's discussion is very stereotypical lol:

A second possibility is that the women in our sample possessed higher levels of one or more unmeasured moderating variables. According to this explanation, both unrestricted women and men will aggress sexually unless a moderating
attitude or trait is present. For men, one important moderating variable was coercive attitudes. Sociosexuality was associated with sexual aggression only for men who had high levels of coercive attitudes. For women, another variable might be more important. One possible candidate variable is responsibility. Winter (1988; Winter & Barenbaum, 1985) has found that the aggressiveness associated with high power motivation is often absent in people high in responsibility. There is also some suggestion that people have been responsible for caring for children (in our culture, mostly women) tend to score higher in responsibility. Perhaps the women in our sample had relatively high levels of responsibility, and it was this responsibility that kept the unrestricted women's aggressiveness within the realm of fantasy.

A final possibility is that sociosexuality is enacted differently in women than in men. Men may play out their sociosexuality as narcissistic Don Juans, expressing little or no empathy for the women they encounter, perhaps even trying to hurt and humiliate them. Women, on the other hand, may enact their sociosexuality in a manner similar to that displayed by the Samantha Jones character in the television program Sex and the City. Samantha is shallow and unable to commit emotionally, but when having sex, she thinks of her partner's needs as well as her own. She fits Reise and Wright's (1996) characterization: fun, self- absorbed, and shallow, but not hostile, violent, or unkind.

Literally bringing up fictional characters lol....

We can think of several explanations for the gender difference in the correlation between sociosexuality and aggressive sexual behavior. The first explanation concerns measurement issues: the aggressive sexual behavior inventory was designed to measure men's sexual aggression against women. It may be that women's sexual aggression against men takes a different form than men's sexual aggression against women, and that a different scale is necessary to measure female sexual aggression accurately. We note, however, that Zurbriggen (2000) found correlations for women between this scale and relevant personality variables, suggesting that the aggressive sexual behavior inventory can be a valid measure of sexual aggression in women

^ That would make sense though and seems like an issue in research.

In women, sociosexuality was unrelated (at the zero-order level) to sexual aggression. Instead, it was related to sexual fantasies of dominance. By engaging in casual sex, unrestricted women are violating the traditional feminine gender role that emphasizes monogamy and emotional commitment. In their fantasies, they are also violating the traditional gender role of compliance and passivity and are reacting assertively and aggressively.

I also think this means that actual harem dynamics would be quite rare at least in 'WEIRD' populations - which all this research almost certainly is based on and likely doesn't apply everywhere else (and of course they've not been that common here for a long time.) Because I think most unrestricted women won't tolerate the power dynamic. And those psychopathic guys are mostly trying to trick virgins into fucking them anyway. I don't even know if these two populations interact all that often lol.

Anyway...

TBH as crude as you put it, you're not wrong. It is sad that people will not listen to what you're saying because it's "not nice". Rather they should hear it for the simple thing we all know...that it's true!

I just don't think it's that uncomplicated actually but there are definitely some people you should stay away from.

No man aims to come home to his woman and ask "hey honey, did you get to meet some random dudes at the bar today and have an exciting group orgy? That's great, glad you had fun. Brought home some Chinese so we can watch Star Wars 13 together and cuddle. Ooooh, you smell like semen, go take a shower girl." And any man that does find interest in that is not the kind of man that will devote himself to provide and protect for that family, because inherently speaking, that family can be replaced in a matter of minutes by anybody else that is willing to spread their legs.

Yeah but again they're not women he's talking about. You're having to default to heteronormative gender roles and research shows that only straight men experience more sexual than emotional jealousy and there are differences there.

The point is that either it IS crude or rather it's so basal that the very idea that we're even having the conversation should have us shitting our britches or grabbing the torches and pitchforks.

This is OLD. It's thousands of years old for western society. We just don't do that. The exceptions are always considered BAD.

Being that the West beats the [BEEP] out of the "East", I'm betting it's better this way and we should not [BEEP] with such core precepts... Also a bunch of other reasons, but this one is sufficiently ominous.

Please calm the [BEEP] down.

Seriously lol:

It only goes one place. That place is child brides and terrorist militias. This [BEEP] does not exist in a vacuum. The whole social order thing, the SOCIAL enforcement of norms even to the point of LAW is explicitly to prevent such atrocities.

They are psychopaths. It is a clinical term and I SAID AND MEAN it in the clinical sense.It's not a well understood term but it effectively ends up meaning the Machiavellian portion of the triad more than anything. They USE people as one uses tools or animals.

It's the sort of [BEEP] that has a man OWN SLAVES, FATHER SLAVES VIA RAPE, and then SELL HIS CHILDREN. Because the reality is that HE KNOWS THEY ARE PEOPLE! His brain does not FORGET that little detail. It's not magically hand-waved away in the mind. He still KNOWS it in his core. He can't NOT know. It's older than breathing. "Those are mine. I made those."

And yet he does it, because he's a psychopath that can turn off that connection, that core programming, to get what he wants. Same deal. These people want sex. They use people for sex. They turn off that human connection to get what they want.

This seems like a hyperbolic assumption. There are so many variables to consider as well and cultural norms and policing. Those cultures involved less policing of men than we do now so I don't think men are going to get away with that on any significant scale.

You really can't look at any other country or time period and make a definitive conclusion when there are so many potential variables.

Anyway I guess his sort of intense reaction to things is spreading to at least some of his followers. Maybe not everyone who deviates from x, y, z norm is completely evil? I dunno.

I mean I don't mind if people think I'm kind of evil because I think that's accurate but they have to get the percentage right.

Also this is pretty fascinating:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10....78023119836000

Recent research challenges the universality of the dominance penalty and suggests that race and gender intersect to differentially shape reactions to authoritative behavior. In particular, research that takes an intersectional account has highlighted distinct reactions to dominance behavior exhibited by black Americans compared with white Americans (Livingston and Pearce 2009; Livingston, Rosette, and Washington 2012; Pedulla 2014). For example, Livingston et al. (2012) showed that black women who demonstrate high levels of competence face less backlash when they behave authoritatively than do comparable white women or black men. One explanation for this is that nonwhite women receive more lenience for their dominance behavior because people with multiple subordinate identities experience social invisibility (Purdie-Vaughns and Eibach 2008 ). Thus, nonwhite women's behavior is generally less seen, heard, or recalled (Sesko and Biernat 2010). Another (not necessarily competing) explanation emphasizes differences in the content of prescriptive stereotypes for black and white women. The argument is that race and gender intersect to create unique stereotypic expectations of black women that are more in keeping with strong leadership styles (Binion 1990; Reynolds-Dobbs, Thomas, and Harrison 2008 ). In this conceptualization, because stereotypes hold black Americans to be more aggressive (Sniderman and Piazza 1993:45), black women?s authoritative behavior is read as stereotype consistent, whereas white women?s is read as stereotype violating and thus more likely to elicit backlash.

Because gender relations are hierarchical, displaying appropriate femininity means conforming to norms that prescribe lower status and deferential behavioral interchange patterns (Berger et al. 1977; Ridgeway 2011). Violating these behavioral norms leads to the dominance penalty that research has documented for white women (Rudman et al. 2012). Likewise, because race relations are also hierarchical and black men are seen as prototypical of their race, research has shown that black men face a dominance penalty and have been shown to be more accepted as managers and leaders when they possess less traditionally masculine attributes, such as being gay (Pedulla 2014) or baby-faced (Livingston and Pearce 2009). But nonwhite women occupy dually subordinate race and gender identities. As Ridgeway and Kricheli-Katz (2013) put it, they are "doubly off-diagonal." Therefore, their dominance behavior may not be perceived as norm-violating in the same way as it is for white women and black men.

Our results also have practical implications. We find that the white woman receives a dominance penalty and the Asian woman is perceived as less fit for leadership regardless of behavioral style. The fact that behavioral style does not attenuate gender bias in this study suggests that when competence is firmly established, white women may not avoid backlash by being nicer and Asian women may not avoid questions about their leadership by being more assertive. Future research should investigate whether there are conditions in which behavioral style might reduce the impact of negative stereotypes.

We also find that Asian men do not experience bias in this context. This is good news, but it is important that future research examine whether our findings would hold in other workplace contexts. Asian men are well represented in the technical workforce of Silicon Valley but underrepresented at executive levels (Gee, Peck, and Wong 2015). Because Asian men are stereotyped as more feminine and deferential than other men, workplaces that privilege aggressive leadership styles (e.g., law firms, Fortune 500 companies, technology startups) may be sites for bias against Asian men.

In this study, we focus on the effects of intersectional "invisibility" in workplace contexts in which women of color are evaluated for job promotion. We argue that even in contexts when the candidate is seen or cannot be ignored (e.g., when the candidate is the only person applying for a promotion or when giving a presentation), being dually subordinate and nonprototypical on race and gender can mean that the content and quality of his or her contributions are less likely to be remembered. This relative invisibility presents freedoms and binds for women of color. One ironic freedom is that acting dominant, a behavior that violates gender stereotypes and often triggers backlash reactions against white women, less often rises to the level of being noticed and punished. It is less likely to get coded as a gender norm violation (Ridgeway and Kricheli-Katz 2013). This is in part because the success of women of color is less threatening to existing status hierarchies. Social dominance theorists have long argued that discrimination is greater against out-group men than women because men pose a larger threat to the existing status hierarchy (Sidanius and Pratto 1999). Rudman et al. (2012) showed that backlash is not simply a negative reaction to counter-stereotypical behavior but is a negative reaction to behavior challenging prescriptive stereotypes that function to maintain men's relative advantages. Thus, even when nonwhite women's dominance behavior is visible, it may not elicit a backlash reaction because it does less to threaten the status hierarchy.

Experimental studies focused on evaluations of black female leaders provide evidence that the advantages and disadvantages of intersectional invisibility are related to subgroup stereotypes. For example, because stereotypes hold black Americans to be less competent than white Americans and hold women to be less competent than men, black women are punished more harshly for poor performance than their white and male counterparts (Rosette and Livingston 2012; Settles 2006). However, when black women's competence has been firmly established (e.g., with an elite graduate degree), they face less backlash for authoritative behavior and are evaluated as better leaders than white women (Livingston et al. 2012; Purdie-Vaughns and Eibach 2008 ). Stereotypes of black Americans as strong, aggressive, and masculine overlap with expectations for prototypical leaders. As such, highly competent black women leaders' relative invisibility may protect against backlash, while stereotypes about their more assertive interpersonal style might make them seem like a better fit for leadership. If this is the case, it has implications for groups, such as Asian Americans, who are stereotyped as highly deferential and feminine.

Second, by expanding the scope of recent intersectional inquiries to include reactions to Asians and Asian Americans, our study has implications for how the content of various racial stereotypes differentially shapes disadvantages. Although women of color may struggle more than white women to be heard and seen in the workplace, stereotypes that associate Asian Americans with subservience and black Americans with lower competence have different implications for how visibility and invisibility affects performance evaluations. For example, research shows that black women who lead successful organizations are evaluated comparably with their white and/or male counterparts, while black female leaders of failing organizations are evaluated more harshly (Rosette and Livingston 2012). In contrast to black women, whose visibility is heightened by a competence-related error that aligns succinctly with stereotypes about their race (and gender), Asian women?s invisibility appears to be exacerbated by stereotypes about their subservience (hence unsuitable as leaders), even though they are stereotyped and perceived as competent.

Our results also have practical implications. We find that the white woman receives a dominance penalty and the Asian woman is perceived as less fit for leadership regardless of behavioral style. The fact that behavioral style does not attenuate gender bias in this study suggests that when competence is firmly established, white women may not avoid backlash by being nicer and Asian women may not avoid questions about their leadership by being more assertive. Future research should investigate whether there are conditions in which behavioral style might reduce the impact of negative stereotypes.

So basically competence is pretty important for black women. White women are penalised for expressing dominant attitudes, black men for being masculine, and Asian women are always viewed as less capable leaders. Asian men don't seem to experience that bias at least in the roles they were looking at.

For example, prototypical members are more likely to be recognized and categorized as group members, and their contributions are more likely to be recalled than nonprototypical members of social groups (Zrate and Smith 1990). As a consequence, those who most closely embody the prototypical American man and women (i.e., white men and women) are the most strongly associated with gender stereotypes and, ironically, are expected to behave in more gender stereotypic ways (Ridgeway and Kricheli-Katz 2013).

I actually don't find most of these findings surprising though honestly besides the one about Asian men I would have assumed they'd experience some penalty. Doubt anyone's really done research on this in the UK but would be interested. I think in the UK especially accents are a huge deal.

[Nyctophilia]

The editing on this video is annoying (also the thumbnail) but it's really interesting to see where the line is with people and Jordan Peterson like this guy was annoyed by his response to Netanyahu:

I struggled with depression for so long, and I always looked up to this guy, I was pretty disgusted when I saw his tweets! Absolutely disgusting

But these tweets don't seem out of character based on stuff I've seen him say.

Of course people don't pay attention to him all the time but yeah it's sort of weird that he's been talking for so many years now and people are still like 'this shows his true colours' only in 2023 lol. Realistically that's probably not the case and just for effect.

he gave me the creeps from the start

He never really provoked that reaction from me. He comes across as someone who is caring and empathetic but also very neurotic. At least on the surface but when you dig deeper it's a kind of selective empathy. He misunderstands certain topics he talks about a lot or misrepresents certain things like some of his comments about trans kids. I can also see Gabor Mate's point though about how he encourages repression and that he has a lot of rage. It didn't occur to me initially but he seems angry a lot and also just very emotional in general obviously. I don't really want to criticise him for that though especially because:

Hes like a like a girl who couldnt handle her emotions. How could you advocate "send them to hell" as a public figure after pretending to build bridges between religions

...but it seems contagious in his audience to some degree. Like that poster on reddit from my previous post.

Also he's never really been a fan of Islam and has said that for years. So yeah with I think with one recent exception I vaguely remember where he made some video addressing Muslims the pattern from him is in general to not do that with Islam.

He was always a psychopath, his mask just fell off
And I'm glad he showed his true colors. So many sheeps were worshipping him already

Really... He goes about with machine guns killing innocent people? He is a man with no feelings at all for other people. A psychopath. That is a FACT is it? What a ridiculous thing to say.

I don't think he's psychopathic at all but he's obsessed with calling other people he disagrees with politically psychopaths (though the definition isn't just people who go around killing people no,) and I think it over his issues with people on social media where he was being harassed by certain anonymous accounts on twitter... Though a lot of those accounts at the time were actually far right I guess and anti semitic which I think is also why he's taking this issue so personally because it's kind of lumped together for him. But since then he's just been on a quest to frame all his critics as psychopathic and narcissistic and also to dehumanise people with some of the language he uses. Like Trudeau is a narcissist according to him and Elliot Page. He's especially bothered by Canadians I guess.

Ultimately I don't think he could be a very good psychologist because I don't think you can have this kind of intense aggressive fear and anger response to certain types of people and personalities and be a good psychologist. I mean it's a common response but not everyone can be a good psychologist. How are you supposed to work with psychopaths, or even people with psychopathic traits, or even politically left wing people, male feminists, some men who attend female protests I guess?

Some of the men I've seen at female dominated protests would make my blood run cold

"We're your allies"

I don't think so
You bloody psychopaths

[quote tweeting someone who quoted him saying 'if you think tough men are dangerous, wait until you see what weak men are capable of.]

bisexual women, possibly other bisexual people, people who are sociosexually unrestricted, women who use instagram, trans people who talk openly about their transition with a significant online following, people who post anonymously online - the list of people he calls psychopaths and narcissists (sometimes interchangeably,) is getting longer and longer lol. How are you supposed to work with those people If you view them in the way he does? He just compartmentalises or?



Jordan are you talking to me or the guys I want to [BEEP]? You can talk to me but I can't allow this cockblocking. He's also not a traditionally masculine man in some ways so it's getting a bit old.

Apparently he was legally required to take social media training which I don't understand the legal specifics of that so not addressing that but it does make sense that he might benefit from that and also a therapist ironically.

Also that twitter thread lol where he talks about male feminists:

Stoicism is a characteristic of tough men. The inability to control emotions is a characteristic of weak men. Biology has time tested these attributes.

...You were quoting Jordan Peterson...

Presentation = kind, supportive

Motive = gaining an edge on courageous men

^ this image is dumb. There are obviously species of animal where certain male morphs disguise themselves to avoid detection and aggression from other males like certain snakes or this species of bird I think are fun:

This cryptic male, or "faeder" (Old English "father") obtains access to mating territories together with the females, and "steals" matings when the females crouch to solicit copulation.[11] The faeder moults into the prenuptial male plumage with striped feathers, but does not go on to develop the ornamental feathers of the more common males. As described above, this stage is thought to show the original male breeding plumage, before other male types evolved. A faeder can be distinguished in the hand by its wing length, which is intermediate between those of displaying males and females.[39] Despite their feminine appearance, the faeders migrate with the larger lekking males and spend the winter with them.[40] The faeders are sometimes mounted by independent or satellite males, but are as often "on top" in homosexual mountings as the ruffed males, suggesting that their true identity is known by the other males. Females never mount males.[11] Females often seem to prefer mating with faeders to copulation with the more common males, and those males also copulate with faeders (and vice versa) relatively more often than with females. The homosexual copulations may attract females to the lek, like the presence of satellite males.[41]

But the examples they use here are all species where they predate on other animals for food and then just male feminists. Well they're not eating the women, generally speaking. Also the bird species comparison wouldn't work because they're very popular and not invisible anyway much closer to trans women and chasers. The rapey orangutan comparison Jordan likes to go with would fit better with the stereotype they're going for, but I think this explanation makes more sense to me:

"I see trad people, walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they want to see. They don't know they're trad."

[...]

Combining the two to suggest that our politics are in part both innate and biological might seem like a leap, but it's far more supported than is commonly known. For example, the closest we can ethically get to controlled human genetic testing is through twin studies, and the numbers bear out that monozygotic twins are much more likely to share the same political temperament than dizygotic twins.

This suggests that if someone is predisposed towards conservatism, but is raised in a 100% progressive environment, their innate political tendencies are still going to come out. It would be similar to a gay person who cannot change their sexuality despite being raised in a strictly Christian environment. If there is no room for reflection and self-expression, it may result in a life of repression and denial. This is best exemplified by the loudly homophobic priest who's eventually caught doing meth with a gay prostitute.

A big sign that we are onto something is that this stereotype has already found its millennial counterpart: that of the vocal male feminist who is discovered to have creeped on or sexually assaulted women, aka the Whedon Effect. It's a trope that has appeared in the ultra-liberal scene of Hollywood, as well as with opponents of the loudly-claimed-to-be-misogynist GamerGate. Note that I'm not implying that conservative tendencies imply misogyny. Rather, I'm suggesting that a man who is predisposed to acting in a dominating or paternal role towards women but represses it, will likely turn into an abuser when their urges boil over, as their protective stance turns possessive.

For reference, male feminists falsely embed themselves in the male hierarchy by becoming active in women's causes and lying in wait to prey on vulnerable, trusting women.

How would that embed them in the male hierarchy?

Anyway women including feminists generally tear the men doing that apart especially these days:



This is a pretty great song about Twiggy Ramirez actually:



She was in an abusive relationship with him and he raped her allegedly.

aren't feminists the ultimate in predators disguised as victims though? The male feminists steak your thunder and will never be accepted by you. Meanwhile female MRA's are accepted whole heartedly. Curious 🤔

Well no one can decide who the real predators are apparently. Not even Jordan Peterson. Just as long as it's someone you ideologically disagree with. Lol. Feminists are often quite disagreeable though so they are probably less trusting on average especially of men... But the more aggressive activist group aren't necessarily the targets. He also can't seem to decide what women should do with predators:



I guess Tumblr will just stick them in a terrarium and hand feed them lettuce like a turtle. Or go on a joint murder spree with them. Either/or. Too edgy? Almost.

So, not really male feminists but rather predators. Are you saying that males who support feminist causes, by their very nature predators?

Yes. Why?
Men are predators

(this tweet was written by a man btw.)

Glad we cleared that up guess there's no issue then.

Police will tell you that consistently the worst murder crime scenes they ever see involve homosexual men.

Very relevant to this thread. Homosexual men are known for trying to have sex with women. And this isn't even true.

Dear God this circle on twitter are retarded.

They want women to be afraid of big burly men but big burly men have been protectors for all of mankind

Well I think women tend not to be attracted to really big builds because that's sort of novel especially body builders. I've noticed women associate certain builds with narcissism or other negative traits. Lol obviously there's also a study for that (not really surprised it's the UK lol....):

https://www.semanticscholar.org/pape...ions-Among-Men

The present study tested the hypothesis, derived from feminist perspectives on body image, that men's greater endorsement of sexist attitudes and objectification of women would be associated with their own drive for muscularity. A total of 327 British men completed scales measuring their drive for muscularity, sexist attitudes, hostility toward women, objectification of women, and key demographics. Results showed that greater drive for muscularity was significantly predicted by stronger objectification of women, hostility toward women, and sexist attitudes, once men's age and body mass index had been taken into account. These results suggest that oppressive beliefs held by men are associated with a desire for a more muscular physique. Implications for theoretical models seeking to explain drive for muscularity among men are discussed in conclusion.

That sample size seems a bit shit.

I don't remember ever seeing a really muscular guy irl. No stray influencers wandering around demanding I rate them 10/10 here lol. I probably have at some point but I just can't think of a time where I really noticed. Except for once as a kid when this guy who might have been the world's strongest man came to school and pulled a bus on his own. I might have imagined that though.

And there's an association between high testosterone and infidelity supposedly (London again yup lol):

Men with high testosterone are more likely to cheat on their partners, new research has suggested.

Meanwhile in women, the hormone has been linked with solo sex, or lesbian flings. While there are many theories about why men and women cheat, new research has shed some light on the role that increased levels of testosterone in men could play in that particular sexual behaviour.

"Testosterone's marked link with masturbation among women, in the absence of an observed link with aspects of heterosexual partnered sex, may be seen as consistent with the notion of a stronger moderating effect of social factors on hormonal influences on women's behaviour."

So you're saying the thing that people generally bring up as meaning you have low testosterone if you're a man actually means you have high testosterone if you're a woman? That's hilarious.

Although I suppose it would make sense. If you consider it a continuum which is probably not how that works, and also don't think that stereotype regarding men is even backed up by anything.

This is true. They are usually conniving little snakes that are continuously plotting their revenge on Alpha males and the women who love them

Tbf I'm not a feminist really (never claimed to be either,) and I think it's fun to plot revenge on 'alpha males' too lol. But that only really started after I started reading alpha male (tm)'s amazing opinions online.

I don't think I can take anyone who calls themselves an alpha male seriously. If you have to refer to yourself as such no you aren't.

[Doseone]

Ignorance is what makes the world interesting. If we knew everything, life would be boring. There is value in discovery. There's nothing like experiencing something good for the first time.