Random Thought of the Day

[Nyctophilia]

(I've only watched about 36 minutes of this video so far)

He makes a lot of good points in this video and many things that I noticed myself and was irritating about the 'anti sjw' crowd, and I also have a lot of these issues because of my general neuroticism/anger issues but I do have to point out when he brings up Ben Shapiro's Barbie video that wasn't even irritating to me it was the funniest thing I've seen him create (with the exception of the time someone edited a video of him singing WAP):



Especially how he was supposedly dragged to see the movie against his will by the producers on his show. I can't help but feel like they wanted to torture him.

He's just so pedantic about everything and his general vibe... It's not good because it shows I really don't respect him on some level but I do just find him entertaining because he's frequently ridiculous.

Also oh man it would be so dumb for someone to make the case that Ellen Ripley and Sarah Conner were 'woke' because they 'became men.' The characters both fit into the motherhood archetype. I don't think I've seen anyone do that though.

edit: I know this is just hypothetical but it's just so dumb lol. Like thinking it's not really unrealistic either for her to be doing all this stuff. I recently read a news story (though kind of an old one) about a Spanish woman who's 13 year old daughter was this is pretty bad btw so spoiler tags Spoiler: was raped by a man then he got out of prison on furlough or something and decided to taunt her daughter so Spoiler: she set fire to him

Also the genderfluid part was hilarious.

Funny that he brings up this lens of how you could view those 80s films through an anti-woke lens if you wanted though because I was visiting my dad recently and he was watcing a 90s film (Hook) and I don't know if he was joking at all but he made multiple comments since one of the kids is black about how it's woke (and he does generally complain about politics a bunch and rant etc despite me trying and wanting to avoid that with him these days, he's also right leaning politically, but this was extra. The fact that it wasn't clear to me to what extent it was a joke shows how fucked things are in general though honestly.)

But you can easily adopt that lens going back several decades if you wanted to yeah (most of the stuff people are complaining about now is really new technically, or the complaints, just the frequency you have to see it online is.) And writers also tend to be politically liberal too of course since conservatives don't tend to create art as often (for personality based reasons,) but then still complain.

The silliest thing is when someone is like 'I can't believe you're a left wing band' or 'I can't believe your music is political' with bands that were so blatantly political? Like System of a Down, Green Day, Rage Against the Machine, Dead Kennedies etc. Read the lyrics now and then good lord.

Green Day is clapping back at Elon Musk after he criticised the band's New Year's Eve performance of their hit song 'American Idiot' in which they took a jab at former President Donald J Trump.

While taking the stage at Dick Clark's New Year's Rockin' Eve, the rock group changed the lyrics of their 2004 song "American Idiot" from "I'm not part of the redneck agenda" to "I'm not part of the MAGA agenda."

The decision upset supporters of the former president and Mr Musk, who tweeted, "Green Day goes from raging against the machine to milquetoastedly raging for it."

Criticism makes no sense. Redneck wasn't flattering in the original song was it? Basically an early form of 'maga'. Trump and Elon are both billionaires who are part of 'the machine' lol. Green Day have been reasonably consistent in their political positions too. If they started making the music they made in the 90s and 2000s now you would have called them 'woke' I'm sure. Plus they had dyed green and blue hair back then.

President-elect Trump has named several billionaires to top roles in his next administration -- a combination worth over $360 billion and that includes the world's richest person.

I believe this is.... *checks notes*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_(Plato)

The starting point is an imagined, alternate aristocracy (ruled by a philosopher-king); a just government ruled by a philosopher king, dominated by the wisdom-loving element. Aristocracy degenerates into timocracy when, due to miscalculation on the part of its governing class, the next generation includes persons of an inferior nature, inclined not just to cultivating virtues but also producing wealth. In a timocracy, governors will apply great effort in gymnastics and the arts of war, as well as the virtue that pertains to them, that of courage. As the emphasis on honor is compromised by wealth accumulation, it is replaced by oligarchy. The oligarchic government is dominated by the desiring element, in which the rich are the ruling class. Oligarchs do, however, value at least one virtue, that of temperance and moderation--not out of an ethical principle or spiritual concern, but because by dominating wasteful tendencies they succeed in accumulating money.

Oligarchy (from Ancient Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkh?a) 'rule by few'; from ὀλίγος (ol?gos) 'few' and ἄρχω (?rkhō) 'to rule, command')[1][2][3] is a form of power structure in which power rests with a small number of people. These people may or may not be distinguished by one or several characteristics, such as nobility, fame, wealth, education, or corporate, religious, political, or military control.

Throughout history, power structures considered to be oligarchies have often been viewed as coercive, relying on public obedience or oppression to exist. Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as meaning rule by the rich, contrasting it with aristocracy, arguing that oligarchy was the perverted form of aristocracy.[4]

Oligarchic.



So history doesn't repeat it rhymes and all that but I suppose you could make the case that Kamala (if she won,) Obama, Biden, George Bush these are all 'timocratic' leaders. Trump is probably oligarchic.

It's stretching things quite a bit I know but I would say they are all/were/would be big on war:

In The Republic, Plato describes five regimes (of which four are unjust). Timocracy (Book VIII, 545 B - 550 B) is listed as the first "unjust" regime. Aristocracy degenerates into timocracy when, due to miscalculation on the part of its governed class, the next generation of guardians and auxiliaries includes persons of an inferior nature (the persons with souls made of iron or bronze, as opposed to the ideal guardians and auxiliaries, who have souls made of gold and silver). A timocracy, in choosing its leaders, is "inclining rather to the more high-spirited and simple-minded type, who are better suited for war".[3] The city-state of Sparta provided Plato with a real-world model for this form of government. Modern observers might describe Sparta as a totalitarian or one-party state, although the details we know of its society come almost exclusively from Sparta's enemies. The idea of militarism-stratocracy accurately reflects the fundamental values of Spartan society. The only one of Plato's five regimes that he does deem fit to govern is aristocracy, the four other regimes (including Timocracy) are unjust according to Plato. The unjust regimes in Plato's work refer to governing that lead to chaos and ultimately corruption.[4]

Good news though the US might get an actual democracy soo- oh no.

As this socioeconomic divide grows, so do tensions between social classes. From the conflicts arising out of such tensions, the poor majority overthrow the wealthy minority, and democracy replaces the oligarchy preceding it. In democracy, the lower class grows bigger and bigger. The populism of the democratic government leads to mob rule, fueled by fear of oligarchy, which a clever demagogue can exploit to take power and establish tyranny where no one has discipline and society exists in chaos. In a tyrannical government, the city is enslaved to the tyrant, who uses his guards to remove the best social elements and individuals from the city to retain power (since they pose a threat), while leaving the worst. He will also provoke warfare to consolidate his position as leader. In this way, tyranny is the most unjust regime of all.

The UK's system is weird anyway. Most leaders come from a particular class background, from particular schools and universities, and you vote for your local candidate not for the leader of the country. The House of Lords is particuarly undemocratic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords

In contrast to the House of Commons, membership of the Lords is not generally acquired by election. Most members are appointed for life, on either a political or non-political basis.[10][11] Hereditary membership was limited in 1999 to 92 excepted hereditary peers: 90 elected through internal by-elections, plus the Earl Marshal and Lord Great Chamberlain as members ex officio. No members directly inherit their seats any longer. The House of Lords also includes up to 26 archbishops and bishops of the Church of England, known as Lords Spiritual.[11][12] Since 2014, membership may be voluntarily relinquished or terminated upon expulsion.[11]

As the upper house of Parliament, the House of Lords has many similar functions to the House of Commons.[13] It scrutinises legislation, holds the government to account, and considers and reports upon public policy.[14] Peers may also seek to introduce legislation or propose amendments to bills.[14] While it is unable to prevent bills passing into law, except in certain limited circumstances, it may delay the enactment of bills for up to one year.[15][16] In this capacity, as a body independent from the pressures of the political process, the House of Lords is said to act as a "revising chamber" focusing on legislative detail, while occasionally asking the House of Commons to reconsider its plans.[17][18]

Technically the monarch has the power to dismiss the prime minister but this hasn't happened since 1834:

The sovereign has the power to appoint the prime minister. In accordance with unwritten constitutional conventions, the monarch appoints the individual who commands the support of the House of Commons, usually the leader of a party or coalition that has a majority in that House. The prime minister takes office by attending the monarch in a private audience, and after "kissing hands" that appointment is immediately effective without any other formality or instrument.[20] The sovereign also has the power to dismiss the prime minister, but the last time this power was exercised was in 1834, when William IV dismissed Lord Melbourne;[21] since then, prime ministers have only left office upon their resignation, which they are expected to offer to the monarch upon losing their majority in the House of Commons.

This system which is undemocratic (in the non-Plato sense and in the Plato sense.) appears to prevent certain forms of extremism (though it's not clear looking at other Western and European countries that the UK would necessarily slide into that anyway yet,) but there is frequent overreach from policing and the government anyway, + other issues so it's very far from ideal.

The conservative party was just in power for like my entire adult/voting life until this government. I didn't vote for labour mind you in the last election I voted lib dems, and I think I've only voted for labour once. I've voted green party at least once but I have issues with them too nationally. I don't really like most politicians or feel that they do much either. And I don't like Stahmer.

Lol back when we were in the EU still I came very close to voting for a transhumanist candidate in that election but don't think I did in the end.

I'm a big fan of throwing my vote away generally though as you can see.

Tbh though if there was nothing particuarly stand out bad about them I would probably vote for a transhumanist running locally too - although I doubt very much that will ever happen. I just feel like in the long term it will have a bigger impact. What I really want though is someone who is open to promoting/legalising/funding emerging reproductive healthcare and science (including artificial wombs and IVG,) and also making the healthcare system more efficient since there are serious problems + increasing longevity + again funding to increase longevity research. Mostly because I believe the process will hopefully make aging less terrible ideally.

Also as my friend said:

We're in a precarious position. The only thing that prevented a right wing surge is our non proportional voting system

Oh and then on top of that something like 50% of my town didn't even vote in the last election lol.

edit: Finished watching this video and the last line 'it's like watching a starving person voraciously eat poison was pretty powerful but I think it functions more like an addiction really.

Ben Shapiro completely lost it when he was interviewed on British television by a right wing interviewer. The reason, he was being held to account on his own words.

Oh I completely forgot about that lol.



Tbf to him though British journalists are kind of brutal and a lot of people from other countries I've noticed, especially conservatives, have a difficult time with them. Jordan Peterson mentioned this before (though it was always female journalists as well in his case.) Like Ben and similar conservatives are used to going on US shows where the interviewer will just kind of nod along with them (which I find kind of cringe honestly when they're political figures like this, like Dave Rubin is the classic example it's like he has no backbone at all,) but UK journalists won't do that - even if they're conservative sometimes as this guy is.

I just watched it. I've never seen an interviewee exit an interview like that

It's happened several times in the UK off the top of my head (though one was a panel show not an interview.) Two times with the same channel 4 interviewer (forgot his name had to look him up Krishnan Guru-Murthy.) I think Richard Ayoade kind of addresses some of the issues some people in the film industry, writers etc have with interviews:



Both Quentin Tarantino and Robert Downey Junior just walked out though.

[Otherside]

First cousin marriage is wrong, it should be illegal. I get that it's a thing in certain cultures, and for some reaso. Its taboo to talk about the harms, but it's ruining children's lives. First cousins share 12.5% of a genome roughly, and the chance of passing on a rare recessive gene genetic disorder is considerably much, much higher than in non-cousin marriages. Roughly, 2 children a week are killed from a recessive gene passed on by the first cousin parents.

[Nyctophilia]

Interesting. It messes the eyes up though.

Some people have some fascination for the 80s and 90s, but I feel that fascination for the 2000s

I rotate through periods but the 2000s is mostly just nostalgic for me.

2010s next

I will be very interested to see if people will be able to do this. Younger people maybe. I think the way culture was transmitted changed a lot starting then. Somewhat in the 2000s too but not to the same extent especially the first half of the 2000s.

A lot of the 2010s internet music genres etc were also hauntological (though of course stuff from the 2000s was really too.) But, it was much more obviously a throw back to the 80s etc. There is some stuff that sort of resembles the 2010s more I guess but harder to pin down because of how cultural transmission changed. And with stuff besides music it's also difficult. I suppose there are certain styles of YT content that can feel nostalgic already.

I feel like they're trying to make recording in ally ways a thing haha:



The roko's basilisk part of the video:



They obviously know each other irl and I wonder if it's the same ally lol.

It's giving the same vibe as this too:



And they're both cover versions.

I'm going to pretend this is a genre now.

Post ironic nightwalking ally emo

[Nyctophilia]

the commitment to deadnaming twitter is my fave

It's not even out of spite. It's a lot more personal than that. I refuse to call it my favourite letter of the alphabet that is associated with:

• The gender neutral pronoun on passports, Mx is the gender neutral equivalent to Mr, Ms, Miss and Mrs in the UK.
• Strange symbolism I used in a bunch of my art work throughout my life without noticing until the past two years while looking at various work.
• I have this weird childhood memory of walking with my mum and there was this building with metal things on the side (I dunno what, it's hard to describe just like these square metal things) that had an x pattern on them (not really visible to normal people haha,) and for some reason as a kid I would get really excited about that and point out the x's.
• A letter that is very connected to the aesthetics of the 2000s e-culture/nostalgic
• A letter associated with pirates/treasure maps - that's pretty cool.
• It just sounds cool when added to random names like Nyx, Phoenix, Calix. Who doesn't love a name that ends in x?
• IAMX uses it for his band name/song/project stuff and I like his music a lot.
• Unknown/missing variable in maths
• Many other things

He's attempting to ruin/co-opt it with his use of it on all his products. 😠




This song used to be called something else but he changed the name lol. I forgot what it was called before now I just remember he changed it:

At this point 4chan is a beacon of intellectualism compared to Twitter.

My problem with 4chan is that you can never be entirely sure who means how much of what they are saying. The problem with twitter is that everyone fully believes the insane things they are saying.

The darkest timeline.

The other problem with twitter is it's like all the worst parts of 4chan with a miniscule fraction of the creativity. 4chan is like twitter fused with Tumblr at least. Twitter is just twitter and had been [BEEP] for years before Elon bought it but then got progressively even worse amazingly. I guess twitter is probably like the worst of boomer right wing facebook, cryptobros, boring/dead inside aesthetics, and I never used telegram but that too probably. Still remember the time from ages ago I saved this one screenshot (I think I edited this partly for reasons because I posted it somewhere else but the funny part is still there):



Trans demon hackers. Also just realised that is gab so nevermind lol but there's a bunch of that kind of stuff on twitter but mostly more boring bigotry really.

Found some other funny stuff while looking for that screenshot:







Contrapoints has basically left twitter. There are a few interesting trans accounts, and Aella and that's about all that isn't just dumb ragebait, or not that interesting to me at this point. At least for more than 5 minutes.

Oh yeah and Grimes occasionally. Despite her abysmal taste in men haha.

Not like this comment section is any better and intellectual. This is just as bad as a bubble as what many people experience on X. This comment section is filled with tons of equally mined people, most of whom probably don't use X, but just despise Elon, because of his Trump affiliation.

Anyway, the truth usually lies between both extremes, and this is definitely on of those extremes.

And no, 4chan is not a pace for intellectualism. The worst pace for intellectualism is probably Instagram/TikTok/Facebook. Followed by Youtube (video entertainment platforms). And then at the top, it's likely platforms like X. Id ague that Bluesky, purely because of how early in the stages it is, is probably the most intellectualist site, followed by X. After all, both sites are primarily debate oriented.

You just dont like Elon. Admit thats what your opinion truly comes from. Have you even used X or prev Twitter?

LOL I've spent too much time on twitter over the past few years and it really is that bad regardless of whether that channel I just stumbled on is a bubble or not. There are very few insightful ideas being posted there, most content is coming from other sites like people reacting to tiktoks or news stories, 4chan posts, sometimes even tumblr posts though that site gets much less attention nowadays thankfully. There's an endless amount of stupid fighting so none of the debates are interesting or productive in anyway. Most people will block and dismiss what you're saying in 5 seconds based on your bio. Very tribalistic. It's really just there to piss people off and encourage fighting which is the opposite of intellectual really. Unless you pay the character count is too small to really write anything extensive and if you write a thread most people won't read the whole thing - if you write multiple tweets in response to someone many won't read more than one. Most cultural trends do not start on the platform, so it's not great in that sense either.

The idea that twitter is somehow 'the best' or second best is ridiculous. Bluesky doesn't seem debate oriented really - I went on there briefly it was like a more chill/friendly twitter but I haven't spent much time on there. There were some posts there suggesting the appeal/intent was to have something that wouldn't just be designed to make people miserable/angry. So of course it won't appeal to people who want that.

Debate does not equal intellectual either. I disliked the site before Elon took it over but the quality has gotten worse since he let on all the far right trolls, and no I don't like Elon (I also didn't like Elon before the Trump thing,) but that's not why the site is bad.

I'm sure you can find anything on the site in a niche sense but the major stuff you're going to stumble on will all be what I said and all very political stuff.

There isn't a good social media site but among the major ones twitter is probably the worst now. Also blogging platforms and people's personal sites tend to have more interesting ideas.

Anyway, the truth usually lies between both extremes, and this is definitely on of those extremes.

That's a kind of bias/fallacy that is not necessarily true at all but is nice in a kind of cliche sense that can encourage complacency.

Argument to moderation (Latin: argumentum ad temperantiam)--also known as the false compromise, argument from middle ground, fallacy of gray, middle ground fallacy, or golden mean fallacy[1]--is the fallacy that the truth is always in the middle of two opposites.[2]

[Otherside]

My least "woke" opinion, since that phrase is doing the rounds on twitter, is that First Cousin Marriage should be banned, we have shedloads of evidence that the risks of rare genetic diseases and infact mortality rates are considerably higher in first cousin marriages.

The fact that is a cultural norm for the Travellers and the British-Pakistani communities does not trump the brutal reality that it is the children of first cousin marriages that are suffering from there parents decision to ignore all the evidence against it and have children with there first cousin.

And no, I don't care that it supposedly "improves family bonds" and "allows for a better financial footing", or that it is "common in the middle east and sub-saharan africa." The evidence is there. First Cousin Marriage increases the odds considerably that your child will have a recessive gene genetic disorder, because if a grandparent has it, there is more chance that both parents are carriers, and could therefore pass two copies of this gene onto there child. Which is what is happening, hospitals in areas with first cousin marriages are seeing more and more children appear with rare genetic diseases.

[Nyctophilia]

@Otherside

I feel like that shouldn't be that conversial? I guess the issue with banning things is figuring out where to draw the line. Like the risk is also higher with older mothers and I don't believe that should be banned especially given the state of Western culture and not providing many options for women in terms of achieving economic and personal stability and having kids. A year or two ago they found 50% of women in the UK aged 30 hadn't had kids yet. I feel like very few people are really ready before the age of 30 these days and many who have kids before 30 had those kids by accident or they were unplanned (or they're part of very conservative religious families.)

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...-birth-defects

The risk of having a baby with birth defects - usually heart or nervous system problems which can sometimes be fatal - is still small, but it rises from 3% in the general Pakistani population to 6% among those married to blood relatives. The researchers also found a doubling of the risk in the babies of white British women who were over the age of 34. That increased risk, rising from 2% to 4%, is already known.

I guess the problem would be repeatedly doing it over many generations though that is also happening with older mothers now too.

I know someone who used to work in a special needs school though and the majority of the students there were South Asian, although the South Asian population in general was pretty high.

Also why I think we need more research into IVG etc to try and reduce risks. Since it's going to increasingly become a problem it's pretty essential now.

But anyway I don't think the decision should be effected by whether it's more popular in certain minority groups regardless.

[Nyctophilia]

I was wondering what this video would be about because I saw it and didn't bother to watch it but I just read about this elsewhere so watching it now:



Burgandy and orange is a choice but he's pulling it off.

Wasn't expecting Curtis Yarvin to eventually pop up in this video lol but sure why not. I probably should have done though really given the CEO topic and his 'patchwork' idea.

This isn't a good thing but as people become more and more desperate and hopeless about any possibility of change vigilantism will increase.

Nobody is talking about how hard and aggressive law enforcement has gone after this dude too. If you or I got shot in New York, they wouldn't be spending these resources on finding our killer. Total bullshit. Law enforcement exists to protect the elite. Disgusting

Another fair point.

[Nyctophilia]

I don't know if any of these guys have been 'bought' but I can see why Vaush and presumably others have said that these guys have been 'bought' (well Vaush suggested that about Joe Rogan specifically in a video I watched recently.) They all seem to have all the same opinions and their political view shift(s) didn't really seem entirely organic (especially sus when people just have all the same opinions on a variety of topics and just flip all of them at the same time. Suggests either grifting or a personality disorder most of the time,) and the Russia simping seems a bit much I dunno.

I also know Joe Rogan said at one point he was going to vote for Bernie or something and now he's like a Trumps supporter with normie conservative positions on everything? I get why someone like him probably wouldn't vote democrat but it would make more sense to be independent or something. Just seems incredibly fake to me honestly.

I haven't watched his podcast in a while so can't really say too much on that but it does seem weird.

Lol that one guy with all the face tattoos and piercings.

"I don't see any gays and liberals on the streets, I see men and women couples, I don't see transvestites, I don't see homeless people this place is heaven on Earth I'm moving here forever."

LOOK AT YOUR FACE.

You're going to judge other people for their appearence? Sit the [BEEP] down boy lol.

"Right now you have people who were in prison for Spoiler: killing and raping people they go to war in Ukraine to get free, then they get back from Ukraine and continue Spoiler: killing and raping people"

Oh I think they were doing a bit of that inbetween in Ukraine too and in the past in Eastern and central Europe since I had a relative who was a first hand witness to various events taking place after world war 2 and plenty of others have spoken about that too.

Oh speaking of my nan her home country (Danzig, now part of Poland,) came up in the video lol. Not in the context of what the soviet army did there though ironically. Just the earlier Nazi occupation. I've posted about this before but no one talks about what the Russians did there and when an art student in Gdansk in 2013 made a statue showing that it was removed and the artist was faced with 2 years in prison.

Prosecutors have launched an investigation into a possible charge of inciting racial or national hatred against the 26-year-old artist, even though his concrete sculpture was only in place for one night.

I get so angry thinking about the response to this, and the general way a lot of stuff has been downplayed because Russians were supposed to be 'the good guys (tm.)

On another site I was on for a few years there was this Russian radical feminist lol so the idea that they are all tradwives amuses me too. Though more outspoken women tend to end up leaving or getting into trouble with the government like [BEEP] Riot obviously.



The UK sometimes arrests people for saying things online but they police it in a highly inconsistent way with very vague, ambiguity regarding laws. Consequently I self censor a little (though not just for that reason,) but yeah I know the feeling and I can imagine it being x1000 worse in Russia so I wouldn't blame anyone for leaving for that reason alone.

"Or the new infamous law about discrediting the armed forces of Russia."

Yeah I would be in prison 5 minutes ago lol.

I have a serious issue with the Russian military, followed by all militaries. Also war.

I guess one thing that made me laugh and revealed just how pathetic they are was when someone in the Russian government said that they had to create an alternative to The Sims because basically The Sims was too powerful and influential (and progressive,) in their country LOL.

[Nyctophilia]

I visited my dad earlier and there was this weird table in the living room with a pattern that looked kind of like some kind of magic sigil on it which was new to me. Apparently my mum found it in the shed and gave it back to my dad (no idea how it ended up in the shed.) So I joked about it being a magic table and he was like 'oh it is.' And I was like 'did someone do some kind of weird ritual?' Joking again and he was like 'oh yeah my sister when she was 16. She and her friends were messing around with a ouija board on the table because she had the same idea about the table I guess.' It was the 60s (I liked how that was just thrown in at one point like some explanation lol.) So I asked him if anything happened and he said they all got freaked out at one point and started screaming. He said he was about 9 or something at the time. Apparently they were all wearing miniskirts and it was her 16th birthday he thinks.

He said he didn't think it was her 18th because she went to Israel when she was 18 and got into a relationship with a guy who had no legs (because he lost them fighting in a war.) But later when she moved back to the UK they had to break up because he couldn't travel because of his disabilities, which apparently was harder or impossible back then (I dunno if that's true.)

I never would have imagined her messing around with a ouija board tbh so kind of interesting. It's very much not the kind of image she gives off during my life time.

We have to normalize getting off T as part of some people's transitions. Transitioning isn't a binary thing, even for binary trans people

I don't know why people would think it's weird especially if the person is non-binary anyway. I think a big reason a lot of people go on t is to get a lower voice. A bunch of the changes like that, genital changes, and facial hair is permanant or mostly permanant. I think there are likely some psychological benefits really with testosterone but then also potential sexuality stuff which can have pros and cons depending on the individual. If you don't care about getting your period (which can happen to some people on t anyway,) or if you get a hysterectomy, and you're not that bothered about being physically stronger + fat redistribution, and you don't want to lose your head hair (which happens to a lot of people on testosterone,) you might as well go off later.

I have an estrogen dominant hormone system and have numerous skin issues on my face (and also spots on my back) lol so... Not being on testosterone has not worked out for me in that department lol. Most of the issues began in my 20s really on/off. Previously there were a load on my forehead and I got some prescription stuff which worked to clear it up until it started causing an allergic reaction so I stopped just before the time they suggested to stop using it. After that the issue came back later but to a lesser degree. Whatever is going on now is probably some hormonal thing since the spots move around throughout my cycle and get better/worse but never go away entirely. I cba doing anything about it now but if I was going to start dating or something it'd be an issue.


"I have hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome probably unsurprising if you already know that I'm autistic, and I'm trans"

Uh it wouldn't have been unsurprising to me. But I have since read a bunch of posts by that one doctor so I guess:

**Elevated Serum Homocysteine Levels, ADHD, Autism Spectrum Disorder, Hypermobile joints (often also have flat feet, pectus excavatum/carinatum), "Fibromyalgia" (I hate this diagnosis name but basically unexplained pain issues) Hashimoto's thyroiditis, IBS / Inflammatory GI issues, Queerness (gender or sexual orientation), migraine headache (mostly XX humans). Non-gender normative behavior, Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (hormonal disruption, hirsutism, or passing out when standing up / "POTS", high resting heart rate, poor stress tolerance), PTSD, Bipolar/Schizo/depression (burnout type), Generalized Anxiety, Eczema, Severe acne in natal females (PCOS), Mast Cell Issues / Allergies, Myopia (negative glasses prescription), Increased Intelligence, Genetic mutations in MTHFR or MTR/R, Irritable Bladder or IC (acidic urine typically, gets up a lot at night to urinate), Spider veins (especially at the base of the neck posteriorly/upper back as well as "cherry hemangiomas". "Translucent" skin with easily visible vasculature.

[Nyctophilia]

In January 2019, Beckinsale was reported to be dating American comedian Pete Davidson. In "called time on their romance."[225]

Lol really? My brother was talking about him yesterday actually. He's like the Taylor Swift of men.

I don't get the hype though personally.

Why do we keep debating the appeal of Pete Davidson?

Much of the confusion spawned over Pete's dating history stems from a suggestion that he's stereotypically less attractive than the objectively, by Western.

"He's stereotypically less attractive."

Yes, yes I know. I've liked several guys like that in my life. Still...

He's had a large quantity of short term relationships with high profile women so I think that's the main reason.

Off the top of my head he's dated Kate Beckinsale, obviously, Kim Kardasian, Ariana Grande, I thought he dated Lana Del Rey but apparently that was a joke. There's tons of other people I don't recognise too lol.

[Nyctophilia]

Still finding it interesting how much money and effort they put into this.

Don't listen to the ignorants it's because he had money so he was seen as important the police only work for rich interests

They're protecting 'the system' over people I think.

edit: Impressive vibe shift honestly.

The shooter is culturally right leaning tech bro btw. Making the mainstream normie conservative media reaction to this even more ironic. I think this is part of why they had to find him quickly though lol.



Too many people caught on that she's Ben's femme persona.

I'm still convinced that Brett (or, as I like to call her, Jen Shapiro) is Ben's child from a secret second family who extorted him for a spot on the Daily Wire

Or that.

Yeah I get suggested her videos or have done several times at one point. I basically never get suggested Ben's. Not surprised her content performs better really.

"Anti porn rad fems watch Brett Cooper what really?"

Yeah that wouldn't surprise me I think she markets to them to some extent because she tries to market herself as a former tomboy and they're all sex negative.



edit: "Why didn't they stream? It's like they tried to emulate streamers but it's all scripted."

Oh no they weren't trying to do that they were trying to emulate this genre of content (like relatively short form culture war social media reaction/commentary content. 10-15 minutes. Including lots of social media comments.):







This is so bleak for the US. But he brings up the UK life expectancy being better and I do have to address this. As with most UK statistics this is being pumped up by the better areas of the UK. Sort of like how we're considered a rich country, but most of the wealth is concentrated in London and a lot of the country lives like the poorest areas of Eastern Europe. Same with life expectancy and health.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...est-in-england

Girls born in the poorest areas of England will have almost 20 fewer years of good health compared with those in the wealthiest, according to figures that also reveal overall life expectancy in the most deprived areas has dropped significantly.

Female healthy life expectancy at birth in the most deprived areas was 19.3 years less than in the least deprived areas in 2018 to 2020, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). For males it was 18.6 years less.

Last week the Guardian revealed that women in the poorest areas of England were dying earlier than the average female in almost every comparable country. MPs and health experts described the revelation as devastating and unacceptable.

Christiane Amanpour on Twitter: "The poorest fifth of the population are now much poorer [in the UK] than most of the poorest countries in central and eastern Europe," says @MyStephanomics . "They would be better off in quite poor countries in the European Union."

https://www.ft.com/content/7204c062-...5-db2f231cfeae

Regional inequality in the UK has become the worst of any comparable developed country and is growing, a left-leaning think-tank has concluded in its annual State of the North report.

Only countries such as the much larger US, once-Communist Romania and South Korea -- which developed very quickly, are more polarised in areas like health, jobs, disposable income and productivity, IPPR North said in its study of the north-south divide.

Luke Raikes, one of the report?s authors, said this had created a "geography of discontent", which partly explained the high vote to leave the EU in many poor towns, particularly in the north, in 2016.

The Conservative government has said it wants to reduce regional divisions and bring prosperity to all parts of the country as it pursues votes in the north and Midlands in next month?s general election. This comes after the gap increased following its public spending cuts in the wake of the 2008-9 recession, the report found.

Mr Raikes said many poorer areas were dependent on public sector jobs after their industrial base was hollowed out in the 1970s and 1980s. But he added that economic development and infrastructure spending have been focused on London and the southeast, the most productive parts of the country, attracting more private investment.

The fact that the US is even worse is, as I said, incredibly bleak.

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2020/jul/...rse-us-england

Across every income group surveyed, people living in the US had worse health than their counterparts of similar incomes in England, finds the study published in JAMA Internal Medicine, led by the University of Michigan.

The differences were greatest among the lowest earners: middle-aged UK residents in the bottom 20% by income enjoyed better health across many measures than the poorest Americans of the same age group.

Not good! (the failures of my country deeply depress me, and you've descended further and worse still - you have these ridiculous talking heads in the US like Ben Shapiro just completely oblivious. Of course he and others like him are not oblivious - they're being paid.)

[Nyctophilia]

The special relationship between two G7 countries has possibly been imperilled by an American scientist's claim that Britain's favoured brew requires a pinch of salt.

The international incident was triggered when a scientist from the US claimed to have found the recipe for a perfect cuppa. The secret, according to Michelle Francl, a professor of chemistry at Bryn Mawr College, is a pinch of salt - and energetic squeezing of the teabag.

Damn I can't believe we've been at war with the US since last January and I didn't even know.

Writing on X, the embassy said because tea was "the elixir of camaraderie, a sacred bond that unites our nations, we cannot stand idly by as such an outrageous proposal threatens the very foundation of our Special Relationship".

The post solemnly reassured a horrified country: "We want to ensure the good people of the UK that the unthinkable notion of adding salt to Britain's national drink is not official United States policy. And never will be."

However, the post has nevertheless left anxious Britons in a state of trepidation. Referring to another nuclear moment in the nations' relationship - when an American woman*claimed on TikTok*that tea could be made in a microwave - the post ended with the solemn promise: "The US embassy will continue to make tea in the proper way - by microwaving it."

I like the idea of Americans microwaving tea. That's very quirky.

(Not a good way to make tea though flavour-wise lol.)

This is horrifying:

"You get some awful cups of tea in the US. People here often use lukewarm water straight from a tap. It's horrific," said Francl, who analysed research papers and ancient texts dating back more than 1,000 years, documenting these experiments in her new book, Steeped: The Chemistry of Tea.

I can see why they have hired scientists to investigate this matter.

[Nyctophilia]

UK gov bans puberty blockers

the UK government has banned puberty blockers "indefinitely" following a temporary block in may 2024. im disgusted, i keep thinking about how many young people are going to have to suffer because of this decision. Despite coming out to my parents when I was 12, I didn't officially come out until I was 14 so I missed out on the opportunity to get on blockers before it was too late. So now Im a teenage boy in sixth form who has almost double D's that are damn near impossible to hide in school uniform even with a binder who wishes he had the opportunity when I was younger. Im so sorry for anybody who this affects- it sucks ass.

It's "my body, my choice" until it's transgender youth.

It's painfully obvious but I have to say it somewhere; the aim of this is to produce a society with fewer trans people. Force them back into the closet as children while we tirelessly work to make the country as hostile to trans people as possible, then hopefully by the time they're adults they'll be too scared and beaten down to come out again. Either that, or at least they'll kill themselves quietly and get buried under their deadname by parents who have been appropriately indoctrinated into enacting the state's transphobic abuse on a more intimate level.

Yes it's disgusting. Especially since it's specifically for trans kids and will still be using them for kids who start puberty early.

It's literally just discriminatory. Children with precocious puberty can still have puberty blockers. The ban specifically singles out trans children.

That's what pisses me off the most. They claim that puberty blockers are "untested" and "irreversible" and yet cis kids can still get them. Instead of banning them they should do more studies but we all know that their reasoning isn't based on science but on transphobia.

They couldn't make it more clear that the only reason they are doing this is because they want to reduce the number of trans people (which won't happen even if people don't medically transistion.) There's very transparently no other excuse.

This is going to particularly effect trans women obviously and it's not like when they turn 18 they'll immediately be able to transisiton since there are super long wait times on the NHS. At least estrogen isn't a controlled substance (yet.) Testosterone is though. But apparently there are ways of getting it.

Also early onset trans people (those who are dysphoric from early childhood, very nonconforming,) are the least likely to desist or detransistion later. The vast majority of detransistioner cases you hear about (I don't consider people going off hrt for other reasons, or who are non-binary to count in this group. Since non-binary people do this all the time while still being non-binary I mean the political anti trans detransistioner group who are like ex-gays,) are people who came out in their mid teen years or later (one guy in the UK who is compaining didn't transistion until his 30s! And is blaming everyone besides himself.) A different demographic group. They basically never use(d) puberty blockers anyway. As you can see from OP merely coming out at 12 is generally too late for that because of how slow the system is in most places. Which anyone who actually has any understanding and isn't driven by bigotry (like the UK government,) would know..

If you attempt to practice conversion therapy some people will avoid transistioning but will continue to be dysphoric and have lower quality of life in the long term. This is not something people care about however.

People want to advise against doing this because a majority of children who don't undergo some version of conversion therapy (and not doing this is conversion therapy,) tend to transistion medically:

Transgender children who are allowed to present their gender identity and change their names have good mental health outcomes, according to a study released on Friday and hailed as "crucially important".

The study, published in the March issue of the journal Pediatrics, shows the positive impact family support can have on the lives of transgender children, a group long hidden from public view.

Researchers found normal levels of depression and only slightly elevated anxiety levels in transgender children who were supported by their families.

Such support included the use of pronouns that matched the child's gender identity, calling them by the name of their choosing and, often, and allowing them to change their hairstyle and clothing to reflect their identity. Such children are also known as "socially transitioned" children.

In a commentary published with the study in Pediatrics, Dr Ilana Sherer, assistant medical director at the University of San Francisco's Child and Adolescent Gender Center Clinic, said the findings were "crucially important".

Sherer said the study was useful for responding to questions surrounding the impact of social transition, and whether and when children are old enough to know that they identify with a gender different from the one they were born with.

Sherer said: "Olson and colleagues give supporters of social transition evidence that shows what we have suspected all along: that socially transitioned children are doing fine, or at least as well as their age-matched peers and siblings."

Sarah Painer, a social worker at the Transgender Health Clinic at Cincinnati Children?s Hospital, said: "I think the study is really reflective of what we see in practice."

Transgender adults experience rates of anxiety, depression and suicide that are dramatically higher than those among non-transgender adults. This is most likely tied to years of discrimination, internal conflict and rejection from social environments, the authors of the study said.

This is a quote from a website of an organisation that is against transgender medical care for youth:

Early Social Gender Transition in Children is Associated with High Rates of Transgender Identity in Early Adolescence

A new study lends credibility to concerns that early social gender transition can lead to persistence of pediatric gender dysphoria

A recent study published in Pediatrics examined the 5-year gender identity development trajectory of transgender-identified children who underwent early social gender transition (SGT). The children were, on average, 6-7 years old at the time of SGT. Five years later, at the average age of 11-12, almost all--97.5%--continued to identify as transgender, including a small subset (3.5%) developing a non-binary identification. Only 2.5% of the children desisted from transgender identification by the end of the study period, and re-identified with their sex.

The authors concluded that detransition among previously socially gender transitioned youth is rare. A significant proportion of the youth in the study had already initiated interventions with puberty blockers (29%) and cross-sex hormones (31%) by the end of the study, and the authors opined that the remainder would likely initiate medical interventions in the future.This finding is in sharp contrast to earlier research demonstrating that most cases of childhood-onset gender incongruence tend to resolve sometime during adolescence and before reaching mature adulthood. However, the children in the prior research were not socially transitioned, and early social transition had been discouraged by prior protocols.

They don't like this because they want this group to be cis people with greater levels of mental health issues.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societ...ender_Medicine

Researchers at the Yale School of Medicine issued a report which described SEGM as a small group of anti-trans activists and not "a recognized scientific organization".[3][4][5] A spokesperson for the Endocrine Society described them as outside the medical mainstream.[6] A paper published in March 2024 described them as a "fringe medical organization".[7][8]

Later onset trans and non-binary people have worse outcomes in the long term imo and higher rates of mental health issues. Imo this is because there are more deviations from social norms. Early onset kids are always very non-conforming and that's why they're dysphoric in childhood. When they transistion they can blend in pretty well usually with straight man and women (they are basically always attracted to their own natal sex, so after transistion are straight.) Obviously this is effected by the age they transistion though. Some end up with mannerisms or speech patterns more like gay men if they do it later like Blaire White because of social/cultural impact on body language and language. I notice very little differences between most trans guys who are exclusively attracted to women and transistion young, and straight cis guys.

People who come out later are more often bisexual which on it's own increases risk for mental health issues, substance abuse, and often comes with a personality structure that causes issues functioning in society. Part of the problem here appears to be an identity thing that's unavoidable - like how biracial people also have greater issues in these areas than monoracial people (but there are ways to reduce the problem like identifying with both strongly.) You don't fit in with either group not just sexually but your personality. Any identity category that transcends categories increases problems because you get more social policing/gatekeeping and Humans aren't happy with this. They like their position in a group to be clear and they're not happy at the bottom of hierarchies either.

When they're not bisexual (and often even if they are,) they are less non-conforming as their birth sex compared to people who come out in early childhood. So they have similar issues to non-conforming homosexual people where they transistion in a way where they stand out as being non-conforming after transistion. Might pass less well because people underestimate the importance of body language and speech patterns on passing (even Blaire White does lol. Of course some people don't care.) The younger you transistion the more you'll pass as a cis homosexual though which is prob the best outcome there if you want to fit in. You have to accept in many cases you won't 100% but that's difficult because Human brain/social species.

People who transistion late are probably more inclined to go on/off hormones, more likely to be non-binary, compared to early onset trans people. Because of the conflict between their personality type and social identity/body/sexual preferences. These are different areas of the brain. As shown in research. Homosexual people have androgynous brains more like the opposite sex personality wise, and trans people have differences in an area of the brain which is tied to body ownership and identity. Obviously I'm speaking about group differences and not every single person.

Some people are great at code-switching and this makes them good actors as well:

I always found it pretty funny that once she did find the voice, she'd use her own voice to make fun of other women.

I will say, her mocking voice is really close to her real voice, but there is a noticeable difference if you listen to an interview before the clips instead of her Rosa voice.

Yeah she exaggerates her own voice a little as well.

Part of the reason they don't want people to come out young is it's part of the overall moral project to try and remove all non-conforming people from society (which isn't really possible.) By arguing that because they are mentally ill etc they are bad. But it just becomes an increasing cycle. A side effect of this is misandry against men too because a lot of the traits society dislikes are actually just masculine ones it seems lol:

Bisexual women exhibit personality traits and sexual behaviors more similar to those of heterosexual males than heterosexual women, including greater openness to casual sex and more pronounced dark personality traits. These are less evident or absent in homosexual individuals.

This reddit comment cracked me up so I'm including it:

That title really reads like being bi turns women into awful people. You know, like men.

Yes that is how society functions. Thank you for noticing.

When examining sexual orientation differences, the researchers found notable patterns, particularly among females. Mostly heterosexual and bisexual females demonstrated elevated levels of sociosexuality and sexual excitation compared to their exclusively heterosexual counterparts. They also scored higher in psychopathy.


"There are now several replications showing that mostly heterosexual women are higher in trait psychopathy than other sexual orientation groups," Semenyna noted. "Psychopathy in this context just means being less concerned with other people's feelings, social expectations, and having lower impulse control. Mostly heterosexual women score more like heterosexual men on this trait, but it's not clear why. It could just be that these women are less concerned about what others think of them, and less constrained by social mores that would view same-sex attraction or behavior negatively."

interestingly, exclusively homosexual females did not exhibit the same increases in sociosexuality and sexual excitation, indicating that mostly heterosexual and bisexual females form distinct groups.

Among males, the findings were somewhat different. Mostly heterosexual males showed higher levels of sexual excitation compared to exclusively heterosexual males. However, there were no significant differences in sociosexuality or Dark Triad traits between homosexual and heterosexual males.

Homosexual males did exhibit higher levels of sexual inhibition, aligning more closely with female-typical patterns. This indicates that while mostly heterosexual and bisexual males may be more sexually excitable, exclusively homosexual males show increased caution and inhibition in sexual contexts.

From wikipedia about some previous research:

Richard A. Lippa proposed that there exist two dimensions of sexual orientation: a gender typicality dimension, and a monosexuality dimension. With the gender typicality dimension being associated with the heterosexual-homosexual distinction, while the sociosexuality dimension has many behavioral effects. He proposes someone who would be at any point in the heterosexual-homosexual spectrum will become bisexual if they are high on the sociosexuality dimension. This dimension being associated with higher sociosexuality, higher neuroticism, lower agreeableness, lower honesty-humility, higher openness to experience, and a minor degree of gender nonconformity.[70] He proposes this as explaining phenomena such as increased juvenile delinquency among bisexuals,[71] increased mental health issues and substance use disorder among bisexuals,[72] and increased dark triad traits among bisexual women.[73] Critics of this theory have described elements observed as coming from experiences of biphobia,[70] but Lippa counters that these phenomena are present even among heterosexual identifying people with some same sex attraction, who would likely be heterosexual passing.[70][74]

[Nyctophilia]

I was looking for an upload of this scene but this was the only one I could find. It's hard to find most Bob's Burgers clips and very few have been uploaded to YT unlike other comedy shows. The editing is pretty weird lol (I figured it was so it could pass as fair use,) and then just half way through the uploader makes a random completely unexpected appearence. Biggest plot twist ever. Anyway:



Louise: "I'm realising the person who doesn't seem OK is you."

Tina: "Me?"

Louise: "No Rudy."

LOL.

Well yeah, you too Tina. I mean you're the only one in your family who ages. Possibly the only one in your world. That's got to be disturbing.

This season has some pretty good story development about the unhealthy parenting practices of Rudy's parenting.




"What's your complaint of the day?"

"You know it's trains"

We are not off to a good start.

Lol no but I do have some complaints.

"It's like the battle of the sexes when it comes to seats on trains. I've noticed that men don't really want to be getting up for us anymore."

I was going to say "now I want to like get up for some guy on the train," to be random except that would be too socially awkward for me (as it would involve initiating a conversation,) but then realised I did technically do this before on the underground LOL. Like I was standing there and this guy was like 'oh do you want to go sit in the empty seat' basically and I was like 'nah you can sit there.' Imagine going around expecting men to get up for you though. Wtf.

There's a really dark joke here involving trains in my country but I'm not going to.

Her viewpoint was so culturally weird to me that I actually assumed she was American (also because most people doing this are American except Andrew Tate who is half American,) but then my brain caught up I realised she has an MLE accent lol.

Lol from now on I will only stand up for guys with long hair. Because of the joke I've taken way too far.

"Thank you for your hair service."

Then start a riot on the underground during the rush hour or something. "You can't do that, that's discrimination." Chaotic neutral.

Turns out one of the people is actually a trans woman.

"I'm sorry you need to leave this seat I thought you were a man."

Chaotic evil would be like moving people from seats reserved for disabled people.

"This is the long haired men seat. I'm afraid you can't sit there."

I'll let women sit in my seat if they're wearing cool celestial print clothing or something. Like someone I saw with cool boots and a dress in Brighton.

I can't believe I googed celestial boots and basically that pair came up lol. I think they looked more or less like this:



I've just found some other cooler boots now though:



Especially this pair:

Price: ?95.73 [? = pounds]

This price makes me sad.

2. Please type "YES" that you understand these boots are U.S. sizing and not U.K. sizing. If you need help choosing your size, please ask!😊💗

I can see why people from the UK want the boots lol. (Because they look cool.)

I think the woman in the video complaining should buy me these boots. I think that would be the feminist thing for her to do.

I haven't finished watching this video but I'm assuming it gets a lot worse based on the title. I didn't make it till 20 seconds before having something to say lol.

When they speak of men having to die for them there is no amount of respect for it. They don't speak about it with any kind of sanctity for life. It's an expectation. You should lose your life so I can live. The gravity of it is no where in their speech at all.

I should lose my life so you can live? A person I've never met before?

No it's insane. But they obviously think their lives are worth more than all men and they wouldn't do that for a guy so why would they judge a guy for not doing it for them? That's the thing but obviously they are just conservative (while I assume not being traditional themselves in ways that trad guys care about.) Also that movie The Titanic was dumb anyway since there was clearly enough room on the door for two people.

It's just something about the way that men are expected to die for others irrespective of whatever life goals, and aspirations they have. They I find a bit gross in this kind of speech. You know what it feels like? It feels like the same entitlement a lot of conservatives or people have in regards to women and their bodies when it comes to maintaining things and you feel entitled but you don't feel the need to support them when they have the kid, you don't feel the need to make sure they have the right services when the children are brought into this world.

Their argument is it's women's responsibility to not have sex (or at least piv sex,) with men in case they get pregnant. This is something I find very easy to do and avoid lol.. But some people don't so can't really speak on that. Some conservatives are extremists about it and think Spoiler: rape victims should be forced to give birth and some think abortion should be legal for cases of Spoiler: rape. The ones who think people should be forced to give birth to their Spoiler: rapists kids disgust me the most and I'm also mildly eugenicist and think ideally you should abort that particular baby for genetic reasons (it's not exactly a high bar lol.) Plus imagine learning that about your parents.... A definite equivalent though is how they shame women who haven't had children like they owe their wombs to society regardless of personal circumstances.

[Nyctophilia]

Reading comments on video I posted before...

For me, I'm in a relationship with a very feminine woman. That dynamic makes me protective and makes me want to take care of her. I don't see "boss girl" type of toxic women bringing that out of me.

That should be how you are innately. Not because of someone else.

???

People tend to be protective of cutenness so the less cute you are the less they feel that. It's also why most people don't care about men.

I don't want people to have this protective dynamic with me but I also don't want them to go around criticising non-conforming people but those women on the podcast and similar women aren't masculine or non-conforming anyway they are very feminine just entitled and I'm tired of the two being lumped together.

Schr?dinger's feminism: a woman is simultaneously a victim and empowered, until something happens. Then she chooses which state benefits her the most.

I don't know these podcasters, are they even self proclaimed feminists? Or are we all just assuming they are?

The fact they feel so entitled to our existence is astoundingly delusional in itself. Also why would we die for someone that said they don?t need us.

Did these womn from the podcast ever say they don't need men? Because I don't think many womn proclaiming they don't need men also want them to open their doors for them.

where have you been for the past 8 years all women say this all the time

really? I'm a womn who doesn't say this, let alone all the time. My fmale friends don't either. Nor any other womn I meet irl.

Extrme thoughts and statements are often quite limited to the internet, where they seem extra prominent because social media algorithms favor content that induce negative emotions.

But my point is actually more so that womn who say they don't need men are not the same womn who say they do need them. The problem here is that aba, preach, and the majority of the people in the comments are assuming all womn say all these things all the time. However, it's two different groups of people who say two different type of things, yet they all happen to be womn.

"Ugh. Men need to stop being like men."

Also,

"Why aren't men more like men?"

Wait, these two womn also say men need to stop being like men??

Yeah it's annoying that people think they're feminists or otherwise against gender roles lol. I'm not even a feminist but the strawman is real. They're obviously redpill/conservative women but they have this entitled attitude so they can't get what they want.

Anybody else find it somewhat empowering to ignore aesthetically appealing women in the wild? Especially the ones who supe themselves up to be seen like the women featured in this episode?

I kinda feel liberated in not trying to assist or make space for her. As a male, I am CONSTANTLY trying to make myself seem as non-threatening as possible.

Instead I focus on the women in my life who give a [BEEP] about me. Outside of them? They?re just NPCs.

Don?t need to be disrespectful or even mean-spirited. They?re just?there.

This feels like he's pretending not to care though. When you actually don't care you won't actively have to avoid looking at people because they won't cross your mind. I've never thought it was empowering on the contrary it's so boring.

And no I don't try to avoid looking at aesthetically (or sexually which is what he prob means but either way,) appealing people. It happens so rarely... (In most places anyway.) Most people kind of blur together and their clothing and appearence doesn't stand out to me either (again in most places some places can increase the odds.) Sexually attractive people are even rarer.

Even online most of the time I just look at photos of the same few guys.

Thinking about it I notice buildings more than people LOL. I'm always looking at architecture and people's houses etc.


A lot of the comments are dumb and I always get the impression that a lot of men commenting about this stuff want women to think like the women in that video but just in a less entitled way so they find viewpoints like mine annoying lol.

"No you're right I don't expect anything from you." (Not even in a passive aggressive sense.)

"What do you mean you don't want some guy to open jars for you!?"

It's like the shoeonhead video where she's like "I know you can open jars but let a guy do it anyway so he can feel helpful."

You mean my incredibly neurotic personality type isn't stereotypically feminine enough? LOL.

What do you mean that's unattractive and you're only attracted to very selective redundant and performative feminine gender roles?

Well I'm non-binary anyway so that presumably should scare off most guys and guys like that. And the rest of my personality can scare off the rest. 😂