Comments

  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    I think you've put a lot of ideas into a very small space. — fdrake

    I can certainly plead guilty there; I don't like writing, so I try to be brief, and make every word count. Also on this topic my thinking is unconventional in some ways, and liable to rub everyone up the wrong way who wants me to be either on their side or on the 'other' side. Thus I am against the patriarchy, and capitalist society in general, but I blame women equally if not more than men for it. Like 'what do you expect, girls, if that's what you go for?'
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    I have a seriously hard time figuring out whether you're being sarcistic or not, and/or exactly whose argument you're responding to. — Tzeentch

    It seems you're not alone there. I'm not sure if my thoughts are too complex or merely incoherent. But can you see the commonality between the 2 quotes that I was responding to?
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    Yeah I agree with Jamal's comment. It's a long way from psychological angle you took though right? I'm mostly reacting to "Men are pitiful", it doesn't seem like the kind of idea you just stumble into as a bloke. Though I did read it as wordplay, as in "to be pitied" {sardonically} and "pathetic". — fdrake

    Yes, I was pointing out the rather strange way that supposedly naturally dominant men complain about being dominated by their inferiors. Must be them damn commies again, taking over the humanities.

    ↪180 Proof
    Niet, danken. My charisma suffices.
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    ↪fdrake
    Sorry, think like what?

    Edit:
    Conveniently, here, from another thread is about what I think:

    I thought it was widely known that civilization, meaning a sedentary society built on intensive agriculture and characterized by social stratification and state institutions, has usually resulted in an oppression of women much worse than they experienced in hunter-gatherer societies. It happens that way for various reasons, including property and inheritance, which requires the control of reproduction. Even if men were dominant in many cases in earlier societies, in civilized society this was intensified and institutionalized.

    I mean, this seems to be the most common view among anthropologists and in associated disciplines, so assertions to the contrary probably need some kind of support, rather than just intuition.     — Jamal
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    Men who are overly preoccupied with pandering to women are hardly ever taken seriously by their male peers. The classic "white knight" / "pretty boy" is seen as dainty, vain and well, useless - not manly. — Tzeentch

    You misunderstand me. Women prefer gang members. They don't choose pretty boys, they choose fighters. Women have bloodlust; look at the audience for men's boxing to see it.

    And if they should change their preference, then they are "destroying the core of masculinity”.

    Notice the knot in the complaint, there. Women dominate because they choose to be dominated and if they should choose not to be dominated they are trying to dominate. Men are pitiable, either way.
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    Can anyone explain to me how the fear of (else the roundabout concern that) “women are taking over and are destroying the core of masculinity” is in fact not a communal projection of personally held aspirations by a certain male faction in society, one composed of individuals that themselves desire to be domineering over all others - women very much here included as those whom they deem themselves entitled to subjugate? Entitled by Nature, by God, it doesn't much here matter. — javra

    "if women stopped wanting to date gang members, guys would stop joining." That's obviously a bit simplistic, (men also join for the status they receive from other men), but I think her point had some merit. — Count Timothy von Icarus

    Here some illustrations of the general thesis that masculinity is defined by women. It is not even controversial in bio-evolutionary circles; the mating ritual quite frequently following the general pattern of male performance and female judging and prize-giving.

    Can anyone explain to me how the male desire to dominate is other than a performance intended to attract a mate?
  • What jazz, classical, or folk music are you listening to?
  • What jazz, classical, or folk music are you listening to?
    And I also can't play the violin.

  • What jazz, classical, or folk music are you listening to?
    Lest I should start to imagine I can play the guitar ...

  • Climate change denial


    Scientific article: phys.org from March 11, 2025
    Permian mass extinction linked to 10°C global temperature rise that reshaped Earth's ecosystems
    https://phys.org/news/2025-03-permian-mass-extinction-linked-10c.html

    Great Wikipedia information on "Extinction Events":
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event

    Great Wikipedia information on "Permian-Triassic Mass Extinction Event'":
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian%E2%80%93Triassic_extinction_event
  • Were women hurt in the distant past?
    One could assume — Outlander

    Can you explicate a little the difference between 'assume' and 'imagine'?
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    I do find the idea of some place where inequalities naturally exist to be slightly worrying without more flesh on the bones. — Tobias

    Here is a natural inequality: a woman knows her own offspring with a certainty that a man cannot match. This much is inescapable biology, that any social gender construction must take account of.

    The significance is a matter of inheritance. So it has importance for the propertied classes in the first place. For a propertied male, "faithfulness" becomes the prime virtue of womanhood, and 'the bloodline' must be protected by her subjugation. Hence, erstwhile Prince Charles could not marry his love, Camilla, but must instead marry a certified virgin. Well, you know the story.

    Of course the biological story we are told is the inverse, that it is the woman who rejects casual sex because of some need for 'support', poor little thing and the huge investment she makes into the child relative to the male. Or is that the propaganda? It really is hard to tell.

    Especially when the likes of Gregory are keeping themselves 'pure', as virginal men, whilst denigrating women as the great manipulators, to ends we can only guess at.
  • Arguments for why an afterlife would be hidden?
    ↪TiredThinker
    Every tale demands a suspension of disbelief; every game requires an acceptance of made up rules. every mathematical construction begins with axioms. Whether the universe is an educational toy or mere entertainment for us eternal beings, it naturally works best on its own terms without prior and post knowledge. For instance, if everyone knew in advance that virtue will be infallibly rewarded and vice punished in the afterlife, then it would be mere common self-centred sense to act virtuously and avoid vices, and thus no sign of virtue at all. Likewise, an exam where the answers are provided with the questions provides no measure of students' attainment, but becomes a copying exercise.
  • Do you wish you never existed?
    Do you wish you never existed? — Truth Seeker

    I never did exist. Or perhaps my wish was granted.
  • Deep Songs
  • Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?



  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    There's not going to be martial law — RogueAI

    Well not today, but once those invasion plans are firmed up for Panama, who knows ...?

  • Deep Songs
  • Is the number pi beyond our grasp?
    Can it be that it it is the concept of "beyond our grasp" that is beyond our grasp?
    (My old friend Ludvic suggested this to me.)
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    -
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    I'm sure you agree that 15 year olds stabbing each other with machetes is degenerate? — Tzeentch

    Of course I do; I'm an old hippie, but sometimes it's the other way about, and the orthodoxy is violent and the rebellion is peaceful. My point is that my attitude, which aligns with yours in this matter, was considered degenerate by the previous generation. These things are values by which we judge others. As far as I can see, you are defending your values, which is fine, but then you accuse those who attempt to make a balanced analysis of such values of, in effect also being degenerate. That's not so ok.

    It's like you know, as none of us other contributors do, what 'masculine' human nature is beyond social and cultural influence, and everyone who disagrees is wrong and degenerate. No doubt you also then know, as I certainly don't, those circumstances if any, when violence is justified and virtuous.
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    The promotion of senseless violence is a problem very particular to certain scenes - gangster culture and football hooliganism, for example. Both have been glorified by pop culture, even though the vast majority of society recognizes these scenes as degenerate. — Tzeentch

    When I was young, the youth culture was all about flower power, giving peace a chance, peaceful protest against the Vietnam war, and nuclear weapons. And that was generally considered degenerate.
    Youth culture is always inclined to be rebellious and the old guard is always inclined to find it degenerate.
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    I also don't agree with that. I think there are public rejections of violence and aggression, which are seen as stereotypically masculine traits, but you do receive social sanctions if you don't behave enough like a man. If no one no longer needed or wanted, ie no longer enforced, the straitjacket of masculinity the expectation to behave that way would dissolve. — fdrake

    The new man of power and the new man of violence is a drone flying nerd; the hard drinking hard fighting Russian type real man cannot compete. When I say 'must change' I mean change or die. It is an evolutionary pressure if you like.

    Of course, 'after the collapse', that pressure may reverse.

    Men are going to be masculine no matter how hard society tries to mould them into something else. — Tzeentch

    Hard to disagree with that, barring mass castration. But also very easy to disagree with as soon as one considers the (surely purely social) division of gay men into 'butch' and 'fem'. Or even just the cliche of the hen-pecked husband.

    If we are talking about the spectrum of men, on almost every measure, there is a good deal of overlap with the spectrum of women, even to the extent that men can lactate and breastfeed. But we are not really talking about the reality of human diversity, but about the ideas and ideals that are prevalent and the identifications that are made and the social pressures to conform to this or that image of what a man versus a woman is or ought to be.
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    Also very much in agreement, yet what I miss in many discussions on this subject is exactly this two way street. We are right now in a time in which is not self evident how and with what man should identify. The general consensus on the left seems to be that man should change and that since they are the problem they should figure it out while the general consensus on the right should be that men should reassert their classical role as the 'head of the table' so to speak. On the one hand, masculinity is being unreasonably problematized, on the other hand it is being reinforced by certain political groups and social media. — Tobias

    Masculinity is problematised in a very different way in mainstream discourse than femininity is problematised. Masculinity's associated with violent crimes, sexual crimes, domestic abuse, posturing, financial risk, overwork, selfishness, lack of community spirit, emotional inflexibility and poor communication skills, and thus is a problem. Femininity's problematised as part of an oppressive system of norms that confines women's conduct and renders them less powerful and less capable of self expression, it is thus seen as posing problems to women. — fdrake

    "... that man should change ..." is a value. It is, in its total vagueness, the value of the left, having abandoned the class war because of the loss of the mass workplace. Although 'left and right' are terms of the ancien regime, and what predominates now is the second dimension of political leaning, between 'authoritarian and liberal' as here, for example. Left and right has become up and down, because the economy is becoming emancipated from human and political control.

    The myth of the very stable genius has replaced the myth of the lonesome cowboy. Not so much 'should', the facts are that man has changed because he must change. His masculinity is now cosmetic drug induced muscle that hides a complete lack of moral integrity. There is nothing behind the performance. He has indeed become the bicycle that every fish no longer needs or wants. Politics is insane because it no longer governs. It's the economy, stupid, follow the money; but the money out-runs us.

    Men are simply way too violent. It's still a huge problem. — RogueAI

    The solution to the violence of men has always been the hero as protector, one's very own violent man. More defence spending, more guns. It used to be that there was nothing more dangerous than a man with nothing left to lose; but now, or very soon, that man will be replaced by an AI drone, that cares naught if it loses everything and can hit you from the other side of the street.
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    There seems to be a muddle of terminology that is creating or at least facilitating disagreement and rancour.

    values Masculine Feminine — Tobias

    It starts here. Values have no sex. So we are talking about values and perhaps virtues and vices that have been traditionally ascribed to and associated with masculine and feminine identities.

    Then, the thesis is that these associations have been changing. The world has changed, for example, with the introduction of "the Equaliser". This charmingly lethal apparatus negates the physical advantage of strength in combat. No one can out-run a bullet, and even a delicate feminine finger can pull a trigger - hence the name. The facts of industry and technology have devalued masculine muscle.

    And this presents a problem to traditionally minded men and women, who Identify with and admire, physical power. The Russia-Ukraine war provides another example; courage means nothing when an infantryman confronts a drone. The drone is the Unequaliser — the drone operator risks nothing in relation to the infantryman.

    The problem is that traditional male virtues have lost their value. And the solution is either a luddite reversion to primitive preindustrial society or a change of identification, of what it is to be a man, and particularly a good man. And of course women are involved with this re-evaluation of all values, because 'man' and 'woman' are identities in relation to each other.
  • On eternal oblivion
    the sense of self persists in terms of "mine" and "yours". — javra

    And how does one know what is mine and yours, except through memory? Dementia becomes fatal when it extends to losing the function that controls breathing. "My lungs?" "My wife?" "My children?" "My home?" "My name?" Such are the identifications one can lose.
  • On eternal oblivion
    Consciousness genus seems to be one of the tricks the Universe performs, mine and yours (species) being examples. But I think it's the mineness and yoursness that having come, will soon enough go. — tim wood

    We are more or less of one mind about this. :joke:

    The way I usually think about it is that it is a question of Identity, or rather, of identification. If oneself is that blank emptiness that is aware of whatever it happens to be aware of, then perhaps there is no difference between one self and another, aside from the particulars that it happens to be aware of from time to time.

    What connects the child to the adult to the old man is memory, a narrative that can be recited, and that particular narrative cannot be repeated, because even if another life occurs that is exactly identical, it will not connect, and so will not continue the narrative that ended. No more than identical twins are the same person.

    Actually, because of my rather materialistic worldview, it’s even more bothersome to me that eternal oblivion seems unlikely, as I wrote above. — Zebeden

    I wonder if you find such considerations reassuring or not?
  • I found an article that neatly describes my problem with libertarian free will
    You haven't engaged with the reasoning presented in the article. — flannel jesus

    That's true. I have presented another position, with other reasoning.

    In short, I agree that 'free-will' is incoherent; that is the extent of my engagement. I then propose that 'freedom' is not incoherent.
  • I found an article that neatly describes my problem with libertarian free will
    In this post I will argue that libertarianism cannot actually explain or make rational why an agent chooses one course of action over another. — George Wrisley

    I used to always have tea at breakfast, but I have changed my habit and nowadays I always have coffee. Not being able to explain such things is integral to the freedom one has.I changed my mind. And that, I would suggest, is a freedom that one always has, but does not always exercise.

    But I would say that it is not by an act of will that one exercises one's freedom, that is rather a contradiction, 'will' being a determining factor in the sense that to be strong willed is to be determined.

    Can anyone else change their mind, or are you all determined to be determined? A determined mind is a programmed mind, and freedom is what allows the mind to be responsive. To a determinist, the mind is a mere epiphenomenon, because it has no known cause or effect.
  • Climate change denial
    This is somewhat off topic, because it doesn't deny fossil fuel effects, but merely ignores them. But we all love Milankovitch Cycles don't we?

  • Kicking and Dreaming
    sleep paralysis. I've suffered this experience and it is terrifying.
    — Christoffer

    Wow, it certainly sounds like it.     — J

    I was going to mention this too. My experience of sleep paralysis is that one can learn to recognise it, and to struggle less and just wait for awareness to grow and the paralysis to wear off. And this relates also to my experience of learning to stop bed-wetting, which involved, in my experience, learning that a dream of urination should be 'a wake-up call'. Once the alarm is set, the problem is solved.

    All of which seems to me to favour explanation 1, but also suggests that wakefulness and sleep are not a dichotomy in the first place, but rather related, graded and complex conditions.

    I can add to the phenomenology an occasional grand-mal epileptic fit, which begins with a sort of shaking or palsy noticeable in hands or eyes and the jaw, that precedes a total loss of consciousness during the fit proper, followed by a confused state that one does not remember in which one might try to get up and wander but with no memory thereof. The return of awareness is gradual and memory is absent and then vague and patchy for several hours.

    This makes clear that wakefulness in the normal condition involves voluntary muscle control, presence to sensory information including proprioception, but also crucially, the activity of memory, all integrated to produce a continuing narrative of experiential flow. Whatever I do not remember in some way, hasn't happened for me, whether it be dream or reality.

    ↪Christoffer
    That picture is so evocative!
  • Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?
    Chat GPT lays it out for you.

  • What are you listening to right now?
    Can blue men sing the whites, or are they hypocrites for singing...

  • Depression and 'Doom and Gloom' Thinking vs Positivity: What is 'Self-fulfilling Prophesy' in Life?
    Dreams can be realised iff 1, they are realistic, and 2, they are enacted. On the one hand one cannot make fantasies real by the power of thought, and on the other the most detailed and well constructed plans still require materials and builders to bring them to fruition.

    A self fulfilling prophesy is not the same as a good prediction. A prophesy can act to produce the future it predicts, as in the old joke:-
    "I know what you're going to say next."
    Reveal
    "What?"


    This is a trick one can play on oneself, or on others, but it is no more magical than an advertisement. People are influenced, and those who believe they are not, the more so. But when the next eclipse is predicted, it is not influenced by the prediction, the prediction is calculated from past observations, and orbits are stable.
  • 'This Moment is Medieval'...
    There is no final victory, as there is no final defeat. There is just the same battle. To be fought, over and over again. So toughen up, bloody toughen up. — Tony Benn
  • Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?
    Here is a surprising novelty, only 100,000,000 years old.

  • What is faith
    I am faithful to my wife.
    there is a story from i know not whence. A bridge across a chasm; you might look at the bridge and wonder if it will support you or not, and you might believe or not that it will support you. But faith is when you trust your weight to it and start to cross. Faith is putting your money or your life where your mouth is, or possibly where someone else's mouth is

    1.Faith is an act, a decision, a commitment.

    2, 3, 4, 5, 6, - I don't know

    I don't know if love is God, but I will act as if it is so.
  • Climate change denial
    How many climate scientists are as qualified as Professor Michael Kelly? — Agree-to-Disagree

    I think almost any climate scientist would be more qualified to speak on climate science than Kelly. If you need a plumber, don't consult an electrician, or a plasterer.
  • Climate change denial
    Here is a really good argument. Climate science is wrong because we cannot stop it.
    — unenlightened

    Sometimes I wonder what your comprehension level is. As usual you have totally misrepresented this video.

    The person talking in this video is Michael Kelly, professor emeritus of technology at the University of Cambridge. Kelly was a government scientist when the Climate Change Act launched in 2008, and has been researching the reduction of carbon in Britain since then.

    Nowhere in the entire video does he say that climate science is wrong.

    He talks about how we don't have the money, the workforce, or the materials, to achieve Net Zero.

    Why don't you watch the video before jumping to incorrect conclusions?     — Agree-to-Disagree

    Ah, happy days are here again!

    Everything he says about the lack of a realistic plan and the vast expense that government commitments imply is pretty much true. Those commitments are not going to be met. I knew you'd like it!

    But several times, in passing, he claims without giving any detail or evidence that climate models are unreliable, and are overestimating the disruption and rate of change. Thus he solves the insoluble problem by denying its existence, and implying as you always do, that climate scientists are pretending in order to further their careers. This is done of course to further his own career - because no one ever wants to hear unalloyed bad news. :cool:

    Why do you imagine I post videos I haven't watched? Or that I haven't somewhat comprehended?


    Here is the evidence that I posted in a separate post to support my statements. It is from a scientific source. — Agree-to-Disagree

    I have already explained that global temperature and sea level rise are lagging indicators to atmospheric CO2 levels, because CO2 acts as an insulator not a direct heat source. The rapid increase in CO2 levels due to fossil fuel burning is only now beginning to have an effect. the radiative balance of the Earth has changed and the planet surface will continue to warm until a new balance is achieved. meanwhile, as we begin to overheat, we continue to add another duvet or two.
  • The News Discussion
    This is a partizan channel. And here is a Canadian politician talking to anyone who cares to listen, and at the end directly to the US government. Words are not being minced, and economies of truth are not being made.

Home » unenlightened