SwiftQuill

Link: https://survey.ucalgary.ca/jfe/form/SV_0DHbQPy5Vr0TAlE My results: Highs: High humility and fairness, expected. Very high emotionality, fearfulness, anxiety, neuroticism, wouldn't expect any lower. Very high flexibility (cooperativeness), also expected as I'm kind of a people pleaser and often bend over backwards for others. High conscientiousness, with focus on prudence (avoidance of impulsive decision making), expected. I'm very risk averse and like to plan things carefully. High openness, aesthetic appreciation, creativity, as expected because my Life Purpose involves producing art. High altruism, I have donated to charity a lot in the past and I enjoy being generous. Lows: Autistic level low on extraversion, gee who would expect I'm the kind of guy who hates clubbing and loud noises and partying. Almost dead in terms of liveliness, this is a mix of introversion and my neuroticism, I often feel paralyzed with stress and I lack energy. Low agreeableness, I actually expected to be higher but eh, my old age has indeed made me impatient and resentful of people. Low organization, yeah I mean it's not really transversal. My bedroom is a mess, so is my laptop, so are my emails, and my car, and my physical documents... I'm messy. Weird? Low inquisitiveness? I mean I've studied philosophy, psychology, I have degrees in IT, in Business Management, I'm the type of person who reads the dictionary for fun. And I watch documentaries and stuff like that. I'm surprised I didn't score high here. High unconventionality? No clue what this metric even measures. Moderate diligence? I'm actually very, very hard working. I expected this one to be one of the highest metrics. I'm borderline workaholic. Low gentleness? I'm actually a lot more gentle than people think. I don't mistreat others, I'm not harsh with anyone. I may be low on agreeableness but I would think I'm high on gentleness.

Now I'm aware most of you dismiss Jordan Peterson as a stage blue right wing grifter, "the king of incels". I won't entertain such low IQ comments here. Let me tell you about the time I saw JP live in 2023. At the end of the presentation he said this (paraphrasing): "The most important aspect of personal development is faith. Even if you are an atheist, faith remains essential. Every sacrifice you make in life, every long-term plan, is fundamentally an act of faith. You can never predict the outcome of your sacrifices with certainty. Even with statistics and studies, you cannot guarantee that a college degree will pay off, that a business idea will succeed, or that the major sacrifices you make will lead to the desired results. These decisions are rooted in faith, not in scientific certainty. Faith is what empowers you to endure hardship and to persevere, even when there is no clear evidence that you will succeed." This lesson isn't obvious. It seems obvious but it isn't. It surely wasn't obvious to me. For a long time I held a Buddhist perspective of things. I used to think faith = expectation = attachment = suffering. But that perspective doesn't empower you. I noticed the areas in my life where I succeeded the most (finances and LP) were the ones I had most faith in. Conversely, in dating, I always had very little faith, and that's the area I struggle with the most. The correlation between faith and success in a domain in life, to me is incredible. It changed my attitude in life, and it gave me an inner locus of control when I started having more faith. Faith is one of those concepts that can seem like a cliché. Something everyone knows but few truly understand. There's a difference between intellectually recognizing the importance of faith and genuinely absorbing and embodying it. If you find yourself rolling your eyes, dismissing it as obvious, that's a sign you may not fully grasp its significance. I encourage you to reflect on the areas of your life where you lack faith. What would change if you truly believed in your ability to succeed there?

@Jacob Morres I'm done debating this topic. Call me privileged and all of that, I don't care. I've been told many times I'm privileged so this is nothing new. I'm not going to debate DEI any further. And frankly I'm going to avoid this politics forum from now on. People have 0 interested in addressing my points and prefer lecturing me about privilege and ignore all of my valid points.

1. I never denied the existence of racism. Just because I have pointed out flaws and biases in woke studies and I'm against DEI, it doesn't mean I reject the existence of racism. I would really appreciate if people stopped making this accusation. 2. I never said "white men are oppressed". I said this woke religion divides people between oppressed and privileged in too simplistic of a manner. I will not pretend all white mens lives are easy because there are problems. Each demographic group has it's own problems. And not everything is about demographic. You can be white male and have shit life. Individual struggles also exist. 3. I will never apologize for being white. Racism, slavery, history, I don't give a fuck. I'm not racist and I don't mistreat anyone for their race. If me not bending over backwards to assume "responsibility" for racism, if that means I'm "fragile", so be it. 4. All of this dog piling because DEI. I've stated my politics many times and people are aware I'm not right wing. Just because I dare to disagree with a few points here and there on this forum, everyone freaks out and starts lecturing me. 5. Go tell a male McDonalds worker he's privileged. If you are all so "empathetic" as you think you are, do it. See if that feels right. Point a finger at him, and tell him he's privileged and that his race has caused slavery.

@Jacob Morres also [removed] for misrepresenting and ridiculing me. You clearly had no interest in an actual discussion with me or in understanding my position.

@Leo Gura then WHY THE FUCK IS IT WHITE FRAGILITY

Maybe I should prepare a woke fragility lecture to educate the public to walk on eggshells and avoid offending the Wokies.

@Leo Gura yes because obviously only white people are racist. Asians? Nah. Black people in Africa? Nah. Obviously it's only those with a light skin tone who inherited the racism genes.

@Jacob Morres my opinion leans on empirical observation which is infinitely better than abstract reading of woke papers. I'm not debating this topic any further.

My biggest enemies in life are woke psychologists, woke sociologists, critical race theorists, woke anthropologists, and woke feminist scholars. These far left activists have invaded universities in the 70's and since then they've been pushing their Marxist religion and poisoning science and academic institutions. They are the most hypocritical, delusional, radical people out there. And their pseudoscience has been so normalized that normal people think there's no difference in rigor between a paper in economics and a paper in feminist religion. I actually make an effort to no longer engage with their intellectual rot. These are Marxist radicals who do nothing all day but read other papers written by other Marxist radicals. They don't understand how normal life works. They don't understand how you can send 1000 cvs and still receive 0 responses. They don't understand the various asymmetries that exist not only in the job market but in society in general. To them, any assymetry is causing by the white patriarchy. They have a delusional concept of what it means to be white, male, and straight. I've been told many times that since I no longer debate this topic, it's because "I'm afraid of facing the truth". Because after a horse has been beaten to death I no longer feel the need to continue. Those hyper intellectuals at Harvard, they wouldn't last a month living as the average white male. They would have an existential crisis if they were ever unemployed or broke. And honestly I wish if God existed, God would put those bastards in these harsh uncomfortable positions. I wish those woke retards would reincarnate in a next life, as a minimum wage McDonald's worker. And gaslit by woke scholars about their supposed "cis white male privilege". Maybe then they would understand why so many people like myself hate wokeness and most of the modern left. They would become so blackpilled they would realize the harshness of life and see the amount of religious bullshit those so called "scientific studies" contain. Nothing angers me more than hypocritical self righteousness. I'd rather have a con artist steal me 1000€ than go to a "white fragility" lecture. It would be less painful because at least the con artist has 0 morals, and so there's no hypocrisy. And also the con artist doesn't gaslight me. He just cheats to get my money. So for anyone reading this thread I suggest you don't bother asking me questions about DEI and scientific wokeness because it's a topic people bring up a lot and I am frankly tired of it. I'm not interested in debates on this topic. Call me right wing, straw man me, tell me I'm privileged, I don't care. I won't entertain this topic any further.

I'm not going to debate the stupidity and bias those woke studies contain. It's not worth wasting time with woke pseudoscience. The same people who produce studies about the evil and privileged white males are the same ones who say trans women don't have an advantage in women's sports. And let's conveniently ignore the anti male bias that exists in various industries like education, HR, the fashion industry. Let's ignore that certain industries and certain college degrees have more female applicants than males. 80% of people in HR are female: "its just women like hr more than men" 90% of people in IT are male: "OMFG IT'S THE PATRIARCHY" It reminds me of studies in the past on middle school and high school education. 80% of top students are male: "OMG PATRIARCHY" Today, female students outperform males. 80% of top students are female: "This proves my high IQ PhD paper in feminist Wokeology that women are more disciplined than men, more inquisitive than men, more conscientious.. etc women are better than men" Again and again and again I've seen and read these bullshit studies. Regardless of what the data is, it's always massaged to fit the woke scholars agendas. Same with the bullshit wage gap studies that say "women on average earn 20% less than men". You might as well say "on average a human being has 1 testicle and 1 boob". This is why people accuse me of being an anti intellectual. Because I'm a critical thinker and I don't dogmatically accept the headlines of those bullshit studies. I've done research myself and I've found when we take more factors into account, the gap isn't nearly as big as Harvard's Wokeology department says it is. Now, am I saying society is 100% fair? No of course not. I'm sure the wage gap exists. I'm sure there is discrimination against ethnic minorities. But I've yet to see good quality research on that topic. It's all full of bullshit woke double standards. People don't understand maybe females just don't enjoy the field of IT as much as males do. Because there are natural assume tries in life. You can't expect a perfect 50/50 make to female ratio. Or straight to gay ratio. Or white to black ratio. People say "if our country has 90% whites and 10% blacks, that's the precise ratio we expect in any company". No, that's full of woke assumptions. First off there simply aren't enough applicants for each job ad out there. Certain industries don't have as many females or blacks. If the job ad is there but the company receives 99% of CV's from white males, there's that. "But that's because patriarchy so we need to push our ideology even further". What Wokies want is a really freaky apartheid type scenario. They want job ads that select for race, gender, and sexuality. They want college vacancies selected for race, gender, and sexuality. They want all of that from work, job positions, all the way down to preschool divisions. The reason for this is because they reject natural assume tries exist. My country has a lot of indians for instance. But most of them start their own business (usually grocery shop). Most of them don't even send cvs to any company out there. But you PhD in bullshit wokeness college professor, the one who wrote the book "I hate white males" the one the bald man here loves because she gives lectures in "white fragility" she will pull up 4000 studies telling me that those poor indians are oppressed. Wokies don't understand that society does have a few asymmetries here and there. I think what's important is to give people opportunities. And if they don't take those opportunity it's on them. Also let's ignore that when I go to many stores with chill jobs like cashier at perfume store or clothes store or Lego store, 90% of the time it's a young woman working there. Yes I know it's controversial to say but fuck it. Women do have clearly an advantage for certain job positions. But why aren't you freaking out about men taking high risk jobs? Why aren't Wokies freaking out most suicides are committed by men? Because any problem in a white man's life is assumed to be his fault and 0 serious attention is taken to it. Why is it 90% of people who work in coal mines, garbage trucks, sewers, those shit jobs, why aren't there studies exploring why men are pushed to such harsh and degrading positions? For certain topics in life, strangely enough there's 0 data, 0 studies. But what there is is infinite mental gymnastics by people who abuse statistics to push their religion. I know statistics. I'm highly educated on research, data, and statistics. And from your favorite Wokeology department I see a shit ton of fallacies. The data is carefully selected, committed and analyzed to serve their agenda. People tell me I'm an ant intellectual because I reject such studies. And then they reverse the burden of proof, and as ME to give them studies. You seriously think I'm going to pour hours into a rigorous research paper only for idiots online to not even read it? Not to mention the constant genetic fallacies that because I'm a data scientist and not a feminist scholar or critical race theory scholar, because my analysis is less valid. I used to be more "open minded" in those sense I would perform mental gymnastics to try see it from the other person's point of view. All the while ignoring the blatant bias in the methodology and conclusion sections of such woke studies. I'm not interested in debating the topic of DEI any further. It's a waste of time.

Afghanistan is Hell on earth. This video isn't explicit, but I found it highly disturbing when I watched it. It's so disturbing it's surreal. Their cognitive development is shockingly low. I've seen videos and documentaries of other third world countries but really Afghanistan takes the cake. There's a scene near the end of the documentary where the leader of the Taliban says "The problem of this country is that it is still too liberal. I will make sure we bring back the roots of the Koran into our society." A country where if you steal an apple they chop off your hands? A country where women have the same rights as cattle? "Too liberal"? Fuck...

And no, Bernie Sanders isn't woke. When people like myself use woke as a pejorative, they don't mean people like Bernie Sanders. As someone who engages in antiwoke circles, trust me no one considers people like Sanders to be woke. I've seen many videos of him speaking about politics and he comes across as a healthy, intelligent progressive. And when he says he's "socialist" he doesn't mean old school socialism. He talks about a social safety net, like in Scandinavian countries type of "socialism".

Good summary.

Woke mental gymnastics. Fallacious reasoning, hypocritical reasoning, ignores asymmetries in other industries (like how women dominate ok psychology or the beauty industry), ignores all the points I made, anti-meriticratic, misuse of statistics. Seen these same arguments hundreds of times before and refuted all of them many times. White men privileged. White men have easy life. Everyone else victim. Double standards everywhere.

@Joshe that's why I make a distinction between cultural Left (wokeness) and political Left (progressive, liberal, socialist, etc). And my issue isn't with the 5% loud sjw activists. It's with the 50% of people who think like Pakman, sound "normal", but still promote really bad ideas and a culture of censorship, self censorship, virtue signaling, radical feminist misandry, and a hyper politicized perspective on everything in society. Even things that shouldn't be political like videogames or Hollywood movies.

@Nemra I've made myself clear on why DEI is unfair and why it harms what little meritocracy there is under current capitalism. One needs to be deeply brainwashed by the likes of Seder or Pakman or Harvard's Wokeology department in order to believe DEI constitutes fairness. Are there problems in the system? Fix it. And let's stop with the zero sum thinking type solutions. Big corporations have been reaching record high on profits in the past few years, and people cry "whaaaa that white (low income) man has it too easy I want to make my life easier by making his harder" this is preposterous. Sometimes I do wonder if this is a Psyop. They be like "hey if we paint our logo rainbow colors and hire a few blacks, cheap immigrants, and women, they will believe society is becoming "progressive" and people will fall for it.

Anyone who tells me I'm "privileged" because I dare to have been born white and male can fuck off. I've spent 5 years, 5 years unemployed, sending thousands of CV's both in person and online. Very late in life did I finally get a job out of sheer luck. In this incredibly harsh job market, you think it's fair to reduce the chances of guys like me to get a job? Just to fill some HR quota? You want to reduce the number of jobs I can access, make shit even more difficult and competitive? Complete bullshit. The job market already lacks meritocracy as is. We don't need to make it even more competitive and unfair. That zero sum attitude of "we need to hire fewer white men and more black women" isn't just retarded, it's immoral. Of all the L's in the woke religion, DEI and Affirmative Action is the biggest L of them all. If the system is broken, do something to fix it. Don't make it even more broken and unfair.

@something_else https://www.resumebuilder.com/1-in-6-hiring-managers-have-been-told-to-stop-hiring-white-men/

They don't care if it's Illegal they do it anyways. I've seen videos of woke CEOs bragging they refuse to hire males or whites. They're still up on YouTube. And LinkedIn.

@Apparition of Jack it's been a few months since I checked these. But as a former member of r/late stage capitalism (and Vaush viewer) I did notice a strong shift away from the topic of middle class. I remember scrolling down on reddit, looking for my anticapitalist copium, only to not find it. Very Blackpill moment :c I miss when that subreddit was good.

@Nemra by DEI in modern entertainment I wasn't referring to DEI hiring policies. I was referring to poorly written characters who serve as "diversity" at the expensive of the quality of the world building or story writing. But you seriously come to me, and ask me if implementing "white men need not apply", as a policy in the current job market - which is already super competitive - is a legitimate form of meritocracy? I find it beyond abhorrent. One's moral compass must be really broken to accept such a policy. Brainwashed.