Basman

Pink huh... To be honest, I think its a hard sell unless you are going for a silly, unserious look. You could make it work by wearing a matching shirt or accessories. Pink sunglasses for example. Wear rolled up jeans then you'll really get that casual summer vibe.

The democrats losing this election to me is simply SD Stage Green running its course and failing to actualize on its idealism politically, fundamentally due to not understanding human nature and antagonizing the lower stages. There seems to be a general consensus that democrats need to self-evaluate. Hopefully it'll lead to more Yellow. That is a silver lining.

I practice art and I have a similar experience looking my feed. A lot of very talented artists and amazing art. It makes me feel jealous and insecure but then I look at a non-curated feed (like Deviantart) and most of its garbage, no offense. Social media promotes the cream of the crop due how engagement shape the digital landscape, so the most amazing, beautiful, sexiest, funniest type shit floats to the top. 80% of the content on social media is not worth looking at. Popular posters tend to curate what they post based on what gets them engagement which leads to their content to becoming manufactured to a certain degree in order to cater to their audience. Its a feedback loop, meaning its often not 100% authentic. Its literally for show. There are some people who live amazing lives but then again you only see the highlights. They 100% guaranteed have their own issues in between photo shoots. That Instagram model is a glorified prostitute for rich Saudi-Arabian men. The simple solution is to consume less social media. Its bad for you mental health any way, as much as I hate that word.

Abortion does "kill" a gestating life objectively. The word "murder" however is quiet strong. I don't think everyone will feel that aborting/killing a fetus is equivalent to killing an adult human. Though "murder" tends to refer to a civil context. Killing combatants during war is not considered murder colloquially for example. We don't consider killing someone in self-defense murder either unless we think it was unjustified. "Murder" implies that the act was unjustified, malicious or callous which is probably why pro-lifers like to call abortion murder. They want to frame it as unjustified and employ charged language to that end. I can agree that abortion is form of killing but I think calling it murder is a gross exaggeration. If you consider abortion murder, what about eating meat? A mature pig is more of a life than a tiny fetus. Or what about microbes? Don't they have equal right to protection as living organisms? Pro-lifers tend to be selective with their definitions and examples to argue for an inherently ideological/emotional position.

You should go to uni if it helps you accomplish your goals. Career goals are the best justification in my opinion, especially if it costs money to go. If you don't need the degree strictly speaking, then consider alternatives first. Most info is already available for free with the internet.

I've heard that some girls get turned on by rape fantasies after having been raped in real life. My impression is that in that context they are trying to make the unwanted wanted psychologically. A kind of cope, but it could be multiple things at once, like the surrender thing, etc. I also heard some girls deliberately go out to bait men into raping them. This seems to me a kind of self-harm and again, a fantasy/desire born from an actual rape experience. I don't know how real that it is but it wouldn't surprise me if there are some women like that.

It doesn't matter so much if they are in a bad faith position. If you want a high quality discussion you take responsibility to argue in a way that is intellectually honest. Your not going to convince people who are set in their ways but you can set the record straight. But right now I don't see them being overly indignant. OP did correct himself quickly. But its clear you don't actually care about any of that and you just want to argue in circles till you get blue in the face. Enjoy your drama.

Just say bigotry then. I would advise that you be open minded to the criticism however in a good faith sort of way. You just end up talking over people and not actually engaging with the subject if you have a bad faith attitude from the start. Its essentially just deflection of the discussion as a whole at that point.

This is a reductive point. You can reduce anything to simply being about identity. Why not commit suicide? your just surviving your identity anyway...

What are some resources for learning game besides Leo's videos?

Congratulations! What I like about kickboxing is that its way more direct and grounded as a martial art in terms of it being actually useful in combat. Very little of the fluff you get in traditional martial arts, like bowing when entering "the dojo". There aren't that many moves in total to learn. You just get to practice what there is a lot.

In an aging population, retirees are going to politically dominate as the majority voting population. Now, everyone votes for their own interest but its problematic when you have a voting majority that are incentivized to think short-term due to dying soon. They have an incentive to sell out the younger working population to fund their pensions and elder services while a minority of working people have to fund all of this. In Spain, something like 20% of ones income goes directly to pay off the pension of a granny. Its unsustainable and unfair. Young people are then priced even further out of having children, exacerbating the issue. In Denmark, they reduced the total amount of years that you receive government grants for studying from 6 years to 5 to fund programs for pensionists. Literally selling out the future. A massive amount of old people voted to leave the EU during Brexit, many of which then died during Covid. When you don't contribute to society meaningfully and you are proven to hold incentives that are actively detrimental to the long-term prosperity of society, your right to political influence should be reigned in accordingly. Boomers go bust! PS: If I start raving about "the good old days" in the future and start advocating for far-right politics using bogus propaganda as basis, you have full permission to hunt me down and euthanize me (preferably painless if possible).

We already bar legal minors from voting. Many countries ban convicted criminals from voting. If justified, we can limit the voting power of anyone. We don't live in a direct democracy nor is it egalitarian in the strict sense. What if pensioners get half a vote if they start becoming the majority of a population? That's reasonable considering.

They worked for themselves and their families, most of them at least. Living long doesn't give you license to hoard wealth and influence. Pensionist should at least have less of say of how a country should prioritize their resources if they form a political majority. They'll run a country into the ground with not a care in the world. People who voted to leave the EU where over twice as likely to be over the age of 65. They don't have the suffer the brunt of the consequences of their actions because they don't have to live that long.

Stage Green group-think is one of its worst aspects of Stage Green and a major reason why Green tends to make things worse politically in my opinion. The left does tend to have better policy in practice but Stage Green alienate people with their uncompromising idealism and ignorance of human nature, making the left lose voters.

Its funny because "adulthood" is steadily being delayed more and more with time. You used to be a fully fledged adult at 16. Now your early 20s is just teenager: the sequel. You are going to need some citation to make your brain claims though. How did you even arrive at those conclusions? In my opinion, social media is quiet bad for children, if only because how it effects their self-esteem and concentration skills. The loneliness epidemic is in part simply because we are better at registering mental illness today making it appear as if there is an increase comparatively due to a lack of accurate data of the past, but social media does feed into it in my opinion. Loneliness is essentially the feeling that you are missing out and social media is very good at making people feel that way.

I think this analogy could help explain the supposedly high homicide rate during the Stone Ages (something like 10-20% of deaths). Hunter-gatherers would live in relative scarcity with little to no control over the resources they needed. Taking from others in a zero-sum kind of way would be extremely effective (plus no moral constructs around the killing of non-tribes members). Could also explain rape and pillage throughout the ages. Way easier than growing crops.

I find the act of reading to be a chore a lot of the time but I make myself read books as it is a prime predictors of success. There's a lot of information there you just don't get from watching videos or listening to podcasts, both in terms of depth and your mind grasping the ideas. Most info I've read I soon forget again but I'm usually left with a couple of actionable concepts. Those are the ones that end up shaping my behavior and changing my world view. Contemplation is key for retaining info in my experience. I like to also write down the essence of the concepts in my commonplace book so I can review them at any time. Reading a book multiple times also helps with retention and depth of understanding. 2-3 a year maybe. It varies a bit. I tend to put off reading for long periods of time to then feel guilty about not reading. It is usually only a couple of concepts that end up shaping my life. Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari has been pretty instrumental in my understanding and contemplation of human nature (worldview). Models by Mark Manson has helped shape how I understand dating from a logistical perspective and also changed how I dress for the better. Ikigai by Hector Garcia and Grancesc Miralles taught my to only eat 80% and that fullness tends to be a delayed sensation. A little bit of this, little bit of that. Yes but you need to read the stuff you think is worthwhile to learn. I rarely read for fun, I read because I think it'll make my life better. Its quality over quantity because you have to work with the material beyond just reading it for it to really penetrate your mind. Boring and poorly written books (*cough Jordan Peterson) do that for me more than anything else. Its about retention and integration of key concepts at the end of day. Its not just finding nuggets of gold but processing it. Reading is merely an avenue for that (sifting). Typically I only remember one or two concepts, so the question is if reading an entire book for those two nuggets was worth it? It depends on how valuable you think does concepts are, but then again you could reread the book and retain even more information. You have to pick the best books relative to what you want to learn.

Man, I really wish you would start spacing your writing. Regardless, I live in a progressive town and most public toilets here are gender neutral, simply labeled as "toilet". Honestly, I think the main draw of gender neutral toilets is that architects only have to focus one creating one set of cubicles instead of planning around the gender divide. Just one room with toilets. Cost cutting in the name of inclusivity. In practice, you lose urinals for men (most GN toilets don't have those) and women probably feel less comfortable sharing toilet space with men. The restroom is like a roosting nest for women and I personally feel a like I catch them in a slightly vulnerable spot whenever I bump into them in the GN toilets. You could design GN toilets as a row of separate rooms, each with their own hand wash and mirror, with no shared toilet space (so its more like a hall). Then you largely avoid the aforementioned friction (though still no urinals unless you count the sink). An alternative to GN toilets would be to just rebrand the handicap toilet. Here's my breakdown: GN toilets can be aight but I don't think its appropriate in all contexts. Men and women have different needs and we shouldn't ignore those for the sake of inclusivity. Gendered toilet rooms in night clubs for example should definitely be gendered for the sake of women's comfort. And I want my urinals back, dammit. Its not oppressive to trans people for them to meet society in the middle. Excessively demanding people to conform to a tiny minority that most people don't even see on the streets will lead to resentment and alienation of people who otherwise would be supportive of you. The hyperbole and charged language of the trans community makes people see them as crazy and unreasonable, like how "feminism" became associated with man hating witches. Those already exist, minus the genitalia stuff. They are called bathroom attendants.

If you recognize it as barbaric why do you present it as aspirational?

What a load... We live better lives now because we don't chuck kids into water. If you want to teach a child something, just teach them. Abuse only teaches children fear. Its obvious and stupid.

Its crazy how Leo has done a complete 180 on this topic. He was the premier AI bro just a year ago.

Here's a fun little moral quandary I encountered recently to chew on. Are child sex dolls immoral. These are about a meter tall sex doll that can appear relatively life like like, some have features like realistic fake skin than can be warmed by internal electronics and voice modules. Most of you are already like "hell no", but I can't see there directly being an ethical issue inherently with the concept despite how creepy and deeply taboo it is. For one, who's getting hurt her? That is as far as I can see the crux of the issue and people arguing against will justify their attitude by arguing that it does cause harm. Arguments like it normalizes pedophilia (appeal to normativity), various slippery slope arguments. On the hand, arguing for child sex dolls hinges on it not being harmful or potentially preventing harm. There is however a lack of data to support either side empirically so this debate comes down to ones attitude (doesn't stop governments from banning these dolls). Honestly, I think the majority of outrage is cultural. Consider than in many medieval and ancient pedophilia wasn't viewed negatively and there didn't existed the distinction between minor and adult like it does today (which arguably doesn't coincide with biology when you consider how common the term "teen is in porn searches). Not making a moral argument here but pointing out cultural bias. At the end of the day its just a doll, right? These creeps are as a good as dead to gene pool anyway so who cares?

Its a fine analogy but I really hate this idea of chucking kids into the water. Like, just teach them. Why you gotta turn their childhood into a liberal bootstrap delusion.