As a rule, I don’t get into personal arguments online. It is an exercise in futility, no one is ever truly going to change their opinion due to a forum post, ad hominem attacks are lazy and unproductive in person, much less when talking with strangers on a screen.
But every rule has its exceptions. You’re a total dick.
Hahahah now I’m a total dick.
Hilarious. I get shit thrown at me this entire time, but now I AM THE DICK for the one time I get truly personal..
Brilliance. This thread has reached new heights. Let’s keep it coming! How high can we go fellas?
Point of order, people not agreeing with you and asking you to explain your position in a way that makes sense is not “throwing shit”. You’re like the guy that drives drunk and then complains about the legal costs of a DUI. “Woe is me, the victim.”
Even your lamentation:
shows me that you haven’t even considered the fact that your behaviour effects how others treat you. It’s like you’re not thinking of others at all, only your position and any perceived injury to you. That is a feature of either:
Youthful exuberance and immaturity. Teenagers have debates in this manner and play the “not fair” card when anyone expresses frustration or fails to yield a position.
True DSM level narcissism.
Being on the spectrum
You’ve not supported any of your assertions with evidence and you’ve gotten childishly angry and dismissive when people don’t agree with your assertions.
Someone has an acute victim complex.
Right, I should have elaborated on where I was coming from rather than just butting in and saying a solution to all the ills resulting from the sexual revolution up til the current day would be arranged marriages. But… it would be just one practice that can get things on track again today. And no, a high divorce rate, a high rate of involuntary celibacy, unrestrained hypergamy, single-parent households, and unmarried single moms raising kids–none of these are signs of healthy coming generations or a healthy society with a satisfactory birthrate.
As said, unrestrained hypergamy, along with many women trying to get into men’s spaces, female depravity, and no responsibility taken by many women for their poor choices in men.
Some around here have pointed out my authoritarian outlook on a variety of topics. But maybe… just maybe… there’s a reason why this outlook developed, right? Does that sound reasonable to you?
I came from an area in an era in which it seemed the majority of fathers had absolutely no authority of households and were completely blind to the perverted and deviant boys that made their way into their homes and not only “dated”, but abused their daughters. But you know, that’s because around the time of the sexual revolution, the “authoritarian mind” was deemed pathological and men were told they should be more broad-minded and that if they guided their daughters in the right direction and that if a community pressured them to get married to decent men young, the women would rebel! We can only see this is false by observing communities that exert such pressure and have some standards that rebellion is actually uncommon.
I digress though. Let’s get back to why I see things as they do. Perhaps those in here have observed debased activities, as I have. But let’s go over some examples.
Have you seen a videotape of a fourteen-year old girl being statutory-raped by a seventeen year old, both of whom you know? Oh, by the way, the tape was watched by several teenage boys, including the male aggressor. Wanna know who taped it? The aggressor’s twelve-year-old brother, by placing the camera in an opening to the attic in the corner of the room.
Ever been in a supervision-free home in which a fourteen year old girl is being passed around for oral sex in various rooms by boys ranging in age from fifteen to eighteen, with drugs use in action too You know, the sort of scenario one might see in those urban films such as Kids?
What about sleeping over another high-school or college-aged guy’s house in the living room and hearing him beat and verbally abuse a young woman?
What about a young man pimping out a whorish girl? I’m not talking about a street walker.
What about boys aged twelve to fourteen already thinking of ways to seduce and debase girls of the same age?
Oh, and to think of the doofus, dim-witted, and dizzy dads who I met while such boys entered their own homes!
Who do I blame for all this? The adult establishment, primarily men!
And by the way, I was the white knight who put an end to some of the debauchery described above! I scolded the a girl and said never to go back to that house! I “white knighted”. She thanked me years later when I came across her in a shopping center three years later!
Pretty women aren’t and shouldn’t be available to all. Not only are many females hypergamous because their innate nature and thorough media brainwashing and social engineering, many men, from being raised on porn and social-media attention-mongers flashing their bare backsides in G-strings and near-nude bodies have become hypergamous too, having been brainwashed into thinking that such seemingly seductive women are in fact promiscuous, unrestrained lusting creatures who just might go for their advances. But they aren’t open to the advances of ordinary men. And they don’t have to be! The issue is that some men actually believe they are entitled to beautiful women, likely because of such an environment.
Attractive women aren’t promiscuous, even if they wind up with many sex partners throughout life. They choose; they don’t bed down indiscriminately despite a large partner count.
When marriage was encouraged for relatively young ages and divorce was frowned upon, people did get married quickly. What this did was create an environment in which beautiful women partnered with handsome and upper-crust men, ordinary women wound up with ordinary men, and homely women wound up with homely men. That was social pressure in action, and it provided marriage and sex for most involved. The sexual revolution lead people to believe that even ordinary men could get a harem, and that every other moderately attractive woman could land a rich and powerful and handsome man. Attractive men can only marry one female each, so this forced people to be more realistic and get better fits for them.
So all this “freedom” left many people having even less sex than before, especially ordinary men. And there’s little else that makes men angrier than being womanless. And a society with a large underclass of womanless men becomes less productive and falls to a variety of ills from these men who are unproductive at best, or suicidal or criminalistic at worse. Think I’m exaggerating? Go look at the societies in which polygamy is practiced and look at the mayhem caused by such a class of men who feel they have no stake in society or nothing worthwhile in their futures. Sorry, jobs, hobbies, and money, don’t make up for a biological urge for a family and a woman.
I’ve said repeatedly that ordinary men should be realistic, even crudely saying, if you’re a five, go for a five. I don’t know of a better way to put it.
This is like sexual or romantic socialism or egalitarianism, not communism.
Anyone who wishes to counter what I say here, go ahead. All I ask is for no snide remarks. I wish I could go further, but I can’t right now.
Reading this thread I feel like its the cornerstone of his personality.
I’m a licensed clinical social worker. I started at an inner city high school, then moved to community mental health, where I worked primarily with kids and their parents as a therapist and part time crisis worker (ER evaluations) before moving into a large primary care center and shifting to a primarily adult caseload. Now I’m in private practice with referrals coming from all of those places. I’ve worked with all sorts of abuse, both of self and others. I was also a runaway and before that a pretty feral kid, so I I’ve had first-hand access to ugliness, too.
I’m now the cock-blocker who teaches girls about “a clear no” and the importance of not just seeing red flags, but heeding them. I’m the mother figure who convinces out-of-control boys of the benefit of respectful behavior, for others, but also for themselves. I send poor kids with abuse histories to college, sometimes.
I say all of this not to necessarily disagree with you, but to point out that it can come from different directions. There’s not only one solution.
There are four identified parenting styles: authoritarian, authoritative, permissive, and uninvolved. Personally, I’m for number two, authoritative. You’re clearly defining number one, which you accurately labeled. Here’s a chart that nicely shows what I learned in school and have come through experience to support.
In working with parents I offer two things over and over again: one is the idea, borrowed from Robert Downey Jr., who borrowed it from a fabled wise Indian grandfather, that you have to “feed the good dog” rather than try to “starve the bad dog.” I offer this to people struggling with couples stuff, too. The other parenting tip I come back to again and again is to decide a consequence for unacceptable behavior and then basically STFU and implement it. Parents will talk and talk and talk, mostly trying to convince the kids that they’re justified in being upset, and it’s stupid. Set the rules and enforce them with a bored look on your face. No rage, no apology. You didn’t do your chore? Okay, no gaming until it’s done. I definitely push that people take control of their households - the phones, my god. Kids are up all night, torturing one another. You’re a parent. Shut the motherfuckers off!
If you go with authoritarian without sharing some of the decision-making and power, and if you don’t give a kid the impression that she is loved and worthy of (parental) respect, she will be vulnerable to boys who demand a blow job. Authoritarian does not offer best outcome, statistically. It creates kids who are either inflexible and angry when crossed, or on the other side overly compliant and in search of someone who’ll take authority over them. At its worst it’s an abusive dynamic. Not saying that’s what you’re espousing, just that that’s a part of the spectrum with that style. Equal-but-opposite is permissive, the child-run house. Younger kids who make it to my office are usually coming from this kind of home. The tantrumers.
I think you may be misusing the term “hypergamy.” This:
Hypergamy (colloquially referred to as “marrying up” or “gold-digging”, occasionally referred to as “higher-gamy”) is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person marrying a spouse of higher caste or social status than themselves.
Would seem to embody the American spirit. It’s every Disney movie ever. I see it as smart, plucky girl works hard to improve herself and attracts the eye of a smart boy who comes from a better family and they live happily ever after. Or smart, plucky boy works hard to improve himself rather than whine that the deck is stacked against him and attracts smart girl from good family and they live happily ever after. Families rejoice.
Mostly people marry people alike to them in terms of looks, intelligence, and socio-economic status, but not always. Do stupid boys chase strippers or their online cousins because they’re “beautiful”? I guess you’re saying they do. So what? Do smart, pretty women want these men? No, Brick. They don’t. They want men with greater character who are looking for same.
I don’t see it being different now, to be honest. I see sensible people making sensible decisions and, if they divorce, doing it with thoughtful regard for their children. I see foolish people making foolish decisions, but tend to view it philosophically. “As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be; world without end. Amen.”
Gotta go work out!
I work in this space and hold an advanced degree in analytics. There are different types and aspects of reinforcement learning if you’re truly interested all under the umbrella of machine learning, of which AI is a part - your reference seems to have been specifically addressing recommender systems.
However, your impotent attempt to discredit me to deflect attention away from your obvious ignorance of the subjects you’re trying to talk about is fairly obvious. It seems you’re used to calling out people for talking above their knowledge, so, whatever, I get the tactic; However, something I’ve noticed about the people here is they tend to talk well below their experience until some idiot comes in here and starts talking about shit they don’t understand as if they have some sort of profound knowledge on the subject. Hence, you.
Normally I wouldn’t have - I don’t really care but you’ve just been dead wrong on most of the shit you’ve been talking about this is just another example of how out of your league you are and continue to demonstrate it.
It goes along the lines of you really need to take a step back and re-evaluate your arguments and your general perspective because you consistently expose yourself about how little you actually know…
He actually has a fair point then. I think they are partly to blame, with men to be blamed generally and primarily.
I’m not sure about that specific example, but there is no shortage of women who not only like stupid men, but degenerate or even criminal and violent men, not to mention women who put up with all sorts of other garbage, including cheating and significant vices.
Some men do similar.
Do you have a way to convert this logic to a pill form I can allegedly hide in my wife’s food…?
As a person, I feel personally attacked by this statement.
Yes, and always have on both sides. Women are increasingly joining men on the “cheating and significant vices” bench, which certainly has to do with the cultural changes that have followed economic changes. “Women are the new men” says it well.
I have a client in the waiting room, so don’t have time, but I had the thought on the way to work that my sense is that things (@greenboy’s issues) have to be approached with a top-down approach, whereas you and he seem to be looking for a bottom-up approach. I may be phrasing this poorly, but I think what most of the posters in this thread are saying is figure out the goal, and work to rise toward it. (Maybe it would be more accurately “bottom-up.”)
When I started my practice I pored over the other therapists in my area’s websites, if any, and considered what I liked and what I didn’t. I knew of one of them because referrals from my workplace went to him occasionally, due to one of the doctor’s having heard good things. I pretty much stalked that guy. He has a crisp, professional website, but which when I showed it to my friends was deemed cold. My website is similarly crisp, but nicely warm. No clutter, no bullshit. His offices are in a nice downtown building; mine, too. You find the top and you chase it. I haven’t had to do any of the introducing and card-distributing I assumed I’d spend the first weeks doing because I’ve come correct with my game. My favorite line in Remember the Titans: “I come to win.”
Imagine me sitting in my office bemoaning that I’m not getting calls. Imagine me whining that things are set up to advantage organizations, not private practitioners (which they are, of course). Imagine me wishing the solution would come from the guy I modeled myself on and the other successful therapists.
I have more to say, but my time is up again.
Let me start by saying, thank you for your well thought out posts. I truly enjoy them.
Without giving it a whole lot of thought, I would guess the amount of women that put up with degenerate/violent men and those that cheat or have significant vices has decreased over time specifically because divorce is an actual option for more women now that they represent a greater percentage of employees.
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying. These women exist. We had a scandal in Baltimore in recent memory where female prison guards were impregnated by prisoners (lots of other issues too). I think that illustrates your point well. However, you sorta just brush off (at least you seem to) the opposite:
A lot of men stay in abusive or sexless/loveless relationships for all sorts of reasons too. Perhaps for good reasons; for example, they want to maintain a two-parent household for their children (a sentiment women can have as well). Perhaps for not so good reasons; for example, they don’t want to pay child support/alimony and be forced to live below their current standard of living.
I think a lot of men like stupid women because they have nice boobs and it makes them feel intellectually superior. I think a lot of men like women that don’t work or work low-level jobs to make them feel superior through their earnings/ability to provide.
I guess my point is, members of both genders have really dumb reasons for being with a toxic person, but because the genders generally want different things from a relationship the reasons vary.
Love this.
I’d expand it to members of both genders do dumb things. We have since we crawled out of the mud. Stupidity isn’t a recent development. We merely have fancier means to exercise our stupidity.
oh cool. the same attitude you have towards women shows up here too. poor innocent greenboy. the world is just out to get him.
spot on.
Is it pronounced e-pic-teet-us or e-pic-tit-us? I’ve heard smart people say it both ways.
Still confused about Denar-ee-ee or denar-ee-aye.
Damn dead languages, I’m bad enough at English.
Don’t ask me I’m terrible with names, lol.
