The director of the first Human Centipede film – the one about a psychopathic doctor who sews three unwilling and unwitting captives together mouth-to-anus to make a sort of “centipede” — proudly declared that his film was “100% medically accurate.” That is, he found a doctor who was willing to say that if one were indeed to create such a centipede, the second and third segments (i.e., people) would be able to survive, provided that you supplemented their rather dismal diet with IV drips to give them the nutrition they were lacking.
This dubious claim to 100% accuracy came to mind today as I perused a post by the blogger who calls himself Dalrock, a manospherian nitwit with a penchant for pseudoscientific defenses of old-fashioned misogyny. In a post with the whimsical title “We are trapped on Slut Island and Traditional Conservatives are our Gilligan,” Dalrock argues that the best “solution” to out-of-wedlock births is some good old-fashioned slut shaming.
Here’s how he breaks down the (imaginary) numbers in a post that is “100% mathematically accurate” – which is to say, not accurate at all:
Assume we are starting off with 100 sluts and 30 alphas/players. The sluts are happily riding on the alpha carousel. Now we introduce slut shaming. It isn’t fully effective of course, but it manages to convince 15 of the would be sluts not to be sluts after all. This means an additional 15 women are again potentially suitable for marriage. This directly translates into fewer fatherless children. This also makes the next round of slut shaming easier. Instead of having 99 peers eagerly cheering her on her ride, each slut now has 15 happily married women shaming her and only 84 other sluts encouraging her. After the next round this becomes 30 happily married women shaming the sluts, and only 69 other sluts cheering them on, and so on. This process continues until all but the most die hard sluts are off the carousel. You will never discourage them all, but you can do a world better than we are doing today.
Why not shame the fathers as well, while we’re at it? Dalrock explains that this just doesn’t make good mathematical sense:
Start with the same base assumption of 100 sluts and 30 players. Now apply shame to the players. Unfortunately shame is less effective on players than it is on sluts, so instead of discouraging 15% of them (4.5) in the first round, it only discourages three of them. No problem!, says the Gilligan [the social conservative], at least there are now three fewer sluts now that three of the evil alphas have been shamed away, and all without creating any unhappy sluts! But unfortunately it doesn’t work that way. The remaining 27 players are more than happy to service the extra sluts. They are quite maddeningly actually delighted with the new situation. Even worse, the next round of player shaming is even less effective than the first. This time only 2 players are discouraged, and one of the other 3 realizes that his player peers are picking up the slack anyway and reopens for business. This means in net there are still 26 players, more than enough to handle all of the sluts you can throw at them.
Well, there’s no arguing with that!
Seriously, there’s no arguing with that, because it is an imaginary construct with only the most tenuous connection with how things work in the real world. “But … MATH!” doesn’t really work as an argument here, since human beings don’t actually behave according to simplistic mathematical formulas.
Film critic note: While the first Human Centipede film offered little more than a workmanlike treatment of a fantastical idea, the recently released sequel, which details the attempts of a deranged Human Centipede superfan to take human-centipeding to the next level, is actually sort of brilliant. If you like that sort of thing.
“I see, so the “choice” is either being a good daughter, wife, and mother (under your own definition) or being “offered” into involuntary prostitution.”
See, “writer” isn’t on there anywhere! Not even “secretary”! What if I want to be a firefighter or a physicist or trade stocks? Under this definition I can’t even play girl’s soccer! >:(
Holly Pervocracy | November 19, 2011 at 11:13 pm
I feel better going to bed now that Ami’s here.
*tags Ami in*
😀
Have a good sleep Holly 😀 Sweet dreams! I’ll handle this 😀
SaruGoku: the >:( was for DKM, not for you, by the way! XD
@stoner, the problem with the dna argument is that cancer, which has unique dna, is not a person, but identical twins, with matching dna, are people. In fact, it is perfectly scientifically possible to easily make a half dozen genetically identical individuals from the same fertilized egg. Did you just make one person into six if you do this? If we are defining personhood, this is an extremely sloppy way to do it. I am inclined to define personhood in terms of ability to have thoughts, emotions, etc., not dna. Studies on fetal brain development are interesting (also, they tend to come down solidly on the side of the vast majority of abortions occuring before there would be any consideration of the issue), but in my opinion, they are beside the point, because even if the fetus were a person, no person has the right to force use of another’s body in such a way.
@Quackers
“I don’t agree with this new policy. But if they insist on it they should release the men on the same terms too. Though I noticed you left out the part that said “Inmates who are fathers also may see early releases, if they’re considered “primary caregivers” for their children.”
You could care less about this policy. You’ll be the first to beat men over their collective heads, pointing out how more men are in prison, proving women aren’t as violent. That’s already used as proof when we already know for a fact men go to prison for crimes women skate free on. Men serve longer sentences. There’s a million and one womens only defenses. We’ve got bi-polar this, post-partum that, infantcide for women, child murderer for men, battered womans defense, and even the all new, “low self esteem” defense.
Equality never tasted so good. Does it ladies? How sweet when women are forgiven for any crime, while men are incarcerated at the drop of any womans hat. And then you lovely equalty minded gals can cite prison statistics to back up your claim of women being so precious. Let’s all join hands in solidarity and celebrate women. More title IX, more quotas, more AA, more abortions, more, more, more of everything for women, They’re just so damned oppressed. And who are their oppressors? Why there’s only one group left. MEN!
My guess is the hatred will soon reach a intolerable state. Would you like more charity, more State agencies, more entitlements, more MSM promotion, more UN help, more love and understanding. Do tell?
@Molly come to Cybertron and become a Transformer! 😀
*transforms from a hippo into a toaster!*
Whoops… that wasn’t quite what I was going for…
Was that a doll reference?
“Women being tradional wife and mother virgin types.”
Taking the Madonna/whore dichotomy just a little bit too literally, I see.
Meanwhile, in the real world, mothers are usually not virgins.
How sweet when women are forgiven for any crime,
o_O
Do you mean ALL women? o: ANY crime huh o:
Equality never tasted so good. Does it ladies? How sweet when women are forgiven for any crime, while men are incarcerated at the drop of any womans hat. And then you lovely equalty minded gals can cite prison statistics to back up your claim of women being so precious.
I’m unsure what you’re referring to here xD
The only person who thinks women are “precious” is you and Meller xD
You should be yelling at yourself… and Meller (it’s odd how you don’t get mad at Meller for ANYTHING… but then… men = good, women = bad XD )
If we can incarcerate any man any time we want, how come you’re not in jail? xD Given that you think every woman here hates you, how come none of them have gotten you locked up yet?
How come none of the trolls here have been jailed? o_O
Meller, you are not explaining how the individual choices of the women are respected in their becoming housewife or sex worker. Do you have answers in these areas?
So Meller suggests that unmarried women should be forced to sexually service men, are to be “trained” and kept “clean” and he accuses us of being crazy?
Yea.
Here are a group of people on the internet arguing with two other people that women are human beings and not slaves. If that isn’t proof enough that feminism is still needed, I don’t know what is.
Also, why should a housewife NOT be a sex worker? Why should a sex worker not be a mother or entertainer – And btw, your conflation of sex work and entertainment is… Interesting. I picture you muttering about Vaudeville and hussies…
“because even if the fetus were a person, no person has the right to force use of another’s body in such a way.”
So this becomes a host/parasite idea as in one cannot live outside the other regardless of wether that one is a person or not….
anyways, I’ve read somewhat on this…most notably Carl Sagan’s Demon Haunted World….
Still haven’t made up my mind on this issue….
It feels like a particularly male idea that there has to be a *moment* when life begins, or becomes human. Women might feel it’s more a process, with no bright line.
That’s the feeling I get from discussions, but then I don’t discuss it very much.
” Would you like more charity, more State agencies, more entitlements, more MSM promotion, more UN help, more love and understanding. Do tell?”
more charity, more love, more understanding, and none of the other stuff.
Including, apparently, your “State womb and property law agency”:
Again, are we paying taxes?
DSC has a good theory xD That NWO is upset that Meller’s replaced him as the “main” troll xD
Whoops, I forgot to say no offense to toads.
Yup Zhinxy xD NWOrld is even MORE expensive than this one XD
Basically his Libertarianism is “I’m king, I don’t pay taxes, everybody else does in order to fund my maniacal schemes”
xD
Yeah… seems like.
Again, do you identify Libertarian, NWO? Can you at least answer that?
@NWO
Care to provide some proof for this “low self esteem defense?”
And don’t tell me what I do and don’t care about. I think this policy is unfair. They should release men on the same terms.
Equating it to shutting down women’s prisons is just stupid though.
DKM:
You want to enforce the old “virgin/whore” dichotomy, forcing women who want to
be personally and sexually independent into involuntary prostitution and you saw we are the ones who are crazy.
You’re barking dude.
“I offer a response to a reasonable question raised howthe concerns both of women committed to either virginity and purity or sex dissolution, and their families”
Again,k this isn’t just “feminists being crazy,” these are prime libertarian issues? How is choice and consent respected in your world, and why is the individual subsumed under the family in a supposedly individualist system?
In regard to sluts vs. marriageable women, I have to ask, what about men who marry these so-called “sluts”, and don’t care? It happens. If some of these “Alpha” dudes are marrying the sluts, doesn’t that make them marriageable by definition?
I mean, I’m not interested in getting married, but I’m not about to tell any women I get involved with that they can’t have sex with other people. And I know there are men for whom marriage is important that feel more or less the same way.
NWO’s absence better be that he’s writing up a long and thought-out response to all of Zhinxy’s points above and not…. that he’s doing his usual dodgy thing xD
“It feels like a particularly male idea that there has to be a *moment* when life begins, or becomes human. Women might feel it’s more a process, with no bright line.”
Honestly, I just like being able to use science to back up anything that will keep me from having to bring a child to term that was conceived against my will. Most of the sex I’m having doesn’t even involve cock, but I keep thinking about how common rape is…