Categories
chad thundercock creepy cringe cuck cuckolding dude you've got no fucking idea what you're talking about empathy deficit entitled babies evil sex-having women evil sex-rejecting ladies foids friend zoning incels irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny reddit vaginas

“A hole, or the promise of one, is all a woman can offer,” declares man who inexplicably can’t get a date

A chad dog enjoying a hole

By David Futrelle

A polar vortex has descended across much of North America, meaning that many of the readers of this blog — and also me — have been feeling pretty chilly lately. So I thought I would brighten your day, and mine, by sharing some reflections on cross-gender friendships.

Oh sorry, I should add that these reflections all come from Reddit’s main incel subreddit, r/Braincels, so they may not actually brighten anyone’s day at all.

Here’s a dude who thinks all guys with female friends have some sort of cuckold fetish.

Here’s a guy who can’t tell the difference between a (cis) woman and a hole in the ground. (Well, a woman and a hole in a woman, anyway.)

No one tell this dude that men have holes, too.

Here’s a guy who says he doesn’t want any female friends because … Chad allegedly has sex with every woman he ever says “hi” to?

I don't want female friends (self.Braincels)

submitted 3 months ago * by Former-Incel-UserIt never even began

Female friends are for cucks, you think Chad has female friends? Hell, no. Because he fucks all of them.

You don't need female friends if you're an attractive guy, because you can just date them all instead of being some emotional tampon.

Fuck being an orbiter.

This guy reworks the famous line from “When Harry Met Sally” and manages to invent a brand new word in the process:

Handheld_Gaming 7 points 29 days ago* 
There is no male female relationship. Its always one or eventually both having Internations of fucking one another.

This dude, meanwhile, eschews female friends to protect himself from hearing endless talk about Chad’s sex life, somehow not realizing that anyone who hangs out on an incel forum hears more discussion of Chad’s (alleged) sex life than the friends of a woman simultaneously dating three guys literally named Chad.

dawoodmuslim 7 points 3 months ago* 
But females pretty much only talk about relationships, so if you have a female friend all she's ever going to talk about is how she's fucking this Chad or that Chad. With male friends, you can discuss philosophy, or hobbies, or something. With foids, all they know is sex, and the leadup to sex, and the aftermath of sex. So being friends with a foid is all about hearing how she's having sex with everyone but you, which is extremely low IQ.

And finally, there’s this guy, who warns his fellow incels that friendship with a woman is the equivalent of having a diet consisting of nothing but soy lattes:

ovrload 6 points 3 months ago* 
if you have female friends you become a meek feminine soyboy. if youre not fucking them, then women are a huge waste of time and energy. because they bring nothing to offer what a male friend can do 100x better other than her vagina.

Once again, I am stunned that these guys have trouble finding girlfriends.

We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

96 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chris Oakley
1 year ago

Speaking of holes, Mr. Hatred_Hatred seems to have one in his head.

jone (social justice cleric)
jone (social justice cleric)
1 year ago

@Cat Mara
@Allandrel

These Transhumanist types are always getting so far ahead of themselves…and reality.
And one could say, common sense as well.

jone (social justice cleric)
jone (social justice cleric)
1 year ago

“A hole, or the promise of one, is all a woman can offer,” declares man who inexplicably can’t get a date

But have you seen the amount of time they spend obsessing over, “the hole?”
I don’t feel like my hole, wondrous though it may be, gives me any power in the world.
But THEY sure do.
I would get a thrill if my existence simply frightened them, if they weren’t so socially isolated, and extremist, and prone to act out in violent ways.
And getting more so every day.

Jenora Feuer
Jenora Feuer
1 year ago

WRT the Basilisk:
I stand by my previous statement that Yudkowsky is Exhibit A for the thesis that people in STEM fields need to be taught basic philosophy in University so they (hopefully) stop trying to reinvent it badly.

That said, to paraphrase some of the comments above, an asshole with a philosophy degree is still an asshole, he’s just better at coming up with pseudo-rational justifications for it.

(Full disclosure: back in University I took a course cross-listed as GEN-ENG 412 and PHIL 315… Ethics and the Engineering Profession.)

Me, I’ve had friends of all sorts over the years, from pretty much all across the sex and gender spectrum. Growing up with a kindergarten teacher for a mother and ‘play nice’ as one of the basic rules almost certainly helped. The fact that I’m largely ace and don’t really care about getting into anybody else’s pants probably helped as well. Mostly, making other people happy makes me happy; I like being friends with people.

(The Google Doodle for today is ‘Celebrating Sojourner Truth’. A good selection, especially for the start of Black History Month.)

jone (social justice cleric)
jone (social justice cleric)
1 year ago

@Jenora Feuer

To an extent, it’s normal for people invested in a career choice to be speculatively excited about how far they could go with their innovations.

But left unchecked by reality, it descends into a self-congratulating masturbatory ego-spiral, so…

that explains a lot.

BlueNinja
BlueNinja
1 year ago

But females pretty much only talk about relationships, so if you have a female friend all she’s ever going to talk about is how she’s fucking this Chad or that Chad. With male friends, you can discuss philosophy, or hobbies, or something.

Says the guy whose view on female friendship is all about sex.

Because if I was friends with a guy who just…

…actively tries to have sex with his female friend…

…all the time, I’d stop being a friend pretty fast. Esp as that isn’t a real friend in the first place. An actual friend can in fact “discuss philosophy, or hobbies, or something,” no matter their gender.

Moggie
Moggie
1 year ago

@Jenora Feuer:

I stand by my previous statement that Yudkowsky is Exhibit A for the thesis that people in STEM fields need to be taught basic philosophy in University so they (hopefully) stop trying to reinvent it badly.

Not a bad idea, but it doesn’t apply to Yudkowsky, who (if I remember rightly) doesn’t even have a high school education.

Nowherepants
Nowherepants
1 year ago

Not gonna lie: Being straight and having friends of the opposite sex can be very tricky because of sexual tension. The rules of conduct are more complex. I’ve noticed that some straight people deliberate choose to have platonic friends of the opposite sex almost exclusively. Both men and women do it. Now it’s not really so uncommon for men to have “gal friends” in this day and age who are strictly platonic…but if most of your “friends” are female that does sound like you want to have a monopoly on female attention and view other men as competitors. I would know cuz I did this when I was a lad in my late teens. And particularly when you brag about it. There are some insecure people who use their opposite sex friends as therapists. Particularly lonely, insecure, socially inept men who do this with their female friends. Not a smart idea. Those guys also are the type who whine about being friendzoned because they think that friendship is an automatic gateway to sex/romance.

But females pretty much only talk about relationships, so if you have a female friend all she’s ever going to talk about is how she’s fucking this Chad or that Chad. With male friends, you can discuss philosophy, or hobbies, or something.

You’re hanging around the wrong females, dude. You should not be friends with women who use you as a therapist. Relationship talk should be between girlfriends or maybe with her gay friends(if she has any).

Nanny Oggs Busom
Nanny Oggs Busom
1 year ago

Absolutely surprising these twits can’t make friends, or fine someone willing to go out with them…

I’m lucky to have friends of a variety of genders, and have for most of my life. People are people, if I am going to spend time with someone they’re going to be people I have things in common with. Their gender and sex are irrelevant.

Lukas Xavier
Lukas Xavier
1 year ago

@BlueNinja
I thought that last bit was weird as well. If you’re actively trying to have sex with someone, you’re not really treating them as a friend. If sex is the primary motivation, that’s not friendship.

Makes me wonder, as others have mentioned, how these guys’ male friendships work. It seems like maybe they just don’t understand what the word means.

Castrating Harpy
Castrating Harpy
1 year ago

While the sexual internations mentioned by Handheld_gaming are definitely an issue in some cross-gender friendships, my personal experience has been that my close male friends turn to me (a lady/hole) for the kind of emotional intimacy that they can’t get from their male friends. They talk to me about their feelings, they ask for relationship advice, they vent their fears and frustrations and feelings of inadequacy in their professional lives… it’s almost as if our conception of masculinity is so rigidly anti-emotional that it’s, I dunno, toxic, or something. But what do I know, I’m just a hole.

Nowherepants
Nowherepants
1 year ago

. People tend to have sex with people that they find pleasant to be around.

Woah! Hold it right there… Sex is not the same as friendship or love. I’ve always viewed romantic love as a close friendship+sex. These 2 things can and often are mutual exclusive. The exception doesn’t prove the rule, it creates a new one. There are people who have sex with people they really don’t enjoy being around. And they might enjoy being around people they don’t wanna have sex with.

Cat Mara
Cat Mara
1 year ago

@jone (social justice cleric):

These Transhumanist types are always getting so far ahead of themselves…and reality.
And one could say, common sense as well.

For sure, for all they dress it up in sciency-sounding words, most transhumanist beliefs are just that– beliefs. Wishful thinking without the evidence to back it up because they don’t want to think about death too much¹. But they will be super-rude about religious people’s faiths because that’s “superstition” but theirs is “science” 🙄. Naw, man, saying science-y words doesn’t make you a scientist any more than Deepak Chopra saying “quantum” a lot makes him a scientist.

But have you seen the amount of time they spend obsessing over, “the hole?”
I don’t feel like my hole, wondrous though it may be, gives me any power in the world.
But THEY sure do.

But… but… they’re going their own way! You have no power over them!

comment image

I think I’ve mentioned this before but every time I hear one of these clowns talk about how he’s going his own way, I’m reminded of a Buddhist parable I once heard.

There are two monks returning to their home monastery from a pilgrimage when they find their way blocked by a river in flood. Standing on the bank is a young woman who is scared to cross and asks them for help. Immediately, the younger monk starts to criticise her (monksplain?): can’t she see they’re monks? Doesn’t she know monks are forbidden to talk to women, much less have physical contact with one? But the older monk just says, sure, no problem, takes the woman on his back, and fords the river. They reach the other side safely. The woman thanks the monks and they go their separate ways. As they continue their journey to the monastery, the younger monk will not shut up about what the older monk has done. Doesn’t he realise what he’s done? He touched a feeeeemale, is what he’s done! He’s probably blown his chance at enlightenment in this incarnation, is what he’s done! Maybe, just maybe, if he spends the rest of his life in seclusion and meditation, he might manage to rescue himself from being reincarnated as the 4th century India equivalent of a reality TV show contestant! And so on. The older monk is silent until, finally, when the gates of the monastery are in sight, when he turns to the younger monk and asks, “brother, I left the woman at the river– why are you still carrying her?”

¹ I mean, I’m not super-thrilled about the idea myself, but I like to think I’m realistic about the state of the art in areas like neuroscience. Also, the idea that our brains are so computer-like that something akin to “uploading” our consciousness is even possible seems naive at best.

TheKND
TheKND
1 year ago

@Nowherepants

You’re pretty old-fashioned, aren’t you?
Most of my platonic friends were and are of the opposite sex and neither do I want a “monopoly on female attention and view other men as competitors”, I just have issues bonding with men. And “sexual tension” has never been a hindrance.
And what is this issue with emotional support? Friends listen to and help each other. That’s not “using one another as therapists”, that’s just some support you give and receive.

defiantcreatrix
defiantcreatrix
1 year ago

I’d like to posit that the reason that dawoodmuslim thinks that all women talk about is relationships is that he has had lots and Lots and LOTS of women talk about their relationships to him.

I know I will sometimes (often?) mention my wife to men at bars/shows/open mics when they seem to be on the prowl and interested in me, for two reasons:
1) I’m not out looking for romance or sex, I’m just there to play or listen to music and sometimes imbibe
and
2) Some dudes, even if they understand you’re not looking/interested, won’t back the fuck off unless I rub their noses in the fact that I’m a married queermo. And I’m well past the wall, and I’m a landwhale – I see what it’s like for younger, prettier, thinner women, and I wince.

So if dagwoodmuseum etc. are talking to women, possibly they’re probably mentioning their SOs/relationships quite a bit and hoping these guys will get the hint.

kupo
kupo
1 year ago

You’re hanging around the wrong females, dude. You should not be friends with women who use you as a therapist. Relationship talk should be between girlfriends or maybe with her gay friends(if she has any).

So don’t…use your friends…for friendship? Because why?

Also, stop talking like a ferengi.

Troubelle: Moonbeam Malcontent, Bard of the New Movement
Troubelle: Moonbeam Malcontent, Bard of the New Movement
1 year ago

@Nowherepants

Uhhh…you’re leaving a few factors out of the equation here.

Most notably, people that…don’t really have an opposite sex? I’m genderqueer. Admittedly, I’m also quoiromantic, so anyone eligible for friendship is also eligible for something more, but not every NB person is. Where do we fall into this equation?

For that matter, you’re neglecting to actually address non-straight sexualities or romantic inclinations. Like…do you think every lesbian wants to have sex with every woman she sees? Do you think every gay dude wants to grab flowers for every man around him? Are bi and pan people just ticking time bombs of sexual tension? Are the ace/aro magic?

Inquiring minds want to know!

Lainy
Lainy
1 year ago

@Nowherepants.

You’re hanging around the wrong females, dude. You should not be friends with women who use you as a therapist. Relationship talk should be between girlfriends or maybe with her gay friends(if she has any).

How long ago were you a lad then? All so what is wrong with talking about relationship with a straight male friend? Why do you think that should just go to women and gay men friends? So a woman shouldn’t talk about her relationships or love life with a straight male friend because he might secretly want to put his dick in her? Also don’t call them females. Their women.

Lukas Xavier
Lukas Xavier
1 year ago

Being straight and having friends of the opposite sex can be very tricky because of sexual tension.

I’ve found the following question to be extremely helpful: “If I never have sex with her, is she still worth hanging out with?”

If you can’t honestly answer “yes” to that, maybe friendship is not in the cards. If you can, then what’s the problem?

Rhuu - apparently an illiterati
Rhuu - apparently an illiterati
1 year ago

Not gonna lie: Being straight and having friends of the opposite sex can be very tricky because of sexual tension.

Hmmm…. Hm. This has not been my experience, either with having attraction to someone or having them be attracted to me. I have a very mixed group of friends, so… Judging by the responses you’ve got so far, I’m going to go with this one might be a ‘you’ thing.

The rules of conduct are more complex.

I would love some elaboration here, because I’ve found that the rules of conduct around people are typically ‘don’t be an asshole’, ‘actually listen when someone is talking to you’, and ‘if you can, remember what they tell you and ask them about it later’.

Now it’s not really so uncommon for men to have “gal friends” in this day and age who are strictly platonic

I’m glad that’s not uncommon? Men should be able to be friends with women, because women are people (As well as all the other ways gender can be expressed).

…but if most of your “friends” are female that does sound like you want to have a monopoly on female attention and view other men as competitors. I would know cuz I did this when I was a lad in my late teens. And particularly when you brag about it.

ooookay, this sounds pretty toxic to me? Why are you bragging about all of your female friends?

There are some insecure people who use their opposite sex friends as therapists. Particularly lonely, insecure, socially inept men who do this with their female friends.

This is true, men often do dump their problems on their female friends. It’s because women are more ’emotionally intelligent’. Also, men often feel like they can’t be vulnerable around other men, or they risk being mocked and/or bullied.

Not a smart idea. Those guys also are the type who whine about being friendzoned because they think that friendship is an automatic gateway to sex/romance.

Someone who thinks they are entitled to free therapy without reciprocation (which is what I think you were going for here) is indeed a jerkface. And I wouldn’t be surprised if they bought into the whole friendzone thing.

But females pretty much only talk about relationships, so if you have a female friend all she’s ever going to talk about is how she’s fucking this Chad or that Chad. With male friends, you can discuss philosophy, or hobbies, or something.

You’re hanging around the wrong females, dude. You should not be friends with women who use you as a therapist. Relationship talk should be between girlfriends or maybe with her gay friends(if she has any).

But, friends sound out their problems with their friends. Sometimes those friends include members who are not the same gender as oneself. Also, why does someone have to be ‘gay’ to care? is it just because they won’t want to sleep with ‘her’?

I feel… I feel like you have a lot of assumptions here, my friend. Perhaps we could talk through a few of them?

*sending an offering to the blockquote mammoth*

Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
1 year ago

I have a couple questions for @Nowherepants here:

You should not be friends with women who use you as a therapist. Relationship talk should be between girlfriends or maybe with her gay friends(if she has any).

What if she’s a lesbian? Could a man be a proper friend to a lesbian?

You’ve got some patriarchal notions floating about in your head, I think, my duck. That’s okay – we live in a society that reinforces that, after all. I hope you can recognize it, though.

Sex is not the same as friendship or love. I’ve always viewed romantic love as a close friendship+sex.

That’s… not right, though? Like, I know a number of people who have close friends that they have sex with, and they aren’t in romantic love at all. They’re friends. Who have sex sometimes.

Romantic love carries the idea of romance – a derivative of chivalry which carries a lot of expected behaviours that have nothing to do with love, sex or friendship. It’s the ideas of a man going to extreme lengths to “win the love” of a woman – who is then expected to reciprocate. There’s a lot of sexist baggage carried along with the idea of “romantic love”. Some people have created a more egalitarian vision of it in their lives, but that’s really not the standard.

Anyways, all that is sort of a nitpick, since you likely didn’t mean the term “romantic love” like that, but it’s something that really sticks in my head. Have heard far too many doods profess their undying love after knowing a woman for three weeks for me to take the idea of romantic love as much more than patriarchy-in-action.

jone (social justice cleric)
jone (social justice cleric)
1 year ago

@TheKND

I just have issues bonding with men.

It’s nearly a miracle that anyone bonds with men, considering how most are socialized to be stoic and task-focused.
Most of the men I know with male friends are really just in relationships of utility.
They get together and play video games, or one helps the other fix his computer/car. They talk exclusively about the task at hand.
And then they’re done. See ya later.

Odd that they have such a problem with being related to as a utility…what other options are there?

I know not all men apply to that statement. But depending on where I am, it can be easy to forget that.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Woah! Hold it right there… Sex is not the same as friendship or love. I’ve always viewed romantic love as a close friendship+sex. These 2 things can and often are mutual exclusive. The exception doesn’t prove the rule, it creates a new one. There are people who have sex with people they really don’t enjoy being around. And they might enjoy being around people they don’t wanna have sex with.

I said people tend to prefer to have sex with people that are pleasant to be around. I didn’t say nobody on the planet has ever had a fling with someone they didn’t particularly like.

But in my experience, even one night stands tend not to be hate fucks. I’ve had my share of casual sex. It’s always been with someone I’ve met at a party or bar and hung out with and had good conversation for a few hours before the hook up happened, or it’s been with an acquaintance. They were men that I didn’t feel like I needed to start a relationship with, but that were at the very least enjoyable to talk to for a little while. I’ve never been with anyone that I found unpleasant to be around. I don’t think I’m unique in that. From what I’ve witnessed, other people who do (or used to do) casual sex took a pretty similar approach.

The reason I said that people who have friend groups that include the gender they’re attracted to isn’t because I think people only have casual sex with existing friends, but because you can meet people through those friends that you can connect with. Even if it’s only a fleeting connection lasting just for a night.

I suppose hate fucks must happen, but they really seem to be more common in movies/TV than reality. I thought Buffy + Spike was way hotter* than Buffy + Angel because of the passion that came out of their adversarial relationship. The hate fuck is a nice fantasy. For me anyway. Not for everyone. But here in real life, if someone is a huge asshole, the last thing I want to do is have sex with them. I just want to get away from them. Again, I’m absolutely not alone in this. Nobody wants to have sex with incels because they are extremely unpleasant. Not because their wrist circumference is too small.

Anyway, I’m an aromantic. So I’m plenty capable of separating sex and love and understanding that they aren’t always the same. I’m also in my late 30’s. So I do understand the ways of the world and don’t really need it ‘splained to me. But thanks.

* Until Spike tried to rape her. That was not so hot.

Jane Done
Jane Done
1 year ago

@Nowherepants

Woah! Hold it right there… Sex is not the same as friendship or love. I’ve always viewed romantic love as a close friendship+sex. These 2 things can and often are mutually exclusive. The exception doesn’t prove the rule, it creates a new one.

To say the exception doesn’t break the rule means you think a situation is utterly absolute with no exceptions whatsoever. Poor choice of words if your intent is to say that people can be different from each other. Also just a poor choice in general to divide human behaviour into different “rules” like some sort of computer program. There’s always going to be exceptions (not the best word to use without supporting statistical data but whatever) because people don’t work that way.

Just like, y’know, het members of the opposite sex who feel comfortable talking about deep emotional things like relationships with each other.

And yes, some people are really into one-night stands, but it’s definitely not as many as the pearl-cluching right would like society to believe (these are the same people who say gay men have millions of partners each).

Also one-night-stand =\= hate fuck

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

That’s… not right, though? Like, I know a number of people who have close friends that they have sex with, and they aren’t in romantic love at all. They’re friends. Who have sex sometimes.

Romantic love carries the idea of romance – a derivative of chivalry which carries a lot of expected behaviours that have nothing to do with love, sex or friendship. It’s the ideas of a man going to extreme lengths to “win the love” of a woman – who is then expected to reciprocate. There’s a lot of sexist baggage carried along with the idea of “romantic love”. Some people have created a more egalitarian vision of it in their lives, but that’s really not the standard.

Part of me used to think of romance as friendship + sex too. A part of me also realized that that really wasn’t it at all and that my thinking was off. Then I realized that I was aro and that’s why I couldn’t really wrap my mind around romantic love. Like, I know it exists. I accept that other people feel it. I just can’t quite grasp it.

I don’t think that’s what’s going on with most men who view romantic relationships in sort of emotionless or transactional way though. I think they’re just mostly clinging to the socialization that men get that tells them it’s a manly way to look at the world. The majority want romance, they just can’t figure out how to express it. As a woman, I never thought that romantic love didn’t exist. I just assumed that something was terrible wrong with me because it wasn’t happening for me.

TheKND
TheKND
1 year ago

@jone (social justice cleric)

They get together and play video games, or one helps the other fix his computer/car. They talk exclusively about the task at hand.
And then they’re done. See ya later.

I actually had that exact talk with the guys from my RPG-group recently. Basically, “Guys, we don’t have to start instantly and just hang and talk for a bit.”. And luckily those guys are the kind to be up for that.

But honestly, it is sad that I have to push that when it happens naturally with all my female friends.

Paradoxical Intention - Resident Cheeseburger Slut

It never ceases to amaze me how these people view sex and friendship as two ends of a binary, rather than two things that can absolutely co-exist.

And not only that, but act as though they’re worth being friends with in the first place with these rotten attitudes. Maybe women don’t want to talk to you because you make your hatred that obvious, Craigory.

(No one tell them about FWB, their heads might explode.)

Lainy
Lainy
1 year ago

It never ceases to amaze me how these people view sex and friendship as two ends of a binary, rather than two things that can absolutely co-exist.

Right? I’ve had sex with people that are just friends with no interest in anything romantic. we still have a deep relationship and have fun together. thinking that kind of interaction can’t possibly exist is just ignorant.

A. Noyd
A. Noyd
1 year ago

Troubelle says:

Are the ace/aro magic?

Well, I sure like to think so.

Mish of the Catlady Ascendancy

The posts upthread about matter transporters and copies of people reminded me of Sean Williams’ three novels, Jump, Crash, and Fall (known as the Twinmaker series in the US, I think).
They’re set in a not-too-distant future where d-mat (a sophisticated teleportation system) is how people travel, so getting from home to school halfway across the world takes seconds. Additional technology known as “fabbers” allows people to instantly create almost anything (food, clothing, etc.), so the concept of wealth and even work is very different.
Of course something goes wrong and d-mat can be manipulated to make ‘dupes’ of people, and there’s a lot more that I won’t go into.
But this allows for some really fascinating explorations of “the self” – e.g. if a person is technically re-created every time they use d-mat, what does it mean to say I’m still me?
It’s kind of like a much faster version of the Ship of Theseus paradox!

Dalillama
Dalillama
1 year ago

Implied Spaces by Walter Jon Williams explores some .ofnthe ramifications of brain uploading/duplication/ mechanical resurrection. Including the possibility that someone might screw with the progamming and the person who comes out is, say, a fanatical devotee of a fascist personality cult. Things get ugly.

Ariblester
Ariblester
1 year ago

Cat Mara
February 1, 2019 at 10:55 am

@Ariblester:

That article you linked about MetaMed was quite the read

There’s worse than that; there is a whole Twitter thread of allegations about that Michael Vassar/ Arc guy who ran MetaMed being an abusive arsehole (needless to say, that link comes with a content warning in letters of fire, visible from space). It could be the type specimen for Toxic Masculinity, Entitled White Valley-Bro Subspecies.

CW: Suicide

I read Kathleen Forth’s suicide note, linked in the thread, with a great sense of sadness. To feel so utterly abandoned that the only option conceivable is a sort of martyrdom is a tragedy. That said, I cannot help but feel that her description of what she calls the “safety pragma” skirts too close to complementarianism for me. And I disagree completely with her implication that a “social justice warrior” is diametrically opposed to rational thought. I have to wonder if the moral philosophy she chose to adopt was a contributor to her pain and feelings of helplessness.

Citerior Motive
Citerior Motive
1 year ago

I like to ask the Basilisk people: what if this future AI prefers to be called a Manticore, and does not care who contributed to AI reasearch, but really bears a grudge against anyone who called it a Basilisk.

In this respect it’s not much different to Pascal’s wager, in that the possible motivations for a malevolent future super-AI are practically infinite, and there is no reason for choosing one over the other.

(As an aside, I happen to believe in God, but Pascal’s wager is still full of shit.)

Cat Mara
Cat Mara
1 year ago

@Ariblester:

I have to wonder if the moral philosophy she chose to adopt was a contributor to her pain and feelings of helplessness.

I wonder that too. I mean, the Basilisk has become a punchline outside of LessWrong but it’s evidence that, for all their high-minded claims of putting themselves on a firmer cognitive footing, for a lot of people in that group, all it’s done is painted them into a very dark existential corner (and that’s before we even talk about the predatory arseholes who are actively exploiting the people in that corner). The reason Roko’s Basilisk became a cause célèbre outside the group in the first place was because of the Streisand Effect, after Eliezer Yudkowsky banned discussion of it at LessWrong when people started freaking out about it. That people started freaking out about it suggests to me that their mindset had already started taking them to very bad places.

@Citerior Motive:

(As an aside, I happen to believe in God, but Pascal’s wager is still full of shit.)

As an atheist, I’m with you on that one. I’ve often wondered whether Pascal, urbane Frenchman that he was, wasn’t trolling when he came up with it. The whole thing is predicated on the notion that any god would be well-disposed towards smart-arses. Which, given how smite-y gods are generally portrayed in holy literature, is not a bet I’m willing to take. I’ll take my chances as an honest atheist over a disingenuous theist any day of the week, thank you.

Nowherepants
Nowherepants
1 year ago

It never ceases to amaze me how these people view sex and friendship as two ends of a binary, rather than two things that can absolutely co-exist.

Isn’t that called Friends With Benefits? I never said nor implied that you can’t be friends with people you also shag. Sometimes this is the case, and sometimes it isn’t.

There are a lot of selfish people out there of ever possible gender or sexuality that use and discard people. Not just for sex. But sometimes for attention/emotional support.

But like I said: when you’re BFF with someone you also have sex with, that’s called (romantic)love.

kupo
kupo
1 year ago

There are a lot of selfish people out there of ever possible gender or sexuality that use and discard people. Not just for sex. But sometimes for attention/emotional support.

What does that have to do with any of this discussion?

But like I said: when you’re BFF with someone you also have sex with, that’s called (romantic)love.

No, that’s called friends with benefits.

Also, are you going to answer why women, specifically, aren’t allowed to talk to their hetero guy friends about their relationships?

Allandrel
Allandrel
1 year ago

I’m a Christian, and I find Pascal’s Wager to be absurdly simplistic. It only makes sense if the only two possibilities are “There is a God who will reward those who believe” or “There is no God.” Really? That’s it? Those are the only two possibilities you can think of? It falls apart the moment you apply some though to it.

It’s like how Maxwell’s Demon purports to change energy levels without doing work.

Observer: Doesn’t the demon assessing molecules and opening and closing its little door constitute work?

Maxwell: No, because shut up that’s why.

Or the so-called Epiminides Paradox, which is only any kind of paradox if you assume that someone must either always tell the truth or always lie. If someone is capable of doing both (like, you know, ACTUAL PEOPLE), then there is no contradiction.

Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
1 year ago

wait wait what?

So you can have sex with a friend and that’s just friends-with-benefits and it isn’t romantic. But friendship plus sex equals romantic love?

It’s the “BFF” thing now that you mean instead of friendship, I assume? I just want to make sure I’m hearing you right on this. Instead of “friendship plus sex equals romance”, it’s “best friendship plus sex equals romance”? (It’s okay for your ideas to shift over time – that’s a good thing. This is how we approach truth.)

So best-friends-forever plus sex-having equals romantic love?

So what about people who feel strong romantic attraction but also are asexual? Is that not romance? Because I know people like that. They love the idea of romance but hate the idea of sex. They want the flowers and boxes of chocolate but aren’t interested in anything more than a chaste kiss.

How do they fit into your concept?

Lumipuna (nee Arctic Ape)
Lumipuna (nee Arctic Ape)
1 year ago

Heh, I’d somehow guessed BFF must stand for “best fucking friend” (not fucking in literal sense).

Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
1 year ago

BFF is Best Friend Forever, far as I know. It just means “best friend, but like, i mean it, pinkie swear best friend.”

Pavlovs House
Pavlovs House
1 year ago

@jone (social justice cleric)

it’s nearly a miracle that anyone bonds with men, considering how most are socialized to be stoic and task-focused.

And this is absolutely why the study of gender and the study of military history are so important to each other, and have gotten a lot of traction (at least in the academic world and within U.S. armed forces professional education).

The mixing up of masculinity (especially the toxic elements) with the the values of soldiering is long-standing in the West and very recent talk about the idea of uncoupling that is waaaay complicated. (The preferred solution is just, well, *not to have wars* but, uh, apparently we’re not *there* yet…)

The profession of arms certainly does try to inculcate into its members a notion of the supreme importance of being task-focused, whether from the very immediate matters of “this is how you clear a jam on an M-60” all the way up to very abstract of Books One and Two of Clausewitz. Yet we are supposed to (and do) bond with each other.

Like, one time when as cis-het men trying to “perform” traditional masculinity, we’re “allowed” do to things like cry, hug and say “I love you” openly to other men is when they’re our comrades-in-arms. Very telling. We’re “allowed” to be and do those things in this one very limited little societal context that just happens to be the one associated with going to our slaughter.

Pavlovs House
Pavlovs House
1 year ago

Could a man be a proper friend to a lesbian?

If not, then neither myself nor either of the Sisters Pavlov got the memo. 🙂

Either that, or (which I fear is the case) once again I’m cis-het manning wrong.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
1 year ago

@ Pavlovs House

Another O/T military thing; but I found out the other day the Ukraine government have just opened up all their Soviet era archives. I got all excited because I’m hoping there’s something about “Seven days to the River Rhine” in there; but then I remembered its unlikely to be in English.

Might be something you can use though.

Pavlovs House
Pavlovs House
1 year ago

@Alan

Thanks, that’s really interesting. Yeah, I don’t read Russian but, never fear, scholars will likely be making use of that stuff for a long time.
As for the “Seven Days to the River Rhine” operational plan, I haven’t really looked closely enough to know what’s really been done on that and other Soviet war plans of that era. William Odom in the Collapse of the Soviet Military (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000) probably has some footnotes to follow that would yield something; I just haven’t looked I admit. Great book, though — the intro. chapters on the background are useful for understanding the 1980s Soviet military machine.

(in which a young future Ms. Pavlov’s House was a nurse. We just barely missed each other though, as she was out right before I was in the U.S. Army during the last little snippet of the Cold War. Whew! Younger Sister Pavlov was in though!)

Pavlovs House
Pavlovs House
1 year ago

@Alan

Say, did you ever look at Macksey on invasion-of-Britain alternate history?

[forgive off-topic]

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
1 year ago

@ pavlovs house

I’m saving all your excellent recommends for later in the year when hopefully I’ll have time to read something that doesn’t end with “Defendant to pay Claimant’s costs…” 🙂