I'm all for more contact.Originally Posted by xerx
Familiarity breeds content.
I'm all for more contact.
Familiarity breeds content.
Getting more exercise isn't such a bad idea either.
I didn't feel this was a problem when I taught in the US, but it's a huge problem in Japan. So many things are sex-segregated for absolutely no reason. For some reason the school itself doesn't let them have boyfriends/girlfriends either. I can't imagine why that's the school's business, but whatever. Meanwhile Japanese media is, as most people know, incredibly sexualized. It's no wonder no one's getting together and having kids here. The sex-ed by the way is super minimal. Not at all what you'd expect from a developed country. Japan is way behind in a lot of ways. I love Japan, but this issue never ceases to blow my mind with how absolutely ridiculously it's handled
Edit: Also it should be stated that I am in a particularly conservative part of Japan. Tokyo et al may be much better, but I don't know about how things are done down there
“Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
— James Russell Lowell猫が生き甲斐
A girl I know met her husband that she married on World of Warcraft, so females can also meet males halfway and communicate them on their video game if they both like doing it. A nerdy weeb-ish man should go for other weeb-ish girls - a weeb always wanting a "Stacy" might be the male equivalent to a Suzie always wanting a "Chad". The guy she ended up with was pretty cute though, kind of more like the handsome beta male type. ((I don't know if they are still together this was years ago.))I'm not asking for men to be "feminized" but for the sexes to have more contact. Boys need to learn to talk to girls somehow, and they're not getting that from video games.
And there have been real life studies that prove that males just aren't as naturally social compared to females anyway. Right down to our DNA. Men like to sulk in our man caves. Women like to be this cheerleader type character with a whole bunch of people even if they are 'nerdy' usually- because their brains are just more wired to be social & people-y. Fe polr in women always comes off to me so much differently than Fe polr in men. An extreme of this probably isn't healthy, that's true- but a lot of it is just genetic.
I don't know. I know this really fat guy who is happily married to a woman and he hardly gets any exercise. When you said 'lots of below to average looking guys get girlfriends' I immediately thought of him lol. He has a job though and everything because I think a lot of relationship things are also resourceful and practical based things not just 'love.'Getting more exercise isn't a bad idea either
Getting more exercise is almost always a good idea. Humans weren’t built to sit on their asses all day.
Why do we have to divide men into alpha males and beta males? Most men are probably somewhere in between anyway.
It's certainly not a bad idea, but I wouldn't want people to have the expectation that just cause they've been exercising they'll suddenly start getting laid. I think the best thing you can possibly do to increase your odds is just to meet more people. Some people might be compatible with millions of people in the world, while others could only ever be compatible with a couple hundred. If you're in the latter group then you need to quadruple down on meeting as many people as possible to increase your odds. Learning languages and doing other things to increase your social contact is going to be very important I think
“Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
— James Russell Lowell
Right, exercise isn't enough on its own. But it's a more beneficial step than scrolling Pepe the Frog memes all day.
I do all this stuff without thinking but not in order to attract opposite gender. This is like a step by step guide for how to improve your Ne in social settings. I definitely wouldn't define my social skills as high. However, around strangers I am very good at it. In a crowded party or a social setting that I know that I don't have to see those people again if I don't want to, my social skills are pretty good, especially if most people don't know most people. It is because I can excel in unknown and unexpected settings and I always put myself into those and besides there is no pressure at all because if I do make a mistake, I really don't care and that carelessness also is one of those things that make this easier.Okay so here's an example of a progressive program to help with this (For the boyz)
Some things to keep in mind:
--Practice each step as many times as you need, before progressing to the next step
--Like any skill, these take time to master
Find a crowded place with many people
1. As you're walking, make eye contact with a random stranger.
2. Say Hi to a stranger, then run away
3. Ask for directions (like to the bathroom) from a stranger, then run away
4. Share a compliment with a stranger, then run away
5. Ask "how are you" to the cashier at the cash register
6. Strike up a short conversation with a stranger
7. Strike up a short conversation with the opposite gender
etc etc... continue building off the last
As you can see, this is basically exposure therapy, challenging yourself more and more and getting comfortable to different types of pressure.
As you get advanced, you can challenge yourself a bit by applying handicaps on yourself.
Examples:
1. Dress like complete shit (wear a dirty white shirt, shoes with holes, messed up hair, etc) and try talking to an attractive girl
2. Purposely makes things as awkward as possible, don't explain yourself, then try to turn the situation around
3. Stir things up and get into a fight, but you're only allowed to use elementary-school insults / memes only (lol)
etc etc... you get the idea
Some invaluable things u will learn:
--You will realize that different social situations require different skillsets/levels expertise.
--You will realize that circle jerking theory (very common here) is not the same as real world experience
--You will also realize that your ego will challenge you and force you to step back into your comfort zone (the urge to over-qualify yourself, defend your honor, etc)
But as you get more and more comfortable in your own skin, you'll begin to see the matrix for what is truly is, navigate its landscape, and you'll be able to stop bullets effortlessly without even trying
According to my perception, socializing gets more difficult when you have to see those people again and again, if mistakes can ruin things for you. For example, I can not be charming at work as much as I can be around my friends and I can't be charming around my friends as much as I can be in a random party. When you actually like someone you don't want to make mistakes. Hence even skilled people or F egos etc can be socially awkward, if they do care a lot.
Last edited by myresearch; 07-09-2021 at 06:04 PM.
Depends. We already have weird expectations and misunderstandings around body language, a class wouldn't fix that as it is up to interpretations. It might get a few golden years, but then it will become a norm people will either hold on too dearly or try to break because they find it destroys natural expression.
I do have some body language quirks that are telling of how I feel, but you have to know me personaly to know what the hell it means since I don't fall in the "norm", and be open to the fact I'm an erratic and unconstant fucko. I have seen how it has changed overtime too, in myself and others and that's rather frustrating. I'd like that nonsense to be set in stone but it ain't.
I like the analogy with The Matrix.
Incel update:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/ohio-...gal-possession
This shit's starting to get real. In some countries, more people have died from Incel and Alt-right attacks than all other types of terrorism combined.
Relevant
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58066659Shares slide after China brands online games 'electronic drugs'
Imagine actually advocating living a lonely and loveless life. My advice is to get yourself a few cats to keep you company lmao.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Lyndon McLeod—an alt-right/MGTOW author and extremist—went on a shooting spree in Denver and killed five people.
https://www.newsweek.com/denver-shoo...-1663930?amp=1
https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/...tims-in-novels
From McLeod:
"Nobody is scared of anyone any more. The State has stopped 99 percent of alphas from engaging in retributive violence; they/we are too scared to lose all we have."
"THAT's why betas & females are scamming/disrespecting incessantly. Until real alphas risk jail nothing will change. #Sanction"
—
Any thoughts on where this guy would be had the recent rise alt-right/mgtow/redpill extremist groups never occurred? In another era, men who were destined to glorify violence and hate women sometimes became serial killers I guess.
In another era, this guy might still have killed five people but it wouldn’t have made the national news.
Which doesn’t change the fact that he was a POS.
I'm generally hesitant to say that people do suicidal mass killings like this "because of" ideological beliefs, whether it's MGTOWism or whatever this is, Islam, or anything else. I think it's more complicated. If you buy into a movement to the extent you do this kind of thing, there are some other things going wrong for you. Increasingly people feel, for good reasons, they have less and less control over their lives, and this sense of alienation IMO provides a lot of the libido behind this kind of thing. When something pushes you into derangement, you latch onto the nearest opportunity to fix what's causing you such stress. Movements like this provide a way to rationalize your pain away and concentrate your anger onto an identifiable enemy, which is especially appealing if you were prone to directing it at yourself. And then the movement itself provides access to people who share similar pain and can offer you comfort and company (loneliness has been climbing in the developed world, and was probably a factor behind this). For the few willing to become martyrs, they probably know on some level they won't change anything, but it wins respect from some of if not the only people they care about or who care about them, and it provides them a sense of purpose.
Essentially what I'm trying to say is that I don't think you can so easily abstract away the person and person's history from the movement. The movement itself is made up of such people.
The standard retort is that the alpha / beta-male thing is a massive cope: These people believe that they're one of the so-called "alphas"—the true leaders of society—having been dethroned by underhanded means, in order to compensate for their perceived failures in life, their failures with women, and any other inferiority complex they may have. And more than that, they resent the fact that they've lost control over women, especially in the area of sexuality."Nobody is scared of anyone any more. The State has stopped 99 percent of alphas from engaging in retributive violence; they/we are too scared to lose all we have."
"THAT's why betas & females are scamming/disrespecting incessantly. Until real alphas risk jail nothing will change. #Sanction"
But it's also true that white working class men have indeed been disempowered, that depression and drug addiction are a fact of life, that divorces are unusually common among the poor, that they're constantly bombarded by images of celebrities with better lives, that they're undereducated compared to women, and that a lot of these grievances wouldn't have existed thirty or forty years ago.
But more pointedly, there is a not-so-subtle inferiority complex at work here. Nobody deserves undue adulation for their choice of work, and it's clear that this need is driven in part by undercurrents of narcissism and chauvinism within these communities, but it's also very fair to say that trades, plumbing, trucking and construction work are not regarded as glamorous occupations by the wider society.
Last edited by xerx; 01-09-2022 at 12:34 AM. Reason: a few words
The "trades" have never been glamorous, and like the poor, they will always be with us.
Society needs a certain number of workers, fewer managers, and still fewer leaders. Schools are set up to ensure that the right number, not necessarily the right quality, of people get directed into those jobs. This process isn't always good for the individual, but it's good for society.
Society is becoming more complex and is evolving towards more people-oriented jobs and away from labor-intensive jobs, most of which can be done by a barrel of oil. It so happens that women are better communicators, on average, than men, so men are being displaced in the workforce by better educated women. Men who are not well-educated are particularly prone to having this happen to them.
It is a nearly universal trait in societies to have one class which everyone looks down upon. Every society in the world has such a class. As long as you aren't in that class, you're OK. But if you lose to a machine your high-paying Union job which doesn't requite an education, and you aren't able or willing to play nice with people in an office, then you might find yourself falling to the bottom of the rung. That rung where you so recently kicked dirt into the faces of the people who were there before you, because you were a Union man and God was on your side. Or whatever you told yourself to justify your Union-extracted pay which was beyond what your education or talents alone could demand.
And here you are, below almost everyone in society. Below the lowest class, members of which seem to be making it in the world because America lost its Greatness and is handing out opportunities to undeserving people who should know their place. Which is below you, dammit.
And women! My God, you are below women. They can get jobs because they actually paid attention in school and now they are earning more than you are.
Fuck, it's time to put the fear of God into these people!
.....I have zero sympathy for people who tear others down rather than build themselves up. Life is hard. Life is a competition. If your free ticket to ride expired, then you might have to do something to better your chances, and even then, your success is not guaranteed. Yeah.
I believe that our economies should transition to artisanal labour — the sort of work that existed before the industrial revolution. If factory jobs aren't coming back (it's hard to see how our workers can compete with Nigeria, Bangladesh or machine learning), then we should be training people to become elite craftsmen who perform bespoke jobs. Bespoke work, because it requires a lot of custom planning, is much harder to automate than an assembly line.
The only real alternative is UBI. There's a lot of talk about UBI, hand-in-hand with creating societies where the worst jobs are automated. But giving free money will be hard to swallow for certain segments of society; and more than that, there are concerns about creating an entire class of shiftless consumers. Moreover, men whose only income is UBI will, I suspect, be even less desirable to women.
Instead of automating undesirable jobs, I propose that everyone does them, not just to deserve UBI but also citizenship. Citizenship, which grants the ability to vote, should be earned with your willingness to sacrifice your personal interests for the interests of the collective good. And being willing to do dangerous or undesirable work is one way of demonstrating your sincerity in upholding a collective enterprise. Moreover, if someone can't compete on the basis of intelligence or technical skill, they can at least compete on the basis of moral skill.
Not that my idea would likely ever be implemented in any case, but I'll add that the system should be entirely opt-in. I personally wouldn't want to conscript unwilling people into what would effectively be a form of slavery.
@xerx, you have a lot of conflicting ideas in your post. Have you read Starship Troopers? Heinlein was also ILE, and he proposed a society in which only veterans could vote. Most people see this as being fascistic.
UBI is a nice idea. Many societies are rich enough to support a limited number of people who consume but do not produce. Usually, the people receiving these benefits are babies, but some societies can extend benefits to some adults. It just depends on how much surplus the producers can create, and if they are willing to work and give some of what they create away to people who don’t work.
Lots of people are willing to do this. Not everyone is able to do this.
While there isn’t a limit on printed money to be handed out, there is a limit on real resources. There is a real world limit on how much of the planet’s resources we can convert into trash and waste heat before we wreck this little Island Earth for everyone.
It turns out that the real world resources available to an average citizen of this planet peaked a few years ago, and now more people are trying to live on less available stuff.
It’s not surprising that large segments of the population are seeing their prospects for future advancement disappear. The world has been eating next year’s seed grain today, and now there’s nothing to plant.
This does not bode well for the idea of UBI, unless you live in one of those pockets of mankind where the population hasn’t outstripped the food supply.
I read an interesting fact the other day. In many pre-industrial societies, up to 40% of babies died, or were killed by their family, before they reached one year of age. No UBI for them. That milk supply ain’t gonna produce itself.
In Ancient Rome, it took ten people working on a farm to allow one person to live off the farm, and Rome was a slave-based society.
Every day, I am grateful that we discovered oil, and I’m pissed that we haven’t used this windfall of wealth to build a more sustainable society.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 01-09-2022 at 01:12 PM.
I have read Starship Troopers, and the Terran Federation really does seem fascist-lite — the machismo alone certainly makes it a contender. But in Heinlein's vision, in order to become citizens, people had to pass though a military boot camp, and every subsequent line of work was explicitly modeled on the military.
Doing unpleasant tasks (like digging ditches, putting out fires, collecting garbage, feeding the homeless, wiping the drool from the mouths of dementia patients) doesn't have the same authoritarian denotation. It is deeply humbling work that can be utilized to influence individuals to become more altruistic; and if not that, then as a sieve to weed out the self-interested. For a lackluster person whose only talent is a sense of decency (something that's not necessarily marketable), however fully-formed or aspirational that may be, it can offer them a central and respected role in society.
I'm personally expecting economic degrowth and scarcity to define my retirement, assuming that my generation even gets to have one.UBI is a nice idea. Many societies are rich enough to support a limited number of people who consume but do not produce. Usually, the people receiving these benefits are babies, but some societies can extend benefits to some adults. It just depends on how much surplus the producers can create, and if they are willing to work and give some of what they create away to people who don’t work.
Lots of people are willing to do this. Not everyone is able to do this.
While there isn’t a limit on printed money to be handed out, there is a limit on real resources. There is a real world limit on how much of the planet’s resources we can convert into trash and waste heat before we wreck this little Island Earth for everyone.
It turns out that the real world resources available to an average citizen of this planet peaked a few years ago, and now more people are trying to live on less available stuff.
It’s not surprising that large segments of the population are seeing their prospects for future advancement disappear. The world has been eating next year’s seed grain today, and now there’s nothing to plant.
This does not bode well for the idea of UBI, unless you live in one of those pockets of mankind where the population hasn’t outstripped the food supply.
I read an interesting fact the other day. In many pre-industrial societies, up to 40% of babies died, or were killed by their family, before they reached one year of age. No UBI for them. That milk supply ain’t gonna produce itself.
In Ancient Rome, it took ten people working on a farm to allow one person to live off the farm, and Rome was a slave-based society.
Every day, I am grateful that we discovered oil, and I’m pissed that we haven’t used this windfall of wealth to build a more sustainable society.
Last edited by xerx; 01-10-2022 at 06:48 AM. Reason: .
I think that’s realistic.
However, I’ve lived through several recessions and you should know that, even in the bleakest times, there are people who prosper.
OTOH, if we're forced to revert to basics in the coming half-century, those blue-collar skills will be widely acknowledged as necessary. These men already are necessary now, and their work is what keeps everything smoothly running, but are invisible compared to the more spotlighted higher-ups, including the class of well-educated liberal activists. Why should they vote Democrat when all they're doing is helping Kamala Harris' career?
Because Kamala Harris is helping them?
Nahhh. That’s not what Fox News says.
The jobs that nobody wants to do (which I don't agree with some of the ones you've listed -- there are people who would want to do those things. Everybody wants to do something, which is why it's absurd to force people to "work" with a threat of poverty),could be handed out to felons as retribution for their crimes. I think I'm going to add this to my world system I wrote here https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...Poor?p=1495791
Even if we grant that they'd do slightly better under the Democrats, what they're still lacking is social visibility and a legacy.
Last edited by xerx; 01-16-2022 at 01:28 AM. Reason: reworded
I was thinking that it'd be exactly like jury duty, which is compulsory for citizens.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
