A man being willing to accept that position is prima facie evidence of a lack of self-respect or a lack of honesty - usually both - & women can smell it on you, which makes you even less desirable than before
Ladies, the guys loudly getting mad about this tweet are lying to you (and want to fuck you)
Notice, they are *threatened* by this
I am causing a problem for them, I am in the way of something they want
This is the key to a viral tweet btw
the people who disagree with you can't just think you're stupid, you have to actually wobble some load-bearing psychological structure
The men of course are Sneaky Fuckers, feigning feminine socialization to get close to women they otherwise couldn't
Women play along because admitting the truth would mean they'd have to reject a lot of "free" validation & attention & favors
If you've had this arrangement with another person - maybe for years - what kind of person would that make you?
Compare the specific accusations unleashed when you push this button: along with, hilariously, "projection"
I'm not going to call them out by name (because I have only love in my heart) but there are young men QTing this thread & tagging a specific young woman in their lives, to let her know how vehemently he disagrees with me
There is a better way, young brother
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Church has been running both of these playbooks in parallel since the 1950s, to different audiences
Now that everybody hears everything that is said in public (& the Church's public profile has risen as one of the last holdouts), that kind of targeting is no longer possible
The Church's tone is confusing to outsiders but we've been hearing both narratives, "the growing gulf between righteous & wicked" & "our deep love & respect for our friends of other faiths" since most of us were born
There's no contradiction there - both narratives are sincere - but their emotional valence to the general public is very different
It's not obvious what is the Christlike level of willingness to pick a fight
Formalized eugenics has always struck me the same as rationalists trying to build minmaxed synthetic religions
You don't know how the organic thing works
You don't even know which variables matter, let alone how to adjust them or how they interact or what the tradeoffs are
There's obviously a dumb version of this argument which is that bad matches are impossible or unimportant or don't happen at scale (they do)
But a psychically healthy person's sense of smell holds a more effective breeding algorithm than your data model
Obviously we are not psychically healthy
But if your beehive is dying, you'd be an idiot to try to solve the problem by trying to manually reverse engineer bees - the solution is to restore the health of the organic system
conservatives argue for a total ban on sex or violence because they're afraid to say what they really think (that some sex & violence is good, & some is bad) - & progressives are calling their bluff
There is no neutral, objective way to acculturate children
& they're obviously framing this to divide us against Christians but no Latter-day Saint parent wants the Bible banned
the progressive atheist who submitted this complaint got them to ban the Book of Mormon as well
recognize that what Governor Newsom is mocking is a conservative religious community's desperate attempt to maintain the pluralist compromises of American liberalism when their counterparty is child molesters
It would be one thing if these were bad or malicious decisions made by a tyrant, because you could kill him or try to persuade him - but there's no tyrant & not really even any decisions
Nobody's in charge, you are in a bus in the air over a gorge
For instance wokeness is not a conspiracy, nobody seriously intended for it to happen, it's just entropy - mindless machines following the contours of a single incentive gradient