Randomness thread, part two.

[OngBonga]

What tit?

That one.

[wufwugy]

hashtag sweatergate

[OngBonga]

It wasn't until I cropped and expanded aubrey's tit that I noticed how nice the pattern is on her top.

[spoonitnow]

What tits?

[spoonitnow]

Kind of looks like my other other bitch, pic: http://i.imgur.com/UH5WsIo.jpg

[OngBonga]

She's got a bit of a weird chin going on. Not like aubrey. Aubrey has a lovely chin.

[spoonitnow]

Dick riding turnt up

[Galapogos]

That sweater lost big points for me when I figured out the cat wasn't part of the pattern.

[spoonitnow]

Fuck the endless Breast Cancer Awareness Month campaigns, and fuck all that goofy pink shit. Know how much attention Prostate Cancer Awareness Month gets? Exactly. Eat a dick with your bullshit trying to feminize everything more masculine than a pack of Skittles.

[OngBonga]

When I saw that spoon had just posted in the commune, I thought to myself "what's the chance he's ranting about sexism".

No doubt he'll see that I've just posted and think "what's the chance ong is talking pointless drivel".

[spoonitnow]

When I saw that spoon had just posted in the commune, I thought to myself "what's the chance he's ranting about sexism".

No doubt he'll see that I've just posted and think "what's the chance ong is talking pointless drivel".

Prostate cancer is the most commonly-diagnosed type of cancer in the United States, but since it only happens to men, nobody gives a shit.

[wufwugy]

Boob cancer is popular because boob

[spoonitnow]

Breast cancer incidence rates in the U.S. began decreasing in the year 2000, after increasing for the previous two decades. They dropped by 7% from 2002 to 2003 alone.

All of that pink headband money must be getting used well.

One theory is that this decrease was partially due to the reduced use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) by women after the results of a large study called the Women’s Health Initiative were published in 2002. These results suggested a connection between HRT and increased breast cancer risk.

Or not.

Hey you know what, fuck Susan G. Komen for the Cure.

In 2012, a Komen attempt to withdraw funding to Planned Parenthood for mammograms drew controversy, leading to a significant decline in donations and event participation from which Komen has yet to fully recover.

Guess how much of their bullshit charity money actually goes to goddamn breast cancer research?

LESS THAN 21 FUCKING PERCENT.

[jyms]

Guess how much of their bullshit charity money actually goes to goddamn breast cancer research?

LESS THAN 21 FUCKING PERCENT.

This isn't exactly a bad thing and not entirely something you should worry about with charities

[jyms]

Guy gets the chance to experience something amazing and he's so busy snapping off a ton of photos I bet he could have watched it on video and got the same experience. Seriously, put down the fucking cameras and enjoy a moment.

Am I wrong here?

[OngBonga]

Prostate cancer is the most commonly-diagnosed type of cancer in the United States, but since it only happens to men, nobody gives a shit.

You don't give a shit either. You only give a crap about the imbalance. It's yet another them-us issue to you.

[OngBonga]

Guy gets the chance to experience something amazing and he's so busy snapping off a ton of photos I bet he could have watched it on video and got the same experience. Seriously, put down the fucking cameras and enjoy a moment.

Am I wrong here?

Pretty fucking sweet train that is. And yeah I think that when I see people at gigs fliming it. Like, you pay £25 so you can watch the gig through your fucking camera?

[spoonitnow]

You don't give a shit either. You only give a crap about the imbalance. It's yet another them-us issue to you.

Wrong.

[OngBonga]

Spoon, here's a question for you... if you had two buttons, one removes 50% of the global male population, and the other removes 50% of the female global population, and if you don't press a button then you have to spend the rest of your life being buttraped by a Norwegian biker, which button do you press?

You definitely survive if you hit the men, just to be clear.

[bikes]

http://gifsound.com/?gif=i.imgur.com...L6n0FJZpk&s=33

quick cheap shoot air out of your nose.

[spoonitnow]

Spoon, here's a question for you... if you had two buttons, one removes 50% of the global male population, and the other removes 50% of the female global population, and if you don't press a button then you have to spend the rest of your life being buttraped by a Norwegian biker, which button do you press?

You definitely survive if you hit the men, just to be clear.

I would press the button that removes 50% of the male population, and it's not even close. I can go into details if you want, but I don't think the option of removing 50% of the female population is remotely reasonable because of the resulting dynamic.

[aubreymcfate]

omg spoon u radfem

[a500lbgorilla]

Spoon, here's a question for you... if you had two buttons, one removes 50% of the global male population, and the other removes 50% of the female global population, and if you don't press a button then you have to spend the rest of your life being buttraped by a Norwegian biker, which button do you press?

You definitely survive if you hit the men, just to be clear.

There is a strictly correct choice to this question.

[Renton]

Ong if you're trying to make the "only men have waged war" argument, I'm not sure that's the way to go about it. Women would be equally as capable of that in a male-less society.

[a500lbgorilla]

I would press the button that removes 50% of the male population, and it's not even close. I can go into details if you want, but I don't think the option of removing 50% of the female population is remotely reasonable because of the resulting dynamic.

Wrong. If I was offered the button, clicking the men is clearly the superior option. But for you, a 50/50 shot at killing me is a price no one is willing to pay. Your ass is getting reamed.

[spoonitnow]

omg spoon u radfem

I wonder what the ratio of men to women (with the majority women) would have to get to before men said fuck it and just took shit over to keep women from ruining everything through their majority.

[a500lbgorilla]

I wonder what the ratio of men to women (with the majority women) would have to get to before men said fuck it and just took shit over to keep women from ruining everything through their majority.

What? How would women take control in the first place? There are still men. And still these shirts:

[wufwugy]

Vox has an article titled: "Marvel's fix for its sexist Spider-Woman cover? Put a logo over her butt."

Not clicking. The irony of wrongness in media is that the more attention it gets, the more it incentivizes the media to be wrong. Which, I suspect, is why the absolute last place you want to go to find factual and reasonable claims is the media. I had hope for Vox at one time. It's still way better than trash like Slate

So yeah, if you want to get rid of bullshit like the unreasonable claims of sexism, you have to either do what Spoon does by attacking it, or just ignore it entirely

[OngBonga]

Ong if you're trying to make the "only men have waged war" argument, I'm not sure that's the way to go about it. Women would be equally as capable of that in a male-less society.

Nah I just wanted to see if spoon hates women that much that he'd hit the women button.

I'd hit the men button, probably twice or maybe even three times.

[a500lbgorilla]

Nah I just wanted to see if spoon hates women that much that he'd hit the women button.

I'd hit the men button, probably twice or maybe even three times.

Why do you hate men that much?

[OngBonga]

I don't. I just like women more, and figure there's a population problem and I have a solution.

[daven]

relevant?
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...anc-inequality

[daven]

Why do you hate men that much?

nah, he just hates not getting laid that much

[aubreymcfate]

that's a great article.

[OngBonga]

nah, he just hates not getting laid that much

^ that was pretty much what I was thinking when I said I'd hit the button more than once. If 75%+ of women are single, well I'd be dripping in bitches then wouldn't I?

[aubreymcfate]

sick soulread daven

[OngBonga]

I was gonna watch some lesbian porn and knock one out before I go to bed, but now I'm full of self pity thanks to you guys. I hope you're all happy, with your active sex lives.

[a500lbgorilla]

relevant?
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...anc-inequality

Toxic is problematic. Wrong is more like it. They showed how wrongheaded they were when those guys invented date-rape-detecting nail polish and it was roundly rejected because no one is expected to use locks to protect against thieves, why should women need nail polish to protect against predators?

There was a time when feminism was a necessary force for change, and those feminists developed a very strong playbook for accomplishing that. Now the playbook is still open and half of those playing off it don't know where to stop.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/s...s-abusers.html

[rong]

Ong if you're trying to make the "only men have waged war" argument, I'm not sure that's the way to go about it. Women would be equally as capable of that in a male-less society.

We're Brits, we've been taken to war by hormonal women before.

[eugmac]

actually all men's lives are run by their women, and secretly they're all glad they do.

[spoonitnow]

actually all men's lives are run by their women, and secretly they're all glad they do.

Nope. And women don't want to be the ones leading.

[jackvance]

So the conversations in the randomness thread still sound exactly the same.. And.total no-brainer to kill half the guys!

[rong]

I'd prob kill half of them now anyway, no nasty alternative option required.

[eugmac]

so... we're killing the better-looking half right?

[eugmac]

oh also society would have to become open to polygamy, obv.

[eugmac]

that's the main problem with polygamy right now. with a roughly even male/female split the math just doesn't add up. unless you're allowed to be in multiple marriages at once.

[rong]

so... we're killing the better-looking half right?

Let's take the top 15% and then those between the bottom 25% and 55%. I'm pretty sure I'm somewhere in the 55-85% range. So this should serve me well.

[rong]

I concur.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30119100

[aubreymcfate]

that's the main problem with polygamy right now. with a roughly even male/female split the math just doesn't add up. unless you're allowed to be in multiple marriages at once.

why is that a problem tho, not everyone wants to be polygamous

broader topic: imo people would be happier & healthier if they knew polyamory was a viable option

[a500lbgorilla]

why is that a problem tho, not everyone wants to be polygamous

broader topic: imo people would be happier & healthier if they knew polyamory was a viable option

When you say people, you mean you.

[OngBonga]

Polygamy is an option.

Become Islamic.

[a500lbgorilla]

that's the main problem with polygamy right now. with a roughly even male/female split the math just doesn't add up. unless you're allowed to be in multiple marriages at once.

Plus the fact that some guys would be pushing 35+ wives ( http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/11/us...ives.html?_r=0 ) and some guys would struggle to find 1.

[OngBonga]

Well, it's an option for men. Any woman who wants more than one husband is a whore.

[a500lbgorilla]

Monogamy is from a time when women needed men to survive and society needed men to work.

In a polygamous society, hotties would make out like thieves.

[aubreymcfate]

When you say people, you mean you.

No. I mean people.

[aubreymcfate]

In that regard I'm pretty damn happy and healthy, so I don't need to have artificial constructions about what's moral in love and sex dismantled for me.

[a500lbgorilla]

Yeah, I'm willing to bet people would be just as healthy and just as happy. That's kind of how happy works.

[aubreymcfate]

Yeah, I'm willing to bet people would be just as healthy and just as happy. That's kind of how happy works.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean, lol. If you think what I was saying was "everyone would be healthier/happier if they were polyamorous" you misinterpreted.

[a500lbgorilla]

Then I did.

[aubreymcfate]

admittedly what I said wasn't super clear, i don't have the time to clarify but i hope at least some of you can figure it out

[a500lbgorilla]

Fuck yesss

[a500lbgorilla]

Girl in the center holds it down.

[wufwugy]

Inequality is the wrong framing. Problems do not get solved by trying to create equality, and equality isn't necessarily a product of solving problems and improving standards across the board.

It is a destructive idea with no natural or theoretical backing. It's really just something people like the sound of, to our own detriment

[spoonitnow]

why is that a problem tho, not everyone wants to be polygamous

broader topic: imo people would be happier & healthier if they knew polyamory was a viable option

The problem with open polygamy is that the vast majority of women become paired up with a minority of men. This leaves a large number of men who are not able to gain sex, and this leads to civil unrest.

Note: When this option is left open, it always leads to a situation where the majority of polygamous relationships are with one man and a number of women instead of the other way around.

Inequality is the wrong framing. Problems do not get solved by trying to create equality, and equality isn't necessarily a product of solving problems and improving standards across the board.

It is a destructive idea with no natural or theoretical backing. It's really just something people like the sound of, to our own detriment

I think that people who want equality (along these lines) tend to not realize that they have it a lot better than the average person on the planet. Instead, they see themselves as being on the bottom half of some unfair scenario and think that achieving a higher level of equality will improve their own situation.

[a500lbgorilla]

Inequality is the wrong framing. Problems do not get solved by trying to create equality, and equality isn't necessarily a product of solving problems and improving standards across the board.

It is a destructive idea with no natural or theoretical backing. It's really just something people like the sound of, to our own detriment

Bullseye. In a world of perfectly equal opportunities and options for everyone, with a rich history of successful men and women in every field and endeavor, there will still be apparent inequalities - more men in engineering and women in caretaking, for example. And for obvious reasons. That Y chromosome, it changes things.

[spoonitnow]

On a related note, allowing polygamous relationships to be accepted as a social norm helps women as a whole and hurts men as a whole. It helps women because it puts them in a situation where they are able to gain access to much better men (including better resources, opportunities, safety, health care, etc.) than they would have been able to access before. It hurts men because the majority of them stop having access to sexual partners who are on an equal or lesser footing.

A man who is a 6 would normally not have a problem getting a female who is a 4. But if females who are a 4 can pull men who are 7s without a problem, then the men who are a 6 are going to be in trouble.

[wufwugy]

Bullseye. In a world of perfectly equal opportunities and options for everyone, with a rich history of successful men and women in every field and endeavor, there will still be apparent inequalities - more men in engineering and women in caretaking, for example. And for obvious reasons. That Y chromosome, it changes things.

True. It applies to more than just gender. In economics, for example, it is important to have wealth inequality. It takes a tremendous amount of capital, controlled by a small number of people, to create a lot of new products and services. Elon Musk and Gabe Newell are my favorite examples, but Steve Jobs is probably the best example

[wufwugy]

On a related note, allowing polygamous relationships to be accepted as a social norm helps women as a whole and hurts men as a whole. It helps women because it puts them in a situation where they are able to gain access to much better men (including better resources, opportunities, safety, health care, etc.) than they would have been able to access before. It hurts men because the majority of them stop having access to sexual partners who are on an equal or lesser footing.

A man who is a 6 would normally not have a problem getting a female who is a 4. But if females who are a 4 can pull men who are 7s without a problem, then the men who are a 6 are going to be in trouble.

Very true

But on the flip side, this would be excellent for society since it would create huge incentives of self-improvement and it would vastly improve mobility for both sexes even if that incentive is non-existent. An example of the latter: women would be more capable of improving status by marrying, and men would be more capable of improving their status by not being bogged down by being poor and married with kids


My personal belief is that people should date/marry outside of their class. This would help optimize value that each party brings to the relationship, since the wealthy person could better improve their position by selecting for other things they value like looks and personality, while the poor person could improve their position by using their looks and personality to gain wealth


Is there a problem that remains unsolved when people embrace markets? Sure, but not that many

[a500lbgorilla]

Any time you have people engaging in any transaction, it's a market. There's huge incentive for self improvement with how things are already.

[wufwugy]

Any time you have people engaging in any transaction, it's a market. There's huge incentive for self improvement with how things are already.

True, but there is also a substantive, virtually immeasurable, institution that deters that. Start listing all the transactions people would like to willingly make that they're not allowed to, and you'll hit a thousand different ones and not even have gotten started.

Not to mention the indirect problems created by that system, which too are immeasurable. You can't put a value on stymie

[wufwugy]

Imagine what Thaddeus Russell would have to say if it was illegal to pay black people to play music. He would say that one law stopped jazz from being created. Which in turn would have had a colossally negative impact on the rest of the future

Well, today it's illegal to pay people for sex. What reason do we have to believe that this policy isn't causing just as many problems as making paying black musicians illegal would be?

[wufwugy]

It's gonna be funny (or not) if the 2016 election is Hillary Clinton vs Jeb Bush, and after Bush wins (if), sexism-crymongers claim she lost because of misogyny or male privilege

[wufwugy]

^^^I forgot to add the second part to that:

It's particularly Clinton vs Bush since everybody would believe that Bill Clinton would beat Jeb Bush, but if Hillary loses to Jeb, the sexism claims will be ripe for the pickings

[a500lbgorilla]

The further you let your imagination run, the farther it will drift. It's entropy. If you don't have a reality check mechanism, you're just strolling through la-la land.

You said you imagine that people in a polygamous society would self-improve based on incentives. I pointed out that incentives still exist for self improvement and the world is chalked full of fat, lazy, slobs. I suspect that the problem is that in your mind people act rationally and would be moved by the incentives of the system, whereas I recognize people are dumb. Or rather, we don't understand the true incentive structure.

I'm a big believer in the power of incentives to move people, just not a believer in people's ability to predict the future. I understand the power of the marketplace, because so much of human interaction can be described as one, not because it solves anything. And yes, laws change how people act in the market place because they levy punishment against actions and so change the incentives. You may be right, but you wouldn't know it from the times you're wrong.

[aubreymcfate]

polyamory -//- polygamy btw I wasn't opining on the latter