Fuck off, Jamie!

Old subthreads
Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5521

Post by Kirbmarc » Wed Sep 19, 2018 1:54 pm

Tigzy wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: Sticky Dicky is simply applying "sex-positive" feminism coherently. He asks publicly and explicitly for crystal clear consent to casual sex, so he gamed the system. It's awkward and a bit pathetic, but it makes perfect sense ACCORDING TO feminist rules.

Winters is simply a misandrist who is frothing at the mouth because a man-beast like Carrier has found a loophole in the SocJus games that allows him to act as a Pick Up Artist while using the language of the reaffirms.
Exactly.

Also, Winters just doesn't like the idea of Carrier getting any sex. I'm pretty sure that what it comes down to. I think, in her mind, she sees some sort of injustice in the fact that an accused harasser (which, in Winters' world, means proven harasser) might still get laid, and therefore she has to try to prevent it. I think she must also believe that women, by and large, are guileless naifs just waiting to be preyed upon by the slobbering hobbit, and she must do all in her power to protect them. Because women have no agency and can't reasonably decide for themselves who to have sex with, obviously.
"Why is that Neanderthal beast Carrier having sex like a depraved babboon, while I, the supreme gentlewoman, so bright, witty and beautiful, can't score a date with the beefcakes from gym downstairs?"

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6428
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5522

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM » Wed Sep 19, 2018 2:18 pm

Titania hits another one out the park.

https://i.imgur.com/qCqfSMw.png

Suet Cardigan
.
.
Posts: 1300
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:26 am
Location: England, a bastion of barbarism and cluelessness
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5523

Post by Suet Cardigan » Wed Sep 19, 2018 2:54 pm

Tigzy wrote: Here's what this kerfuffle boils down to:



What Carrier is doing is unseemly.

It's impolite. Inappropriate. A bit rude. Not the kind of thing one does in polite company.

And yet, not so long ago, these people called this sort of thing tone-trolling.

The borgeoise underpinnings of 'grass-roots' SJWism shine through once again.
These people are also fond of the phrase "slut shaming", but I guess they are - surprise - a tiny bit hypocritical.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5524

Post by Kirbmarc » Wed Sep 19, 2018 2:57 pm

Suet Cardigan wrote:
Tigzy wrote: Here's what this kerfuffle boils down to:



What Carrier is doing is unseemly.

It's impolite. Inappropriate. A bit rude. Not the kind of thing one does in polite company.

And yet, not so long ago, these people called this sort of thing tone-trolling.

The borgeoise underpinnings of 'grass-roots' SJWism shine through once again.
These people are also fond of the phrase "slut shaming", but I guess they are - surprise - a tiny bit hypocritical.
It's only slut shaming if it's done to a woman. Slut shaming is shaming someone who has a lot of sex, plus power. Men have all the power and women have no power, so a woman can never slut shame a man. Checkmate misogynists!

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6781
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5525

Post by Tigzy » Wed Sep 19, 2018 3:12 pm

Kirbmarc wrote: "Why is that Neanderthal beast Carrier having sex like a depraved babboon, while I, the supreme gentlewoman, so bright, witty and beautiful, can't score a date with the beefcakes from gym downstairs?"
:lol:

That applies to Peez too. You can just imagine him in a room with Carrier and Watson present, and Catpeezle simmering away in full-on Travis Bickle mode as he observes them both. He. Must. Not. Touch. Her.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5526

Post by Kirbmarc » Wed Sep 19, 2018 3:29 pm

Tigzy wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: "Why is that Neanderthal beast Carrier having sex like a depraved babboon, while I, the supreme gentlewoman, so bright, witty and beautiful, can't score a date with the beefcakes from gym downstairs?"
:lol:

That applies to Peez too. You can just imagine him in a room with Carrier and Watson present, and Catpeezle simmering away in full-on Travis Bickle mode as he observes them both. He. Must. Not. Touch. Her.
To be fair I also think that Carrier's reputation as a lady-killer is greatly exaggerated, by Carrier himself among others. He simply harasses flirts with as many women as he can, gets shot down and seen as a creep a lot of times, and manages to score mostly because of the law of averages.

Pretty much anyone who regularly takes showers can have sex if they don't care about getting rejected and ask out lots of people. If you have zero standards getting laid is just a numbers' game. You don't need to be good looking, you don't need to be charismatic or witty or funny, you just need to have to "send out your bat sign" often enough.

If you are good looking, witty, or charismatic you'll attract more and better partners, of course, but Dickie doesn't seem to care about the quality of his relationship as much as he just wants to get his dick wet.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5527

Post by Kirbmarc » Wed Sep 19, 2018 3:34 pm

Incels are mostly not getting laid because of lack of serious trying. They expect women to flock to them just because they exist, and they crumble at the first rejection. Also many of them have comically high standards and absurdly mismatched preferences ("she has to be slutty but also a virgin").


AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5529

Post by AndrewV69 » Wed Sep 19, 2018 4:33 pm

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Wed Sep 19, 2018 6:08 am
AndrewV69 wrote: BTW ...

Anyone know who is funding Sticky Dickie? His lawsuit that is.

Apologies if this was answered before.
That Marco guy from Mythicist Milwaukee -- same one who is moderating Sticky and Sargo's forum.
Thanks.

Any idea why he is doing this, apart from discontent with PeeZuss et. al.?

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6332
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5530

Post by Really? » Wed Sep 19, 2018 5:02 pm

AndrewV69 wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Wed Sep 19, 2018 6:08 am
AndrewV69 wrote: BTW ...

Anyone know who is funding Sticky Dickie? His lawsuit that is.

Apologies if this was answered before.
That Marco guy from Mythicist Milwaukee -- same one who is moderating Sticky and Sargo's forum.
Thanks.

Any idea why he is doing this, apart from discontent with PeeZuss et. al.?
The Mythicist Milwaukee people have been slobbering his knob for years. They are probably his single biggest supporter at this point, and they don't care how many women who are less than half his age that he inducts into his polycule.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5531

Post by Brive1987 » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:27 pm

For the third time running I have come out INTJ.
A paradox to most observers, INTJs are able to live by glaring contradictions that nonetheless make perfect sense – at least from a purely rational perspective. For example, INTJs are simultaneously the most starry-eyed idealists and the bitterest of cynics, a seemingly impossible conflict. But this is because INTJ types tend to believe that with effort, intelligence and consideration, nothing is impossible, while at the same time they believe that people are too lazy, short-sighted or self-serving to actually achieve those fantastic results. Yet that cynical view of reality is unlikely to stop an interested INTJ from achieving a result they believe to be relevant.

Guest_b8931fdb

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5532

Post by Guest_b8931fdb » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:28 pm



this apparently took place in Iran. very impressive. genuinely hope no one is jailed or worse over this

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5533

Post by rayshul » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:36 pm

Kirbmarc wrote: Incels are mostly not getting laid because of lack of serious trying. They expect women to flock to them just because they exist, and they crumble at the first rejection. Also many of them have comically high standards and absurdly mismatched preferences ("she has to be slutty but also a virgin").
I read the incel.me forum fairly often and it is really very sad, I feel real sorry for them.

They are right though around the fact you do have ot be attractive to get a date. Like it's real hard if you aren't.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5534

Post by rayshul » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:37 pm

What are other people's Myer Briggs? I'm interested now. I'm an ESTP.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5535

Post by Brive1987 » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:40 pm

Kirbmarc wrote:

Pretty much anyone who regularly takes showers can have sex if they don't care about getting rejected and ask out lots of people. If you have zero standards getting laid is just a numbers' game. You don't need to be good looking, you don't need to be charismatic or witty or funny, you just need to have to "send out your bat sign" often enough.
What sort of MTBF is considered acceptable and does this vary by location and technique?

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 4856
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5536

Post by KiwiInOz » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:47 pm

rayshul wrote: What are other people's Myer Briggs? I'm interested now. I'm an ESTP.
INTP/INTJ

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5537

Post by Brive1987 » Wed Sep 19, 2018 11:06 pm



Penny Wong is gonna have a mind snap.

piginthecity
.
.
Posts: 1003
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:20 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5538

Post by piginthecity » Wed Sep 19, 2018 11:12 pm

Kirbmarc wrote: Sticky Dicky is simply applying "sex-positive" feminism coherently. He asks publicly and explicitly for crystal clear consent to casual sex, so he gamed the system. It's awkward and a bit pathetic, but it makes perfect sense ACCORDING TO feminist rules.

Winters is simply a misandrist who is frothing at the mouth because a man-beast like Carrier has found a loophole in the SocJus games that allows him to act as a Pick Up Artist while using the language of the reaffirms.
Yes. And I'd take this further and say that Dicky's view is the logical end-point of the SJW idea of sex.

Everything creative about sex has been removed. Every element in which it's an emotional adventure. Or an expression of passion. Or involving the surrendering to one's passions. Every sense it which it's a journey of discovery of the other person with the other person. They remove all the risk from it, yes, and they remove everything that might be uncomfortable and inconvenient, but at the cost of rendering it merely anodyne 'play'. All agreed in detail in advance. Under the auspices of some Code of Conduct written by some committee or another with the right to redress if, in hindsight, it has involved anything in any way difficult.

The sex is never about the other person, or the two of you as a couple, it's just about satsifying what you personally have declared yourself to be 'into'. It's a mere transaction.

It clearly has never even occurred to Carrier to wonder why none of his 'girlfriends' want to go with him to this conference. Whether he could spend a weekend persuing an enthusiasm of hers instead, or even whether a weekend doing something on his own and not centred on female company for a change might do him some good and refresh him in some way. No - the way he talks about these 'girlfriends' is as if he's got a sex-doll with interchangeable heads. This one is not available so this other one will have to do. If none are available then there's always the pool of others to dip into.

Maybe on some level, Winters is angry because this reality is dawning on her - Normal 'shitlord' attitude to sex might sometimes involve viewing the other person as merely an object. Feminist rule-based sex absolutely guarantees it.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5539

Post by Brive1987 » Wed Sep 19, 2018 11:28 pm




piginthecity
.
.
Posts: 1003
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:20 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5540

Post by piginthecity » Wed Sep 19, 2018 11:54 pm

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/n ... spartanntp


That's great coming from the person who shot Clive Anderson and took to the skies in a helicopter gunship.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5541

Post by Kirbmarc » Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:13 am

Brive1987 wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:

Pretty much anyone who regularly takes showers can have sex if they don't care about getting rejected and ask out lots of people. If you have zero standards getting laid is just a numbers' game. You don't need to be good looking, you don't need to be charismatic or witty or funny, you just need to have to "send out your bat sign" often enough.
What sort of MTBF is considered acceptable and does this vary by location and technique?
It depends on how horny you are. Of course it varies by location: the more people you're likely to meet, the less time you have to wait between getting shot down. Technique helps if you are charming and witty, otherwise fame works pretty well as a substitute. That's why Dickie is so pissed when he's not getting invited to conferences. As the star of the show he gets lots of attention, so he can plow through a crowd of potential "dates".

Basically there are two kinds of people who get laid a lot: attractive ones with a good game and those who just try hard enough. Dickie is the latter.

Guest_b8931fdb

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5542

Post by Guest_b8931fdb » Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:34 am


Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5543

Post by Kirbmarc » Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:49 am

rayshul wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: Incels are mostly not getting laid because of lack of serious trying. They expect women to flock to them just because they exist, and they crumble at the first rejection. Also many of them have comically high standards and absurdly mismatched preferences ("she has to be slutty but also a virgin").
I read the incel.me forum fairly often and it is really very sad, I feel real sorry for them.

They are right though around the fact you do have ot be attractive to get a date. Like it's real hard if you aren't.
Nah, not really. You just need to get over your shyness and ask around a lot. Or alternatively dress better, take care of yourself, develop an interesting personality and social hobbies. Oh, and learn to calibrate your standards.

Most incels are pretty normal looking, but they're whiney bastards who moan about how much they have it hard while wasting time instead of finding ways to sort out their issues. They need therapy, not a hug box/safe space.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5544

Post by Kirbmarc » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:01 am

piginthecity wrote: Yes. And I'd take this further and say that Dicky's view is the logical end-point of the SJW idea of sex.

Everything creative about sex has been removed. Every element in which it's an emotional adventure. Or an expression of passion. Or involving the surrendering to one's passions. Every sense it which it's a journey of discovery of the other person with the other person. They remove all the risk from it, yes, and they remove everything that might be uncomfortable and inconvenient, but at the cost of rendering it merely anodyne 'play'. All agreed in detail in advance. Under the auspices of some Code of Conduct written by some committee or another with the right to redress if, in hindsight, it has involved anything in any way difficult.

The sex is never about the other person, or the two of you as a couple, it's just about satsifying what you personally have declared yourself to be 'into'. It's a mere transaction.
Life is about shades of grey, uncomfortable moments, failing and coming back again, misunderstandings, false starts, problems. The SJWs want a permanent Safe Space. It's no wonder that they turn everything boring.
Maybe on some level, Winters is angry because this reality is dawning on her - Normal 'shitlord' attitude to sex might sometimes involve viewing the other person as merely an object. Feminist rule-based sex absolutely guarantees it.
Moreover, feminist rule-based sex makes people bitter at every misunderstanding and uncomfortable moment, trying to constantly leverage power over each other in an unforgiving fight for who is making more "emotional labor". So long-term relationships, which are based on compromises, frank communication and forgiveness, are turned into a nightmare.

Feminists want the "perfect partner" that is infinitely understanding, infinitely considerate, infinitely mindful and thoughtful, and everything that falls short of that is "emotional abuse" or "the Patriarchy". But since feminists are humans they still long for some kind of emotional connection, so they hope, really hope that the Perfect Prince Charming will come along on a white steed. But the only one they get is Carrier, who has gamed the system to act like the Supreme Shitlord. No wonder they're furious.

Guest_b8931fdb

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5545

Post by Guest_b8931fdb » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:03 am

Kirbmarc wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:49 am
rayshul wrote: They are right though around the fact you do have ot be attractive to get a date. Like it's real hard if you aren't.
Nah, not really. You just need to get over your shyness and ask around a lot. Or alternatively dress better, take care of yourself, develop an interesting personality and social hobbies. Oh, and learn to calibrate your standards.

Most incels are pretty normal looking, but they're whiney bastards who moan about how much they have it hard while wasting time instead of finding ways to sort out their issues. They need therapy, not a hug box/safe space.
I am not sure you are disagreeing with rayshul.

In particular reading this
take care of yourself, develop an interesting personality and social hobbies.
makes me want to subscribe to your newsletter about solving world peace, earning a million dollars, etc.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5546

Post by Kirbmarc » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:05 am

"There are no good men! They're all pigs interested only in having sex at any cost, and being sneaky and manipulative about that, too! If only there was someone who was honest, and respected our desires, and upfront!"

"...hey ladies, I heard you were wishing for a White Knight of Clear Consent. Here, I am. Consider this a bat signal. I really value women, you know, adore them for their souls. And want to have lots of Very Consensual Sex. Who's interested?"

"Fuck off, creep!"

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5547

Post by Kirbmarc » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:12 am

Guest_b8931fdb wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:49 am
rayshul wrote: They are right though around the fact you do have ot be attractive to get a date. Like it's real hard if you aren't.
Nah, not really. You just need to get over your shyness and ask around a lot. Or alternatively dress better, take care of yourself, develop an interesting personality and social hobbies. Oh, and learn to calibrate your standards.

Most incels are pretty normal looking, but they're whiney bastards who moan about how much they have it hard while wasting time instead of finding ways to sort out their issues. They need therapy, not a hug box/safe space.
I am not sure you are disagreeing with rayshul.

In particular reading this
take care of yourself, develop an interesting personality and social hobbies.
makes me want to subscribe to your newsletter about solving world peace, earning a million dollars, etc.
Jesus. Dressing better, eating better, doing some exercise, finding a social hobby, growing as a person, having lots of interests, reading a lot, talking with a lot of people, visiting places, finding something that makes you enthusiastic about life, that's the same thing as solving world peace and earning a million dollars?

Life IS hard, but most incels are sitting on their asses playing video games all day, eating shit, dressing like dorks, not taking care of themselves, trudging through life like it's an endless chore, and not even TRYING to ask out women in a socially acceptable way. Or asking one woman out, then waiting six or ten months to ask another. No wonder they're single.

I've seen really ugly men getting laid if they put some effort into it.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7060
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5548

Post by MarcusAu » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:22 am

Kirbmarc wrote: Nah, not really. You just need to get over your shyness and ask around a lot. Or alternatively dress better, take care of yourself, develop an interesting personality and social hobbies. Oh, and learn to calibrate your standards.
Why can't they do it the old fashioned way and start a sex cult? ?

Did Crowley die in vain?

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5549

Post by Kirbmarc » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:29 am

MarcusAu wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: Nah, not really. You just need to get over your shyness and ask around a lot. Or alternatively dress better, take care of yourself, develop an interesting personality and social hobbies. Oh, and learn to calibrate your standards.
Why can't they do it the old fashioned way and start a sex cult? ?

Did Crowley die in vain?
That's an idea that Carrier could approve of, as long as the cult is about worshiping him.

Guest_b8931fdb

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5550

Post by Guest_b8931fdb » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:31 am

Kirbmarc wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:12 am
Jesus -- Doesn't cost money, does cost time

Dressing better -- costs money, requires a fashion sense (more money), probably requires more frequent haircuts (more money), probably requires a certain body type (may not be possible). All in all, sounds expensive, time consuming, a pretty enormous lifestyle change, esp for joe random cubeworker

eating better -- costs money, costs time, well fucking eat better, you'll have chicks in no time

doing some exercise -- costs money, costs time, and to what end, as you know since you are a scientist and rationalist exercise and weight loss are not correlated, but reasonably, I will grant you that it is beneficial health wise, and mentally, and that may help a great deal.

finding a social hobby -- oh. maybe they have one, just one you don't approve of. Otherwise, yeah, become a volunteer at the otter rescue center, find a hobby, just not gaming, computing, working on cars, or really any hobby, I mean, which hobbies are on your list that you think the incels have not considered, they're all gamergaters you know that march in kkk parades

growing as a person -- yeah, grow as a person, sounds easy. what's the email address of your newsletter, no fuck that, I think I'll just get some off the self-help section, hey this one on jebus looks swell

having lots of interests -- yeah, have lots of interests, damn you you don't have enough interests, wat?

reading a lot -- yeah, read more you fucking incel cunt, new harry potter and the cursed child is coming out, go read that and some handmaiden's tell, just don't play magic

talking with a lot of people -- yeah you fucking incel with the social anxiety, go talk to people, that's your problem.

visiting places -- yea ya stupid incel, I bet you haven't been to iceland yet, or Macho Picho.

Come on Kirbmarc, you're normally smarter / more compassionate than this.

Not to use SJW terms, and I don't follow the incel forums, but your advice sounds simplistic, ageist, ablist, as well as fit for a certain kind of very privileged young healthy individual with free time and free cash flow. Maybe that's who 99% of incels at forums are, but you're not describing the lives of quiet desperation led by many men and women wrt dating.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5551

Post by Brive1987 » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:33 am

Kirbmarc wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:13 am
Brive1987 wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:

Pretty much anyone who regularly takes showers can have sex if they don't care about getting rejected and ask out lots of people. If you have zero standards getting laid is just a numbers' game. You don't need to be good looking, you don't need to be charismatic or witty or funny, you just need to have to "send out your bat sign" often enough.
What sort of MTBF is considered acceptable and does this vary by location and technique?
It depends on how horny you are. Of course it varies by location: the more people you're likely to meet, the less time you have to wait between getting shot down. Technique helps if you are charming and witty, otherwise fame works pretty well as a substitute. That's why Dickie is so pissed when he's not getting invited to conferences. As the star of the show he gets lots of attention, so he can plow through a crowd of potential "dates".

Basically there are two kinds of people who get laid a lot: attractive ones with a good game and those who just try hard enough. Dickie is the latter.
Let’s say you go out every Wednesday and Saturday. Would that cover off the desperados and the quality tail? Are we then thinking a lay every second or third week? What sort of ROI re drinks etc would that represent? Would outsourcing procurement using a commercial basis make sense? What about time based opportunity cost? Have you considered these hidden overheads?

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5552

Post by Brive1987 » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:42 am

Does this logic hold? Or must we reference the intermediate therapy report?


Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5553

Post by Brive1987 » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:51 am

:think:

Sounds like a good time was had by all. Rivals Becky circa 2007.


Keating
.
.
Posts: 1909
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5554

Post by Keating » Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:58 am

I still like that Senator Feinstein, the woman who sat on the accusation since July, had a legit Chinese spy working for her for years unnoticed.

Keating
.
.
Posts: 1909
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5555

Post by Keating » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:07 am

Hey Guest_b8931fdb, pretty much agree with you (except the part about Kirb :bjarte: :dance:). In the past, I’ve had a hell of time finding social interests that aren’t male dominated, or populated by over 60s. On the other hand, I also know women who sit home with their cats every night, and complain they can’t find a man.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5556

Post by Brive1987 » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:17 am

Keating wrote: Hey Guest_b8931fdb, pretty much agree with you (except the part about Kirb :bjarte: :dance:)
“Come on Kirbmarc, you're normally smarter / more compassionate than this”

:lol:


Guest_b8931fdb

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5557

Post by Guest_b8931fdb » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:17 am


MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7060
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5558

Post by MarcusAu » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:41 am

Perhaps the time has come for 'Guestxxxx' to account for themselves...or at least get one to log in with.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5559

Post by Kirbmarc » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:45 am

Brive1987 wrote:
Keating wrote: Hey Guest_b8931fdb, pretty much agree with you (except the part about Kirb :bjarte: :dance:)
“Come on Kirbmarc, you're normally smarter / more compassionate than this”

:lol:

Switzerland is less gung-ho about suppressing hate speech than other nations. What's your point?

(Also, Russia Today? You might as well start posting InfoWars videos).

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5560

Post by Kirbmarc » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:48 am

Keating wrote: Hey Guest_b8931fdb, pretty much agree with you (except the part about Kirb :bjarte: :dance:). In the past, I’ve had a hell of time finding social interests that aren’t male dominated, or populated by over 60s. On the other hand, I also know women who sit home with their cats every night, and complain they can’t find a man.
I explicitly called out feminists for being obsessed with a silly Prince Charming fantasy. This isn't about gender wars, it's about people who want online hug boxes, which are actually bad for them.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5561

Post by Brive1987 » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:53 am

MarcusAu wrote: Perhaps the time has come for 'Guestxxxx' to account for themselves...or at least get one to log in with.
That can only end well.

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5562

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:53 am

Kirbmarc wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:13 am
Brive1987 wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:

Pretty much anyone who regularly takes showers can have sex if they don't care about getting rejected and ask out lots of people. If you have zero standards getting laid is just a numbers' game. You don't need to be good looking, you don't need to be charismatic or witty or funny, you just need to have to "send out your bat sign" often enough.
What sort of MTBF is considered acceptable and does this vary by location and technique?
It depends on how horny you are. Of course it varies by location: the more people you're likely to meet, the less time you have to wait between getting shot down. Technique helps if you are charming and witty, otherwise fame works pretty well as a substitute. That's why Dickie is so pissed when he's not getting invited to conferences. As the star of the show he gets lots of attention, so he can plow through a crowd of potential "dates".

Basically there are two kinds of people who get laid a lot: attractive ones with a good game and those who just try hard enough. Dickie is the latter.
My impression of the "true" Incels is that they have some form of social anxiety and an inwardly directed perfectionism. I don't think many of them are interested at all in the mechanical approach to sex. It is a neurotic need to feel emotionally safe going in that is the big hurdle and that is rarely going to happen.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5563

Post by Brive1987 » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:54 am

Kirbmarc wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:
Keating wrote: Hey Guest_b8931fdb, pretty much agree with you (except the part about Kirb :bjarte: :dance:)
“Come on Kirbmarc, you're normally smarter / more compassionate than this”

:lol:

Switzerland is less gung-ho about suppressing hate speech than other nations. What's your point?

(Also, Russia Today? You might as well start posting InfoWars videos).
You’re not normally so obtuse.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5564

Post by Kirbmarc » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:59 am

Guest_b8931fdb wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:12 am
Jesus -- Doesn't cost money, does cost time

Dressing better -- costs money, requires a fashion sense (more money), probably requires more frequent haircuts (more money), probably requires a certain body type (may not be possible). All in all, sounds expensive, time consuming, a pretty enormous lifestyle change, esp for joe random cubeworker

eating better -- costs money, costs time, well fucking eat better, you'll have chicks in no time

doing some exercise -- costs money, costs time, and to what end, as you know since you are a scientist and rationalist exercise and weight loss are not correlated, but reasonably, I will grant you that it is beneficial health wise, and mentally, and that may help a great deal.

finding a social hobby -- oh. maybe they have one, just one you don't approve of. Otherwise, yeah, become a volunteer at the otter rescue center, find a hobby, just not gaming, computing, working on cars, or really any hobby, I mean, which hobbies are on your list that you think the incels have not considered, they're all gamergaters you know that march in kkk parades

growing as a person -- yeah, grow as a person, sounds easy. what's the email address of your newsletter, no fuck that, I think I'll just get some off the self-help section, hey this one on jebus looks swell

having lots of interests -- yeah, have lots of interests, damn you you don't have enough interests, wat?

reading a lot -- yeah, read more you fucking incel cunt, new harry potter and the cursed child is coming out, go read that and some handmaiden's tell, just don't play magic

talking with a lot of people -- yeah you fucking incel with the social anxiety, go talk to people, that's your problem.

visiting places -- yea ya stupid incel, I bet you haven't been to iceland yet, or Macho Picho.

Come on Kirbmarc, you're normally smarter / more compassionate than this.

Not to use SJW terms, and I don't follow the incel forums, but your advice sounds simplistic, ageist, ablist, as well as fit for a certain kind of very privileged young healthy individual with free time and free cash flow. Maybe that's who 99% of incels at forums are, but you're not describing the lives of quiet desperation led by many men and women wrt dating.
I have looked at the incel forums and in 99% of the cases they're young and healthy, and many of them are in college, when you have plenty of free time. Many of them also have incredibly high standards for the people they want to date.

I'm not saying that finding dates is equally as easy for everyone. I'm saying that complaining about not finding dates on a website is completely pointless. Also online hugboxes are dangerous. It's better to try and do whatever you can, and carrying on through failures, then to sign in on incel forums where people bitch and moan about how life is unfair and it's all the fault of the Conniving Women.

Incel forums aren't the only online hugbox. SJW websites are all about people bitching and moaning about how everything is so unfair and horrible to manatee-kins and cat ladies. They're about as hateful and useless as the incel communities.

Life IS unfair, requires times and money and effort, and some people will always have it better than others. Dating isn't a commodity you can subsidies like healthcare or public education or public works. Perhaps a system of state-sponsored prostitutes could sort out the mechanics of sex for the sexless, especially if they're unable to get some relief on their own. I think that in Japan there are people paid to assist patients with masturbation.

But most incels don't want sex with professionals anyway, they want to feel loved and chosen. That's something you cannot just buy, you have to work for it.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5565

Post by Kirbmarc » Thu Sep 20, 2018 3:02 am

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: My impression of the "true" Incels is that they have some form of social anxiety and an inwardly directed perfectionism. I don't think many of them are interested at all in the mechanical approach to sex. It is a neurotic need to feel emotionally safe going in that is the big hurdle and that is rarely going to happen.
You could be right. My point is that the incel forums make this much worse by selling fantasies about conniving women conspiring against the poor little incel victims.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16627
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5566

Post by Brive1987 » Thu Sep 20, 2018 3:11 am

A different riff replacing the traditional “Men of Harlech”


Guest_b8931fdb

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5567

Post by Guest_b8931fdb » Thu Sep 20, 2018 3:27 am

Kirbmarc wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:59 am
Incel forums aren't the only online hugbox. SJW websites are all about people bitching and moaning about how everything is so unfair and horrible to manatee-kins and cat ladies. They're about as hateful and useless as the incel communities.

Life IS unfair, requires times and money and effort, and some people will always have it better than others. Dating isn't a commodity you can subsidies like healthcare or public education or public works. Perhaps a system of state-sponsored prostitutes could sort out the mechanics of sex for the sexless, especially if they're unable to get some relief on their own. I think that in Japan there are people paid to assist patients with masturbation.

But most incels don't want sex with professionals anyway, they want to feel loved and chosen. That's something you cannot just buy, you have to work for it.
Alternatively, I once heard John Waters, the movie maker, who is gay, talks on Fresh Air (Terry Gross) about how good it was for him to attend (or be forced to attend) "finishing school" in terms of teaching him how to navigate adult society, perhaps even dance.

Right now we're hearing of a protest where kids don't want to be forced to give presentations in front of class. A few years ago, it was kids shouldn't be made to kiss their grandparents.

I wonder if for many incels the problem is no one has taught them, or forced them to present in front of class, or how to dance, or how to drink tea, or any of that shit that perhaps society did teach.

Combine that with feminist theology about how horrible it is for men to have lustful thoughts about women, and perhaps too how easily men are mocked for just about everything, and I can imagine the best thing for incels IS a pickup artist course, a course that acknowledges they have a dick and acknowledges that women aren't all pure angels standing on their pedestals but do want to date and there are common things they like and dislike even if they tell you otherwise.

All this reminds me of the Scott Aaronson piece from 2014. I haven't read it since then, so I don't know how comparable it is. But Scott could be talking about me, and I think both of us could have benefited from John Waters finishing school, and if I were younger, perhaps even benefit from some form of PUA course now. (I know of several soon to be college men that I think would benefit from "finishing school")

The Scott Aaronson comment:
https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2 ... ent-326664

The Atlantic article about that:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... le/384539/

Amanda Marcotte:
https://www.rawstory.com/2014/12/mit-pr ... -to-women/

Karen Straughn
http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/2015 ... nerds.html

Arthur Chu chimes in:
https://www.salon.com/2015/01/10/the_pl ... _feminism/

to grossly over simplify:

how much of incel is "I don't know how to dress or dance and I have no rhythm and I am scared of rejection and no one taught me otherwise"

but that still doesn't account for the millions of men and women who can't find partners due to looks, health, weight, age, poverty, etc. And the way victorian then patriarchal and even now feminist society demonizes most of that makes it a very difficult hole to dig out of.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7060
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5568

Post by MarcusAu » Thu Sep 20, 2018 3:53 am

So has anyone seen the following yet?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgSrpd3MxY4

nb Trigger Waning for offensive language!

screwtape
.
.
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:15 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5569

Post by screwtape » Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:24 am

I remember being rather impressed with the honesty of one of the commenters in that thread, who gave away the game:
dorothy wrote:In broad brush strokes, we would like the attractive men to find us attractive and potentially to hit on us and the unattractive men not to notice we are women.

In fact we want a very small percentage of men to find us unbelievably attractive and to hit on us, but in, you know, a nice way. We would like a slightly larger number of men, but still small, to find us very attractive but to do nothing about it (they can talk to each other about how hot and unattainable we are though) and the rest just to completely leave us alone and preferably have no thoughts about us at all.
High school summarised in two short paragraphs.

piginthecity
.
.
Posts: 1003
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:20 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5570

Post by piginthecity » Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:25 am

No, guest_XXXX, 'PUA' is just as silly a label as 'incel' and you'd be just replacing one load of cultish, made-up class-based nonsense for another.

As Kirb says the solution is on an individual basis, stop identifying with others who you perceive are in the same boat in the hope of some collectivist liberation narrative and take some responsibility for yourself. You can certainly learn from others who seem to be navigating life more successfully, but if someone wants to promote some label they want you to adopt, and themselves as some sort of teacher or leader of those with that label then you're being fooled.

screwtape
.
.
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:15 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5571

Post by screwtape » Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:56 am

MarcusAu wrote: So has anyone seen the following yet?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgSrpd3MxY4

nb Trigger Waning for offensive language!
Only in the UK iTunes store at present, and my Apple ID is only good for purchases in the Canadian store. I'll have to see what I can do to get around that.

Snapfingers
.
.
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5572

Post by Snapfingers » Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:23 am

Kirbmarc wrote:
rayshul wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: Incels are mostly not getting laid because of lack of serious trying. They expect women to flock to them just because they exist, and they crumble at the first rejection. Also many of them have comically high standards and absurdly mismatched preferences ("she has to be slutty but also a virgin").
I read the incel.me forum fairly often and it is really very sad, I feel real sorry for them.

They are right though around the fact you do have ot be attractive to get a date. Like it's real hard if you aren't.
Nah, not really. You just need to get over your shyness and ask around a lot. Or alternatively dress better, take care of yourself, develop an interesting personality and social hobbies. Oh, and learn to calibrate your standards.

Most incels are pretty normal looking, but they're whiney bastards who moan about how much they have it hard while wasting time instead of finding ways to sort out their issues. They need therapy, not a hug box/safe space.
No. This might have true many years ago. Todays women are delusional about their sexual market value because our whole modern culture is that way. 5-10 % of the men are fucking 80 % of the women. The ugly women can always get laid and then dumped. The ugly guys don't get laid ever. The problem is growing, but telling these unfortunate men to "dress better" or "try more" isn't the solution.
Feminism, man - spoils everything.

d4m10n
.
.
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:17 am
Location: OKC
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5573

Post by d4m10n » Thu Sep 20, 2018 6:00 am

This looks like an exciting event, on par with a middle tier Marvel movie


Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6781
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5574

Post by Tigzy » Thu Sep 20, 2018 6:28 am

Kirbmarc wrote: To be fair I also think that Carrier's reputation as a lady-killer is greatly exaggerated, by Carrier himself among others. He simply harasses flirts with as many women as he can, gets shot down and seen as a creep a lot of times, and manages to score mostly because of the law of averages.
Yeah, but we're talking in comparison to Catpeezle here. By which standard, Dicky is a Casanovian God-Emperor of cock.

Driftless
.
.
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 8:13 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5575

Post by Driftless » Thu Sep 20, 2018 6:46 am

Snapfingers wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
rayshul wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: Incels are mostly not getting laid because of lack of serious trying. They expect women to flock to them just because they exist, and they crumble at the first rejection. Also many of them have comically high standards and absurdly mismatched preferences ("she has to be slutty but also a virgin").
I read the incel.me forum fairly often and it is really very sad, I feel real sorry for them.

They are right though around the fact you do have ot be attractive to get a date. Like it's real hard if you aren't.
Nah, not really. You just need to get over your shyness and ask around a lot. Or alternatively dress better, take care of yourself, develop an interesting personality and social hobbies. Oh, and learn to calibrate your standards.

Most incels are pretty normal looking, but they're whiney bastards who moan about how much they have it hard while wasting time instead of finding ways to sort out their issues. They need therapy, not a hug box/safe space.
No. This might have true many years ago. Todays women are delusional about their sexual market value because our whole modern culture is that way. 5-10 % of the men are fucking 80 % of the women. The ugly women can always get laid and then dumped. The ugly guys don't get laid ever. The problem is growing, but telling these unfortunate men to "dress better" or "try more" isn't the solution.
Feminism, man - spoils everything.
That is why "enforced monogamy" (as a cultural norm) is a good thing for society. It increases the number of men and women who find a partner. Without it you get polygamy, and that leaves a large number of men with no partner.

Although I agree that the incel movement seems to include men who don't realize that you need to earn the respect of a potential partner. And like it or not it is men who have to be the ones to take initiative, and taking initiative means possibly getting rejected.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12308
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5576

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:00 am

rayshul wrote: What are other people's Myer Briggs? I'm interested now. I'm an ESTP.
As of this morning, COMMANDER (ENTJ-A). My results vary slightly, but it's usually one of the E--- /leaderships.

A century ago, MBTI represented a decent attempt at psychometrics. But its four axes are based on stuff Jung pulled out of his ass, whereas the Big Five axes manifested spontaneously out of the data. If useful Big Five tests are available, then MBTI should be retired.

Myers-Briggs was popular when I was in the corporate world. (Though, so was graphology in some places.) Despite me consistently testing as a Commander/Field Marshal type, none of my ENIJ* bosses thought to promote me, rather to fear and neutralize me.


* Exceptionally Narcissistic Incompetent Jackoff.

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6332
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5577

Post by Really? » Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:23 am

I think someone should start a change.org petition to get Kristi Winters a job. She has so much free time.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12308
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5578

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:39 am

Really? wrote: I think someone should start a change.org petition to get Kristi Winters a job. She has so much free time.
I think I know of a likely employer:


Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12308
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5579

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:56 am

By chance, came across two economy articles this morning:

The Leftist Elite Globalist New Yorker whining that trump's tariffs won't let China grow, and that OMG Apple & GM might have to find non-chinese sources for parts:
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-colu ... with-china

The mixed bag Atlantic warning of indicators that our Brave New Economy (which the New Yorker wants to preserve) is headed for an epic collapse:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ge/570649/

screwtape
.
.
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:15 am
Contact:

Re: Fuck off, Jamie!

#5580

Post by screwtape » Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:06 am

screwtape wrote:
MarcusAu wrote: So has anyone seen the following yet?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgSrpd3MxY4

nb Trigger Waning for offensive language!
Only in the UK iTunes store at present, and my Apple ID is only good for purchases in the Canadian store. I'll have to see what I can do to get around that.
Found it and watched it. Not a very technical documentary, but some lovely aerial photography. Worth the time.

Locked