It’s better than deliberately being unclear.
Sometimes I feel like I’m in a catch-22 replying to you.
I agree that arguing any and all points looks biased and slows things down. I can see how I might come off as biased.
In this case, I could have just made an assumption that YT is great at manipulating search to reflect one’s bubble. That doesn’t line up with my experience but probably would have progressed the conversation more in the direction you were going. My experience is that YT search is bad and my impression is that YT doesn’t put much effort into it. There are lots of (relatively) easy things they could do to improve it but don’t. Some parts of search are just entirely broken (like the ‘watched’ filter is entirely broken for me; it’s just permanently empty).
But also, if I avoid making assumptions and answer more honestly then I get a criticism like coming off as biased and arguing bad points.
One thing I note is that if I expand on closed answers, that seems to distract the conversation. So I could just answer yes/no/unsure instead. But I don’t think that would necessarily help much if there’s a disagreement. Maybe I’m wrong about that, though, and overall it would mean a quicker and more on-topic discussion.
Right, I guess you mean this part:
I wasn’t sure how to respond to it so left it for later. More thoughts in a moment.
Yeah, that’s true.
re: “definitely-not-redpill, definitely-outside-your-echo-chamber”, I feel a bit trapped by my own research, here. I’ve looked extensively before for videos on dating app dynamics and have watched all the ones I can find. I haven’t seen any that clearly contradict the redpill take, but have seen lots that are compatible. Are they all inside my bubble, then? I’m left wondering if there’s anything that I’ve watched or read that would satisfy the definitely-not and definitely-outside criteria. Maybe it’s a situation where I should not provide examples. I could offer them and not provide them, too.
This thread, I think.
I have thought about order of operations before, both in regards to throughput and also in terms of efficiency for algorithms. The algorithmic case is the relevant one here. With applying an algorithm, you already know which tests are decisive (assuming there are non-decisive ones) and any ordering is just applying it in a way to reduce overall work or time or whatever.
I think what happened is that I was thinking about a pipeline of criteria separated into decisive and non-decisive tests. The decisive ones are used for filtering, and the non-decisive ones are used for ranking. I recognized that if you took a test flagged as non-decisive and then applied it as decisive in the decisive part of the pipeline, then it was no longer non-decisive. I then concluded that the change was to do with the change of position (prioritization), instead of recognizing that it materially changes the nature of the test.
Isn’t that ad hoc then? What do you think ad hoc means?
I can see why it’d look like that.
ad hoc meaning like spur of the moment. created or instantiated at the time it’s needed.
IDK how to explain without sounding defensive, but I think the reason for the apparent difference in answer is thinking about it in two slightly different contexts. The first is: did I come up with the idea of prioritization at the time I wrote that sentence? No I think I came up with it a bit earlier. How much earlier: a few posts earlier in that branch (second context). I don’t recall exactly.
So yes it’s ad hoc at an earlier point.
Maybe also I changed my mind about it during the past few days and didn’t realize.
All of them!? How many hours of video do you think you watched?
Do you have any notes on how you looked, e.g. search terms used, sites or sub-sections of sites searched on? Do you have notes on which ones you watched or what they said or your opinions?
Did you read anything or focus only on videos? Why?
Why?
You agree with the anti-vax video and the study it discusses, did not research the anti-vax talking points yourself (so e.g. no searching for rebuttals), but you think you can judge it’s good without doing your own research. You think the claims are simple so evaluating or discussing them would be simple and reaching agreement about them wouldn’t be a huge, derailing tangent. Is that right?
I had a thought that might be helpful, or might be inapplicable to you. I don’t know. It involves lots of guessing at your thought process.
My idea is informed by the way you have talked about trans issues, dating, intersectionality, feminism, women, vaccines, postmodernism, and maybe some more I’m forgetting explicitly but implicitly influenced my idea.
I am wondering if your method of trying to be non-tribalist includes, roughly, an assessment of where the political discussion is taking place and then staking out a position that you view as mixed and centrist. Leaning a certain way, e.g. right, but not fully buying into all of the mainstream right wing positions.
This might be intuitive even if not intentional. So if you aren’t doing this intentionally, maybe give it a bit of thought and see if you can find ways you might do it intuitively.
For example, I would summarize your position prior to our debate here as roughly: Trans people are delusional and shouldn’t be allowed in women’s sports or bathrooms.. But as long as they wait to butcher themselves once they’re over 18, that’s their decision as individuals and they should be allowed to do so.
Similarly, on women/dating it would be something like: Women control access to sex, mathematically dating is way easier as a woman and women are incentivized to practice hypergamy. That doesn’t mean hypergamous women are used up whores, that would be a misogynist take, they’re mostly just behaving as expected because of the reality of dating. It’s just an unfortunate reality for men.
You moderate away from the more extreme right wing position (which would be e.g. all trans medical care should be illegal; most women are whores riding the cock carousel until they hit the wall, etc.) — the position you hold is a more moderate/centrist right-leaning position that feels fair and balanced to you.
I think there are some problems with this.
Firstly, I don’t think being non-tribal means moderate or centrist views. It could easily mean you take various extreme views, if you think they’re right. The concern would be if your views are consistently extreme along one tribe.
But also, maybe more importantly… what constitutes a moderate view changes. The Overton window shifts frequently and often in extreme ways. Views on trans people, or on dating women, have changed over the past 10 years, and the past 20 years, and at various other shorter and longer intervals. So if you judge (intuitively or intentionally) things by the moderate view, that means your views are going to get warped by whatever the public discourse becomes.
You can see this with lots of tribal people, even the moderates. e.g. many moderate Democrats today support things like universal healthcare, universal basic income, and other policies that were not as popular a few decades ago. And many moderate Republicans today support things like tariffs, concentration camps, and using the military on US soil against US citizens. Those are also policies that were not popular Republican positions a few decades ago.
Similar shifts have happened (and continue to happen) in other areas of culture, like trans people or dating or vaccines.
I expect this may sound wrong to you at first and will be an unpleasant idea. But from an outside perspective it has seemed pretty consistent across a range of topics so far.
That I can find, yeah. I don’t think this is as extreme as !? would indicate.
IDK, 10+ hours maybe of directly relevant stuff excluding typical low quality redpill content.
No and no. I have some notes from the time that are related but not directly about those videos.
I read what I could but only really found pages via direct search. Mostly that was relevant for the history of dating apps, online dating, and match making more generally.
Regarding video focus, that’s where a lot of content by or targeting young adults is.
I wound myself up a bit I guess. The abysmal state of medicine and vaccine propaganda evokes an emotional reaction in me. There’s a lot of overlap with the trans agenda, too.
Yeah, mostly.
Maybe not the last point, since the point of raising it wasn’t actually to evaluate whether the study was correct or not. I also wouldn’t think it’d be simple if someone had strong pro-vax biases.
Why do you think searching for and evaluating rebuttals is unnecessary?
You can’t quickly find 20+ hours of YouTube videos related to dating app dynamics with a few searches right now? Are you excluding a large number of videos for some reason? What kinds of titles are you including or excluding as relevant?
I don’t. But I often skip it if I don’t know how to do it efficiently.
I’ve found looking for rebuttals hard in the past (which isn’t a reason not to but it can be low yield).
I did a test just now both for the vax study and for redpill positions on dating. (I did the redpill one first because I was more focused on that, so spent more time on it too)
Vax study:
Okay I immediately found criticisms (though haven’t evaluated them). This seems due to it being referenced in a US senate hearing, and a documentary released on the 3rd (~8 days ago). So in this case I could have if I’d looked – which, thinking about it, makes a lot more sense to do with popular stuff people are discussing because there will be some people invested in writing a rebuttal. I think the criticisms are somewhat lacking, though it might be a distraction to go into details about that.
Redpill criticisms:
I looked for rebuttals to redpill positions around dating on YT and google. There are some decent criticisms of the more extreme redpill positions (which I mostly agree with), but it’s pretty superficial. There was also at some good points about contradictions or ridiculous asymmetries (which are pretty common and not extreme), but IMO those criticisms are limited and don’t address the core issues (and I didn’t hold any of the criticized views).
From YT I mostly got pro-redpill content for the searches:
- wrong about dating apps
- redpill wrong about dating apps
- why is redpill wrong about dating apps
- hypergamy isn’t real
One of the main sources of redpill criticism were youtubers selling dating courses. Maybe that’s a search bubble thing.
I searched google for the last two and got better results, but mostly general. I checked everything on the first page of both searches.
So looking at like 20+ videos and shorts, and reading or skimming like 15 articles, I didn’t find a good rebuttal for my position on dating apps or hypergamy. It wasn’t a waste of time, but it took a while (like 2 hours) and I didn’t find what I wanted.
Yes and no. Putting aside a lot of stuff being recent (last 24 months, there was less before), there are a lot of derivative or unoriginal takes. I’ll skip a lot of that if it feels like I’m not going to get any new ideas. There are also longer form things and I usually won’t listen to all of it, or count all of it as relevant.
I am not that confident about estimates of watch time. If I include everything I started watching and skipped through, it’d be higher.
re titles: I click on anything relevant. I do get suggested stuff that isn’t redpill content, too. Example – How I’d use dating apps if I were looking for love, based on research, Psychology with Dr. Ana
Side note for @anonymous105, I found this during my YT searches for redpill criticisms. You might be curious to learn I pretty much agree with this thesis statement Why Red Pill Content Is Failing Both Men and Women (1:20). It’s from the guest in a whatever podcast debate. (Not sure about the full debate but I’m going to look for it.) FWIW in terms of claims made, the main thing I disagree with is at the end, that women’s behavior didn’t change.
Maybe there’s an element of that but I’m not consciously doing that. I am centrist in some senses and liberal (in the anti-authoritarian sense). It feels more like I have my own box of acceptable ideas and float around in that. I’ll keep it in mind when new things come up and try and pay attention to my thought progression.
Re prior position on trans and women/dating: yes. Both summaries are missing some things but I guess you weren’t trying to be perfect, so it’s close enough at that level of detail.
In some cases this is true but that’s not why they’re my positions. One thing I try to do is take principled positions and keep my principles consistent, and I’ll change based on that. Maybe there’s something subconscious going on that’s biasing me towards whatever seems centrist but I don’t think that’s a major factor.
Our range of topics has been pretty narrow IMO. And my distaste for the current popular left positions mostly come down to some simple things (most of which I’ve talked about in this thread).
@anonymous45 Here are some relevant links. What do you think about these?
Oliver also has other episodes about trans issues.
Look at the comments too.
I haven’t researched or fact checked this.
I watched them all. The second one (hysterectomies) was most impactful. I might break up my responses a bit. If I don’t get to them all in this post I’ll get to the missing ones later. (I don’t, I only wrote about this one)
Hysterectomies:
I’m surprised by how bad this seems in terms of prevalence. Taking it at face value, it made me wonder if all men really are that bad. (“All” here could mean like 75%, enough so that it’s the norm not the exception.) I really hope not. I have sympathy for the women described. I’m curious about their spouses and home-life too – would there be lots of problems or is this kind of thing commonly latent?
I’m more critical the rest of this post, but it’s not my intent to lessen the experience of the women described.
I think Bonniedoes (author) is biased to some extent in that it doesn’t sound like she was in a relationship and she’s seeing a small sample in a biased context (women who have sought out support groups). So I’m not sure it’s wise to draw conclusions besides that the bad stuff is happening to some degree. I also wonder what the take-home handout is after a hysterectomy (probably nothing).
The US has like 600k hysterectomies annually (about 2x other western nations), so it’s possible this is actually a pretty small problem, but it’s hard to tell. I’m also curious about culture since the US has much higher religiosity which I’d guess correlate with more traditional views on “wifely duties” (as one commenter’s MIL put it). IPV incidence looks higher in the USA than other western countries (maybe up to 2x).
The title is interesting “Animals actually wouldn’t even be this cruel”. Nature and animals absolutely would be this cruel (putting aside the actual capacity for cruelness). Animals die after having their insides ripped out all the time, and what looks like rape is common. She’s not really making that point though (and later, 5:20, compares the male abusers to “wild, rabid animal[s]”. Rather it seems like she’s making a point about the lack of humanity, empathy, respect, etc shown by the spouses.
I didn’t like part about cutting dicks off. Understandable but the video has 60k likes / 300k views so kind of irresponsible. Also cruel.
Towards the end she says some interesting things:
How much, uh, do you have to view your partner as inferior to you and as subhuman that you know that they just had a surgery that involves nothing going in the kitty cat and still, because you want to get your rocks off, and because you’re a fucking animal and you have no self control, you still make your partner do things… knowing it could literally kill them. Or irreparably and horrifically harm them.
Getting one’s rocks off and having no self control seem like a small part of the story. Like the husbands could just masturbate (and arguably with a 6-12 week recovery time this is the only viable alternative). The “no self control” part isn’t about frequency (at least not entirely) because combined with masturbation it doesn’t present a direct problem. The animal part though makes sense since there’s a direct disregard for one’s wife’s welfare, comfort, long term health, etc. I wonder if these people see everyone else like that or just their partner or all women generally.
I don’t like the misandry at the end (after the above quote).
The Comments:
I am mostly just writing my immediate thoughts here, so they can get off topic a bit. I mention the likes for top level comments too since it seems relevant how popular various comments are.
THE BEAR. THE BEAR. THE BEAR. THE BEAR. THE BEAR. [repeated another 15x or so]
4.7k likes but other bear posts had a more. I understand (emotionally) this position more than I have before.
One thing that occurs to me is that, thinking of women picking the bear, it makes a lot more sense thinking about it as a choice between a bear and some particular man (or group). Ofc when someone picks the bear we don’t know which man their thinking of, but I think that would be curious as a follow up question.
I’ve never been so grateful to be a childless single woman.
2.9k likes. First thought was sad because I don’t like people feeling vindicated for anti-natalist ideas.
Second though, it strikes me as an odd thing to say considering that the OP is about hysterectomies and ended with the claim that men will always leave disabled women for someone 10 years younger.
Working in healthcare opened my eyes to these issues. Nurses have told me about walking in rooms and having to forcefully remove men from women who had just given birth, had surgeries, traumatic accidents, comas, you name it. I can’t imagine the stories we don’t hear about.
800 likes. I might ask someone IRL how common this is.
[Possibly reacting to the end about men leaving disabled women] Everyone in health care knows this. There’s more. Most men leave a terminally ill wife. Most women do not leave a terminally ill husband; every cancer hospital has counseling for women to prepare them for this reality.
7.9k likes. I checked and while data is scarce, one study found men left 21% of the time, and women 3%.
Republicans are trying to put an end to no fault divorce.
8.1k likes. Forced sex + tearing stiches sounds like rape + grievous bodily harm to me, which should be grounds for divorce. I get the feeling that with the no fault divorce topic, among feminists, any opposition is seen as wanting legalized marital SA or something. I wonder what the view is among the republicans she’s thinking of.
That said, no fault divorce has always seemed like a poorly discussed topic to me. It seems like the feminist view is either make marriage trivial to dissolve (no fault divorce included), or go back to what we had pre 70s. But what we used to have was stupid and had a short list of conditions for acceptable divorce. Example: one reason was infidelity, which produced a cottage industry (pre NFD) for staging SFW but scandalous or risqué photos to facilitate mutually agreeable divorce.
While I agree with no fault divorce in principle (why do you want to be in a relationship with someone who doesn’t want to be anymore, anyway?) I think people don’t take marriage that seriously anymore which is not great. I guess if anything I’m against no-responsibility divorce, where courts don’t take into account context and how each partner is behaving (sometimes this hurts men, and sometimes this hurts women).
“I don’t see your mouth bleeding tho”
396 likes. Also,
when I would have a cyst rupture my ex would say, you still have a mouth… one reason he is an ex
2.7k likes. While oral seems fine if both parties want to, I sympathize with the objectification. Also I would guess that most women wouldn’t be in the mood with any downstairs pain.
First reply to cist comment:
The first time someone said this to me, I replied, “You have a hand, use it.” He smacked me, I gave him a black eye and that was the end of our relationship. I wish I had stayed that strong, but dating really wore me down and it became harder to stand up for myself.
Fair response. BF is the asshole. I struggle to figure out how women end up in these relationships sometimes.
Maybe this is one of the reasons that women shit-test.
my ex husband (father of my children) waited 6 months without asking ONCE when I said “im not ready” after my 6wk checkup after our first child. never asked at all after our 2nd child until I said something, and then later when I divorced him, he still helped me in my recovery with my hysterectomy 2 months after I filed and we had been separated because I was struggling more than I thought. no questions asked. we were not compatible at all, but he was at least not going to make me suffer in that way
673 likes. Later in that thread (same author):
[…] I was just trying to say that some men are still decent. […]
The husband here seems kinda detached. I’d want updates, not just for the sake of resuming sex, but also because it’s relevant to her recovery in general. Maybe this isn’t the full picture, though. It is nice to see someone mentioning that decent men exist despite the complications in her story.
this is such an unpopular opinion but this is why i believe in waiting as long as possible during the dating phase, to see how they respond to not being able to get physical. sometimes these situations or childbirth are the first time in the relationship that women get a chance to see their true nature.
139 likes. I agree with this (now, not 5+ years ago). Something like 3 months instead of 3 dates (or 1). But it only works in a society where women apply this generally, not just for the guys they see as having long term potential (otherwise there are incentive and dynamics problems). I don’t think no sex before marriage is viable anymore outside of specific communities.
My girlfriend is getting a Pap smear (which sounds painful) in a few weeks and I wouldn’t even dream of doing ANYTHING like that until she’s telling me she’s good to go and fully healed, let alone something as intense as a hysterectomy
127 likes. IDK how old this guy is but I feel like one should know that a pap smear is routine. (He’s corrected in replies at least.) I know sex ed is pretty bad and inconsistent in the US though. Apparently some countries have replaced pap smears, favoring a cervical screening test that can be self administered.
All men:
I was thinking about the all men thing the past few days. There is kind of an obvious way to put it that’s true, which is that given an appropriate historical context and upbringing, all people are capable of doing terrible things. I don’t think that’s the argument being made, though. The argument is that it’s salient.
If it’s true, then I don’t think it shows up in IPV data. Given most western countries have something like a 25% incidence over a woman’s life, and that men can be responsible for more than one woman responding that they’ve experienced IPV, my guess would be 5-25% of men are problematic in the ways described above. It could theoretically be more than 25% of men, too, but that would need to count men who have never been in a relationship, or have a weird skew in relationship distributions.
In terms of the idea that men would SA someone if they could get away with it, IPV seems like a reasonable proxy, but not perfect.
Have you looked into and evaluated potential reasons IPV data could be inaccurate?
Also idk where you’re getting 25% from:
About 41% of women and 26% of men experienced contact sexual violence, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner during their lifetime and reported a related impact.
What did you consider misandry? I think you are referring to where she said that men leave their wives when they become chronically ill. Is that what you were talking about?
Yeah, the US seems higher than other western countries. I searched a bunch of other western countries (particularly looking for a low end) and found examples below 20% (like switzerland). I found a map that has data on hover: https://vaw-data.srhr.org/map (note the US has lower stats here than 41%). Also https://data.who.int/indicators/i/BEDE3DB/E0D4E17.
IPV data can be inconsistent regarding what it counts (some of them include psychological and emotional IPV, not just physical and sexual). It seems consistently higher the more categories that are included.
Have you looked into and evaluated potential reasons IPV data could be inaccurate?
Not deeply. I did think a bit about it. There are a bunch of possible reasons that come to mind, including some based on culture.
Yeah. She switches from talking about the men who SA’d their post-op partner to speaking generally about how all men act with partners who become disabled.
I’m a bit confused regarding what you think she was saying. You say here she was talking about “how all men act with partners who become disabled”. Do you think that she meant to be literally saying that all men leave when their partner becomes disabled? Or do you think that is a reasonable way to interpret her words?
Oh, I see that you actually said something about this in your original post:
So you do seem to think that it was a claim about what all men will always do. I don’t think that is a reasonable way to interpret what she said. Before she said that, she said that men who rape their wives to the point that they become disabled will probably leave them. So if she thinks that men who commit horrific rapes will only probably leave when their wive becomes disabled, how does it make sense to interpret her as saying that all men will always leave?