Good quote from Correia.
He’s correct. Arguing is a spectator sport. You don’t waste your time on the already decided, you convince the undecided, and give ammo to your side. If there isn’t an audience, don’t waste your time.
Almost always true. I think I’d call this sort of argument a debate, and leave the word “argument” to mean a case that we present in the spirit of mutual comprehension and helpfulness.
I just realized that by microblogging I’ve basically rediscovered Twitter. Shoot me now, because that means it’s all downhill from here
Social Justice Warriors are all closeted freaks. SomethingSensitive.com regularly does exposé type pieces on SJWs from another forum rife with them… and to the letter, every SJW they’ve profiled so far has had serious mental issues. Some of them write rape fantasy, others sniff women’s hair on subway trains, and one of them even had an S&M type relationship with a black woman he regularly tied up and whipped. Yes, a lily-white social justice warrior tying up and whipping a black woman.* You can’t make this shit up.
Now any time I see a SJW or other leftist type ranting about feminism or transgender queers or what the fuck ever I wonder what horrible secrets they’re hiding from everybody. It’s almost as if your average SJW is projecting to compensate for something…
This is extremely interesting, especially in light of the fact that current science indicates homosexuality is just another fetish. One wonders, naturally, what is going on to turn all the NY Jews gay, all the SWPLs masochistic cuckold fetishists, and all the LA and London entertainment elites into pedophiles.
I’m not necessarily fingering the transdimensional psychic octopus from space, but someone out there has a better grasp of this social engineering stuff than we do.
On that note, “gay face” is real, and so is “creep face”:
In phrenology, we say that the eyes are the window to the soul. This is because the face is the seat of the personality, which develops subtle markers from the environment until the end of neocortex development, after which it is set in stone. The overall shape indicates racial history, a la classic anthropology.
The hands are the window to the prenatal environment and the cranium indicates genetic predisposition. Bone structure/somatotype seems to play an important role that I haven’t quite figured out, but it is clear that this is epigenetically malleable according to environmental cues like “I’m obese, therefore release estrogen”.
This prediction continues to be one of my better ones, suggesting that I name it something. I’m going to go with “gender-biased dimorphism hypothesis”. It is an extension of r/k selection theory. Assuming that females prefer to reproduce with males exhibiting trait A, and that males prefer to reproduce with females exhibiting trait B, a k-selected population will tend to produce:
- Men who are more A than before and women who are more B than before (sexual dimorphism, classic r/k theory)
- Men who are more B than before, but less B than their women
- Women who are more A than before, but less A than their men
Height is a good example (assume nutrition, et al., are fine). Say a race averages 5′, where men and women are of similar stature. Height is overwhelmingly a masculine trait, meaning women choose mates based on height far more than men do. After a little k-selection, this race may produce a new average of 5’6″, where the men are 5’8″ and the women are 5’4″.