This seems very logical. I have no objections. It’s in the spirit of common law, mostly trying to discover the underlying folk law and make it explicit and procedural rather than impose a new mandate.
Not sure Zuckerberg has three mistresses but maybe it wouldn’t be bad to demand that he have three close female friends other than his wife.
Consent and non-consent are uniquely important when it comes to sexual interaction. The most traumatizing part of rape (and indeed the most appealing to rapists) is often the role that agency plays. Victims feel that they have been denied control over their own bodies. This often leads to self-harm, or in some cases, fantasies in which they replay their rapes and imagine it as something they participate in willingly. Similarly, rapists are often (in the case of men) people who feel emasculated (either in life or in relation to a specific person) and seek to exert control over another person by force.
As for claims that women don't find it attractive when men ask for consent, or the idea that society only cares about whether these people achieve fame or not: You yourself state in this article that you have only ever had experience with one partner, and this might just be a you thing.
This is probably the worst thing I've ever read. Did you ever think to consult your wife on this, or another human being? Please remove yourself from the most schizophrenic depths of Reddit and Twitter, and seek help.
Wait you think there are women in the world who get sexually excited about a man asking if he can kiss her, grope her breast, take off her pants, etc? There are a lot of people in the world, so I'm sure there are a couple, but this is not something most women desire.
Wow, what a strawman. No, I obviously don't think it's realistic for someone to ask for consent before any physical interaction, but any non-dense human can understand the distinction between kissing an sexual intercourse. Ideally, someone should obtain consent at some point during a sexual encounter.
There's a mountain of research into women's self-reported rape fantasies going back for fifty years, notably including how the frequencies don't seem to track spatially, temporally or sociologically with any of the usual scapegoats. The notion this all pertains to trauma management or male insecurity is ridiculous.
I was not saying that all rape fantasies are a result of rape; simply that consent plays a unique, significant role in trauma. If we're going to talk about the psychological evidence then we can talk about how most research shows that these rape fantasies are often not an actual wish for assault.
Moldbuggian Formalism in any domain pertaining primarily to women is impossible. If you don’t understand this, you’re NGMI. Some might say Orthodox Judaism is the most ardent attempt in that direction ever made, but look where that got them
I had a dinner conversation last night about Jensen Huang and said literally the exact same thing. Don’t know if this is a good or bad thing, becoming too much of an autist
I certainly don’t deny that there’s a real critique of the morality paradigm to make but Michael Tracey is a deranged sociopath. I spent a month on the road with him a dozen years ago and I can tell the new mental territory he entered when his Epstein/Andrew schtick began. It also just happens that I just passed shloshim for my mother who I barely was able to mourn in peace due to the outrages of my psychotic sister whom it was quite disturbing to just the other day realize exactly how much like Tracey she is. (And oh boy do I have the story on American modern Orthodox dysfunction for you some time on her). I’m telling you all this openly and candidly because I value your work and my connections to it enough that I don’t want to lose it over just how personal a subject Tracey is for me and all the more now. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
He's right in the sense that the schizo theories on Epstein have no convincing evidence. But it's clear that Epstein was tied to intelligence agencies, including the US and Israel, ran degenerate sex parties with Eastern European prostitutes (who were probably all of legal age) to garner influence, and ran shady financial deals for a lot of rich and connected people who were 99% Zionists.
I assume you’re referring to the morality/consent issue and not the conspiracy/Mossad issue. So on the former having put much less thought into it than the latter Epstein seems to have covered the whole spectrum from the clearly criminal to the more complicated and I have no desire to attempt an unpacking.
On the latter for the record it would be nonsense to deny a Mossad connection at the critical Wexner/Maxwell juncture in the early 90s but it makes total sense that they would have cut him off by the time he got into legal trouble if not well before and that through the 2010s Epstein simply used his con artist skill set to convince Larry Summers and Andrew and all the rest that they hadn’t.
Regarding the Venn diagram between the two, if you’ve ever seen the case that Little Carmine was actually a genius and realizing the strong resemblance physical and otherwise with Epstein, what Epstein had going at his zenith was certainly not Eyes Wide Shut but perhaps can be understood as Eyes Wide Shut if it were put on by Little Carmine.
This seems very logical. I have no objections. It’s in the spirit of common law, mostly trying to discover the underlying folk law and make it explicit and procedural rather than impose a new mandate.
Not sure Zuckerberg has three mistresses but maybe it wouldn’t be bad to demand that he have three close female friends other than his wife.
your schizoest read in a while
Thanks bro, that means a lot.
Consent and non-consent are uniquely important when it comes to sexual interaction. The most traumatizing part of rape (and indeed the most appealing to rapists) is often the role that agency plays. Victims feel that they have been denied control over their own bodies. This often leads to self-harm, or in some cases, fantasies in which they replay their rapes and imagine it as something they participate in willingly. Similarly, rapists are often (in the case of men) people who feel emasculated (either in life or in relation to a specific person) and seek to exert control over another person by force.
As for claims that women don't find it attractive when men ask for consent, or the idea that society only cares about whether these people achieve fame or not: You yourself state in this article that you have only ever had experience with one partner, and this might just be a you thing.
This is probably the worst thing I've ever read. Did you ever think to consult your wife on this, or another human being? Please remove yourself from the most schizophrenic depths of Reddit and Twitter, and seek help.
Wait you think there are women in the world who get sexually excited about a man asking if he can kiss her, grope her breast, take off her pants, etc? There are a lot of people in the world, so I'm sure there are a couple, but this is not something most women desire.
Wow, what a strawman. No, I obviously don't think it's realistic for someone to ask for consent before any physical interaction, but any non-dense human can understand the distinction between kissing an sexual intercourse. Ideally, someone should obtain consent at some point during a sexual encounter.
There's a mountain of research into women's self-reported rape fantasies going back for fifty years, notably including how the frequencies don't seem to track spatially, temporally or sociologically with any of the usual scapegoats. The notion this all pertains to trauma management or male insecurity is ridiculous.
I was not saying that all rape fantasies are a result of rape; simply that consent plays a unique, significant role in trauma. If we're going to talk about the psychological evidence then we can talk about how most research shows that these rape fantasies are often not an actual wish for assault.
This is officially a Neo-Emdenist blog.
What is the new job? Congrats!
Clicking buttons on a screen.
Moldbuggian Formalism in any domain pertaining primarily to women is impossible. If you don’t understand this, you’re NGMI. Some might say Orthodox Judaism is the most ardent attempt in that direction ever made, but look where that got them
I had a dinner conversation last night about Jensen Huang and said literally the exact same thing. Don’t know if this is a good or bad thing, becoming too much of an autist
I certainly don’t deny that there’s a real critique of the morality paradigm to make but Michael Tracey is a deranged sociopath. I spent a month on the road with him a dozen years ago and I can tell the new mental territory he entered when his Epstein/Andrew schtick began. It also just happens that I just passed shloshim for my mother who I barely was able to mourn in peace due to the outrages of my psychotic sister whom it was quite disturbing to just the other day realize exactly how much like Tracey she is. (And oh boy do I have the story on American modern Orthodox dysfunction for you some time on her). I’m telling you all this openly and candidly because I value your work and my connections to it enough that I don’t want to lose it over just how personal a subject Tracey is for me and all the more now. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
But he's right about Epstein.
He's right in the sense that the schizo theories on Epstein have no convincing evidence. But it's clear that Epstein was tied to intelligence agencies, including the US and Israel, ran degenerate sex parties with Eastern European prostitutes (who were probably all of legal age) to garner influence, and ran shady financial deals for a lot of rich and connected people who were 99% Zionists.
Baruch Dayan Emet
I assume you’re referring to the morality/consent issue and not the conspiracy/Mossad issue. So on the former having put much less thought into it than the latter Epstein seems to have covered the whole spectrum from the clearly criminal to the more complicated and I have no desire to attempt an unpacking.
On the latter for the record it would be nonsense to deny a Mossad connection at the critical Wexner/Maxwell juncture in the early 90s but it makes total sense that they would have cut him off by the time he got into legal trouble if not well before and that through the 2010s Epstein simply used his con artist skill set to convince Larry Summers and Andrew and all the rest that they hadn’t.
Regarding the Venn diagram between the two, if you’ve ever seen the case that Little Carmine was actually a genius and realizing the strong resemblance physical and otherwise with Epstein, what Epstein had going at his zenith was certainly not Eyes Wide Shut but perhaps can be understood as Eyes Wide Shut if it were put on by Little Carmine.