I called someone a stupid whore

[Cognisant]

She wasn't understanding so I clarified, believe it or not there are people in this world who are not neurotypical, who can be very intelligent but don't necessarily understand subtle social cues.

And then there's cultural differences, what might seem like common sense to you might not actually be as common as you think.

What was I supposed to do, force myself on her or jump to some presumption?

 

[The Gopher]

Already this is straying from reality, since when do women who aren't comedians tell jokes?

Hey now, I'm fucking hilarious.

Yes you are, your hilarity alone drew me back to the forum

Hmm.

I think nit-picking hado's exact examples and stuff aside. As fun as it is to do. He is pretty accurate.

I do think the frame you're seeing the world with is a little off. That doesn't mean the frame you should see the world in is an ultra femboi nazi frame but reading the post it does have "Hurm" vibes.

And Puffy coming from someone who had that frame and now has moved house for a different frame that includes that frame but also now includes other parts of the frame that has altered his opinion of his original window view knowing it wasn't so hot is good.

Even Adaire does seem to have swung away from misanthropy this week and I can see how she's trying to help even though from your perspective it's going to look like an attack.

I don't know. We haven't talked for ages I'm not sure how much stake you would put in me being well meaning at this point so I'm not entirely sure what I'm trying to achieve. Maybe just be a person who has no reason to attack or dislike you saying "Yeah, I know how it feels and know how you got to your opinion but it isn't exactly accurate either and at least some of these people appear well meaning/might have good points."


Edit: Def not racist though.

 

[Puffy]

So, you all orchestrate an appearance on discord or sumthin sumthin? (Nice to see ya’ll)

@dair +1

 

[The Gopher]

So, you all orchestrate an appearance on discord or sumthin sumthin? (Nice to see ya’ll)

@dair +1

Someone said Yellow was back.

 

[Puffy]

So, you all orchestrate an appearance on discord or sumthin sumthin? (Nice to see ya’ll)

@dair +1

Someone said Yellow was back.

Trust Yellow to rally the troops. She was always the cheerleader around here.

Has the party moved off of discord? INTPf discord server seems dead from what I can see.

 

[Yellow]

Was discord where we were? It's good to know I'm not going crazy, remember there being another place we all talked. (Other than Skype, which I just couldn't do anymore, software-ily).

Anyway, I missed y'all.

Gopher, are you still President?

 

[Black Rose]

Gopher, are you still President?

I am not sure which side he was on in the 2020 election?

 

[Deleted member 1424]

I think you're thinking of the old defunct irc chat, yellow. There were lots of skypes, I believe. The current intpforum discord is an unofficial one owned by seteleche, who is still somewhere one presumes. The intpf ecosystem is like a gnarled tree, a mass of strange wandering roots.

Kuu did make an official intp discord called the dark castle. He organized it with a loving attention to structural aesthetics, but it never went live and has remained unused for a long while now.

@Kuu
What do you think? It could be worth resuscitating if you're not otherwise pre-occupied. It's shame to go waste and there appears to be not insignificant interest. You're a good neutral figure.

 

[The Gopher]

Actually you know what it could be. It could just simply be giving others the benefit of the doubt in all things. Maybe she's gone through some fucked up childhood trauma that makes her actions understandable, but not right, but that makes her actions and perspectives make sense in context.

You still don't need to go out of your way to help her necessarily but just accepting that there's probably a reason she is this way, and it's sad and a shame, and hopefully one day they'll be better but there's no point kicking them while they are down for fucking up when it's a by product of something else.

Like seeing the guy driving crazy on the road and thinking, hmm maybe the passenger is dying and he's racing to the hospital or seeing the person lose it in the store and thinking maybe their partner just died and they are stressed. Maybe they grew up being bullied and rejected and now see women as "other" and not people with the same faults and flaws. Maybe they grew up with their father sexually harassing them and it's warped their boundaries and how they think they should relate to and or use men.

It's hard to say. I think it's easy to be automatic in responses and assume the worst of people we disagree with or assume people do stuff for malicious reasons. Actually stopping and actively thinking why someone might be a certain way or say certain things takes more effort but it's a better way of living. People be broken sometimes. That doesn't mean you need to bend over and be walked on but you can just be firm and say this is not something I can help with, here are the reasons. Be firm, strong, but not unkind. This won't stop people from being unkind to you for the things you are broken in but maybe it is how people should be.

Idk kinda rambling.

 

[Cognisant]

Maybe they grew up being bullied and rejected and now see women as "other" and not people with the same faults and flaws.

I totally get that women aren't different but they're treated different and because they're treated different they think they are different and that's what bothers me.

Like I didn't go into this with high expectations, I wasn't expecting her to meet me half way and as time went on I kept lowering my expectations, and lowering them, and lowering them some more, until I'm at the point where I'm seriously thinking if I have any self respect I need to block her, she's just manipulating me and it's plain as day she really doesn't care about me, not even as just a friend.

Then there's the night with the cops and she's in my own home ignoring me while she calls everyone else she knows asking them for the same unreasonable help she's asking from me, and I still don't crack the shits with her. (Australian for: lose my temper)

The next day I'm think ok enough is enough and we're already past that point but I'll give her one final chance to do something, I won't ask for an apology but I'll tell her I'm going to block her and even if I'm not boyfriend material, even if she doesn't want to be my friend at the very least if she sees me as someone useful I'll get some kind of token apology out of her. Then we can still be associates, I do understand the value of maintaining a social circle even if it's with people I don't like I'll still try to maintain those connections because maybe through them I'll meet other people.

Her response is "I'm so upset right now".

At that point I was entirely done with being nice and honestly I still don't give a shit how unnecessary or poorly timed it was, it felt good and I'm still glad I called her a stupid selfish whore.

A week prior she had called me (because I hadn't chatted with her for a couple weeks) at about midnight and started asking me all these really intrusive questions about my sex life and my feelings about casual sex. I was quite taken aback because that's not something I do but the next day we're chatting and I say it's not how I usually do things but if she wants to I'm cool with it. A few days later I follow up on this topic because I've neither got a yes or no out of her and she fobs me off with effectively "stop bothering me I'm studying" and I got the message loud and clear, she's was just manipulating me to keep me on her team.

I didn't cover that in the OP because it's really humiliating.

Anyway here's the thing, you're trying soo hard to justify her actions but why? This is something I've noticed with society in general, whenever a woman does something wrong it gets downplayed, everyone's so keen to try and see their side of it and try to understand. But if it's a man? Hell no.

Don't believe me? Go read a newspaper and read it through the lens that everything else is the same, but swap the genders, and don't assume that if someone was a different gender they would have acted different. What I want you to look for is how are men and women treated differently and I think you'll find that society expects very little of women but men are treated harsher and held to a higher standard.

Heck stuff like this is apparently funny.
I think it's psychotic.



In summary I'm not the Buddhavista, I haven't achieved inner peace.
I'm a defensive vengeful asshole who is trying to do his best, sometimes.
And when I'm not being attacked, or treated like shit, or telling people who don't know what math is that they're stupid, I am all in all actually pretty fucking saintly.

Except the whole pissing on churches thing

 

[Yellow]

Rest assured that cringy things are cringy regardless of gender. Of course there are gender disparities, and they exist in both directions. But please remember that bias and privilege aren't a zero-sum game.

That being said, I wouldn't sweat this girl too much. I mean, she has to keep living with being her, which doesn't sound too fun right now. You get to walk away.

 

[AntaresVII]

Cog would describe intpforum.com to a person he badmouths here as a dim, somewhat backward place full of his intellectual inferiors that he occasionally graces with his presence as a sort of community service. He's the only real life it has left you see. It's really not worth his time, but he settles for it anyway, because he's a good guy.

I was under the impression this is how we all view the forum

 

[AntaresVII]

Personally if I had 3 intelligent people highlight something to me that'd give me pause to consider whether I might be wrong and listen.

See this is the shit I like this forum for avoiding

Emotional appeals aren't inherently bad, but people who make them without carefully considering their underlying logic spout this kind of garbage

"3 intelligent people" a ridiculously bold appeal to authority, but not even the worst of this joke

Guilting someone into listening to you by accusing them of failing to be properly introspective about their own faults is, in this context at the least, an unfounded and unfair insult.

Actually, that serves as a prime example of what I dislike about your entire string of posts: You imply a moral high ground for yourself by purporting a calm and caring attitude, when you are really doing little more than using empty niceness and indirection to cloak insult. I believe they call it passive-aggression.

Observe the tone of my posts, and especially dair's latter ones, and they're quite calm in tone. It's really evident that I'm not offended by any of your posts or triggered by anything you're saying.

Passive-aggressive emotional backstabbing: "See how nice I'm being? We're trying to be nice. We're just trying to help you. Why are you so upset at people trying to be nice?"

But even though I'm being quite calm and non-aggressive, I can see you're evidently triggered by what I'm saying. You can't help but perceive it as threatening or hostile, or like I'm trying to blame you, or prove you're flawed.

Why defend your arguments when you can gaslight your opponent?

Human emotive states are far too complicated to imply that someone is being willfully blind or insensitive for seeing a darker side to what you view or want to be viewed as having an element of light. Just because you generally wish someone well does not mean that what you say to them cannot be inaccurate, unfair, biased, or even cruel.

Regardless of any qualitative aspects to your arguments, your presentation of them is a gross perversion of genuine empathic outreach, and I find it despicable.

Why you think you can get away with this crap in a place dedicated to people who are famed for their distaste of such manipulation is frankly beyond me, and I should hope you either begin to use emotive appeals properly or stop attempting them altogether. To do as you have does naught but mar the image of emotive persuasion in general, which is to most of us already highly suspect, driving people further from the kind of grace you purport to espouse.

No one needs this kind of garbage; it's disgusting, and it puts genuinely kind people to shame.

 

[Puffy]

The reality is @AntaresVII that you come across as triggered by my posts where your post isn’t having an emotional effect on me. You’re not very familiar to me as a poster so I’m not going to speculate why that’s the case, it’s just a curiosity to me. If you were highlighting something real in me that I was avoiding or denying I’d expect myself to feel some reaction from what you’ve shared.

On my end, it’s as I have confidence in my own intentions and the purpose of my writing. So what you say doesn’t upset me. I read it and reflect on it and am grateful for you sharing how you feel with me. I’m even comfortable with you or Cog or whoever going on believing that. But I have to humbly and politely disagree.

 

[Hadoblado]

Antares
He didn't say Cog needed to change his mind because of the authority of other people being smart.

He said that he would stop and consider whether he was wrong if people who are smart disagree (and implied Cog should do the same). That's completely different, and something I would also do (and I include Cog among the number of people who would catalyse such introspection).

It's not "we smart you dumb" it's "hey, you're doubling down on a perspective but you're getting a lot of pushback, why are all these other capable thinkers seeing this so differently?".

 

[Puffy]

Exactly. If Hado had come in and +1’d your post I’d be trying to do the same thing of examining myself in light of what they’ve shared. Same if other people start +1’ing you.

One thing I’ve learned is that it’s very hard to see yourself truly through your own filters, defence mechanisms, and biases. It’s very, very hard. So other people calling me out is a blessing to me as it presents an opportunity to me for growth and better self-understanding. That’s why I thank you for sharing what you’ve shared as I see it like you’re sharing a blessing with me.

If one person critiques you though that can be an anomaly which for all I know might be more a reflection of that person than me. Hence what I wrote in my previous post.

If several people highlight the same thing to me that’s becoming more like a consensus. There’s less chance of individual bias involved. So for me if multiple people highlight something to me that’s an easy win for me to get a look in at a part of myself that I don’t understand as well. That’s what I meant in what I said to Cog.

It’s like if 3 women broke up with me for the same reason. It’s probably time I look at what they’re showing me about myself.

The thing is Cog has basically said to me ‘I think you’re wrong, Puffy’ and so I’ve dropped it. As at the end of the day we are the final sovereignty on our own selves. There’s always the chance that Cog is right and that I’m just projecting my own issues onto him. I think multiple people highlighting it reduces the likelihood of that bias, which is a part of why I posted, but it could nonetheless be true, so I respect what Cog says and drop the conversation.

I’m only expanding on this as I feel it’s important to demonstrate that highlighting emotions isn’t necessarily manipulative and has a place in intelligent discourse. Like what I shared with Dair I believe that emotion drives a lot of peoples beliefs and behaviours. So to me you can’t be impartial unless you acknowledge emotion and how it might be biasing a conversation. You’re welcome to disagree, it’s just a fundamental aspect of how I see communication with people.

 

[AntaresVII]

Given the context of your reply, or maybe just time and shift in mood (perhaps both), I think it's fair to say I mistook your intentions.
My experience of some of the particulars in, for example, your wording, such as

you come across as triggered

have been almost exclusively of those attempting to use emotive appeal for the purpose of manipulation and dodging logical integrity.
In that regard my unfamiliarity with your style is certainly a contributor to my misunderstanding.

However, because that has been my experience, I
1. will consider that I may still be correct, though I think not to the degree I first supposed, and
2. would also caution that your stylistic choices may be legitimately problematic if you do not wish to convey the insincerity and manipulation I (perhaps) mistook you to be.

My experience is of course limited, but it has been my consistent observation in verbal discourse that the sincere generally put much less emphasis on their own reasonability, whereas those seeking to manipulate almost always focus on it, as a means of guilting/gaslighting others into reconsideration

Perhaps the variation brought about by the written medium changes this, so, although I am not certain that is the case, I must consider it a possibility.

Another possibility is that, while I believe my initial judgement was incorrect in degree of severity, it may have yet held some accuracy in direction.
As I see it, it seems that you assumed a viewpoint where only a story was given, this being problematic because the mode of human story telling tends to rely on setting up such viewpoints to make them interesting, but does not necessarily require the teller to hold solely that view.

This appears to me to be consistent with Cog's responses to your arguments, setting up what is essentially a straw man, making possible the appeal ad populum (@Hadoblado you are correct it is not an appeal to authority, that was a mistake on my part.) of "3 smart people are telling you to consider a different view" the issue being that the reason consensus against that view is possible is that it is not actually the perspective Cog holds personally, but rather a fragmented version of it, selected primarily for its suitability for story-telling.

The issue that I take, then, remains of your resorting to an emotive appeal unsupported by sound logic, which naturally took the form I recognized and took objection to.

If, though, it happens that I am wrong there, there still remains one I think fair objection, that the particularities of your presentation are unduly indicative of that kind of manipulation, despite their sincerity. I have naught much to say on that account but my caution that your presentation sometimes has the appearance of disingenuity, which I certainly recognize is a difficult obstacle to overcome, but I would hope you consider worth the effort.

Again, I do believe I greatly overestimated the degree to which your comments may have been disingenuous, so, whatever the case beyond that, I share your view of criticism as a great opportunity to learn, about myself if justified, and others if not, and of course welcome any you have in return to mine.

 

[Black Rose]

whatever is important to the ego is an attachment. the egoism cog has we all share in that regard. but is it a choice? I am only satisfied by what my ego wants but what deems the wants of the ego? emotion? reason? God? but is choice an option? can I want what I don't agree with? probably not. it must be a change from without not within to change desires.

 

[Hadoblado]

I'm going to come in Puffy and +1 Antare's point

The way you post fails to distinguish itself from someone that is acting out a persona or sewing manipulative seeds (I remember having a similar style back when I first started playing mafia on a different site - got me wagoned hard). No doubt you experience it as authentic, but it comes across as carefully constructed to me. I've never had any reason to distrust you though, and we've known each other in passing a long time.

As for the three smart people thing, I agree with it but don't think it's a very effective point because it's easy to dismiss any group of three people based on some shared interest. In another thread, Cog and Yellow both reject compatibility and this gives me pause, more than if either of them did so alone mostly because I don't see them as having overlapping ideologies or interests. But there are any number of combinations of smart people I would reduce down to a singular vector and I suspect it's easy for Cog or anyone else to do the same (feminists, progressives, virtue signallers, mod-adjacents, people they've had disagreements with... etc.). So yes I think it should give people pause, but I don't think it's useful to argue it should give people pause.

 

[Daddy]

Jesus. Sounds like she’s kind of a user of men. I feel bad for you.

This is why I have little interest in people these days. I just don’t want to have my boundaries disregarded or people trying to use me like some kind of farm animal for their benefit. The struggle is real.

 

[Puffy]

@Hadoblado @AntaresVII

Thanks for raising this. This is what comes to me after reflecting today but if you feel it doesn't match up with what you're observing then feel free to highlight that.

So for me I agree that there is a disparity between the real me and the persona that I commonly show to people and which mediates my interactions with them.

Internally, I'm actually a bit more like how someone like redbaron or Lyra presented themselves on the forum. By that I mean my self is very fiery, idealistic, strong-willed, combative, passionate, opinionated, impulsive, etc.

But I also carry this wound of rejection from trauma. There's a part of me which is very uncomfortable with being seen or judged by others, or creating conflict with them that might provoke that, and so has to hide through these carefully constructed manoeuvres. So, I carefully construct things in such a way as to come across as "nice", and "reasonable", and "agreeable" with people. Because that's what gets me accepted and protects me. And I fear that if I am direct and show people the fire in me, or how I really feel in a given moment, that it will create conflict and rejection.

So like you say it's like speaking with a persona, or a robotised person as it also tends to mean that I modulate all my real emotions (which belong to the self) through my persona, which lives in the mind and intellect, and so they just come out flattened as words and thoughts and cerebral. Which is basically what I'm doing right now. This post is like a construct or a robot becoming self-aware of itself and giving a meta description of the purpose of its programming. It just doesn't know how to, or is deeply resisting and doesn't want to, run the self-destruct program. My best guess is that's as the construct is a defence mechanism that originates as a response to protect myself from trauma, so there is probably an underlying fear programmed into the construct that its existence is necessary or I won't be safe.

The thing I would disagree with is that I don't believe I'm malicious. I think if someone were to somehow analyse all my posts here you wouldn't get much evidence of maliciousness. I have the tools at my disposal to manipulate people, and you've (Hado) probably seen some of them in the brief Mafia encounters we had. But I treated that as a game where anything goes, in life I voluntarily choose to not do that and do things the honest way as I believe it's morally wrong. To me that's a mark of my integrity; and I would say this post as a whole is a mark of my honesty.

However, I do think if you analysed all my posts you'd see evidence of persona. I can see a gradual transformation in my posts where I've gradually become more direct and like myself over time. But certainly starting out in 2009 you'd see me being all friendly and all the time and I agree it's fake.

In a way, that's really what my blog thread "Eyes without a Face" is about. I called it that because it describes being a mask and not having a real presence. And I basically use that thread as my safe space on the forum to gradually tease aspects of myself out.

The side-effect of being this way is that I might come across as manipulative and disingenuous or insincere. And actually, in a way, I agree that it is manipulative and disingenuous or insincere. It's just not malicious, or done with ill-intention or intent to harm. It's done with intent to protect and carefully guard how I'm perceived and my underlying emotions and motivations. Others have misunderstood and fallen out with me about this before, but I think like Antares they were getting confused by my signals and interpreting it as maliciousness. I have myself considered if I'm a narcissist before, as me and Lyra were similar in a lot of ways and I feel like he probably had NPD. Also, as there seems to be a deeply self-absorbed (or maybe just self-recursive) aspect to the process I'm describing. But so far when I've raised it with people in the profession such as therapists who know me well they've denied it.

The tragedy or comedy of it, depending on how you see it -- I tend to see life as a comedy -- is that I'm someone who actually really likes people and wants acceptance and belonging. But tragically/comically also makes it impossible to achieve that or any kind of real connection to himself or others through the process I'm describing. I've been trying to break free of this for years but have come to an acceptance that it's a gradual process of healing that can't happen all at once.

I do actually agree with you as well that I see something Mafiaesque about my posts here. Including this one. I just can't quite peg it. At worst with Cog in this thread I think I just relate to him and am describing what I would tell myself about how I see his situation. But I can also see how this process could possibly trick me into believing I'm being sincere in certain situations when I'm not, like when someone says "we're good" when you're actually pissed off with them. If I were being passive aggressive with him, for example, my guess is it would just be as I was uncomfortable with the aspects of myself he reminds me of.

You'd have to trust me in saying that in terms of my conscious intentions I'm a pretty sincere person though.

I feel like my construct is this comic book supervillain whose revealing his master-stroke after 12 years on the forum. Lol. Sorry for the self-indulgent spew, that's kind of what I mean in saying it feels like this can be a self-obsessive process. Maybe that's that part of me being on guard all the time and self-monitoring itself, or maybe writing long posts is my way of exhaustively covering a subject from all angles so as to minimise risk of being misunderstood. I am really grateful for you highlighting this to me anyway as it did cause me to reflect a lot and I haven't put the dots together in this way before and there's fresh insight there. I am sincere when I say that I'm open to other's observations, and I welcome any other input you have.

@Antares. In terms of observations of you, my first impression when I saw your initial post was just that you've experienced being emotional manipulated before and that when you saw my posts it was reminding you of that experience. Of course, happy to be wrong on that one. And I'm grateful for you in putting these posts together as well, thank you.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

I mean Fukyo and Kuu coming in to ridicule Cog is just rude. Can't you at least laugh in private?

I'm sure he can take all of that, but there are people actually trying to reason with him here so that just ruins the therapy for our boy.

Also you were gone for so long that you were pronounced dead so you don't have the right to make guest appearances

 

[Fukyo]

It's been, what, 5 years, and this is the welcome I get? Damn Blarr, that's cold. I wasn't even laughing.

 

[Black Rose]

@Puffy you always seemed like the most reasonable considerate person on the forum. But you say you have a wild side you are afraid to express. I kind of feel that same way. But for me, it is more a lack of communication skills that is the problem. I am very easily hurt if I mess up. I've deleted a lot of messages because they did not feel right. It was because I knew I would be intentionally misunderstood. It has been years since I've felt no inner conflict from forum interactions. So I have had to become more reasonable. But I am still fearful of mistakes so I keep silent about my personal view. I don't know how to say what I really want to say.

The problem with being bold is the conflict but it is more who you are talking with. "Can't say that to this person". Thinking of it as a persona is emotionless. So if it is just to protect one's self, yet is non-attached, it is still a fear of loss of composer. That is what a persona is? Composure is/takes many forms, that is what a person can be different people. Self Image is the attachment. Identity is the attachment. Hiding and identity or projecting one. Secure or insecure.

We all want to feel safe in expressing ourselves and that is where habits form. We have to know what is allowed. What can and cannot be done. And if the result is what we want.

Whatever tension is causing a persona to exist it is pulling on or limiting/constraining the insecurity in tow.

tension hides in the background, I know this myself, it is the source of hidden motives.

Personas are something to hide behind but they make us feel safe. They resolve inner tensions in some way. But they keep us bound to a degree. We are trying to protect ourselves.

 

[Puffy]

@Animekitty

Thanks AK, I feel like you get where I was coming from.

For me reflecting today my previous post has a bias, which I think is that I tend to look at the whole "persona" thing in a pessimistic way. Like it's the obstacle or the enemy and if I could just find a way to destroy it, then I'll be free and happy.

Yet there's a possibility that will never be the case, and that maybe that part of me exists with good reason. It's not an entirely bad thing. There are certain positive traits that I have as a result of it, such as you perceiving me as considerate and reasonable for example, which balances out my other traits. Maybe I would become too overbearing or too opinionated or too x, y, z, without it, and then as a result of that I'd develop over problems that I don't have as much now.

So it's about checks and balances and finding a way for the different aspects of your psyche to work in harmony together as friends with different specialisms, rather than seeing them as antagonists that cancel each other out, which can only create internal tension and conflict. All these different aspects of my psyche co-existing are what make me Puffy.

Perhaps what I'm describing is simply that my "persona" has too much of a dominant role in my life, which causes other aspects of me to be diminished. Which has certain side-effects such as me being insincere and not really expressing how I feel sometimes. So attention needs to be put on trusting the other aspects of me more, so that that can come to the forefront more often and balance things out.

I feel that's happening naturally and I'm certainly a lot happier in myself and a helluva lot more functional now than I was even a couple of years ago. It's just a slow process and takes a lot of patience. As with most worthwhile endeavours.

You come across as a lot more grounded at the moment, AK, I hope things are developing well for you.

 

[The Gopher]

Maybe they grew up being bullied and rejected and now see women as "other" and not people with the same faults and flaws.

I totally get that women aren't different but they're treated different and because they're treated different they think they are different and that's what bothers me.

Don't believe me? Go read a newspaper and read it through the lens that everything else is the same, but swap the genders, and don't assume that if someone was a different gender they would have acted different. What I want you to look for is how are men and women treated differently and I think you'll find that society expects very little of women but men are treated harsher and held to a higher standard.

Heck stuff like this is apparently funny.
I think it's psychotic.



In summary I'm not the Buddhavista, I haven't achieved inner peace.
I'm a defensive vengeful asshole who is trying to do his best, sometimes.
And when I'm not being attacked, or treated like shit, or telling people who don't know what math is that they're stupid, I am all in all actually pretty fucking saintly.

Except the whole pissing on churches thing

Hey that's almost exactly my point. Imagine if you were treated differently your entire life you would come to just expect that. You can't fix 23 years of being treated a certain way in a day by calling someone a whore. That's the opposite.

You need to lead people to see how men and women are treated differently and look and how each individual has been treated and then work with that.

Yes women are treated differently in society I am not denying it. It's a big part of the reason I wish I was female and would prefer to be female/am non binary. (not entirely the reason but yee. Gotta go pick someone up bbl.

 

[Kuu]

What was I supposed to do, force myself on her or jump to some presumption?

Yes. The act is itself a question. If she's not interested then she'd back off. It's not rocket surgery.

What do you think? It could be worth resuscitating if you're not otherwise pre-occupied. It's shame to go waste and there appears to be not insignificant interest.

I am indeed not otherwise pre-occupied at the moment. Let the hunger games begin.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Oh the dead have begun to speak.

 

[BurnedOut]

@dair @Cognisant

I am going to try to be as neutral as possible. Since, I have a fair degree of understanding of Feminism and Politics around this, I will attempt to be as objective as possible.

So, from what I understand, Cognisant is being blamed for being sexist and smug. Hado and Puffy tried to be neutral. I agree with Hadoblado when he talks about how dair's or any feminist's reaction is expected to be like that and since she is a woman, it makes all the more sense that she will react with more aggressiveness. I would have also reacted like that. To be honest, the portayal of the woman was not pleasant to read, it was quite judgemental but it cannot be disputed that you can write whatever you want but also that you will receive reactions that others considered appropriate.

About your accusations of dair being aggressive towards you, you are not any less aggressive towards you. Both of you shit on each other and blame the other for being as asshole but as far as I can see for the limited amount of time I have been here, none of you are in the mood to empathize with the other side.

Someone had to point out that your fucked up description was indeed fucked up to read in the face of growing awareness about gender equality. I had planned to but then I removed that part because I was not in the mood to fight with you and I don't entirely consider you as despicable as you were portrayed.

______

Cognisant's description of that woman was not entirely surprising. I would go as far as to say that he is not entirely in the wrong from the most objective perspective. I don't know if Cognisant is a feminist or not but he has not exactly held all the views held by feminists and his reasons stay valid until feminism proves its mettle in the realm of psychology. He is of the view of males and females not being inferior to the other but he considers them unequal in unequal aspects and hence sounds 'raw' or 'primal' in his opinions. I have observed this in my own threads.

As far as the world is concerned, he is not the only one but the comprises the majority of the male and female crowd who tend to similarly judge the other gender. Hell, even you and I (before turning feminists) may have made similar judgements. It is because it is the universal culture.

Women, feminists or not, blatantly get the freedom to rave men being 'cute', 'hot', 'manly', 'OK', 'too poor', 'too rich', 'nice', etc as far as going out of their way (especially young ones) to announce their judgements similarly as Cognisant. Psychology research still talks about (apparently) hardcoded cultural differences between men and women and it is going to stay like that for a long time. Therefore, from a conventional and scientific (until further developments), Cognisant's views are not as offensive as many people here felt. I was pissed at his descriptions too but I found them normal and bearable because that is how I have witnessed men in media and in real life behaving and talking. There is a definite change but 'men will be men' still hold.

The 'whore' thing got everyone talking and also that she is Chinese with a perfectly pitiable background. Nobody knows better than Cognisant whether she was actually as naive as everybody here is assuming. Maybe we are all wrongly judging Cognisant to be fucked up. We don't know if Cognisant is fucked up or not. Perhaps, the situation is too sweet to not savor and not shit on Cognisant. 'Stupid fucking whore' is a more common insult than you think. It is as common as women calling men 'losers' or 'fuckboys' or 'jerks' or 'perverts'. The expletive used by Cognisant is certainly on the extreme end but he seemed to be clearly extremely frustrated and hurt. His mistake was to say that on intpforum.com which is hilarious to think of. Saying 'stupid fucking whore' does not make him a loser or the emo kid suffering from borderline personality disorder or does not indicate childhood trauma or ostracism of himself. Rather, it speaks of his explosiveness more than anything else. He should have mentioned about how she blew a guy who was a sexual offender for money in OP. That would have provided more context.

The behaviours as these newly minted feminists are not feministic in many aspects except in matters of employment, politics and holding certain views. The fashion industry, the glamour industry, the social fads still promote blatant segregation. While feminism is about literal equality except some hardcoded ones that are impossible to achieve, it is wrong to say that feminists are actually feminists. While feminism among women is in the 'freedom to be individualistic' phase, it is nonsensical that they themselves use puritanical feminism as a standard to bash other men which is indeed sad. I am not making any allusions to dair here.

But it is alright, this is a long process and it is bound to take some time.

My verdict is that the reaction against Cognisant by dair was out of proportion but that is just the objective examination of it. Her subjectivity is still important because she is not devoid of feelings.

As usual, Cognisant did not bother to counter the points made by proper expositions or falsifications but by posing counterquestions so it is understandable why this turned into a shitshow (which is entertaining).

______

dair, obviously, you overreacted but that is just my opinion. You are not objectively wrong either according to my evaluations because feminism even if underdeveloped in the minds of everyone, needs to be propagated quite ardently even if it comes at the risk of sounding like a SJW.

It is the right thing to do but it should not come at the cost of someone getting mob lynched. Your reaction nearly caused that. My personal belief is that everybody deserves a chance to be heard and not be viscerally attacked, empathy is very important but this is better said than done. Cognisant nearly got fucked from all the sides and I think that it is a little too much for him to receive which got him more riled.

______

Cognisant and dair, I'd prefer you keep fighting because the forum full of hibernating polar bears who scratch their pot bellies in their waking hours, someone needs to fight over proverbial fishes to create occasional spectacles for us to watch. I have missed that after the departure of gps.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

Yes, yes burned out. I'm hysterical and emotional and Cog's response is clearly and obviously my fault and not his own. What ever was I thinking.

Though I suggest you read what I wrote specifically. It really wasn't much on the topic, because there were too many unknowns. I value precision, deliberation, and brevity in my own writing. Cog's a productive writer. He's always going to outpace me and most anyone else on that front. It's part of the reason he always ends up talking to himself. He spins a good narrative though, especially to himself. What doesn't follow, he compensates for with volume and repetition. A crass, but effective tactic since humans, myself included, are stupid. Now did you read what I said? Or did you read what he said I said? They're quite different. Usually I'd let the text speak for itself. I'm not generally interested in defending myself from such things, especially on a topic that really has nothing to do with me at all. Yet you want to accuse me of hysterics and wrap me up in it again... Well, admittedly, I am proud about some things. Another foible I guess.

Sadly, the show, or at least my part, is over. Though I am glad you were entertained. I should dislike to be found boring.

 

[Cognisant]

This has been fun but I concur, shows over.

 

[BurnedOut]

Yet you want to accuse me of hysterics and wrap me up in it again... Well, admittedly, I am proud about some things. Another foible I guess.

I did not call you hysterical nor did I made any kind of allusions towards such a thing. I considered the context and read most of yours and his posts before putting out what I feel.

I get that you had early childhood trauma and that can produce radical self interest because of the sheer scale of unmet needs, but is it reallly that impossible to treat people like people, instead of ends? You clearly want something else in your life and you're in a self perpetuating cycle.

I consider this as an overreaction, going as far as to accuse him of having 'radical self-interest' and having 'early childhood trauma'. Then it turned him getting accused of being a sexist and a racist, both of the claims that I was scratching my head over. The former may be true but the second one regarding him being a racist on the basis of using the word 'bogan' and explicitly pointing out that she was Chinese was nonsensical. In all the countries in the world, there is always a feeling of 'them' and 'us' and it is not necessarily racist in nature. Linguistically discriminating due to someone's class is just colloquial and a heuristic.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

*massages temples*
He says so himself about the childhood trauma, publicly.

It was Glairhaidh who brought up racism, I never spoke about it. I really don't want to touch that with a 100 ft pole.

Now armchair psychoanalyzing is usually just projection and can sometimes be wildly irresponsible. I generally want to avoid it, but letting other maladapts feed into confirmation bias felt worse. You'll notice it was not the op that sparked my initial post of substance, but the indulgence of the op. Now I'm not a professional, nor do I claim any special wisdom, but I have not insignificant experience with the consequences of early childhood trauma. Like any good monkey I recognize patterns. One of the grand experiments of my life is figuring out if the trauma and displacement of those under 5 can be resolved afterward. Or if we are simply fools to try... I still don't know. It hurts though.

Maybe by disrupting a pattern, it can change. I hope so.

 

[Black Rose]

One of the grand experiments of my life is figuring out if the trauma and displacement of those under 5 can be resolved afterward.

I suppose it is the depth in the psyche. Has it become in the frequency range to dislodged or not and in what conditions.

 

[Cognisant]

Dair just close the thread, I think everyone that was involved has said everything they think needs saying and @BurnedOut if you want me to clarify any points I've made or answer to any you think I haven't just message me.

He says so himself about the childhood trauma, publicly.

Yes but the whole stepfather thing wasn't in my early childhood, my parents divorced when I was six, it was an early-mid teens thing.

The nastiness that came before the divorce might have done some early childhood damage but whatever, that was a long time ago.

 

[BurnedOut]

The fat lady sang, I am bored. Shut the thread