Sociopath Community

Tryptamine said: 

I can bring up tons of incidents, but I think everyone here is familiar...well women have just as good of reasons to not want to live that way as men do. If anything, they have more reasons.

Then there is the collapse of social roles. Many women yearn to be mothers and live a traditionally feminine lifestyle, and don't wish to be part of the rat race, or even to accept "biological equality", when clearly we are divergent in our functions as gendered social animals.

There's men who yearn to be stay-at-home fathers too, taking up the motherhood role for themselves, and don't wish to be a part of the rat race. 

Why not classify these as workers versus nurturers, instead of making it about gender? 

Think for a second of why there is a sugar daddy phenomena replete with web sites for connecting, and not really a "sugar momma" equivalent.

...dude you have not been looking in the right places then, the Sugar Momma thing is booming pretty hard right now. 

I believe they call it "Hagmaxxing", and before that it was a type of "Cougar". 

Dragoonback said: 

kuhne said: 

 Many people are seeing the hypocrisy of the Left. I am happy you've woke up. Inclusion and tolerance don't extend to others with different views.

I suspect there are many happy women in traditionally right leaning families. Roles are well defined.

 There is no reason to tolerate intolerance

Intolerance towards intolerance lends to both groups fighting over perceiving their own problems only through the enemy. It makes it harder to bridge the gap between people, and overtime said opposition looks less and less like actual people. If one of them is tolerant meanwhile it can serve as a model, but that doesn't tend to leave an impact on people unless the one expressing tolerance does it from a more powerful position than the intolerant person. 

Without said model, both sides can justify anything done based on how they believe the other would do the same thing but worse. 

Simply having a willingness to talk with people of groups outside of your own can help with avoiding sinking as deep into the echo chamber, as once you see a joke made about people you've had in depth talks with you can go with "That's not the experience I've had with them", or at least have their talking points as somewhere to branch off from. 

Spatial Mind said: 

If you ask me, in a straight relationship in most cases the men are the prize.

Take Quintasia.

 /mfw she's the comparison you make to compare men and women

Already you have thrown your argument in the trash. 

All the times she fucked up with those guys, each time she could've been in a better place. Even when it came to Tryptamine, his heroics would've been more of a blessing if she never ruined it. Like many cases she never had anything to offer.  

That's in most cases the man is the prize. Almost all of them I reckon. 

These days men are aware that women will try to train and manipulate them, which of course makes those of them very undesirable. Left wing feminist ideology lol, has done a real number on the dating scene, and while men approach women less these days, it only appeases the women men should stay away from the most. For such reasons women lean toward the right.    

If you ask me, companionship is the prize. To be with someone else, and to feel seen by them, is basically the core of the yearning. 

Tryptamine said: 

Very real. At the most basic level, we can detect things like developmental androgen or estrogen exposure by broadness of face, “softness” of features.

This sort of detection is at the heart of many gender dysphorics. 

If you listen to their style of language, it tends to lend to a fixation on this. 

People can also recognize trustworthiness in a face, or dark triad traits (specifically, dark triad males can recognize other dark triad people).

A lot of it's in the eyes in general. Even watching the current season of "Before the 90 Days" on TLC has been featuring someone who is clearly ASPD (for the flaws of it, not some sort of serial killer or whatever), and it's like... you can tell something's off about him before you begin checking the specific boxes based on a series of tells. 

This is how people discern beauty and ugliness on an instant basis for the most part. I personally believe you can detect someone’s temperament by their face quite accurately, and across life you can see people who resemble other people you have met, and they will be similar in nature. People seem to have varying abilities to detect in that way.

Astrology leans into this pretty hard, even down to said physical features and tendencies. 

Dragoonback said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

 Not trying to cast insults, but you really do wear stupidity from ignorance and makebelief out of derangement on your sleeve.

I know it sounds like an insult, I'd be, I have to bring it up cause I really think you need to address the reason why everyone in your life knows, you're full of shit. It already brought you to ruin.

 How do I wear ignorance when you are gladly full of fallacy and narcissitic derision whenever you respond?

Ironically there you go again being ignorant while questioning your own.

There is no king mate. Nor is there a Peter Pecker. Of course I need to explain that to you as you stumble into yet another deranged rant about the same old shit that has nothing to do with the conversation.

Not another attack, but it would really help you to stay out of other people's conversations.

I might insult you but you actually use ad hominem and other fallacies.

You're being vague. 

Actually a lot of people in my life think I am genious when I've tried to explain that I am not. If anything I get the most hate from religious people for being an atheist.

 People keep thinking you're a genius...... while you keep trying to explain that you are not. I can't believe that, but I do agree with the 2nd part of your claim. 

As for the religious, the muslims, they hate you for sure, but it's not because of your atheism. You hate them, and they, on the most part, don't know you to hate you.

Christians are taught not to hate, though the probably won't like you either, why would they or anyone like you ?  Are you friendly or something ?

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Today I don't see any censorship of the left, or feminism, if anything we can clearly see how angry they are on social media. 

You're going to be less inclined to see problems that exist when they aren't targeting you, that's how privilege works. 

I imagine left wing people get banned for making death threats. Them being censored for being left wing or feminist ? Not the case. 

It's less that social media platforms will shut down members of the left, and moreso bigoted intolerance being given enough of a platform to normalize into everyday conversation. 

 What's bigotry to you ?

Not wanting men in the girls room ?

Expectation of using people's fake pronouns ? ( in some cases until they change their mind )

Homophobia for not being sexually attracted to crossdressers ?

I'd reckon these are people's boundaries being disturbed, and not bigotry. People can be how they are and still coexist as they have been, but to force society to progress in such a perverted way is unacceptable. 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

If you ask me, in a straight relationship in most cases the men are the prize.

Take Quintasia.

 /mfw she's the comparison you make to compare men and women

Already you have thrown your argument in the trash. 

She's a prime example. Not liking her doesn't dismiss her as, ( are you ready for this ? I think not ) a real woman. 

Yes she is a real woman with a vagina. Sure she's fucked up but in terms of the gender roles her and her subjects were extreme cases. She really never had much to offer any of those guys. Just sex. 

Men have no inherent value, women do, though when a guy doesn't want to sleep with her, he doesn't want her.   

All the times she fucked up with those guys, each time she could've been in a better place. Even when it came to Tryptamine, his heroics would've been more of a blessing if she never ruined it. Like many cases she never had anything to offer.  

That's in most cases the man is the prize. Almost all of them I reckon. 

These days men are aware that women will try to train and manipulate them, which of course makes those of them very undesirable. Left wing feminist ideology lol, has done a real number on the dating scene, and while men approach women less these days, it only appeases the women men should stay away from the most. For such reasons women lean toward the right.    

If you ask me, companionship is the prize. To be with someone else, and to feel seen by them, is basically the core of the yearning. 

 Too soft. Can't make it about that with women. Her vagina will dry up and she'll go looking for some bad ass who'll spread her wide open.

There is never case where men have to take on a traditional female role, but with no man around, women have to take on masculine roles, many of them cannot which is why I say in most cases, men are the prize. Especially if he's the one paying for everything which is often the case. 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Today I don't see any censorship of the left, or feminism, if anything we can clearly see how angry they are on social media. 

You're going to be less inclined to see problems that exist when they aren't targeting you, that's how privilege works. 

I imagine left wing people get banned for making death threats. Them being censored for being left wing or feminist ? Not the case. 

It's less that social media platforms will shut down members of the left, and moreso bigoted intolerance being given enough of a platform to normalize into everyday conversation. 

 What's bigotry to you ?

It's literal definition, except in this case focusing on how the lives of marginalized groups stand to be treated worse for the time being. 

Not wanting men in the girls room ?

Expectation of using people's fake pronouns ? ( in some cases until they change their mind )

Homophobia for not being sexually attracted to crossdressers ?

See they're not even people to you, they're just the subject of right wing talking points that you can parrot. 

I'd reckon these are people's boundaries being disturbed, and not bigotry. People can be how they are and still coexist as they have been, but to force society to progress in such a perverted way is unacceptable. 

Normalizing -isms is going to stand to do damage. 

While it's generally bad to suppress speech, it's mostly bad over the backlash that follows the attempt at said suppression. Over how strongly language was supressed by those who ascribe to -isms has been, people who'd now be at the butt end of that are going to have a worse time for a while. 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

If you ask me, in a straight relationship in most cases the men are the prize.

Take Quintasia.

 /mfw she's the comparison you make to compare men and women

Already you have thrown your argument in the trash. 

She's a prime example. Not liking her doesn't dismiss her as, ( are you ready for this ? I think not ) a real woman. 

Using a highly unstable mentally ill person as a general statistic is going to skew the outcome, and with it the legitimacy of your claim. 

It'd be like using me as a prime example of a man, it's going to not reflect the average. 

All the times she fucked up with those guys, each time she could've been in a better place. Even when it came to Tryptamine, his heroics would've been more of a blessing if she never ruined it. Like many cases she never had anything to offer.  

That's in most cases the man is the prize. Almost all of them I reckon. 

These days men are aware that women will try to train and manipulate them, which of course makes those of them very undesirable. Left wing feminist ideology lol, has done a real number on the dating scene, and while men approach women less these days, it only appeases the women men should stay away from the most. For such reasons women lean toward the right.    

If you ask me, companionship is the prize. To be with someone else, and to feel seen by them, is basically the core of the yearning. 

Too soft. Can't make it about that with women. Her vagina will dry up and she'll go looking for some bad ass who'll spread her wide open. 

Sex is a form of communication, and communication generally is important in a healthy relationship based on the common ground both partners find when it comes to their communication styles. 

There is never case where men have to take on a traditional female role, but with no man around, women have to take on masculine roles, many of them cannot which is why I say in most cases, men are the prize. Especially if he's the one paying for everything which is often the case. 

I've seen more than enough cases where divvying the roles outside of expected norms has worked out for all involved. 

Turncoat said: 

Tryptamine said: 

I can bring up tons of incidents, but I think everyone here is familiar...well women have just as good of reasons to not want to live that way as men do. If anything, they have more reasons.

you love the burqa? or mass gropings on new year's eve at a train station?

Then there is the collapse of social roles. Many women yearn to be mothers and live a traditionally feminine lifestyle, and don't wish to be part of the rat race, or even to accept "biological equality", when clearly we are divergent in our functions as gendered social animals.

There's men who yearn to be stay-at-home fathers too, taking up the motherhood role for themselves, and don't wish to be a part of the rat race. 

Why not classify these as workers versus nurturers, instead of making it about gender? 

we are acknowledging how biological designs are a reality. this is why post equal education and all of that, women still overwhelming do the same kind of work, and so do men

Think for a second of why there is a sugar daddy phenomena replete with web sites for connecting, and not really a "sugar momma" equivalent.

...dude you have not been looking in the right places then, the Sugar Momma thing is booming pretty hard right now. 

I believe they call it "Hagmaxxing", and before that it was a type of "Cougar".

you think there is the same kind of market there?

Tryptamine said: 

Turncoat said: 

Tryptamine said: 

I can bring up tons of incidents, but I think everyone here is familiar...well women have just as good of reasons to not want to live that way as men do. If anything, they have more reasons.

you love the burqa? or mass gropings on new year's eve at a train station?

That's a bit of an alarmist response to the idea of women being given equal opportunities. 

Then there is the collapse of social roles. Many women yearn to be mothers and live a traditionally feminine lifestyle, and don't wish to be part of the rat race, or even to accept "biological equality", when clearly we are divergent in our functions as gendered social animals.

There's men who yearn to be stay-at-home fathers too, taking up the motherhood role for themselves, and don't wish to be a part of the rat race. 

Why not classify these as workers versus nurturers, instead of making it about gender? 

we are acknowledging how biological designs are a reality. this is why post equal education and all of that, women still overwhelming do the same kind of work, and so do men

Are we not going to acknowledge those who don't conform to that though? 

If the US suddenly said only women should drink alcohol over how they metabolize it in a superior way, and that it impairs men's ability to be successful members of the workforce when compared to nurturers staying home, would you then say men should no longer drink? 

I don't see why averages solely should constitute some sort of template, nor do I see biology as a reason to give men more rights than women. Why not let it play out where the individual can make their own choices? 

Think for a second of why there is a sugar daddy phenomena replete with web sites for connecting, and not really a "sugar momma" equivalent.

...dude you have not been looking in the right places then, the Sugar Momma thing is booming pretty hard right now. 

I believe they call it "Hagmaxxing", and before that it was a type of "Cougar".

you think there is the same kind of market there?

It's on the rise is more my point, and has been for a bit now as a symptom of the US becoming that much less patriarchal in the name of capital.