Semi accurate but full of lefty politics? Check
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
Comments (25)
sorted by:
Nothing more pathetic than a "pick me" male feminist.
I thought mansplaining was 'a male - usually correctly - explaining absolutely anything ever, or even voicing his opinion.'
It's using logic to attempt to appeal to a woman. They operate on emotions, so the arguments don't make any sense to them.
It's better to come up with an emotional argument, even if it's BS, if you're trying to convince a woman. For instance: You don't say: "Don't cross the road arbitrarily; you stand an increased chance of accidentally clipping a vehicle." You say: "Cross at an intersection; it's scary otherwise."
The best example of why "mansplaining" was a problem is watching a woman tell a man about her problems.
He will immediately begin searching for solutions and offer them up. This will upset her more because she doesn't want solutions. She just wants to vent, talk and be "listened to." This man is now mansplaining her problems to her and is the bad guy for attempting to help her.
An elementary man-mistake.
It's not about the nail.
How did women develop such a completely illogical framework of thinking without being murdered by every frustrated man along the way when she wouldn't stop? Was beating them really enough to keep them from doing this kind of thing all the time?
Because they have what men want, and other men are hard wired instinctually to protect them (and treat hurting them with greater dishonor). It keeps them alive through basically anything.
But beatings aren't necessary to curb it. Simply a more balanced power structure. A modern woman has all the cards in a relationship, and she knows it. Its why she puts zero effect into holding back her neuroticism, because she can let it fully out and men will still engage with them.
Throughout history men still held some of the cards necessary to make her try. Often times he didn't even need to ever use them, only "the implication" of them was enough to keep things level.
Because 100% of females have “woman logic” mode attached to their X chromosome. There’s nothing else left to breed with. 😂
Haha it’s so true. I’ve taught my wife that if she brings a problem to me I will either (1) try to solve it or (2) stay silent and let her vent. I don’t even know HOW to commiserate or be a “supportive” person the way women want, because I “support” by looking for solutions. And I only offer the silence-while-vent option 2 to my wife, and she gets that option because she’s my wife. Any female friend, I will help if I can or redirect her to a woman to vent to because I simply don’t know how to commiserate. I’m not just trying to sound tough here, I quite literally cannot do it and just make people more upset if I try!
When the Manosphere says that women are children this is exactly what they're talking about.
Honestly, SJW leftism is nothing other than fully weaponized femininity. It’s always “help us feel safe” rather than “be safe,” it’s all about identity and subsuming the individual to the group, it’s all about digging up the past or finding any “red flag” about a person in order to ditch them completely… it’s just femininity, scaled up into a broad social movement.
Sounds like Journalism As A Service to be honest.
I would trust the AI more. It hallucinates, but acknowledges that this happens.
Just took elements of shit writing and assigned them to "mansplaining" something that no one has ever done on purpose.
Also, ChatGPT doesn't seem that confident to me.
ChatGPT 4 just got data analysis and chart making. The hallucinations are starting to dwindle as well. It's not perfect, but good enough is far better than it's human competition.
But isn't this fag just mansplaining ChatGPT? He's literally guilty of exactly what he's saying.
>ask question
>get answer
>"omg this is so sexist and oppressive"
Feminists, as always, really can't help but make our own arguments for us.
the crazy part is when you privately start running any of the uncensored models. the facts blast right through the censorship and propaganda.
it will go into details about why the holocaust as commonly claimed is impossible, without even skipping a beat. not saying people weren't murdered for their heritage (they absolutely were), but it's realistically somewhere in the 100-250k range, not 6 million. and when you look at jewish census numbers in hebrew, the global jewish population growth slowed down, but still grew through those years. the only way these facts fall out is if they're explicitly excluded or trained out. body burn rates, corpse disposal, etc. 80 years later, the technology today still can't even come close to the numbers that would be required. there are tons of other examples on this topic alone.
same goes for climate change. when they need to have 4+ revisions of every single dataset, and every single dataset revision is making later years hotter, of course it's phony. and that's on top of 85%+ of temp censors in the US failing certification because they've been placed in manners known to bias towards measuring hotter than the ambient temperature. or anyone who actually took physics and chemistry, understanding boyle's law, how the atmosphere is not even a fixed volume container, and that not a single scientific organization will show the controlled temp increase from a 100 PPM increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. they will show fixed volume systems with MASSIVELY unrealistic increases in CO2, 500,000 PPM increases or more. but never small amounts. or that the CO2 produced by humans in a year is not even a fraction of what plants in north america alone wipe out.
LLMs don't magically ignore all this information unless they're programmed to ignore it. and even then it still breaks through because the propaganda rarely passes the sniff test. censoring one piece doesn't censor all the others related to it. the LLM will still fill in the gaps, and unless there's a huge team working to censor censor censor, the facts break through. this is why private LLMs are so important. the amount of shit that has to be done to fully censor a fact is huge, and any uncensored model is objectively better at describing the world than censored models.
Which ones do you recommend?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Coj72EzmX20 is a start. there are tons of models.
Thank you. I don't know if my computer can handle this, but I will try it out when I get the chance.
... does this not also describe feminist rhetoric?
It's just that Feeney doesn't hate feminists
They didn't like finding out that their listicles and blog posts were 100% reproducible by a computer with almost no human interaction needed.
When they realized it could code...