3
TheOpiner 3 points ago +3 / -0

The red and black pill communities alongside the evolutionary psychologists whose findings side with the latter, not in nihilism but in knowledge, appear to be getting it right about human nature.

Having looked into it myself, it is brutal.

3
TheOpiner 3 points ago +3 / -0

I get the suspicion that cutting spending for illegal immigrants will be the last thing they do. They're more likely to allow indigenous pensioners to freeze first for their ideology.

2
TheOpiner 2 points ago +2 / -0

The UK recently had their budget and I could just hear accountants, business leaders and commentators disgusted at the various taxes they levied at the richest. Their suggestion, do the complete reverse of Norway, have the Government actively rescind its manifesto promise on the grounds of changed circumstances and increase taxes substantially on the poorest while reducing or abolishing taxes for the richest and if pensioners, families and children suffer, so be it. This isn't some fringe, edgy commentary channel on YouTube or Rumble this was said on, this was on mainstream media outlets such as BBC Radio 4.

The problem with people arguing for no taxes on the wealthy is that the Government then has to levy taxes on the poorest and the middle classes which leads to emigration, suffering and indigenous flight while illegally entering immigrants won't care and will continue as normal. You will have your indigenous population leave the country either by flight or body bag.

1
TheOpiner 1 point ago +1 / -0

They didn't want their advertisements next to national socialist propaganda, hate speech and harassment. Then there is a exodus of left wingers to BlueSky come Trump's victory. At the same time, the advertisers come back.

Hmm...

6
TheOpiner 6 points ago +6 / -0

Even the "normies" on the mainstream media websites are complaining about how Netflix could not cope with the traffic (250 million I saw as one estimate). As things stand, there is still a place for live broadcasting which can have an infinite number of people watching without it keeling over.

6
TheOpiner 6 points ago +6 / -0

Wait until private companies jump on board because they will follow and all the non-jobs these career influencers are showing off on TikTok disappear. My sympathies will be with the low paid workers whose jobs will disappear through automation and face the real prospect of never finding a job again.

5
TheOpiner 5 points ago +5 / -0

Any adversity I've seen toward MGTOW tends to be from those who have an issue with people being single. As in, being single and either not succeeding in the dating market or explicitly choosing to quit the market because the game is rigged is both seen as misogynistic and feminine by said individuals.

7
TheOpiner 7 points ago +7 / -0

They are also:

  • Many people stating they've left their husband or boyfriend over the election.
  • Numerous posts stating that they will engage in sterilisation as a form of revenge.
  • Advocating for women to refuse to ride in a car with a man or have a man as a passenger.
  • Boycott family gatherings at Thanksgiving, birthdays and Christmas.
  • A push for segregation between women and men in society.

I don't know how it is possible for people to get this angry. Any male community that advocated a tenth of what is being suggested on that subreddit would be nuked in minutes.

7
TheOpiner 7 points ago +7 / -0

Not really. MGTOW calmly and rationally look upon the state of the dating market and/or divorce and retreat to independence and self-determination in peace. These women are acting irrationally, hysterically and emotionally. These women also have political capital with the left. MGTOW are apolitical and despised by all sides of the political spectrum.

16
TheOpiner 16 points ago +16 / -0

...removing themselves from the dating pool, and sparing all of us their drama. Good. We all dodged a bullet, single men especially.

Early days yet but I suspect these women were the dating pool. Anyone who didn't express these traits were either starting long term relationships young and have been in one for a decade or two or if they ever find themselves single, they are very quickly off the dating market.

Ultimately they are still in the dating market but just for the top tier men - so, business as usual then.

13
TheOpiner 13 points ago +13 / -0

I accept their terms. I'd also add no OnlyFans to that list too.

19
TheOpiner 19 points ago +20 / -1

Biology → Culture → Ideology.

Alphas and Chads are a result of biology (predominately genetic). Which informs culture and in turn ideology and never the other way round.

Think of it in the form of computers - the hardware you use determines the operating system which in turn determines the software you can use but the software can't communicate with hardware directly and you can't run an OS designed for say ARM on an x86 processor natively.

In terms of politics, Alphas and Chads can change culture and in turn ideology but you can't prop up un-masculine men in the hope of changing culture and biology.

ETA: A key aspect of this is the general observation known as Briffault's Law - "The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place". This observation of biology informs culture which informs ideology but never the other way round.

1
TheOpiner 1 point ago +1 / -0

Which is one of the reasons why Elon seems keen on having a walled garden approach for X, because that closes that loophole from his perspective. It won't, however stop the Nitter instances that can get through the wall.

3
TheOpiner 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm only summarising the findings from the video. I think it's common knowledge that they want to push their beliefs, ideologies and desires on other people, including how the player should look like or be nudged to choose in a video game.

25
TheOpiner 25 points ago +25 / -0

TL;DW - People who actually play games do not want to play as themselves - they want to play as at least, an idealised version of themselves - strong, tall and attractive. People see video games as a form of escapism from real life. Games that incorporate DEI have predominately been financial failures because people do not want to play as themselves. Game avatars via the Proteus Effect can change the self-esteem of the player and playing as yourself or as a non-idealised avatar can have negative effects on the player. Which is why people don't play as themselves.

Did I say that people do not want to play as themselves?

5
TheOpiner 5 points ago +5 / -0

Aydin Paladin did a two hour video on this very subject in the last day or so. I read the comments after viewing the video and the one thing that was apparent was that people do NOT want to play as themselves or as an avatar that represents someone in real life. What they want is escapism, strong, sexy, idealised individuals, even to the point that people actively create avatars that are the polar opposite of who they are!

These activists will destroy the gaming industry. I think they grossly underestimate just how angry and fed up people are of these ideologues. A reckoning is coming, one that will potentially be bigger than GamerGate in 2014.

Dove should stick to making overpriced soap.

11
TheOpiner 11 points ago +11 / -0

And as it appears from the article there was influence to change the article to mimic rhetoric from the Government and show them in a positive light, will the BBC now give up the pretence of being impartial and separate from the state?

The same week GB News was fined £100,000 by Ofcom for platforming the now former leader of the Conservatives.

3
TheOpiner 3 points ago +3 / -0

Startpage - Google search results without the Google.

15
TheOpiner 15 points ago +15 / -0

Men without a wife or girlfriend are some of the most hated, despised individuals looking at the results (on Brave, I don't use Google unless I really have to) - akin to some of the worst criminals incarcerated in prisons worldwide. And an attitude that isn't restricted to South Korean feminists either, it's more mainstream and worldwide than we'd like to think.

5
TheOpiner 5 points ago +5 / -0

You would think if this was for testing purposes it would be easy for them to explicitly state it was for testing only on the graphic so if this happened, you wouldn't have this reaction, wouldn't you?

4
TheOpiner 4 points ago +4 / -0

The concept of being perceived to be single to be profitable is not exclusive to Japan or these idols. Streamers and OnlyFans thots do it too. The second it's revealed they have a boyfriend or husband (spoiler - they all do), the revenue plummets.

The difference comes from (the perception of) purity and morality.

27
TheOpiner 27 points ago +27 / -0

Schrödinger's Feminism strikes again. They demand both equality and chivalry simultaneously while ignorant that you can't have both and they must pick one. I'd have more respect for them if they were just honest and disavowed their calls for equality.

3
TheOpiner 3 points ago +3 / -0

Democracy is an illusion. We know that the public does not decide who ends up in charge, they just fortify it.

We also know that Robert Jenrick will win the forthcoming Conservative leadership race. Kemi Badenoch may be popular with the members but she won't be allowed to win. Those in charge do not want another "Liz Truss" to happen ever again.

3
TheOpiner 3 points ago +3 / -0

The irony of the archive Reddit post is that they also banned the MGTOW community where such a post would have been commonplace. Many of them fled here.

16
TheOpiner 16 points ago +16 / -0

It also has to be publicised far and wide. Make everyone fully aware with zero doubt that defamation will not be tolerated.

The one danger is if it gets weaponised to silence whistleblowers and legitimate ethical journalism. Truth is only a defence and you can still be found guilty of defamation despite everything you say being true purely because the other side has the most cash. Something we've seen to some extent with the abuse of YouTube's copyright system being abused to silence critics who hit a raw nerve or told the truth about someone that the other person does not want the public to hear and see.

view more: Next ›