Things that were once shameful have been successfully inverted into points of pride.
Things that were once noble are often regarded as shameful.
And the people of the West swallowed these lies whole, largely because within all of this inversion, there was some little grain of it that provided an indulgence of their own sin.
Things that were once shameful have been successfully inverted into points of pride.
Things that were once noble are often regarded as shameful.
And the people of the West swallowed these lies whole, largely because within all of this inversion, there was some little grain of it that provided an indulgence of their own sin.
Pride? Lust? Greed? All of the above?
Destruction is one of the easiest things to sell to humanity. It always looks like something innovative and liberating. Drugs, free love, unlimited credit expansion, effort-free returns on capital, or even something as simple as being a posturing, obnoxious gamma.
Vox uses the word "dyscivic", which encapsulates it very well. We are tearing our culture apart, and looting it morally, culturally, and financially.
It's all a cheat code and a short cut, which is the wide path that the many find themselves on.
They want to "remove shame from promiscuous behavior", yes, but that does not mean they've succeeded. Talking about which ones they have, is better than your blanket statements and generalities.
This is awkward - you've confused "can't" with "not going to".
I've tried to be gracious here, but you keep asking (or demanding) in a very Gamma way, and I would not be respecting the theme of this blog if I responded. Maybe if you retraced your comments here and re-engaged with more respect and less posturing, you would get responses that are more to your liking.
If you like, I would be happy to explain where you departed the rails of proper engagement.
I pose a rebuttal to the claim ("shame not removed"), and included a detail ("bodycount").
SDL has said to focus on the What's of behaviors. Exploring the contours of what behaviors women are ashamed of, is eminently within the lanes of this discussion forum.
The fact that women are ashamed of their bodycount and don't usually bring it up, refutes your general claim ("shame removed"). You have not updated your general claim thus far, in the face of this counter-evidence.
I don't debate people who use Gamma tactics, Jimmy.
Again, review your engagement style, recognize and learn what you did wrong. I'm trying to help you. Or ask someone else here to help you. Your Gamma style is obscuring what may or not be salient points. It's muddied by all the posing.
I will leave you with the last word on this thread, because Gammas love to have the last word. This will also allow you to imagine you've won whatever debate you think may have occurred here. If you work on your presentation and engagement style, you can eventually merit actual debate.
And five points to you if you can correctly identify the gamma tactic I myself used in this response.
Things that were once shameful have been successfully inverted into points of pride.
Things that were once noble are often regarded as shameful.
And the people of the West swallowed these lies whole, largely because within all of this inversion, there was some little grain of it that provided an indulgence of their own sin.
Pride? Lust? Greed? All of the above?
Destruction is one of the easiest things to sell to humanity. It always looks like something innovative and liberating. Drugs, free love, unlimited credit expansion, effort-free returns on capital, or even something as simple as being a posturing, obnoxious gamma.
Vox uses the word "dyscivic", which encapsulates it very well. We are tearing our culture apart, and looting it morally, culturally, and financially.
It's all a cheat code and a short cut, which is the wide path that the many find themselves on.
Time to get into specifics of "removing shame from promiscuous behaviors". Which behaviors.
It's self explanatory.
They want to "remove shame from promiscuous behavior", yes, but that does not mean they've succeeded. Talking about which ones they have, is better than your blanket statements and generalities.
It's left as en exercise for you.
#skillIssue
I believe in you! You will figure it out!
You pretend because you can't name specifics.
This is awkward - you've confused "can't" with "not going to".
I've tried to be gracious here, but you keep asking (or demanding) in a very Gamma way, and I would not be respecting the theme of this blog if I responded. Maybe if you retraced your comments here and re-engaged with more respect and less posturing, you would get responses that are more to your liking.
If you like, I would be happy to explain where you departed the rails of proper engagement.
@SecritKing,
You pose a general claim ("remove shame").
I pose a rebuttal to the claim ("shame not removed"), and included a detail ("bodycount").
SDL has said to focus on the What's of behaviors. Exploring the contours of what behaviors women are ashamed of, is eminently within the lanes of this discussion forum.
The fact that women are ashamed of their bodycount and don't usually bring it up, refutes your general claim ("shame removed"). You have not updated your general claim thus far, in the face of this counter-evidence.
QED.
I don't debate people who use Gamma tactics, Jimmy.
Again, review your engagement style, recognize and learn what you did wrong. I'm trying to help you. Or ask someone else here to help you. Your Gamma style is obscuring what may or not be salient points. It's muddied by all the posing.
I will leave you with the last word on this thread, because Gammas love to have the last word. This will also allow you to imagine you've won whatever debate you think may have occurred here. If you work on your presentation and engagement style, you can eventually merit actual debate.
And five points to you if you can correctly identify the gamma tactic I myself used in this response.