Lottery of Babylon posted:

Men want to have sex with as many women as possible, and give them no support.

Women want to have sex with the highest status men available (as women perceive status, which is similar to the way a small evil child raised by cannibal head hunters perceives status), and be supported by men.

A prisoner’s dilemma problem, the war of the sexes, ensues.

If both freely pursue their interests, we get a defect/defect equilibrium, where a small minority of men have casual no strings attached sex with the large majority of women, and a these women sleep with only one man at a time, but sleep with one man after another, trading partners in an unending struggle to get a better male, or get a better position on his booty call list. This bad female behavior is exacerbated by the male tendency to give the newest woman the highest position on his boot call list. Women get the sex they want until they approach the end of their fertile years, but children don’t get fathers. Since producing fatherless children places a large burden on women, most women do not have children until used up on the cock carousel and approaching the end of their fertile years.

To enforce a cooperate cooperate equilibrium, mating choice has to restricted, denying men access to women, and women access to men. In order that men have the incentive and the power to restrict female sexual choice women have to be owned by men. Men and women have to be stuck with each other. Men need to own women, except that they cannot sell, rent out, abandon, or give away a well behaved woman that they have had sex with.

Iterated prisoner’s dilemma has a good solution if the number of iterations is large and has no definite end, but this is not the case with mating behavior, because a woman’s fertile years are short. The progressive scenario where woman sleep with one man after another until they find “the one” and then live happily ever after is prisoner’s dilemma with a large and indefinite number of iterations resulting in cooperate/cooperate, but the actual outcome is that they sleep with one man after another until they start to get desperate.

Rollo Tomassi, in his excellent book “The Rational Male”, starts out by criticizing “oneitis” – criticizing male disinclination to defect. If you defect on women harder and faster than they defect on you, women will defect on you less, not more. It is a successful and effective male adaptation to female emancipation. It works. He also criticizes mate guarding, because ineffective mate guarding is counterproductive, and effective mate guarding is illegal. Hard to do effective mate guarding without substantial social support – which certain religious communities have, but most of us do not. That effective mate guarding is difficult and illegal is extremely distressing to males.

The Vosgian Beast posted:

Amazon already recommended me a book called Kill All Normies. poo poo works fast.

BENGHAZI 2 posted:

thats actually a book about the rise of the internet alt-right, the author did a guest spot on chapo last week

The Vosgian Beast posted:

It vaguely looked like that might be the case, but I didn't want to click on it to check

quote:

This was accomplished, seemingly single-handedly, by Milo Yiannopoulos, with his (admittedly brilliant) application of his trademark flamboyancy and a cool punk rock aesthetic (Sex Pistols, c’mon)

The Vosgian Beast posted:

Looking through the responses to Nagle's book and man

https://twitter.com/hpmacd/status/876534234973863936

Michel Houellebecq is really luck he was born French so people assume he's deep and existential instead of just the more literate version of a standard redditor

The Vosgian Beast posted:

http://thermidormag.com/angela-nagles-wild-ride/ Already a DE "takedown" lol

The Vosgian Beast posted:

He's proposing complaining about by writing long novels in which Sharia Law is instituted in France or whatever

quote:

As an international space populated with anarchists and libertarians, non-conformists and government-haters, the dark web quite naturally gives itself to wide definitions of freedom. It points to the self-serving nature of power elites, decries corruption in governments and legal systems, satirises the ‘phoney’ war on drugs, and laughs at all officialdom and all attempts to curtail the freedom of individuals. It likes drugs, has no respect for official banks and has a fondness for guns.

Ronnie went in that direction. There were areas I wouldn’t allow him to go into – porn, for instance – but the Ronnie who existed last summer was alive both to drugs and to the idea of weaponry. It’s one of the contradictions of the dark web, that its love of throwing off constraints doesn’t always sit well with it’s live-and-let-live philosophy. There are people in those illicit marketplaces who sell ‘suicide tablets’ and bomb-making kits. ‘Crowd-sourced hitmen’ were on offer beside assault weapons, bullets and grenades. One of the odd things I discovered during my time with cyber-purists – and Ronnie found it too – was how right-wing they are at the heart of their revolutionary programmes. The internet is libertarian in spirit, as well as cultish, paranoid, rabble-rousing and demagogic, given to emptying other people’s trash cans while hiding their own, devoted not to persuasion but to trolling, obsessed with making a religion of democracy while broadly mistrusting people. Far down in the dark web, there exists an anti-authoritarian madness, a love of disorder as long as one’s own possessions aren’t threatened. The peaceniks come holding grenades. The Manson Family would feel at home.

The Vosgian Beast posted:

Honestly the thing that confuses me most about Wesley being the Good NeoReactionary in the eyes of Scott and company is that even putting aside his terrible opinions, he's such a petulant little poo poo who's a dick even to other LW types who don't kowtow to him enough.

BENGHAZI 2 posted:

I didn't say he wasn't insanely racist, or that he wasn't the personification of the old "a liberal is a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet hurr hurr" canard

Because that is no poo poo what happened to him

The Vosgian Beast posted:

http://thermidormag.com/angela-nagles-wild-ride/ Already a DE "takedown" lol

Improbable Lobster posted:

Dude has been a hyperconservative wackjob forever, it just so happens that he was able to hide it a little better in the past.

BENGHAZI 2 posted:

i too dont understand how lacking any kind of context surrounding the scene might affect this discussion

also his example of 90s grimdark is from 1982

quote:

My friend Max coined a word. "Borfs." Since "nerd" has slowly been drained of most of its negative connotations and become a synonym for "obsessive and knowledgeable" (e.g., "Ask my friend about that band, he's a total music nerd"), we need a new word to describe a particular kind of person. He thought of this word while watching The Matrix, as he was wondering what kind of person thinks good guys wearing dark glasses and leather gunfighting bad guys in suits is cool. Borfs ... that's who.

Borfs are internet tough guys who love "cool" violence and can only relate to a female character in a movie or comic book if she's wearing black leather high-heeled boots and carrying an Uzi. A borf has never gotten into a fight on the street, but is confident he can kick anyone's rear end because he studies karate and does a lot of no-contact sparring. Borfs also have no sense of humor. Sure, they may laugh at homophobic jokes, but they have absolutely zero sense of humor about their black belt in karate, their polarized Oakleys, their gym bag with a Chinese dragon on it, the literary merits of Frank Miller, or their collection of ninja throwing stars.

Garth Ennis's series The Boys seems tailor-made for borfs. The titular "boys" are a small band of rear end-kickers who are a self-appointed watchdog agency who keep tabs on superheroes. This isn't a bad setup, but Ennis has proven that the more freedom he has (for instance, when The Punisher became a MAX title instead of a Marvel Knights title), the worse he is. He never met an exploding head or hamster up the rear end that he didn't like. And the problem with Ennis is that his writing is never quite good enough or funny enough to be as hateful as it is. The Boys is chock-full of bloody violence and sexual shaming of women and homosexuals, and I felt dirty after reading it.

As far as satires of superheroes go, The Boys is as sophisticated a piece of iconoclasm as a schoolboy's crude drawing of Superman sodomizing Wonder Woman. In Ennis's world, superheroes are portrayed as venal, homicidal, useless at saving people, and sexually deviant to a man. The problem with this is it isn't specific to superheroes. Ennis's conceit is that they act like heroes but are really rapists and bullies in private, but he hasn't thought it out beyond depictions of violent orgies. This is a "critique" that could just as easily have been applied to police officers, schoolteachers, professional athletes, or community theater actors, and it would have about as much resonance.

Worst of all, the protagonists are nearly as nasty and unlikable as the villains. The leader of the Boys, Billy Butcher, is a Yank-hating Brit who wears all black, including a leather coat and the requisite Doc Martens. (See definition of "borf" above.) There's also nothing interesting and clever about the way they take down superheroes. There's a magic potion they take that makes them just as strong as superheroes, so they can kill them with their bare hands. Borfs, of course, will take umbrage at my description of this substance as a "magic potion," and will be happy to explain its pseudoscientific properties. But you know what, borfs? It's still a magic potion, and it's loving stupid.

danger-carpet posted:

Garth Ennis is mostly famous for stuff he wrote in the 90s; as somebody else pointed out comics were busy learning all the wrong lessons from their 80s predecessors at the time. I'm familiar with his work and no, I don't think he understands that Dredd's "moral courage" was intended as satire. This is a guy whose prostitute-turned-superhero protagonist breaks the fourth wall in order to tell readers they should Support Our Troops.

I find this review sums him up:

Marxist-Jezzinist posted:

All comics are loving stupid

Marxist-Jezzinist posted:

All comics are loving stupid

danger-carpet posted:

Garth Ennis is mostly famous for stuff he wrote in the 90s; as somebody else pointed out comics were busy learning all the wrong lessons from their 80s predecessors at the time. I'm familiar with his work and no, I don't think he understands that Dredd's "moral courage" was intended as satire. This is a guy whose prostitute-turned-superhero protagonist breaks the fourth wall in order to tell readers they should Support Our Troops.

divabot posted:

I liked and enjoyed The Boys and read it through to the end, but probably won't a second time. If Garth Ennis in maximum splatter and never mind the coherency mode appeals, it's precisely that. However, if you're in the mood for Ennis-hate, I also recommend this detailed hateread of it which is pretty accurate in everything that is wrong with it.


Particularly this one.

Marxist-Jezzinist posted:

All comics are loving stupid

quote:

Worst of all, the protagonists are nearly as nasty and unlikable as the villains. The leader of the Boys, Billy Butcher, is a Yank-hating Brit who wears all black, including a leather coat and the requisite Doc Martens. (See definition of "borf" above.) There's also nothing interesting and clever about the way they take down superheroes. There's a magic potion they take that makes them just as strong as superheroes, so they can kill them with their bare hands. Borfs, of course, will take umbrage at my description of this substance as a "magic potion," and will be happy to explain its pseudoscientific properties. But you know what, borfs? It's still a magic potion, and it's loving stupid.

The Vosgian Beast posted:

Race Realists posted:

goddrat benghazi is having the most glorious meltdown

Frogfingers posted:

I loved Garth Ennis' Punisher MAX run but I haven't touched it since high school and for good reason.

Race Realists posted:

goddrat benghazi is having the most glorious meltdown

Race Realists posted:

goddrat benghazi is having the most glorious meltdown

Race Realists posted:

goddrat benghazi is having the most glorious meltdown

BENGHAZI 2 posted:

edit again the entire point of that dredd scene is that he does a bad thing but it's the only way to save mega city one and stop even more people from dying, it is literally supposed to be a complicated moral moment, going "man was that the right call" is the intended reaction

Tacky-rear end Rococco posted:

Wait, where?

lol if you can't pump out 3000 words in half an hour on anything you've enjoyed enough to actually think about.

Anil Dasharez0ne posted:

it's actually a brilliant satire of meltdowns you gently caress