|
hyphz posted:But the commonly given response that "if many people are rejecting you then you are the problem" denies knowing both of these at once. Of course, they can know it, but they keep being told it's wrong, that instead there is a black-and-white "problem" threshold of success in human interaction that they are under, and that by changing their behavior (exclusively) they can be over it, no matter what other people are involved. The advice to do something, anything to be more socially successful is still good because getting more chances is better than having no chance at all. Yes, stay fat, unwashed, poor, undriven, uneducated, depressed because there's a risk that doing something is not a 100% chance of getting results. Please ignore that working on yourself will better your life anyway unrelated to other people. I'd really feel for incels who put in the work to get their life together but given their demanding child-like predestination-driven mindset, somehing tells me I won't find many.
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 00:11 |
|
|
hyphz posted:But the commonly given response that "if many people are rejecting you then you are the problem" denies knowing both of these at once. Of course, they can know it, but they keep being told it's wrong, that instead there is a black-and-white "problem" threshold of success in human interaction that they are under, and that by changing their behavior (exclusively) they can be over it, no matter what other people are involved. No it doesn't, and you are a moron if you think it does. The meeting point of those two facts is this: some people won't like you, that is reality and you have to live with like everyone else, if nobody likes you, there's a[t least one] problem with you. The idea that nobody will be liked by everybody and that looking at individual rejections is meaningless is literally one of two premises you're responding to. quote:Nobody ever says "well you could get fitter but it might not result in anything" even though that's the truth. That isn't the truth though. If nothing else, it will result in being fitter, which is a benefit in and of itself. And while it may not be of a social benefit when dealing with some people, it will be a benefit when dealing with others. You are arguing that it's unreasonable to expect a group of people to understand that humanity isn't a hive mind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
If you can't get over the fact that human actions are not 100% predictable then you shouldn't be in a relationship because: a) guess what - you'll be dealing with an unpredictable human and that's apparently terrifying to you, b) you're a child and children shouldn't be in relationships, that poo poo is for grownups.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:and how that's so loving Raven?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
Guy Mann posted:BPA is so stable that they used it in lab equipment, the panic over it is entirely because one woman said that a combination of harsh lab chemicals and ridiculously sensitive frog eggs might have effected their development and people just ran with it. Lol the concern ain't about it's stability but rather it's status as an endocrine disruptor
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Domestic Amuse posted:How many of these guys are just latent homosexuals who just need a little push in the right direction to burst forth from the closet? As a homo I can tell you that these guys are just raging misogynists not closet cases
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
DragQueenofAngmar posted:the advice doesn't say that because it doesn't assume you are a terrifying sociopath, which is what you are if you legit don't understand that "your behavior and hygiene is repellent, be better and more people will like you" does not mean "follow these steps and literally no one can turn you down, it will be impossible, because these are the Correct Methods" But that's what you assume if you say "if other people treat you in way X, then there is a problem with you." If the interactions of others are not determined and not reliable, then you are never entitled to judge someone else based on their interactions. If you do, you break that assumption. Of course, people don't accept this. They do the classic motte-and-bailey thing of making arguments like the ones above, that it's obvious there are no guarantees and that anyone who thinks otherwise is stupid, then as soon as that discussion is over they go back to making the judgment that someone is a problem, ignoring the implicit contradiction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
hyphz posted:But that's what you assume if you say "if other people treat you in way X, then there is a problem with you." god you're so stupid and you think you're so smart
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
hyphz posted:But that's what you assume if you say "if other people treat you in way X, then there is a problem with you." Yeah, talking about gay incels is so much less fun than this. Oh, yes. Hoo boy. I kind of feel like "deep" analysis is making this thread less and less fun to read.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
"There are things you are doing (or not doing, as the case may be) that are very likely generating negative outcomes" being true does not mean that "There are things you could be doing that are very likely to produce positive outcomes" is true. I don't understand how you are having trouble with this, unless you are literally incapable of grasping concepts that are not 100% binary.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Palpek posted:If you can't get over the fact that human actions are not 100% predictable then you shouldn't be in a relationship because: a) guess what - you'll be dealing with an unpredictable human and that's apparently terrifying to you, b) you're a child and children shouldn't be in relationships, that poo poo is for grownups. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-legacy-distorted-love/201608/the-destructive-force-narcissistic-injury
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
nobody tell hyphz about probabilistic phenomena
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
hyphz posted:But that's what you assume if you say "if other people treat you in way X, then there is a problem with you." But you're confounding basic civility with accepting a romantic and/or sexual relationship with somebody. You generally have the right to expect other people not to treat you like scum - unless you treat them like scum first - but you don't have the right to make any given person date or have sex with you. We can quibble about what counts as civil treatment, but giving up the ability to meaningfully consent to sex or romance should be off the table.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
*an incel, face growing redder and redder* "you don't understand, either human interaction is 100% unpredictable and trying is pointless, or else I should be able to mind control a woman by being nice, middle ground and nuance doesn't exist, anything else is a logical fallaceeeeeeeeeeeee"
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
chumbler posted:unless you are literally incapable of grasping concepts that are not 100% binary. it's this, he doesn't understand why people don't act like computers
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
These guys think women are the only shallow ones and that being gay is a magical window into being accepted for the way you look. Gay men can be just as shallow as anyone else and a lot of gay men feel insecure about the way they look for the some of the same reasons everyone else does. There's also a fair amount of blatant racism on Grindr and other hookup apps. Just go to r/gaybros sometime, it's basically r/incels for gay guys. So many threads that boil down to "Gays are just shallow size queens and I'm only attracted to power tops who are hyper masculine but I also want a committed relationship. I'm the only masculine gay guy in the whole world who wants to settle down and I'm going to be alone forever a booo hooo hoooo. I'd be in a real relationship if everyone wasn't such a slut." RobotDogPolice fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Sep 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
RobotDogPolice posted:Gay men can be just as shallow as anyone else Gay men are the shallowest fuckers on the planet man. They have it down to a science
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
chumbler posted:"There are things you are doing (or not doing, as the case may be) that are very likely generating negative outcomes" being true does not mean that "There are things you could be doing that are very likely to produce positive outcomes" is true. I don't understand how you are having trouble with this, unless you are literally incapable of grasping concepts that are not 100% binary. But that's also true??? People can absolutely act in ways that are cool and good and likely to result in people treating them well. Nothing is garuanteed, neither the positives nor the negatives.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
DragQueenofAngmar posted:it's this, he doesn't understand why people don't act like computers Hey, they're the ones saying "you're the problem". Not "there's an x% chance that you're the problem." But they won't say that, because they don't really believe it, and they have no idea what x is. (Oh, and declaring that human behavior is probabilistic opens whole new cans of worms.) Having a black-and-white perception that's positive (you can get everything you want if you X and if you don't you never will) is no better than having one that's negative (either there's no point trying or I can mind control people) given that both are equally wrong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Palpek posted:If you can't get over the fact that human actions are not 100% predictable then you shouldn't be in a relationship because: a) guess what - you'll be dealing with an unpredictable human and that's apparently terrifying to you, b) you're a child and children shouldn't be in relationships, that poo poo is for grownups. well maybe you're an unpredictable person with zero logic but I'm a rational actor with a powerful brain and perfect logic so none of this applies to me and wouldn't apply to you if you were a rational actor with perfect logic and furthermore 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
I'm a pretty loving bad poster but you're trying way too hard and missing the point. 
EPIC fat guy vids fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Sep 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Melania is an extremely abusive relationship with The POTUS btw
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Having a black-and-white perception that's positive (you can get everything you want if you X and if you don't you never will) is no better than having one that's negative (either there's no point trying or I can mind control people) given that both are equally wrong. no one is suggesting that people should do this and if that's what you're getting from all these posts the problem is you and the way you think
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
I apologize for somewhat contributing to turning this thread into the direction of brokebrains e/n thread but I guess it at least proves that human stupidity is one of those rare 100% predictable things in life.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
DragQueenofAngmar posted:no one is suggesting that people should do this and if that's what you're getting from all these posts the problem is you and the way you think Perhaps. But plenty of well-meaning people, if someone doesn't believe "if I do X then I will definitely succeed", will attack them for giving up. Or they might pay it lip service but if they in any way act on that belief by mitigating their efforts to do X then they'll attack them for that. All of this is training people to have black-and-white perceptions and overmuch perception of control, in the supposed name of motivating them. But it's not then surprising that when things don't work out for them the perceptions flip to negative but retain those same properties that were hammered into them. hyphz fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Sep 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
You are the only person viewing this as black and white.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
"you guys, we need to be giving advice in a totally different way! Only 99.8% of people understand the extremely obvious point and we're leaving these poor other dudes behind  "
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
DragQueenofAngmar posted:"you guys, we need to be giving advice in a totally different way! Only 99.8% of people understand the extremely obvious point and we're leaving these poor other dudes behind Aren't the r/incels folk just that 0.2% ?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
DragQueenofAngmar posted:"you guys, we need to be giving advice in a totally different way! Only 99.8% of people understand the extremely obvious point and we're leaving these poor other dudes behind You're forgetting that deep down potential incels are 80% of men (non-Chads) so... not such a small number anymore, is it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Perhaps. But plenty of well-meaning people, if someone doesn't believe "if I do X then I will definitely succeed", will attack them for giving up. Or they might pay it lip service but if they in any way act on that belief by mitigating their efforts to do X then they'll attack them for that. All of this is training people to have black-and-white perceptions and overmuch perception of control, in the supposed name of motivating them. But it's not then surprising that when things don't work out for them the perceptions flip to negative but retain those same properties that were hammered into them. Yeah, this is all bullshit. There are no legions of people saying "Do X and you will definitely succeed" with human interactions. They are saying "Do X and over time you will have opportunities to succeed" which is absolutely true. Especially if the former case assumes a particular time frame or small sample size. Let's take this out of the realm of socialization, since that's seems to be tripping you up. Lets say these guys were instead whining that no matter what, they never win at poker night. They've been going their buddies house for years and left fifty bucks lighter, each and every time. Now, lets imagine that it turns out that what they are doing is some combination of folding every hand until they bleed out on the antes and/or only betting on hands that are actively bad. One can give them good advice on how to change their strategy to improve their chances of success, but that isn't the same as a guarantee. You are basically arguing that, of course, it's totally reasonable for someone to conclude based on one bad night, or even one bad beat, that poker strategy is bullshit, and if you don't have a royal flush it's over, man.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Perhaps. But plenty of well-meaning people, if someone doesn't believe "if I do X then I will definitely succeed", will attack them for giving up. Or they might pay it lip service but if they in any way act on that belief by mitigating their efforts to do X then they'll attack them for that. I don't think there are many circumstances where people are being told they will definitely succeed at all of their goals if they do X. The only person who would make that kind of promise is dumb, delusional, or selling something. Most people who have an ounce of judgment will realize they can't expect a universal outcome when it comes to anything regarding human beings. And if someone doesn't have judgment like that... well, I think the men of r/incels are severely lacking in judgment, and if it's even possible to fix that, it would be through education and possibly medication and therapy. None of which they will ever receive if they think they are beyond reproach and block out those who say otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
Gambor posted:Yeah, this is all bullshit. There are no legions of people saying "Do X and you will definitely succeed" with human interactions. They are saying "Do X and over time you will have opportunities to succeed" which is absolutely true. Especially if the former case assumes a particular time frame or small sample size. Ok, this is a good example. If someone's routinely losing at poker, then you can look at their strategy and see if there's a problem. Sure. But you have to do that looking. You can't just immediately say they are the problem, without checking their strategy first. After all, it is possible that no-one at the table is playing "wrong" but in Poker someone must lose. Also, since there is no guarantee they will start winning when their strategy is fixed, you should at least admit that there is a _chance_ that the most productive choice for them is to stop playing poker. Yes, playing a better strategy may improve their odds, but those improved odds could still leave them a couple hundred down. This doesn't mean they shouldn't try if they want to, but you can't just disregard it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
once again your complaint boils down to the fact that there is no way to be 100% assured of success at anything in life, which, uh, fuckin get used to it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
[quote="“DragQueenofAngmar”" post="“476661590”"] once again your complaint boils down to the fact that there is no way to be 100% assured of success at anything in life, which, uh, fuckin get used to it? [/quote] Cool. But then you and society need to "fuckin get used to" the fact that there will be some number of people who just don't succeed, find it out of their control, and end up with warped perceptions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
hyphz posted:Cool. But then you and society need to "fuckin get used to" the fact that there will be some number of people who just don't succeed, find it out of their control, and end up with warped perceptions. You fail when you've stopped trying.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
The poker analogy is actually terrible so of course hyphz bought into it. Dude, there is no equivalent of being a couple of hundred down when we're talking about getting fit, eating healthy and working on yourself. It's a net gain even if you don't reach your goal but of course you got lost in an imperfect comparison not knowing what the hell you're even comparing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
society is used to it. as i asked before, do you have a solution to this that doesn't involve the 99.8% of people who understand this concept catering to the tiny group of computerbrain men
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
The poor will always be with us, so it's like, why even give to charity?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
a lot of poor people aren't hateful misogynistic assholes, for one
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 00:11 |
|
|
This thread is in dire need of content. Stop trying to analyze ineffectual lunatics and post more terrible incel postsquote:Why are women so stupid? quote:LynchingTriHardsFemales need to be hanged. • 14h
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 22:12
|
|