vigilantpuma

> Are you saying women can't understand the basic arithmetic of demographics relationship pairing, on their own? That they don't understand they can't all realistically settle down with the top % of men, if they don't want to end up alone?

No, that’s what you were saying and I was responding to that. I’m genuinely baffled at this response. Did you lose context? Do you really think I am saying that? Are you unfamiliar with sarcasm, or do you assume everyone being sarcastic always labels it with /s? Genuine question because I thought my meaning was pretty clear.

Similarly with the other point you quoted (out of context). Yes, women are happier living by themselves than with men who feel only contempt for women. The worst thing in life is not to end up alone, it’s not ending up selected out of the gene pool, the worst thing in life is to end up chained to a bad partner.

By the way I did chatGPT your claims and, unsurprisingly, they range in accuracy and substantiation. The claim about childless women over 40 being particularly unhappy is especially badly substantiated (particularly since it mixes those who are willingly childless with those who wanted children but couldn’t have them). In fact, older men who are childless seem to be unhappier than older women who are childless.

It’s interesting to see the narrative in men’s spaces about how dumb women are and how they’re going to end up dying alone surrounded by cats and how the men pushing this narrative don’t realize how supremely unattractive this makes them to women.

I don’t know if you’re capable of actually hearing this, but I will repeat it for you again. Talking about women like they’re idiots and expressing this kind of contempt towards them makes you supremely unattractive to women. And yes, they absolutely can tell that this is what you think, no matter how well you think you hide it in person. I hope that, if not today, then maybe a year from now or five years from now, you will sit with yourself and really consider that idea.

It’s just the latest new tech right wing obsession (see Elon Musk ranting about it on twitter, meanwhile no Tesla has middle seat LATCH). In a couple of years they’ll move on to something else.

I do think society would be better off in many ways if more people had kids but the current dialogue about it is offputting.

I think that’s not really true, it just looks that way from HN. I did a series of UXR interviews maybe 3 months ago for an unrelated project but one where we had to gain an understanding of how people use AI in their workflow, and it really still runs the gamut.

You mean that only those who are okay with AI are still in the game?

I’ve got a foot in both worlds and I feel pretty discombobulated. It’s amazing to be able to build whatever I imagine, but I also feel like something I loved has been taken away from me.

I keep thinking it would be interesting to do a series of interviews with software engineers on how they’re dealing with this change.

> "6 feet, 6 inches, 6 figures", "ewww he's got an ANDROID? ick!"

None of those things are why you can’t get a date.

> Thanks "AWFUL" (Affluent White Female Urban Liberal) women!

This is though.

> I guess we can explain them the math that if they wish to find happiness and not die alone surrounded by cats

Let me tell you, women are waiting with bated breath to hear you explain this to them.

Last I checked, most western societies don’t allow polygamy and most people still prefer monogamy. You don’t have to explain anything to anyone, women get it. They are just happier living by themselves than surrounded by dudes who make condescending remarks about them dying surrounded by cats. I guess maybe we can explain that to men.

Working how? China has a pretty low TFR.

It sounds like you are an atypical man (even 100 lifetime partners is 99th percentile and you’re claiming more than that in the last 10 years) engaging with a minority subset of women (those who engage in casual hookups). I don’t know that I would make extrapolations from that to the general population of women. As for the guy I was responding to, I think there are far more obvious reasons why someone obsessed with this “666” idea and using acronyms like AWFUL to describe women can’t get a relationship or even a date.

It does help. Older parents tend to have better mechanisms for coping with stress, and are less likely to physically abuse their kids, as just two examples.

You’re gonna be out of touch with your kids’ generation basically no matter what.

I was mostly addressing the “if it wasn’t statutory rape before marriage” claim. The fact is it usually would be.

At least in California the statutory rape law exempted married couples.

Statutory rape in California is sexual intercourse with anyone under 18. It’s a misdemeanor if the age difference is less than 3 years, but a felony if the adult is 21. So yes, a lot of these marriages would, in fact, constitute statutory rape.

That being said, the law makes an exception for married couples.

Have you really convinced yourself this is an actual standard of a significant proportion of women, even liberal women?

Of course social credit is a big part of internal politics, but if you have to resort to an external social network for your internal signaling, something is very broken. This whole subthread is about someone claiming they have to be active on LinkedIn to prove their worth to someone inside their organization.

Non dysfunctional workplaces don’t require you to be a prolific LinkedIn poster to get on the radar of the person who decides your promotions.

“ There are no innocents in Gaza.” funny, this is exactly what people said to defend what Hamas did on October 7th.

The babies and young children in Gaza are as innocent as they are everywhere else in the world. If you can’t see that, you should reexamine the lens you use to look at the world, it’s distorting things massively.

Sorry, nearly the entire population of these cities has been displaced, their homes all destroyed (not “damaged” but basically completely razed) and you’re saying it’s not ethnic cleansing because Israel says they will withdraw when Hamas disarms (e.g. when pigs fly)?

Come on.

What Israel has done in Gaza is absolutely not justice, but if you categorize killing babies as evil, then you should remember that the Bibas kids were also babies.

I think people really don’t realize what they’re missing out on. A really good illustration of this: https://www.lightpollutionmap.info/

If you live in England, for example, there is nowhere you can go to see a truly dark night sky. If you live in New York City, it’s a 4 hour drive, and even that isn’t completely dark.

I have no idea what a “r*” is. You’re making claims that aren’t backed up by anything and resorting to insults when asked for an actual citation.

The data doesn’t support the claim that the vast majority of accidents on a per mile basis occur while driving close to home rather than on road trips. The DOT also appears to have published on the side of “replacing air travel with driving will result in an increase of fatalities,” [1] so you’re not even right about your other claim.

“It is known” is not a good basis of argumentation.

[1] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2005-08-26/pdf/05-167...

The point the person above you is trying to make is that they lived in communities, in constant communication and contact with others. The idea of going home and hanging out by yourself is at least as unnatural as cities where you can still build a relatively stable community if you prioritize that sort of thing.

That’s not a citation on “ Vast majority of accidents [on a per mile basis] happen on regular driven known routes not road trips.”

Vast majority on a per mile basis? Do you have a citation for that?

It’s absolutely a trick to get travelers to pay extra, but I can grudgingly accept the nickel and diming when my party consists of adults. When one of the members of my party is a literal 3 year old, it becomes ridiculous.

Are you saying this is the worst economy or political climate the world has ever seen? Both economies and political climates change. It is strange to make a permanent decision based on a temporary circumstance.

Nevertheless, you have made a decision not to have kids and that decision is worthy of respect even if it rests on shaky logical foundations. But you should similarly respect people’s choice to travel with their children and appreciate that as someone who has opted out of that part of the human experience, you have no insight into it and shouldn’t be making statements about disincentivizing parents from traveling with their children. Ultimately, children are just small people. If you can’t deal with interacting with that subset of the population, I suggest you fly private. Or… don’t fly.

People do travel with babies for fun and there’s nothing wrong with that! It is possible to have a good time traveling with young kids, even a baby.

This sounds like a different problem than the one this post is about. For baby-in-lap, no one is being guilt tripped into switching seats because the baby doesn’t have a seat.

If you’re being guilt tripped into switching seats so that a family with a young child can sit together, consider blaming the airline for not automatically seating a young child next to their guardian.

But we CAN survive turning off both the Faber-Bosch process and cargo shipping. Our numbers would be diminished, we would lead poorer, much harder lives. But no one would claim that getting rid of modern fertilizers would be the end of the species. But the claim you’re making is that we won’t be able to stop AI from destroying our species because turning it off will destroy our species?

Yes. It gets a little tiresome to read all these people prophesying doom and then turning around and continuing to work on the doom. If you genuinely think you are building the mechanism of the destruction of our species, the only rational thing to do is to do everything to stop that progress, not continue to work on it so you can buy a mansion in San Francisco (which will not be very useful when AI destroys humanity in four years).