471–480 of 535 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why though? Maybe the advantages are natural and our species is selecting for it.
"Advantages" are often to the individual's benefit, but the species' detriment.
Cats spread all over the world from the desert because of advantages.
Advantages mean you survive and procreate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alot of discussions from trans people have been very validating of gendered experiences as they get to objectively experience both and see the difference
Do you believe that they get an unadulterated perspective of both experiences? That they would be getting the experience of a woman rather than that of a trans woman?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was going to comment something similar to this. To an extent, dressing and grooming well is a sign of respect you show to other people as well as to yourself. If you can't clear that relatively low bar, don't be surprised when people aren't super excited about what you might add to their lives.
> If you can't clear that relatively low bar, don't be surprised when people aren't super excited about what you might add to their lives. You mean like that guy giving keynote presentations in a turtleneck and jeans?
I'm also not talking about having a great fashion sense though, and it's okay to prefer a more casual look. Just pay a little attention to how you dress and care for yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Advantages" are often to the individual's benefit, but the species' detriment.
I dunno...Wolves are pretty much endangered anywhere, but the cute and friendly ones became dogs and are everywhere. Cats spread all over the world from the desert because of advantages. Advantages mean you survive and procreate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean that generally. We have sex for pleasure and for many it’s hard to abstain forever. I’m not referring to sex addiction as a chronic disease.
Yes. And sex results in babies. I cannot link to any resources backing that claim so you'll have to just trust me here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Among all the other reasons that people have explained that this isn’t exactly correct a probably isn’t entirely attributed to just weight… I’ll make an opposite proposition. Perhaps we are evolutionarily programmed to avoid people with impulse control issues?
Nope, it's cultural. If you look at cultures outside of your narrow window (in both time and space), you'll find that the perception of fatness has varied wildly over the millenia.
Women in every single culture have much thinner waist hip ratios than the male counterparts, suggesting that men like them thin.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went from being a scrawny guy in my teens, to a chubby/fat gamer in my late teens/early 20s, and then a fit athlete in my mid 20s. While I had envisioned much more interest from the ladies, my biggest surprise was how much nicer, kinder, and helpful random people were. And in a professional setting, co-workers and leaders just treated you more seriously - especially when it came to handing out leadership roles on p…
Also helps to not be a teenager.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Best way to get a manager position is to be a few inches taller than everybody else. It doesn't make a lick of sense, but pay attention to how often the boss is taller than everybody else on the team. Not always, but far more often than random chance can account for. (Incidentally, the best boss I ever had was barely 5 feet.)
IIRC CEOs have a very high average height, and height can account for a very large portion of the female vs male management disparity.
Actually it accounts for more than the difference, controlled for height men are discriminated against for leadership positions since there are barely any short male leaders and there are plenty of tall female leaders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You gotta be careful about Louis Theroux. I watched one of his old documentaries (late 90s IIRC) about South Africa with a guy who is a Afrikaner that I speak to semi-regularly on the internet. He said that while the people that Louis presented did exist, they were considered loons by the rest of the community. Most of the documentarians from the BBC even some of the better ones like Adam Curtis, tend to distort thin…
Thanks for the heads up. For the most part he interviews people with hundreds of thousands or even millions of followers on social media. So not random nobodies, and at least some of the names I’d at least heard of (like the Tate brothers). But as with anything, being a bit skeptic is a good thing.
The most infamous one he did was The Jimmy Saville Weird Weekends. I am 90% certain that Louis knew he was Paedophile at the time. He even made sure to include a scene where one Jimmy's friends visited. The guy looked like a old stereotype of a paedophile. My friends and I burst out laughing while watching it. It was almost like it was something from Brass Eye.
The Tate Brothers are just conmen and are criminals. I am from the UK and met people like Andrew Tate IRL. You can find them in every pub back in the late 90s/early 2000s.
As for the other manosphere guys. I am familiar with many of these guys, as they typically do the rounds at some point on the podcast circuit on YouTube and various other sites. I like listening to long streams as I am frequently driving from one end of the country to another. I used to listen the dumpster fire stuff like Legion of Skanks, Drunken Peasants, The CuntStream etc. A lot of these dudes used to turn up on these sorts of shows, which were basically someone streaming Google Hangouts while they got drunk and high.
A lot of the the Manosphere guys are normally involved with other grifters such as Laura Loomer, Nick Fuentes etc. and have a lot of cross over with loads of niche Z-tier E-celeb sub-cultures such as "The Dabbleverse" and "Da Sektur".
[flagged]
This would only matter if the students were unfairly graded, which the paper didn't demonstrate.