Ben Simmons

@DisaffectedPod "Teach men not to rape" does work in backwards countries with actual cultures of rape. However, you're not 'teaching', you're enforcing new behaviors. In the West it means that women are the final arbiters of the appropriateness of any potentially sexualized interaction.

"Teach men not to rape!" That may sound reasonable to you on first glance because we've been hypnotized by modern feminism. But think it through, and it breaks down. It's unbearably stupid and is not connected to reality at all. The vast majority of men don't rape. There is no "inborn rape proclivity" in the majority of men that has to be "taught out." A minority of criminal, personality disordered men are rapists (just like a minority of people are murderers). You cannot "teach them not to rape." What does that even mean? Do you think your normal 12 year old son "doesn't know" that "raping girls" is a bad thing? Do you think he's inclined to do this unless you specifically tell him, "it's bad and hurts girls so you shouldn't do it?" Do you think your son responds with, "Oh, gee, mom. I never thought about it that way. OK. I promise I won't rape girls the way I was planning to." Good lord. -J

@augustorehn @follynomics Yes. I am willing to place limits on generally good principles if the specific situation justifies it. The rest of your post is just embarrassing ideology as religion and historical revisionism, which is why no one outside of your cult takes you seriously.

You have no justification based on rights on this. It's pure consequential post hoc rationalization based on stuff you want. You don't produce a right based on desire to achieve your will. Thankfully people like you lost during the enlightenment and because of that we had an era of unprecedented material progress. Brought by the RECOGNITION, not manufacturing, of unalienable natural rights. There's no voting that can change that, not ever, and just like they correctly pointed at their time, unjust laws that violate these rights are not even valid.

An antitrust economist told me innovation itself is anticompetitive. It took me years to figure out he was telling the truth. Footnote heavy.

@CalamityClown @HkonMk Yeah, it's hours of reading and porting around to optimize this fight without any negative impact on the rest of your playthrough, which is kind of a silly waste of time for a fight that is much easier with even one less enemy. But that never stopped me before.

@BenSimmonsStack @HkonMk Ansbach never joins this fight thankfully and Hornsents questline is so easy for me to fuck up I almost always have to fight him alomgside Leda, and dane butat least Hornsent is squishy so he's less of a problem than the others lol

ok so Leda just declared war I don’t think we’re all making it out of this

@CalamityClown @HkonMk Came to post this. I did my 1st playthrough blind, which makes these quests more or less impossible, and this fight was hard as hell. By contrast, it is trivial if you design your playthrough around minimizing this fight.

@HkonMk Now imagine this battle if you ignored or didn't complete all steps of other peoples quests.. If you ignore everyone's quests you get ganged up on by literally everyone except Ansbach and it's living hell and you can't finish the DLC unless you beat this lol

@Nunya83731781 @berserksouls eldenring.wiki.fextralife.com/Night+Comet

@berserksouls This is my problem with Elden ring. So many cool spells and aow’s but they’re near worthless in boss fights (aside from the obvious R2 stick exceptions) Why would I use fp-heavy sourcery builds with long windups when I can break malenia’s knees with 2 square offs on a toothpick?

@augustorehn @follynomics Voting away freedom of association is precisely what I can and will do if necessary.

@BenSimmonsStack @follynomics A wise man once stomped out of a room saying: "You're all a bunch of socialists" Imagine thinking you can 'vote away' freedom of association and socialize private property because you're not ok with certain outcomes that it's producing. Yikes.

@Thomas_Anton12 @follynomics Oh no, not sensible and practical edge case limits on my general ideals. This is too complicated and means I no longer have a single universal answer for every problem humans face in cooperation. Libertarians are mental children.

@BenSimmonsStack @follynomics Antitrust is one of the most evil laws in America. It's literally punishing successful people for being successful.

@golddustbeing @myzayneity Literally who else? Not even a discussion.

@BenSimmonsStack @myzayneity and you think men protect women from predatory men? sure buddy sure…..

Y'all wanna know why I am so radical in my feminism? Because I was literally 8 years old, wearing cute, childish shorts with unicorns in it, when I was cat called in such an horrid way by a man in passing car that my dad, whom I was walking hand in hand with, was genuily scared that the car would turn around and try to kidnap me. My parents never put shorts or skirts on me ever again. My little sister recalls this incident, and many others that happened as I grew up as a kid with a little more curves than others, and she remembers telling my mom that she didn’t want to be "pretty" like me so no grown ass man would ever do that to her. This is the world we live in.

@PhillAndry86 MRA is for fat, impotent losers. Mirroring feminism like a whiny, defeated slave. Masculine men reasserting control over society will be as simple and painless as flicking a switch. The problem is the lack of masculine men, a problem you contribute to with your flaccid ideology.

Why are men more interested in pushing "there are differences between men and women" more than fighting for their rights? What is wrong with men?

@WillHavePeace @ChristianHeiens Thinking it could ever be any other way is what got us here. It's not the jews or women or commies or whatever else that got us here. It's you and me thinking that we could abrogate our male responsibility to systems and pieces of paper that would magically make everything work

@ChristianHeiens We're going to have to fight our whole lives aren't we?

The Right wants to be free of power, but "being free of power" is itself a decision that requires the exercise of it. In short, it's a self-undermining posture. Being free of power requires wielding it in the first place.

@0000yyxt @Kama_Kamilia Nothing to fix.

@Kama_Kamilia I can fix her.

Shia fundamentals leaving your body the second you leave the Middle East.

@berserksouls More like: Bonk stick until you gather every piece for your int build, then you zap the 3 bosses left in the playthrough.

@EwoodTerraces @RockChartrand This is a comical assertion. Make whatever hilariously obtuse retort you want, log off for a day and then come back and reread what you just wrote. I don't expect you to admit it to me, but you will be forced to admit to yourself that this is a ridiculous thing to say.

@BenSimmonsStack @RockChartrand No but there will be now that we have knowledge of it. Unless an apocalypse style thing happens and it needs rediscovering but when it does it will be defined by words that mean exactly the same as today

China is proof that abandoning parts of communism is better than practicing it consistently. You should point to Pol Pots Cambodia. That was a guy who took it seriously.

@EwoodTerraces @RockChartrand has there always been a word that means 'quantum mechanics'?

@BenSimmonsStack @RockChartrand Incorrect the language might evolve slight from pronunciation to spelling but there’s always been a word that means mother, always be a word that defines a tree. You’re not even worth talking to if you can’t even agree on the definitions of words and language

@EwoodTerraces @RockChartrand In 1,000 years, none of those 19 words will have the exact same meaning they do now, if they are used at all. Locking the word 'fascism' into a strict definition decided by Mussolini 100 years ago while the ideology has grown and evolved over time is ridiculous.

@BenSimmonsStack @RockChartrand Apart from those 19 words that you just used. They stay the same so that we can carry on understanding each other. It’s just the words that you choose when having ideological / political discussions that you can you adapt anytime you’re proven wrong, just refine the meaning

@EwoodTerraces @RockChartrand Correct. Words and their associated concepts change over time as we try to map a constantly shifting ideological landscape.

@BenSimmonsStack @RockChartrand Oh so you’re just redefining words to fit your own predisposition. I see

@EwoodTerraces @RockChartrand Non-responsive. The entire point of my post is that fascism isn't forever locked in to its nascent origins in post-monarchical Europe. It has grown and evolved, and contemporary China is the best example of how this ideology can be wielded in the contemporary world.

@BenSimmonsStack @RockChartrand Read Mussolini and admit you’re totally wrong. A doctrine of fascism is only about a 15 minute read sjsu.edu/faculty/wooda/…

@dgx1776 @RockChartrand Agreed. The only major flaw, from a functional perspective, is the tendency for the mix of nationalism, militarism and historical grievance to lead to ill-conceived military adventurism. China has, so far, avoided this inherent pitfall.

@BenSimmonsStack @RockChartrand The West had deliberately made fascism a bad word. The reality is that fascism and national socialism work much better than anyone realizes.