Post a controversial opinion

Meaningless sex is good

http://i65.tinypic.com/2rym5qh.png

are you guys the same douche

And as im slippin outt
U whisperd desperate timezzz

infinity man, infinity man
infinity man meets sleepingbag man
they kind of agree, nobody wins
infinity man

Meaningless sex is good

― infinity (∞), Friday, December 8, 2017 9:03 PM (fifteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

isn't it better and easier to just jerk off
get it out of your system
why bother, so much hassle
meaningless sex sucks

Xp

Getting batman vibes

Am i right?

Flappy bird

We are not in agreement unfortunately

I presume that if all the participants are eager and fully engaged with one another during in the act, then it will in all likelihood be good sex.

otoh, "meaningless sex" is a pretty vague and meaningless phrase. how much meaning is required to bestow meaning? because I find it hard to think that utterly selfish and self-absorbed sex that negates one's sex partner's involvement could be considered "good".

imo, the very goodness of "good sex" implies some scintilla of meaning somehow crept into the event. you don't have to conceive a child or fall in love for the rest of your lives to achieve some sort of meaning.

My controversial opinion is that we need more diversity of all kinds here. Racial and gender diversity most of all, but also ideological. I’d welcome a conservative. Like if Ross Douthat wanted to post here I’d be game; it would add some variety to our conversations. A Jesuit priest or something could be interesting. Would also be down to get some truly radical left wing posters. Maoists, antifa types, Andrea Dworkin type feminists.

The politics here are very genteel for the most part.

There are few to no places on the internet that host even marginally civil conversations between true ideological adversaries. This will never be one, but I’d like a place like that, where I could watch the grand dialectic of our century unfold in real time.

In the past I have played the lonely liberal foil in at least three conservative forums. The biggest problem with occupying that role is that you attract a dozen opponents, all slinging arguments at you of various kinds, none of which is free of questionable assumptions, mischaracterizations of your position, or mere jabbing at you to see if they can make you squeal like a pig. The pile-on becomes too much to respond to in any reasonable fashion, and few, if any, minds are changed or even slightly modified.

If the colloquy could somehow be confined to single combat between champions, then it would be more interesting and sustainable. Painting a target on your shirt and wandering onto the shooting range doesn't seem to work out well.

Postscript: I eventually arrived at a rule of thumb, that internet adversaries will always look past whatever argument you actually make and automatically respond as if you made the argument they preferred to refute. The regularity with which this happened was so predictable that the only surprises came was when my words weren't twisted to suit my interlocutor's idea of what 'a liberal' ought to have said.

Maybe. If we could get a patient, likable conservative rather than a bomb thrower it could lead to productive conversations I think.

there already are people here with widely differing views on social issues

I went on a gun forum to figure out some things about selling my dad's collection. Clicking on the general talk forum was a terrible mistake.

Yeah we don’t need real conservatives when we have Mordy and Dmac

i follow a couple moderate conservatives on twitter as intellectual charity and i have to restrain myself from unfollowing them, like, weekly

you guys could send some “miss u” ilx mail to a few ex-ilxors but I get the impression half the the libertarian joke brigade have some skeletons

Mordy's is a weird case, ideologically, cuz on the one hand he's a typical Frankfurt school Marxist / leftist humanities gradstudent dbag, but he also reads moldbug and scott alexander and robin hanson. and on top of it, he's super fn religious??

i think i'd beat any current or recent ilxor at a libertarian ideological turing test

like academic libertarian or American politics libertarian

Cognitive libertarian?

i can handle someone like Will Wilkinson (who really reads like a standard issue neolib more than anything resembling a "libertarian" in 2017) but really fuck like 99.4% of those clowns

Xps played at a reasonable volume

Otm

I avoid almost all live music bc of this

Alcohol sucks

i will cosign that one

How does meaningless translate to selfish in sex

I appreciated Tombot's TMBG reference

My controversial opinion is that we need more diversity of all kinds here. Racial and gender diversity most of all, but also ideological. I’d welcome a conservative. Like if Ross Douthat wanted to post here I’d be game; it would add some variety to our conversations. A Jesuit priest or something could be interesting. Would also be down to get some truly radical left wing posters. Maoists, antifa types, Andrea Dworkin type feminists.

The politics here are very genteel for the most part.

Otfm. I don't get that 'desire' at all.

Me neither but as a point of fact that sentence is not the majority of words in that paragraph

also people who don’t enjoy live shows should avoid them NOT CONTROVERSIAL

Think treezy may be alluding to oh never mind

I would like to join all other grumps and declare the concerts should be quick, early, played at a reasonable volume, and offer seating.

Guys, your local symphony/concert hall needs you and you clearly need it.

sund4r on all of the money

what if Ross Douthat were a trans black woman who quoted von Mises

look if you wanna talk to conservatives there's fucking millions of them just don't drag the rest of us along

You pay lip service to the lack of race and gender diversity and then spend the majority of words wishing for Ross Douthat to show up. How about go fuck yourself.
― El Tomboto, Saturday, December 9, 2017 9:19 AM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

will do tombot. thank you for this helpful response.

^ genteel

lol

I wish Ross Douhat would post on ilx because it would be fun to see him get relentlessly clowned and owned for being such a basic peabrain

He overrates Grimes.

ilx doesn't have a token moderate conservative because there's no real space to be a moderate conservative anymore. (also we don't have very many new users in general.) even david brooks and douthat types don't defend the trump administration / can't really present themselves as republicans anymore, and that's what they're paid to do. at this point if you don't agree w/ the statement 'I can't defend anything the republican party does at this point', you probably aren't going to fit in most ilx-type environments.

I used to post to an 'ideologically diverse' Canadian politics message board with a lot of conservatives (and even they mostly thought Republicans were insane - in the pre-Trump years). It was interesting and intellectually challenging for a while, even if it was sometimes just to have to read more and think to sharpen my own arguments, but, in the end, once I was familiar with their basic lines of argumentation and confident in why I reject them, I wasn't getting a lot out of it. (Or there might be certain issues on which we agreed, and again, I still wasn't getting much from the discussion.) There are published conservative/right-wing writers who are better at it than the vast majority of message board posters. (And that goes for the best of them. There were a bunch who fit Aimless's description.)

if you want to engage w/ ideological diversity posting on a message board is the wrong way to go (for the reasons aimless mentioned above). find some intelligent ideologically diverse individuals you enjoy talking to and engage them privately in person or over IM. if they continue to make arguments for their positions that you find challenging/innovative/worth discussing then continue to engage them. if they stop then find someone new. don't bother doing it in public the entire pubic discursive sphere is an anti-intellectual political positions wasteland designed entirely to self-satisfy pre-existing ideological biases and claim rhetorical online space as a surrogate for real life political accomplishments. no one really wants their positions challenged (unless they need them challenged by the orthodoxy to bring themselves more in line w/ their preferred hegemonic position). if you're one of the tiny minority who actually wants that you'll need to find it elsewhere.

what if Ross Douthat were a trans black woman who quoted von Mises

no one really wants their positions challenged (unless they need them challenged by the orthodoxy to bring themselves more in line w/ their preferred hegemonic position)

no shit 99% of the opinions on this thread are minor deviations. once in a while someone posits an actual controversial opinion (one that has social stakes) and generally they're pilloried.

you haven't noticed that most ppl would rather bring their opinions into line w/ the popular consensus then be isolated/ostracized and mocked/dismissed for dissenting? why would a libertarian ever post on ilx? you'd have a bunch of hyenas desperately contending to be the one to deliver the blow that either converts them or sends them packing. ilx is a little brighter than most online communities but it's not any more open-minded or tolerant of heresy. nb that there are individuals on ilx past and current that are v bright and well worth speaking to in private (and sometimes they generously expose themselves to shaming in order to share an idea that the hivemind might not be receptive to) but ilx is otherwise like every other in-group in history. a lot of ppl enjoy participated in groups that support their ideology/opinions - that's why v few groups actively court controversy (tho they get it anyway since even minor shibboleths arising in in-groups have the potential to spark clusterfucks).