• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Is it now forbidden to be wrong?

This is the same dumb debate as with video violence in the 1980's. Something we studied at length. It turns out children have no problem separating fact from fiction. The violent computer game debate of the 1990's. Same shit.

You need to be careful with the younger ones, but the older ones are fine.

To the extent there is a problem it's about background assumptions, not the acts themselves.

From the video violence research I saw I think the most serious find was that a child watching a kung fu movie will be more aggressive up to ten minutes after watching the video. Most will not be. The effect is not permanent nor cumulative.

Each of these moral panic outrages are followed by studies that show that the moral panic was unfounded.

That I will agree with. By the time a kid is watching a kung fu movie it's not going to be a problem in that regard.

What I'm talking about is the background--we see a lot of complaints about this with pornography. Guys getting the expectation that sex just jumps to the main event.

I'm not an expert, nor particularly initiated, but as I understand this movement is American and came out of the remnants of the Osho/Baghwan movement from the 1970's. Today it's under the big tent of "Tantra". Which, a long time ago, stopped only being about Tantra or anything hippie or New Age. Now it's just a term we can use in polite society, which to the initiated, are tips and tricks on how to be a better partner and lover. It's developed now into a huge diverse multi-faceted movement with all kinds of perspectives and uses. Many of these courses are 0% woo. Plenty are quite sciency.

That's sure a change in meaning! I have always understood tantric sex to be about avoiding ejaculation.

A lot of it is focused on teaching us to slow down, pay attention and to create emotional connection to those we have sex with. To be less focused on performance, and more on the needs of the other. And also needs of yourself. And also about being more playful and fun. a fun things about these courses is that it's like 90% women attending. If you're a gross unsexy incel and you really want to get laid, this place is heaven. Loads of super hot women will throw themselves at you. Because these workshops are supervised, in remote locations, are limited in time, and a super super super safe spaces it makes the women lose their inhibitions and anxieties and just go for it. Its worth going simply for the spectacle of seeing a bunch of randy women seemingly trying to rip the few attending men apart.

In other words, practical sex ed, not actually prostitution-related. While the subject matter is a good idea I would want a class where you bring your partner, I'm utterly not into sex with a stranger.

"Yoni massage". Don't be fooled by the name. it's 0% Woo and hippie. A lot of women don't like sex that much because they have had bad experiences and tend to tense up prior to intercourse. Making sex unnecessarily difficult. This is a hooker fingering a woman. It's all about making the woman relax about penetration, so she can enjoy having sex more. It can also be painful. Since a part of it, is literally to massage muscle knots inside the vagina and make them release. If a woman is very tight in her vaginal muscles, and has been over a long time, it can be extremely painful. And as with all massages, feels awesome afterwards.

Why would the name imply woo? It's just a word borrowed from another language to avoid the negative connotations.

Obviously sex work. But for whatever reason, this is fully legal everywhere, advertised openly and seems universally to NOT be seen as sex work. Quite baffling really. But it is what it is.

I think the difference is whether the objective is simply orgasm or not.

As for fully legal everywhere.....I tried a search locally. Looking locally for tantric massage hit #1 the website has the prices as "recommended tribute"--nope, he's operating outside the law. Specifically looking for classes or workshops I'm some pages in and haven't seen anything the US.
 

That I will agree with. By the time a kid is watching a kung fu movie it's not going to be a problem in that regard.

What I'm talking about is the background--we see a lot of complaints about this with pornography. Guys getting the expectation that sex just jumps to the main event.

Sure. But let's identify the correct problem. Is it porn? Or is it the fact that we have a Christian, sex negative culture, that leads to porn often being the only available education on sex. If we starve a population on general information, but give easy access to an extreme version of information, the extreme version of information is going to get spread more. It's an incredibly easy problem to fix. Be less sex negative. Not to slut shame. Tolerate public nudity. Also... the more sex negative we are, the more sexually fixated a culture will be. That's just basic human psychology. If we want to make people relaxed about sex we need to make sex something to be relaxed about. Not a big deal.

Me personally if a woman won't have sex with me on the first date I assume she's not attracted to me. There's no second date. That's not because of pornography. That's because life has taught me that women who have sex on the first date are more likely to be more fun and rewarding long term partners. It's a question of personality and chemistry.

A lot of guys like to be a manly caring man and take care of his anxious and insecure woman. For those guys, I'm sure not having sex on the first date, is the way to go. Because those women need more reassurances until they are won over. But I'm not attracted to women like that. I like strong, powerful women, who have their shit together, and who know what they want and take it. I don't want a woman to need me for anything other than sex and moving the occasional sofa. It's just a matter of preference. That's just my taste in women.

But it could be worse. Let's be happy we're not living in a Muslim majority country. Those guys are sex negative off the scales. An extremely unhealthy culture around sex IMHO.

I'm not an expert, nor particularly initiated, but as I understand this movement is American and came out of the remnants of the Osho/Baghwan movement from the 1970's. Today it's under the big tent of "Tantra". Which, a long time ago, stopped only being about Tantra or anything hippie or New Age. Now it's just a term we can use in polite society, which to the initiated, are tips and tricks on how to be a better partner and lover. It's developed now into a huge diverse multi-faceted movement with all kinds of perspectives and uses. Many of these courses are 0% woo. Plenty are quite sciency.

That's sure a change in meaning! I have always understood tantric sex to be about avoiding ejaculation.

Brace yourself for another long post.

This network of relationship and sexuality courses is a new world. 20 years ago you would have been correct. These tantric courses were only for New Age hippies who had all manner of esoteric cooky beliefs. The course leaders back then were guys that had participated in the 1970'ies hippie cults, had hibernated right through the 1980'ies, re-emerged in the 1990'ies as New Age guru's, having switched from reaching enlightenment to self-help. But essentially doing the same thing. The difference at in the late 90'ies they had 30 years of experience having worked on free sexuality and open relationships. At this point they had very little illusions left. They had learned the hard way, what was bullshit and what worked. No, open relationships isn't for everyone. This was all happening in conjunction with another major shift in culture.

At the end of the 90'ies (thanks to the gay pride movement) came a general cultural shift towards and more open, tolerant and sexually relaxed culture in the west. This is when porn became normalised. Normal people were increasingly curious about exploring sexuality in a safe, sane and consensual way. They started joining in. This rise of interest led to a slew of books being published (based on the experiences of the old hippies mentioned above). Works like The Ethical Slut, More than Two, The Way of the superior man, No more Mr Nice guy, Screw the Roses send me the thorns... its a very very long list of books. These all have in common to teach spineless bleeding heart hippies to man up and fuck her woman well OR teach knuckle dragging rigid manly men who cum after 30 seconds, to become more attentive and sensitive lovers. These books all came with courses, organized by the authors or those affiliated. It was (and is) a movement.

Around 2010 came courses that made a clean break with the hippie past. This led to stuff like The Game and pickup artistry. We can discuss the ethics of these courses. But they did work. They did help men have consensual sex with women. Or courses more geared toward women "The New Tantra" (ie not tantra). And a huge variety of semi hippie semi sensible groups and retreats.

But this is is evolution of the same movement. It's still evolving. But it's here to stay and will only mature over time and become normal and acceptable. I mean.. EVERYBODY has had issues and problems with their sex life. Every man has failed to get a hard on at an inopportune moment. I think every woman has found herself having sex in a way she wasn't at all ok with. These are super basic issues every human being requires help and guidance with, and our Christian heritage society has let us down. There is help for everybody to get more in love and in tune with their own bodies. And other people's bodies :)

So basically, 20 years ago you would have been correct. Today it's all different.

But I should be very open an honest about that I haven't explored this world much at all. I've been to a couple of courses. All were great. But geared toward less experienced people. It was still good. So what I've managed to pick up, is just bits and pieces here and there. I'm NOT an expert. I have read all these books mentioned though. The Ethical Slut should be mandatory reading to every human. It's basically about how to treat lovers with respect and how to avoid playing games with them. Which is difficult when hormones and passions are raging.



A lot of it is focused on teaching us to slow down, pay attention and to create emotional connection to those we have sex with. To be less focused on performance, and more on the needs of the other. And also needs of yourself. And also about being more playful and fun. a fun things about these courses is that it's like 90% women attending. If you're a gross unsexy incel and you really want to get laid, this place is heaven. Loads of super hot women will throw themselves at you. Because these workshops are supervised, in remote locations, are limited in time, and a super super super safe spaces it makes the women lose their inhibitions and anxieties and just go for it. Its worth going simply for the spectacle of seeing a bunch of randy women seemingly trying to rip the few attending men apart.

In other words, practical sex ed, not actually prostitution-related. While the subject matter is a good idea I would want a class where you bring your partner, I'm utterly not into sex with a stranger.

There's all varieties. Some are shady as fuck. Some have a more clinical vibe. There's any and all varieties. Most of these are geared toward bringing your own partner. But I advise against that. You have all manner of fucked up dysfunctional patterns with your partner. Those are exceedingly difficult to break. It's way easier to pay a professional, (who will never be a threat to your relationship) to give you lessons 1:1, and give you a totally different idea of how sex can be experienced. It's way more educational.

I know a woman in Amsterdam. She works as a domina. But she only dominates dominant men. Her job is to show dominant men how women like to be dominated. The point of her sessions is to teach these guys how it is to receive what they are accustomed to dishing out. So they get better at it.


"Yoni massage". Don't be fooled by the name. it's 0% Woo and hippie. A lot of women don't like sex that much because they have had bad experiences and tend to tense up prior to intercourse. Making sex unnecessarily difficult. This is a hooker fingering a woman. It's all about making the woman relax about penetration, so she can enjoy having sex more. It can also be painful. Since a part of it, is literally to massage muscle knots inside the vagina and make them release. If a woman is very tight in her vaginal muscles, and has been over a long time, it can be extremely painful. And as with all massages, feels awesome afterwards.

Why would the name imply woo? It's just a word borrowed from another language to avoid the negative connotations.

Good point. I retract my statement and agree.


Obviously sex work. But for whatever reason, this is fully legal everywhere, advertised openly and seems universally to NOT be seen as sex work. Quite baffling really. But it is what it is.

I think the difference is whether the objective is simply orgasm or not.

As for fully legal everywhere.....I tried a search locally. Looking locally for tantric massage hit #1 the website has the prices as "recommended tribute"--nope, he's operating outside the law. Specifically looking for classes or workshops I'm some pages in and haven't seen anything the US.

Ok. I thought it was fully legal everywhere. My bad. But before long, I'm sure it will be.
 
Last edited:

What I'm talking about is the background--we see a lot of complaints about this with pornography. Guys getting the expectation that sex just jumps to the main event.

Sure. But let's identify the correct problem. Is it porn? Or is it the fact that we have a Christian, sex negative culture, that leads to porn often being the only available education on sex. If we starve a population on general information, but give easy access to an extreme version of information, the extreme version of information is going to get spread more. It's an incredibly easy problem to fix. Be less sex negative. Not to slut shame. Tolerate public nudity. Also... the more sex negative we are, the more sexually fixated a culture will be. That's just basic human psychology. If we want to make people relaxed about sex we need to make sex something to be relaxed about. Not a big deal.

You are completely missing my point--I'm not talking about sex on the first date, but the absence of foreplay. The background, not the foreground.

Me personally if a woman won't have sex with me on the first date I assume she's not attracted to me. There's no second date. That's not because of pornography. That's because life has taught me that women who have sex on the first date are more likely to be more fun and rewarding long term partners. It's a question of personality and chemistry.

A lot of guys like to be a manly caring man and take care of his anxious and insecure woman. For those guys, I'm sure not having sex on the first date, is the way to go. Because those women need more reassurances until they are won over. But I'm not attracted to women like that. I like strong, powerful women, who have their shit together, and who know what they want and take it. I don't want a woman to need me for anything other than sex and moving the occasional sofa. It's just a matter of preference. That's just my taste in women.

But it could be worse. Let's be happy we're not living in a Muslim majority country. Those guys are sex negative off the scales. An extremely unhealthy culture around sex IMHO.

It's not merely a matter of insecure. Not all of us are up for sex with near strangers.

That's sure a change in meaning! I have always understood tantric sex to be about avoiding ejaculation.

....

So basically, 20 years ago you would have been correct. Today it's all different.

Looks like I should pay more attention to it. I had filed it as woo and didn't realize the name now applied to something very different.

There's all varieties. Some are shady as fuck. Some have a more clinical vibe. There's any and all varieties. Most of these are geared toward bringing your own partner. But I advise against that. You have all manner of fucked up dysfunctional patterns with your partner. Those are exceedingly difficult to break. It's way easier to pay a professional, (who will never be a threat to your relationship) to give you lessons 1:1, and give you a totally different idea of how sex can be experienced. It's way more educational.

If you're up for sex with strangers I see your point.

Obviously sex work. But for whatever reason, this is fully legal everywhere, advertised openly and seems universally to NOT be seen as sex work. Quite baffling really. But it is what it is.

I think the difference is whether the objective is simply orgasm or not.

As for fully legal everywhere.....I tried a search locally. Looking locally for tantric massage hit #1 the website has the prices as "recommended tribute"--nope, he's operating outside the law. Specifically looking for classes or workshops I'm some pages in and haven't seen anything the US.

Ok. I thought it was fully legal everywhere. My bad. But before long, I'm sure it will be.

I think you're overestimating our government. The Republicans are utter morons about anything related to sex. Even when the Democrats are in power something that radical isn't going to happen.
 

What I'm talking about is the background--we see a lot of complaints about this with pornography. Guys getting the expectation that sex just jumps to the main event.

Sure. But let's identify the correct problem. Is it porn? Or is it the fact that we have a Christian, sex negative culture, that leads to porn often being the only available education on sex. If we starve a population on general information, but give easy access to an extreme version of information, the extreme version of information is going to get spread more. It's an incredibly easy problem to fix. Be less sex negative. Not to slut shame. Tolerate public nudity. Also... the more sex negative we are, the more sexually fixated a culture will be. That's just basic human psychology. If we want to make people relaxed about sex we need to make sex something to be relaxed about. Not a big deal.

You are completely missing my point--I'm not talking about sex on the first date, but the absence of foreplay. The background, not the foreground.

I think you are creating an illusion of a glorious past and a good ol¨days where people knew how to behave sexually. I find the idea that men, before porn, in a time where domestic abuse was seen as normal were any better at foreplay than men are now. I'm willing to put good money on that back in the day, it was worse.




That's sure a change in meaning! I have always understood tantric sex to be about avoiding ejaculation.

....

So basically, 20 years ago you would have been correct. Today it's all different.

Looks like I should pay more attention to it. I had filed it as woo and didn't realize the name now applied to something very different.

Be warned though. There's a lot of hippies still. You need to sift through a lot of bullshit to get to the good stuff. And having seen the evolution of this up close, I am absolutely convinced the sensible part of the tantric movement will grow exponentially, until it dwarves the woo hippies. I'm also convinced that the sensible part of the this movement will get sick and tired of being associated with the hippies and will rebrand. At some point. But we're not there yet.

With the risk of repeating myself, the core of this movement is the same for the woo and the sensibles. It's just a question of removing the magical language (and passive aggressively). It's all about slowing down, pay attention to your partner, start with low risk areas (ie don't go straight for the genitals), once sex has started don't fuck with the goal to achieve orgasm. Take your time. It's also a lot about talking before and after sex, sharing feelings, experiences. Training us to set boundaries. Not just women. Men fucking suck at accepting that they don't need to be up for everything. It's ok as a man to say they're not ok with something. If women think men handle rejection badly. Just wait until men start setting boundaries and watch the psychological meltdown of the women. It's incredibly educational to do this in a group. To literally see that other men are struggling with similar things. Or that when you do this thing, it's not just your women who doesn't like it, no woman likes it. Afterwards just sitting in a ring and comparing notes is extremely educational. It can be shredding for ones ego and self image. But the guys who get really bad news, also really really need to hear it. People also often suck at asking for consent in a sexy way. Either people "just go for it" (great potential to fuck it up) or they ask as if it's about signing a contract. The art of playfully getting a partner to agree to something without killing the vibe is an art that needs to be practiced.

At this point, our culture is so starved for good information on this and training that it's still incredibly low hanging fruit. And these organisers are making a shit tonne of money leading workshops. It's already a mass movement. This is NOT going to go away.



There's all varieties. Some are shady as fuck. Some have a more clinical vibe. There's any and all varieties. Most of these are geared toward bringing your own partner. But I advise against that. You have all manner of fucked up dysfunctional patterns with your partner. Those are exceedingly difficult to break. It's way easier to pay a professional, (who will never be a threat to your relationship) to give you lessons 1:1, and give you a totally different idea of how sex can be experienced. It's way more educational.

If you're up for sex with strangers I see your point.

Good point. We all need to start digging where we stand.

I know plenty of people are, fundamentally, monogamous in their outlooks. I'm not. But I respect it.
 
This idea of helping groups by avoiding bad words is well suited for our modern Internet age. It's a super easy way for individuals to quickly identify the people who are evil online. But it's an illusion....

We need to keep repeating the mantra "it's ok to be offended". It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend. Not only does the Internet allow quick global communication. But it also allows us not to see things we don't want to see. Nobody needs to see anything they don't want to.
Its amusing to watch Youtube videos that don't toe the line with regard to the leftist agenda....
I agree, partially, with Dr. Z on this matter. I think his mantra "It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend" has merit. Where it goes too far is
(a) The censorship we're speaking of is not as commonplace as right-wingers imply. Instead, trolls like Hannity or Carlson seize on every instance they can find, exaggerate it, and use it to bamboozle more and more Americans.
(b) Spreading anit-Semitism and White Supremacist lies IS a big problem in today's America, and is likely to lead literally to the breakdown of democracy. Newspapers didn't publish bullshit letters to the editor. Facebook and Youtube also have the right — some would say obligation — not to facilitate partisan lies.

BTW, "leftist agenda" is a good example of a propagandizing shibboleth. Liberals seek peace, prosperity, safety, opportunity for all, and a happy future. But QOPAnon uses the phrase as proxy for "leftists" pretending nanobots are vaccines, demanding that 23 different bathroom types be installed in public facilities, and wanting to use police for target practice.
 
This idea of helping groups by avoiding bad words is well suited for our modern Internet age. It's a super easy way for individuals to quickly identify the people who are evil online. But it's an illusion....

We need to keep repeating the mantra "it's ok to be offended". It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend. Not only does the Internet allow quick global communication. But it also allows us not to see things we don't want to see. Nobody needs to see anything they don't want to.
Its amusing to watch Youtube videos that don't toe the line with regard to the leftist agenda....
I agree, partially, with Dr. Z on this matter. I think his mantra "It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend" has merit. Where it goes too far is
(a) The censorship we're speaking of is not as commonplace as right-wingers imply. Instead, trolls like Hannity or Carlson seize on every instance they can find, exaggerate it, and use it to bamboozle more and more Americans.

But this is a dangerous position.

I think we can all agree that the conservative position is wrong and hysterical. Nobody is trying to cancel Christmas. CRT isn't being taught in schools. Nobody is legally forced to use people's chosen pronouns. These facts alone doesn't make woke harmless.

I think there's a core of truth in the conservative critique of the left/woke. But they go so overboard that we on the left can easily shoot down their dumb arguments But they aren't completely insane.

(b) Spreading anit-Semitism and White Supremacist lies IS a big problem in today's America, and is likely to lead literally to the breakdown of democracy. Newspapers didn't publish bullshit letters to the editor. Facebook and Youtube also have the right — some would say obligation — not to facilitate partisan lies.

I think stopping white supremacist propaganda and thinking that will stop Nazism and anti-semitism is misguided.

I think white supremacism is simply a heritage from the Age of Colonialism when white people ruled the whole world. If we tell ourselves the story that white people ruling the world was a result of white people being superior then it fits a lot of the available data. The solution to this problem is the west being less dominant. As industrialism and IT penetrates into more countries the domination of the west will wane. That's just a matter of time and is an irreversible process. So we need to do nothing to fix this. Yes, it sucks for brown people now. But the things that happened in history happened. These events generate explanatory theories. It doesn't matter how wedded you (or me) are to your pet theory against White Supremacy. That's just because you and me have made a different story based on the data.

I think Anti-semitism is simply a side effect of the domination of Christianity (and Islam). As long as these two religions are big lots of people will hate Jews. I think this is unfixable. But historically this has been the situation. I don't think it matters how much it says in the Bible to turn the other cheek. All you need is a fraction of Christians not getting the full picture. Some of them will hate Jews. I think anti-semitic propaganda is neither here nor there.

It's think is dangerous to think that ideas spread based on dosage. As if the more we hear something the more we believe it. That's not how explanatory stories work


BTW, "leftist agenda" is a good example of a propagandizing shibboleth. Liberals seek peace, prosperity, safety, opportunity for all, and a happy future. But QOPAnon uses the phrase as proxy for "leftists" pretending nanobots are vaccines, demanding that 23 different bathroom types be installed in public facilities, and wanting to use police for target practice.
 
This idea of helping groups by avoiding bad words is well suited for our modern Internet age. It's a super easy way for individuals to quickly identify the people who are evil online. But it's an illusion....

We need to keep repeating the mantra "it's ok to be offended". It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend. Not only does the Internet allow quick global communication. But it also allows us not to see things we don't want to see. Nobody needs to see anything they don't want to.
Its amusing to watch Youtube videos that don't toe the line with regard to the leftist agenda....
I agree, partially, with Dr. Z on this matter. I think his mantra "It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend" has merit. Where it goes too far is
(a) The censorship we're speaking of is not as commonplace as right-wingers imply. Instead, trolls like Hannity or Carlson seize on every instance they can find, exaggerate it, and use it to bamboozle more and more Americans.

But this is a dangerous position.

I think we can all agree that the conservative position is wrong and hysterical. Nobody is trying to cancel Christmas. CRT isn't being taught in schools. Nobody is legally forced to use people's chosen pronouns. These facts alone doesn't make woke harmless.
It does make "woke" irrelevant though. We are waging heated discussions, people getting threatened over things that aren't actually happening. People are getting elected to office and legislation is being passed to stop CRT in public schools or defeat the lie that is Covid-19 or the steal of the 2020 election. The "woke", has engaged little public policy. In fact, the "Woke" can in part be lumped in with the War on Xmas and CRT and Covid-19 as either grossly exaggerated or entirely made up. You continually insist that Woke is some sort of slippery slope, where as the right-wing is fully engaged in so many conspiracy theories they led a quasi-riot that required Congress to be evacuated.

Censorship should be done sparingly, and it can't be allowed to drive an agenda. The reality is that Woke is terribly toothless and relative to the alt-right, wholly irrelevant and powerless.
 
This idea of helping groups by avoiding bad words is well suited for our modern Internet age. It's a super easy way for individuals to quickly identify the people who are evil online. But it's an illusion....

We need to keep repeating the mantra "it's ok to be offended". It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend. Not only does the Internet allow quick global communication. But it also allows us not to see things we don't want to see. Nobody needs to see anything they don't want to.
Its amusing to watch Youtube videos that don't toe the line with regard to the leftist agenda....
I agree, partially, with Dr. Z on this matter. I think his mantra "It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend" has merit. Where it goes too far is
(a) The censorship we're speaking of is not as commonplace as right-wingers imply. Instead, trolls like Hannity or Carlson seize on every instance they can find, exaggerate it, and use it to bamboozle more and more Americans.

But this is a dangerous position.

I think we can all agree that the conservative position is wrong and hysterical. Nobody is trying to cancel Christmas. CRT isn't being taught in schools. Nobody is legally forced to use people's chosen pronouns. These facts alone doesn't make woke harmless.
It does make "woke" irrelevant though. We are waging heated discussions, people getting threatened over things that aren't actually happening. People are getting elected to office and legislation is being passed to stop CRT in public schools or defeat the lie that is Covid-19 or the steal of the 2020 election. The "woke", has engaged little public policy. In fact, the "Woke" can in part be lumped in with the War on Xmas and CRT and Covid-19 as either grossly exaggerated or entirely made up. You continually insist that Woke is some sort of slippery slope, where as the right-wing is fully engaged in so many conspiracy theories they led a quasi-riot that required Congress to be evacuated.

Censorship should be done sparingly, and it can't be allowed to drive an agenda. The reality is that Woke is terribly toothless and relative to the alt-right, wholly irrelevant and powerless.

It's not so much that I think woke is a slippery slope. I think any stage on that slope is terrible. I think the idea of woke is fundamentally flawed and can only lead to pure evil. Even if the slope isn't slippery, woke still needs to be destroyed. It's nothing but a corrupting force that ruins everything it touches. It's great if it only ruins things a little bit. But why should we put up with anything being ruined because of woke?

Woke replaces genuine progress with empty symbols and posturing. I believe woke is an obstacle if we want to fight racism, sexism and homophobia. The more woke, the less progress.

I believe the only reason woke exists is because it's easy. We can keep the racism, sexism and homophobia. Nothing needs to change. And woke allows us to swim in the sea of virtue and goodness. Wokes believe they are fighting the good fight against racist, sexism and homophobia. They are nothing if not passionate. They remind me of evangelical Christians, equal in their passion, fighting for Jesus, conservative values in order to bring peace, love, understanding and a warm cuddly blanket of safety. Yes, they're absolutely deluded. Just like wokes.
 
I believe the only reason woke exists is because it's easy. We can keep the racism, sexism and homophobia. Nothing needs to change
So, openly combatting racism = supporting racism.


Whining about "freedom" whenever racism is called out = leading the charge against it.


Just curious, did you get your degree in public relations from the George Orwell International Finishing School? Or is it just Opposite Day where you are?
 
This idea of helping groups by avoiding bad words is well suited for our modern Internet age. It's a super easy way for individuals to quickly identify the people who are evil online. But it's an illusion....

We need to keep repeating the mantra "it's ok to be offended". It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend. Not only does the Internet allow quick global communication. But it also allows us not to see things we don't want to see. Nobody needs to see anything they don't want to.
Its amusing to watch Youtube videos that don't toe the line with regard to the leftist agenda....
I agree, partially, with Dr. Z on this matter. I think his mantra "It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend" has merit. Where it goes too far is
(a) The censorship we're speaking of is not as commonplace as right-wingers imply. Instead, trolls like Hannity or Carlson seize on every instance they can find, exaggerate it, and use it to bamboozle more and more Americans.

But this is a dangerous position.

I think we can all agree that the conservative position is wrong and hysterical. Nobody is trying to cancel Christmas. CRT isn't being taught in schools. Nobody is legally forced to use people's chosen pronouns. These facts alone doesn't make woke harmless.
It does make "woke" irrelevant though. We are waging heated discussions, people getting threatened over things that aren't actually happening. People are getting elected to office and legislation is being passed to stop CRT in public schools or defeat the lie that is Covid-19 or the steal of the 2020 election. The "woke", has engaged little public policy. In fact, the "Woke" can in part be lumped in with the War on Xmas and CRT and Covid-19 as either grossly exaggerated or entirely made up. You continually insist that Woke is some sort of slippery slope, where as the right-wing is fully engaged in so many conspiracy theories they led a quasi-riot that required Congress to be evacuated.

Censorship should be done sparingly, and it can't be allowed to drive an agenda. The reality is that Woke is terribly toothless and relative to the alt-right, wholly irrelevant and powerless.

It's not so much that I think woke is a slippery slope...
You argue it all the time!
I think any stage on that slope is terrible. I think the idea of woke is fundamentally flawed and can only lead to pure evil. Even if the slope isn't slippery, woke still needs to be destroyed. It's nothing but a corrupting force that ruins everything it touches. It's great if it only ruins things a little bit. But why should we put up with anything being ruined because of woke?

Woke replaces genuine progress with empty symbols and posturing. I believe woke is an obstacle if we want to fight racism, sexism and homophobia. The more woke, the less progress.

I believe the only reason woke exists is because it's easy. We can keep the racism, sexism and homophobia. Nothing needs to change. And woke allows us to swim in the sea of virtue and goodness. Wokes believe they are fighting the good fight against racist, sexism and homophobia. They are nothing if not passionate. They remind me of evangelical Christians, equal in their passion, fighting for Jesus, conservative values in order to bring peace, love, understanding and a warm cuddly blanket of safety. Yes, they're absolutely deluded. Just like wokes.
That's great. The whole house is on fire and you are standing in the front yard telling the fire department that their hose is going to damage a bush if they continue being so reckless.
 
This idea of helping groups by avoiding bad words is well suited for our modern Internet age. It's a super easy way for individuals to quickly identify the people who are evil online. But it's an illusion....

We need to keep repeating the mantra "it's ok to be offended". It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend. Not only does the Internet allow quick global communication. But it also allows us not to see things we don't want to see. Nobody needs to see anything they don't want to.
Its amusing to watch Youtube videos that don't toe the line with regard to the leftist agenda....
I agree, partially, with Dr. Z on this matter. I think his mantra "It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend" has merit. Where it goes too far is
(a) The censorship we're speaking of is not as commonplace as right-wingers imply. Instead, trolls like Hannity or Carlson seize on every instance they can find, exaggerate it, and use it to bamboozle more and more Americans.

But this is a dangerous position.

I think we can all agree that the conservative position is wrong and hysterical. Nobody is trying to cancel Christmas. CRT isn't being taught in schools. Nobody is legally forced to use people's chosen pronouns. These facts alone doesn't make woke harmless.
It does make "woke" irrelevant though. We are waging heated discussions, people getting threatened over things that aren't actually happening. People are getting elected to office and legislation is being passed to stop CRT in public schools or defeat the lie that is Covid-19 or the steal of the 2020 election. The "woke", has engaged little public policy. In fact, the "Woke" can in part be lumped in with the War on Xmas and CRT and Covid-19 as either grossly exaggerated or entirely made up. You continually insist that Woke is some sort of slippery slope, where as the right-wing is fully engaged in so many conspiracy theories they led a quasi-riot that required Congress to be evacuated.

Censorship should be done sparingly, and it can't be allowed to drive an agenda. The reality is that Woke is terribly toothless and relative to the alt-right, wholly irrelevant and powerless.

It's not so much that I think woke is a slippery slope...
You argue it all the time!
I think any stage on that slope is terrible. I think the idea of woke is fundamentally flawed and can only lead to pure evil. Even if the slope isn't slippery, woke still needs to be destroyed. It's nothing but a corrupting force that ruins everything it touches. It's great if it only ruins things a little bit. But why should we put up with anything being ruined because of woke?

Woke replaces genuine progress with empty symbols and posturing. I believe woke is an obstacle if we want to fight racism, sexism and homophobia. The more woke, the less progress.

I believe the only reason woke exists is because it's easy. We can keep the racism, sexism and homophobia. Nothing needs to change. And woke allows us to swim in the sea of virtue and goodness. Wokes believe they are fighting the good fight against racist, sexism and homophobia. They are nothing if not passionate. They remind me of evangelical Christians, equal in their passion, fighting for Jesus, conservative values in order to bring peace, love, understanding and a warm cuddly blanket of safety. Yes, they're absolutely deluded. Just like wokes.
That's great. The whole house is on fire and you are standing in the front yard telling the fire department that their hose is going to damage a bush if they continue being so reckless.

I don't think so. To use your metaphor. The house is on fire and Wokes show up spraying gasoline on the fire while bragging about how great they are at putting out fires. They're not helping.
 
This idea of helping groups by avoiding bad words is well suited for our modern Internet age. It's a super easy way for individuals to quickly identify the people who are evil online. But it's an illusion....

We need to keep repeating the mantra "it's ok to be offended". It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend. Not only does the Internet allow quick global communication. But it also allows us not to see things we don't want to see. Nobody needs to see anything they don't want to.
Its amusing to watch Youtube videos that don't toe the line with regard to the leftist agenda....
I agree, partially, with Dr. Z on this matter. I think his mantra "It is ok to be offended and it is ok to offend" has merit. Where it goes too far is
(a) The censorship we're speaking of is not as commonplace as right-wingers imply. Instead, trolls like Hannity or Carlson seize on every instance they can find, exaggerate it, and use it to bamboozle more and more Americans.

But this is a dangerous position.

I think we can all agree that the conservative position is wrong and hysterical. Nobody is trying to cancel Christmas. CRT isn't being taught in schools. Nobody is legally forced to use people's chosen pronouns. These facts alone doesn't make woke harmless.
It does make "woke" irrelevant though. We are waging heated discussions, people getting threatened over things that aren't actually happening. People are getting elected to office and legislation is being passed to stop CRT in public schools or defeat the lie that is Covid-19 or the steal of the 2020 election. The "woke", has engaged little public policy. In fact, the "Woke" can in part be lumped in with the War on Xmas and CRT and Covid-19 as either grossly exaggerated or entirely made up. You continually insist that Woke is some sort of slippery slope, where as the right-wing is fully engaged in so many conspiracy theories they led a quasi-riot that required Congress to be evacuated.

Censorship should be done sparingly, and it can't be allowed to drive an agenda. The reality is that Woke is terribly toothless and relative to the alt-right, wholly irrelevant and powerless.

It's not so much that I think woke is a slippery slope...
You argue it all the time!
I think any stage on that slope is terrible. I think the idea of woke is fundamentally flawed and can only lead to pure evil. Even if the slope isn't slippery, woke still needs to be destroyed. It's nothing but a corrupting force that ruins everything it touches. It's great if it only ruins things a little bit. But why should we put up with anything being ruined because of woke?

Woke replaces genuine progress with empty symbols and posturing. I believe woke is an obstacle if we want to fight racism, sexism and homophobia. The more woke, the less progress.

I believe the only reason woke exists is because it's easy. We can keep the racism, sexism and homophobia. Nothing needs to change. And woke allows us to swim in the sea of virtue and goodness. Wokes believe they are fighting the good fight against racist, sexism and homophobia. They are nothing if not passionate. They remind me of evangelical Christians, equal in their passion, fighting for Jesus, conservative values in order to bring peace, love, understanding and a warm cuddly blanket of safety. Yes, they're absolutely deluded. Just like wokes.
That's great. The whole house is on fire and you are standing in the front yard telling the fire department that their hose is going to damage a bush if they continue being so reckless.

I don't think so. To use your metaphor. The house is on fire and Wokes show up spraying gasoline on the fire while bragging about how great they are at putting out fires. They're not helping.
No, that isn't metaphorical at all. The comparison would be a bunch of Wokes showing up and saying that the house didn't have any solar panels, too large an energy footprint, and not enough minorities and women in the fire department. IE, their impact would not be noticed. Meanwhile, the alt-right started the fire because they thought a pizzeria committing awful things to children existed in the building because they read about it from Q-Anon.
 

I think you are creating an illusion of a glorious past and a good ol¨days where people knew how to behave sexually. I find the idea that men, before porn, in a time where domestic abuse was seen as normal were any better at foreplay than men are now. I'm willing to put good money on that back in the day, it was worse.

Might be something to that, but there is plenty of information floating around now for those who will look.


Looks like I should pay more attention to it. I had filed it as woo and didn't realize the name now applied to something very different.

Be warned though. There's a lot of hippies still. You need to sift through a lot of bullshit to get to the good stuff. And having seen the evolution of this up close, I am absolutely convinced the sensible part of the tantric movement will grow exponentially, until it dwarves the woo hippies. I'm also convinced that the sensible part of the this movement will get sick and tired of being associated with the hippies and will rebrand. At some point. But we're not there yet.

Definitely. I still find plenty of the old woo.

With the risk of repeating myself, the core of this movement is the same for the woo and the sensibles. It's just a question of removing the magical language (and passive aggressively). It's all about slowing down, pay attention to your partner, start with low risk areas (ie don't go straight for the genitals), once sex has started don't fuck with the goal to achieve orgasm. Take your time.

Definitely. I can't even understand a guy with the goal of orgasm. Getting there faster doesn't make it any better, why not enjoy the getting there?

It's also a lot about talking before and after sex, sharing feelings, experiences. Training us to set boundaries. Not just women. Men fucking suck at accepting that they don't need to be up for everything. It's ok as a man to say they're not ok with something. If women think men handle rejection badly. Just wait until men start setting boundaries and watch the psychological meltdown of the women. It's incredibly educational to do this in a group. To literally see that other men are struggling with similar things. Or that when you do this thing, it's not just your women who doesn't like it, no woman likes it. Afterwards just sitting in a ring and comparing notes is extremely educational. It can be shredding for ones ego and self image. But the guys who get really bad news, also really really need to hear it. People also often suck at asking for consent in a sexy way. Either people "just go for it" (great potential to fuck it up) or they ask as if it's about signing a contract. The art of playfully getting a partner to agree to something without killing the vibe is an art that needs to be practiced.

At this point, our culture is so starved for good information on this and training that it's still incredibly low hanging fruit. And these organisers are making a shit tonne of money leading workshops. It's already a mass movement. This is NOT going to go away.

If they're making a shit ton of money it means more organizers are needed.

Good point. We all need to start digging where we stand.

I know plenty of people are, fundamentally, monogamous in their outlooks. I'm not. But I respect it.

Even without another relationship in the picture to make monogamy relevant there's also the issue of how well you need to know someone to be comfortable having sex with them.
 
I believe the only reason woke exists is because it's easy. We can keep the racism, sexism and homophobia. Nothing needs to change
So, openly combatting racism = supporting racism.


Whining about "freedom" whenever racism is called out = leading the charge against it.


Just curious, did you get your degree in public relations from the George Orwell International Finishing School? Or is it just Opposite Day where you are?

I think what he's saying is that woke is far more about virtue signaling than actually doing anything. It's like my objection to the various climate agreements--virtue signaling without doing much of anything but trying to shut up the people pointing out the problem.

Not to mention that it rather actively condones racism against the standards.
 
I believe the only reason woke exists is because it's easy. We can keep the racism, sexism and homophobia. Nothing needs to change
So, openly combatting racism = supporting racism.


Whining about "freedom" whenever racism is called out = leading the charge against it.


Just curious, did you get your degree in public relations from the George Orwell International Finishing School? Or is it just Opposite Day where you are?

I think what he's saying is that woke is far more about virtue signaling than actually doing anything. It's like my objection to the various climate agreements--virtue signaling without doing much of anything but trying to shut up the people pointing out the problem.

Not to mention that it rather actively condones racism against the standards.
That is entirely opposite to the actual definition of "woke"; a woke person, by definition, is a person who has become conscious of their situation in a way that immediately demands change, and both personal and interpersonal evolution. When a fluent AAVE speaker says to "get woke", they do not mean "sit on your ass".
 
I believe the only reason woke exists is because it's easy. We can keep the racism, sexism and homophobia. Nothing needs to change
So, openly combatting racism = supporting racism.

How are they combating racism? I can't see it happening. Creating racially defined separatist safe zones deepen racial divides. Continually drawing a focus to race can only perpetuate it. I think the only way to kill racism is to stop making it a thing. The world is full of ethnic groups who integrated into the culture around them and stopped being seen as the other. Wokes are keeping alive differences by continually picking at it, like we pick at a wound to prevent it from healing.


Just curious, did you get your degree in public relations from the George Orwell International Finishing School? Or is it just Opposite Day where you are?

It's not a question of opposite. It's a question of engaging in a bullshit theatrical project instead of fixing the actual problem.
 
I believe the only reason woke exists is because it's easy. We can keep the racism, sexism and homophobia. Nothing needs to change
So, openly combatting racism = supporting racism.

How are they combating racism? I can't see it happening. Creating racially defined separatist safe zones deepen racial divides. Continually drawing a focus to race can only perpetuate it. I think the only way to kill racism is to stop making it a thing. The world is full of ethnic groups who integrated into the culture around them and stopped being seen as the other. Wokes are keeping alive differences by continually picking at it, like we pick at a wound to prevent it from healing.


Just curious, did you get your degree in public relations from the George Orwell International Finishing School? Or is it just Opposite Day where you are?

It's not a question of opposite. It's a question of engaging in a bullshit theatrical project instead of fixing the actual problem.
All you ever do is apologize for racists and angrily defend their "rights", yet you have the unmitigated gall to say that the people who reformed this country's legal system from the top down, are reforming policing, are ending discriminatory housing practices loophole by loophole, and are creating spaces for black folks in higher education against immense institutional inertia are doing "nothing" to combat racism? I think you must know that this is a fat load of bullshit. You're not offended by social action because you're afraid it it will "divide people", you're just offended by it.
 

I think you are creating an illusion of a glorious past and a good ol¨days where people knew how to behave sexually. I find the idea that men, before porn, in a time where domestic abuse was seen as normal were any better at foreplay than men are now. I'm willing to put good money on that back in the day, it was worse.

Might be something to that, but there is plenty of information floating around now for those who will look.

I had read all those books and blogs before attending these workshops. Attending these workshops, my big wakeup call is that those books are almost useless. These are all practical skills. It's about feelings and creating emotional bonds. It's about having a sexual experience with a healthy well balanced person who has embodied these skills. I think that's the only way these kinds of things can be taught. When it comes to sex, our teachers are our lovers. In a sexually dysfunctional and neurotic culture only dysfunctional and neurotic patterns are taught and repeated. We're emotional beings. While we are capable of intellectualizing and talking about this rationally. We're not rational beings. Certainly not when we're having sex. That's actually the thing that is good about New Age. Since it is 100% anti-intellectual, it's a good vehicle for training this. Within New Age, if it feels right it is right. Which is great to practice when engaging in self pleasuring. Most people don't even know how to masturbate in a healthy way. There's courses even on that. And they are great.

Reading is a fundamentally intellectual activity. Sex is not. Translating an intellectual concept you are reading into an emotionally grounded activity is very very hard. Most people fuck up the basics. Most people who read about tantra, just don't get it. They often think the exercises are cringy and embarrassing.



With the risk of repeating myself, the core of this movement is the same for the woo and the sensibles. It's just a question of removing the magical language (and passive aggressively). It's all about slowing down, pay attention to your partner, start with low risk areas (ie don't go straight for the genitals), once sex has started don't fuck with the goal to achieve orgasm. Take your time.

Definitely. I can't even understand a guy with the goal of orgasm. Getting there faster doesn't make it any better, why not enjoy the getting there?

Men do it because it's a binary receipt of being a successful lover. There's a fundamental difference in how women and men feel valued and valuable. To oversimplify it, women are loved and valued for who they are. Men are loved and valued for what they can do. The masculine role is one of performance. The feminine role is that of creating excitement and being exciting. It's not 100%. Women can take on the masculine role. And men can take on the feminine role. In healthy sexual play people play around with this and it goes back and forth. But men will gravitate toward the masculine, and women the feminine.

It's not that men are intrinsically bad lovers. It's more a question of nature having created two different genders with conflicting needs and desires in order to make the sex more interesting. I think the conflict is by design. It creates and interesting and fun tension. Or should be interesting and fun. At least if you accept it and play around with it.



It's also a lot about talking before and after sex, sharing feelings, experiences. Training us to set boundaries. Not just women. Men fucking suck at accepting that they don't need to be up for everything. It's ok as a man to say they're not ok with something. If women think men handle rejection badly. Just wait until men start setting boundaries and watch the psychological meltdown of the women. It's incredibly educational to do this in a group. To literally see that other men are struggling with similar things. Or that when you do this thing, it's not just your women who doesn't like it, no woman likes it. Afterwards just sitting in a ring and comparing notes is extremely educational. It can be shredding for ones ego and self image. But the guys who get really bad news, also really really need to hear it. People also often suck at asking for consent in a sexy way. Either people "just go for it" (great potential to fuck it up) or they ask as if it's about signing a contract. The art of playfully getting a partner to agree to something without killing the vibe is an art that needs to be practiced.

At this point, our culture is so starved for good information on this and training that it's still incredibly low hanging fruit. And these organisers are making a shit tonne of money leading workshops. It's already a mass movement. This is NOT going to go away.

If they're making a shit ton of money it means more organizers are needed.

That's why I am 100% convinced this is a world that is going to explode. I'm also 100% sure that in the near future attending sex courses in order to be better lovers is going to be culturally normalized and near obligatory for anybody hoping to keep a partner around. The fact that well trained lovers are better lovers and are therefore better at keeping partners will create a cultural push towards this.

The writing is on the wall. It's hard to overestimate how quickly this movement is expanding. We're already flooded with garbage shit tantric teachers teaching dodgy nonsense to clueless hippies. The reason they stay in business is because the basic skill level in society is so low. Sexual abuse and sexual exploitation is rife in these communities. Why? Well, because a psychopath who learns these skills and gives women the best sex and earth shattering mindblowing orgasms is going to be able to keep women, desperate for good sex, around no matter how much they treat them like shit. How do we stop these guys? It's super simple. We educate the healthy and well balanced guys. So they're just as good at pleasing women as these tantric predators. And that is what is happening now.
 
All you ever do is apologize for racists and angrily defend their "rights", yet you have the unmitigated gall to say that the people who reformed this country's legal system from the top down, are reforming policing, are ending discriminatory housing practices loophole by loophole, and are creating spaces for black folks in higher education against immense institutional inertia are doing "nothing" to combat racism?

I think you have me confused with somebody else. For example, the civil rights movement was necessary. I'm a huge fan. I fully support this black police officer.


I hope his boss is fired. I wish Satan appears and creates hell, just so this guy can burn in it. This isn't a white officer having a civil conversation and sharing his opinions about the intricacies of racial policies. This is just straight up racist harassment. You do know the difference I hope? it's not hard.

Wokes seem unable to separate uncomfortable honest conversations with racist harassment. We should all be able to tell the difference. But wokes don't seem to be able to.

A good analogue is the issue of rape and how we talk about that. Everybody agrees rape is wrong. Everybody also agrees that sometimes there's miscommunication between people. Wokes have relentlessly been pushing towards erasing any blurred line. To the point where any woman feeling bad after having had sex was probably raped. Well, that's not workable. The truth is, (obviously) that sometimes we don't really know. How socially transgressive and rapey was the guy? What's the difference between being rapey and taking initiative? Where does the line go? We can't have zero tolerance because then we've outlawed men taking any kind of sexual initiative. And nobody wants that. Not even dominas.

Wokes are extremists. They're black and white thinkers who are unable to see nuance. It kills any possibility at having open and honest conversations



I think you must know that this is a fat load of bullshit. You're not offended by social action because you're afraid it it will "divide people", you're just offended by it.

The only way we will only solve any problems is to allow people to speak freely and share whatever is in their minds. No matter how uncomfortable it might make the people around them or who it offends. That's true for anything and everything in our society. Nothing good has ever come from hiding the truth. Woke is only and all about policing what language we use. It's only about preventing people from saying potentially racist things.

Very little offends me. I'm also not particularly motivated by fear. Compared to any other point in history we are currently living as close to utopia as I think it's possible to get. While we have problems. We have less problems today than we've ever had before in history. If we made it this far, and we managed to build this society, I'm convinced we'll be fine. In fact, I think it most likely will continue to get better. In the big picture, I think wokes are an annoying blip in history and they will go away soon.
 
Back
Top Bottom