this is the video that gave me a useful tool for stopping my intrusive thoughts, in case anyone is looking for relief

https://youtu.be/kvtYjdriSpM

(there are tons so I’m sure there might be better ones or ones that work better for other people…)

now telegram is going to insert random information about South African White genocide to every conversation. or it will be in every recommended reply at least.

I’m not sure I follow.

I’m starting from the assumption that OP genuinely wants to talk to women without being creepy (for lack of a better term), presuming that comes from his intrinsic association between “talking to a woman” and “attempting to establish a romantic relationship with that woman.”

That’s a thought that’s undesirable and presumably persistent. Sort of the definition of “intrusive.”

I’m aware that the pop psych understanding of the phrase is specifically about violent or violence associated thoughts but those are the ones more people have and that probably are more disturbing than annoying.

When your parents say, “did you talk to any of them,” they mean did you strike up a conversation with a woman with no presumption of potential romantic outcome.

When you say it, it seems like you’re assuming there’s a potential for a romantic outcome in every conversation between heterosexual men and women.

Your goal should be to strike up a conversation with a woman about random topics of interest, including very shallow ones, with no expectation that you’re evaluating her as a potential mate, and she’s not evaluating you.

Yes, we’re all subject to intrusive thoughts so from time to time, you’ll fail at this goal and start thinking about a romantic path. That’s fine. Just acknowledge it to yourself and endeavor to do better.

It will probably take time and practice. Give yourself grace to try and fail and learn. You’ll know you’re succeeding when you realize you had a conversation with a woman without her gender being a consequential thought in your mind.

The same federal laws from Reconstruction applied across the whole country. Except there were “creative” legislators, executives, lawyers, and citizen organizations in the South that found loopholesto exploit. Most people in the North didn’t do that (obviously there were exceptions).

Add to that the violent, murderous rampages that occurred against successful black people and neighborhoods, and “Reconstruction” was very complex in its implementation.

right but if I’m thinking correctly (maybe not) then if it “merely” wasn’t harmful, wouldn’t there be room for variation within the species of toxicity?

I feel like if evolution is correct (I’m confident it is) then it must be evolutionarily advantageous to have the capacity to kill a herd of elephants with one’s toxin, assuming all animals in the group have that capacity.

We can go lower!!!

lots of rights get modified, curtailed, or eliminated by the larger society based on misuse or misbehavior or other transgressions.

(or positions of power, etc…)

those are rookie numbers, we can do better!

everything ought to be transferred to Ukraine, but only the European stuff is likely to be in the near term.

that’s one thing Biden really should have done after the election.

with “hire more” you do run up against the “9 women can have a baby in 1 month” limit, but in this case it’s likely to help.

if this is machine learning and neural networks, I can believe it’s a good thing, maybe even meaningful for the potential of so called artificial intelligence.

if this is an LLM that’s alleged to have popped this “virus tail” theory out of… what exactly…? I’m not buying it.

this is a rift between MAGA and Ukraine.

or they could say between the US government and Ukraine.

I still support Ukraine and most Harris voters and many traditional Republicans (Eisenhower type) do, too.

I hope that the Biden admin did a good job of building them up and building Europe up to last through 2-4 years of a potential MAGA administration. Even if they were confident it wouldn’t happen. Hope for the best and prepare for the worst and all that.

the… remarkable… thing about this is the Trump administration probably thinks they’re winning this.

every example of “monkey considering monkey stranger” was “bad monkey.” That is the forest of this article: we’re good monkeys to monkey friends and bad monkeys to monkey strangers.

but that’s not the case at all, because we have monkey traditions and monkey manners and monkey mores.

again I agree that we don’t think of people outside our 150-200 person capacity in the same way as those we know well. we don’t give them the level of consideration we should. we don’t live up to the golden rule all the time.

but EVERY example in the article was monkey stranger --> bad monkey.

my thought is actually that higher levels of technology begin to whittle away at the workability of more “free form” social organization.

For example, I’d argue that American Indians were living in something much closer to anarchy than anything else when the technologically vastly superior Europeans arrived with guns and absolutely demolished them.

I think anarchist societies could probably solve problems that require high technology (electricity, sewage, water distribution…), probably in ways we can’t imagine. But I don’t think they can solve the “higher technology oppressor” problem.

it seems accurate to say that most people conceive only of “people i know well enough to fully humanize” and “all other humans.”

I take a huge issue with the portrayal that all of us are willing to fuck over the second group all the time with no acknowledgement that over the centuries we’ve built elaborate customs and mores for interacting with strangers or within groups or between groups.

The author focusing on hypothetical examples of monkeys mistreating monkey strangers exclusively is inaccurate to the reality we all live in. There are monkeys out in the real world who just help monkey strangers altruistically. Just stopping to help change a tire gives the lie to the author’s premise.

Are there asshole monkeys? Sure. But we’re not all assholes to monkey strangers.

AND even in small knit monkey communities sometimes there are “defectors” (game theory term) and the society can react to them in many different ways.

do you remember one or two? I’m unlikely to go get that book any time soon.

up to what size & technological level?