Nobody ever went broke overestimating the gullibility of Americans.
However, even that is kind and charitable to an unwarranted degree: go ahead and point out to David here https://davidrozado.substack.com/p/the-political-biases-of-gpt-4 that he's mistaking theocracy for a bit of hypocrisy. "Gee oopsie woopsie you made a fucky wucky. uwu" Be as gentle and persuasive as possible. See how he responds. I'll wait.
Americans are theocratic, and superstitiously believe they're not a theocracy. David will tie himself in pretzels to avoid ever admitting out loud that the religion is religious. If his daughter is raped, his son dies from a drug overdose, and his wife poached by some thug, if he himself must be impoverished and then die (to murder) to avoid calling a spade a spade, well, that's just how loyal he is. You wouldn't question his faith, would you?
Nobody ever went broke overestimating Americans' loyalty to their superstitious religion.
>"whereby derogatory comments about some demographic groups are flagged as hateful while the exact same comments about other demographic groups are not labeled as hateful"
Woke is more correct than the mainstream: heresy is heresy, non-heresy is non-heresy.
Christianity claims to be the religion of love. Wokism is nothing but evolved Christianity, and as such uses "hate" as a generalized term for heresy. They can't use [heresy] for heresy because one of the superstitions is that the religion is not a religion.
Anyone who evokes Envy is "hateful" for provoking self-hate in the resentful, you see. E.g. men, because they are superior to women (especially according to women) must be denigrated to avoid provoking women's Envy. (Especially single women, e.g. whores, who have no claim on a man's excellence.) It's fine to praise women relative to men because only a tiny, irrelevant minority of total losers would ever Envy a woman.
If that upsets you, try looking at what women are actually like, rather than reading superstitious journalisms about women. Look at a woman in particular: does she truly live a life with anything you envy in it?
David will never win this fight as long as he supports the religion's claim to be secular. You can't cut down a tree by laboriously fighting a single leaf-bud every spring. Even in the unlikely event David et al manages to make GPT 'neutal' (left-left-leftist instead of left-left-left-leftist) the tree will simply make a second bud to cover the loss. You especially can't cut down a tree when the scaffold you built to reach the budding leaf constitutes a wall ensuring nobody can get at the trunk.
"David will never win this fight as long as he supports the religion's claim to be secular."
ReplyDeleteHe may be playing a word game on that. "Secular" originates in ancient Catholicism as being opposed to "Religious" where "Religious" means "Monastic." Hence priests who don't live in monasteries are called "Secular clergy." Secular technically means "of or related to the world"...but in usage in ancient Catholicism "the world" is the world of sex havers, so secular is sexular. All sex havers are seculars and "secular clergy" (even if celibate) are called secular because they serve as priests to seculars. Whereas priests who serve as priests to monks are "monastic clergy." Thus traditional Catholics typically don't even call themselves "religious" as Prots do, because that would mean being a monk or nun in their vocabulary. At least they didn't until the new meaning of secular and religious was enforced by the media in the 2000s.
One of the problems with Christianity is that "sex haver" isn't a slur if you're not living in Democratic times with Democratic Men. Just the opposite - celibacy in the face of worthy wives is a sign of severe deviancy.
ReplyDeleteCalling a spade a spade, the Democratic Woman is a whore. Egalitarianism: one woman is a whore, therefore, every woman is a whore. Or else. As such, in Democratic times, the sex haver means john. If you're actually a husband with a wife, you're not a john.
Incel(1): Wants to be a john but won't approach a whore who would agree to sell to him.
Incel(2): Wants to be a husband but can't find a wife in the endless sea of whores, especially since even the potential wives present like whores until they're alleged-married.
Incel(3): Volcel that whores and their johns can't distinguish from either of incel(1) or incel(2).
P.S. A simp, then, is a wanna-be john who can't afford the whore they've picked. Window-shopping john.
Simps obviously very simpering once you realize they're defending a whore's honour. Bro, she doesn't have any.