I like how Tanya’s thoughts here can be easily overlooked as typical meme hyperbole by people who don’t know that that is exactly what she thinks about at all times.
I wonder if there would be a way to draw that up. A healthcare system paid for by the states that participate and distributed federally. Treatment only for those from states that participate. Thus still pitting the government against the pharmaceutical companies in terms of fair prices and pushes states to ideally make their own choices which would slowly move towards more and more states choosing to support their people. We would have to be dicks and deny medical attention to people coming from other states. I’m sure there are a million holes to work out, but no one should have any reason to argue with it outside “I don’t want others to get help if I can’t.”
I would argue that we provide medical care for out of state people but all the facilities have posters providing the truth and sources of why it works well in this state. Maybe that way they’ll look a little deeper into why they have to travel to another state to get help.
Well, this meme is specifically promoting the notion that how attractive you look directly correlates to your ability to date people. When how you look is not the be all end all of dating.
This general concept of one’s “biologically ordained appearance” being incompatible with finding love and relationships is closely tied with incel ideology. The “black pill” is generally used to denote that you’re biologically and immutably so unattractive that you will never be able to “compete in the sexual marketplace.” Felt gross just typing that. It’s also attached to the conspiracy theory of “hypergamy,” that you’re so unattractive that even women of “comparable conventional attractiveness” won’t ever date you.
The message of the meme, that someone is so unattractive they can not date anyone at all, is not explicitly incel ideology, but that notion is closely tied to it. In all likelihood this meme was made by someone in the incel community or who regularly consumes incel content.
Well, this meme is specifically promoting the notion that how attractive you look directly correlates to your ability to date people. When how you look is not the be all end all of dating.
How is that incel ideology? Incels hate women and think they are entitled to sexual relationships. This has nothing to do with believing dating potential directly correlates to physical attractiveness (which it does, at least for men).
this meme is specifically promoting the notion that how attractive you look directly correlates to your ability to date people
There are behavioral studies showing this to be completely true. As someone who is honest about how I probably wouldn’t date an unattractive person, I freely admit this tracks; and, unlike incels, I absolutely don’t blame either gender for this fact. It’s just how our brains are wired.
ohh is there also a study defining exactly how ugly YOU are? or maybe you have some mental health issues and this is just more self deprecating talk?
that’s the issue here, mother fuckers keep saying “study study study fact fact fact ugly ugly ugly” but that speaks nothing to their own situation. you can abuse facts and research, and I see it literally every day: depressed people cherry pick negative evidence to support their worldview that they are worthless
Biologically attractive people will be generally more successful at having casual sexual encounters. Whether or not this tracks to actually finding love or just finding sex is unsure. Furthermore, whether it has to do with “unattractive” people being less confident/more self-conscious is yet to be shown.
If you take care of yourself and actually go out and interact with women (and people in general), forcing yourself into uncomfortable social situations, eventually you’ll get better at talking to people and talking to people is like 80% of dating.
Like many, I have not seen any success, or really attention (to share my social skills) in dating apps. That step is wholly decided by physical attractiveness.
I’d be happy to throw away any attempt at using those sites, but unfortunately much of the dating world has moved to them; and the people in relationships I do know generally used them.
What we know of those sites suggests the only men receiving attention on them are in the top 10% in terms of appearance. I’ve also anecdotally heard from women who admit to using the environment more for attention seeking behavior than actual relationships. I certainly wouldn’t call myself “ugly” for being in the bottom 90 percentile. I am okay with my appearance - I just know I’m not a perfect Adonis. I’m even okay with that behavior from the opposite gender - you can’t help what you like. Even if one of my friends was a granite-chinned gigachad, I wouldn’t fault him for just refusing to work through such a toxic environment - even if he has trouble finding such relationships elsewhere.
This is a complex situation not faulted to any one gender. The net effect, though, is that it’s not a good idea for anyone to date unless you’re blinded towards the survivorship bias you see from those that make it through, or are unconventionally attractive.
Everyone’s idea of physical attraction will be different. There’s also people who don’t strongly have opinions about physical attraction as they do about personality attraction. And then you have intellectual attraction.
There are people out there single and happy regardless of their attractiveness and not even bothered with it. They aren’t even lonely. There are people where it’s not even their lifestyle. There are plenty of people who may not appear physically attractive to one person but are in happy relationships. So physical attraction is a red herring argument when it comes to describing what makes a person turn into an incel.
It’s about how an incel handles rejection and being alone. There’s much more to do with obsessiveness, loneliness, entitlement, anger transference and toxic thinking than it does with attraction in and of itself. The toxicity becomes more a self fulfilling prophecy.
Sure, people that can completely ignore physical appearance exist; it’s a bit of a straw man to say any claim is about 100.00% of people. The point is that appearance matters to a majority of people - and that it’s often the first attractor that even leads to any further discovery. Romantic comedies tend to put “opposites” into quirky unexpected circumstances that lead to that discovery, but that won’t happen for a lot of people.
But as to your second and third paragraphs, you are completely correct - and it may have been a missed expectation thinking I was arguing against that. People should be happy on their own. It might just be me thinking that the meme is originally pointed towards people expressing that relationships are something everyone should seek, because it has nothing to do with attractiveness - and that is what I consider untrue. But yes, people can still choose to be “ugly” (by mild comparison) and happy. Nothing totally excuses toxic behavior from people’s rejection.
The message of the meme, that someone is so unattractive they can not date anyone at all, is not explicitly incel ideology,
Hmmm, to me it read differenlty: that someone who is attractive doesn’t understand the problems that come with being unattractive, and also it was funny how naively the guy in the bottom row asks “are you sure?”.
I guess, like everything else in life, there’s more than one way to read/interpret something.
Incel ideology is defined by the “involuntary” (the “In” in “Incel”). So by definition, saying that something can be changed, implies it is not involuntary. And not a part of the ideology.
And because choosing to follow the ideology is a choice, there can be no such thing as a “small ‘i’” incel.
Except it’s not exactly involuntary for them, is it? People who subscribe to that ideology are undateable because they become awful, toxic people, which can be changed.
There’s r/foreveralone. I don’t know how the community evolved, but like 7 or so years ago it was basically what you described. People seeking comfort over feeling undateable and being scared of never finding anyone, but without the toxicity and hate that incels are known for.
This is absolutely an incel meme. Incel ideology hinges on always placing the blame on something external (often women and genetics) for their problems, never their own actions. If someone were to blame themselves and take responsibility for their own situation, it would by definition not be Involuntary.
I posted it to promote one thing and one thing only: giggles from the shitposting meme community.
I’m F30 (if that matters at all), I have a boyfriend, we live together in a stable and happy relationship, we’re both social, have lots of friends and boardgames and beer, and occasionally take each other out on dates at nice restaurants. Neither of us is “unattractive” (whatever that means in this context, quite subjective I’d say), and we both laughed our ass off at this meme, it was funny, and gave my brain the giggles. Not everything like this is pushing incel ideology, and neither does anything else on my profile (feel free to check, I guess?).
PS: It’s nice to see people giving each other advice for dating here… One funny thing about the meme is that that person in the bottom row might simply “view” themselves that way, or exaggerate the contrast between him and the guy in the upper row. All in all, some people got the laughs, others got nice advice, there was no intention to promote any kind of ideology, so I’d say it’s been a good post.
One funny thing about the meme is that that person in the bottom row might simply “view” themselves that way, or exaggerate the contrast between him and the guy in the upper row.
YOU ARE SO CLOSE TO GETTING IT
no one on earth looks like the dude in the image but I see people everyday who genuinely believe that’s what they look like and their life is doomed
you can see how someone who is exposed to that mentality regularly would be alarmed to see it appearing on here right?
In any case, thanks for pointing it out. Obviously people should be aware that it’s a meme that has incel undertones and is likely made by an incel (I found it online and reposted it here… not really anywhere in specific, I think I was duckduckgo’ing something else and this popped up in the results, so not from 4chan or anything like that).
I can appreciate that you laugh at the funny face, but the message genuinely disgusts me.
I respect that. I understand that, if seen from the incel lens, this meme looks bad.
I want you to post memes that aren’t shitty
**Sorry, sadly that’s not something that I’ll stop doing on Lemmy Shitpost.**I recommend you check out Ten Forward, where I post better memes… if you like Star Trek.
I apologize for my tone. be well snek
You too, TimewornTraveller, may you travel somewhere less cruel than our current era for some time and rest that weariness 😊
I’m not trying to diminish your experience, but it’s called “dogwhistling” for a reason. You, being in a secure happy relationship, are unlikely to hear it. But a deeply insecure young man looking to externalize his shame absolutely will. He is the target, not you.
Right, thanks for pointing out that it would be dogwhistling if I had done it intentionally. I’m not taking it down though, seems like there is sufficient discussion in the comment section about this, plus people seem to think it’s more funny than it’s offensive.
Meme-style dogwhistling actually relies on unwitting “carrier” intermediaries to spread and normalize the ideology. You see the same technique a lot with anti-trans memes too (“I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter” is a common one that gets often repeated by non-transphobes).
By posting, upvoting and laughing, “normies” (emotionally secure people) play into the propagandists hands. A dogwhistle is not just the meme itself, but the entire social scenario around it. The real target of the whistle will see upvotes and laughter as reinforcement that the “unspoken ideas” espoused in it are true (there are a few in this thread).
“I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter” to me sounds like it makes fun of made up tumblr genders.
Anyway, I guess I don’t see it the way you do. I think it’s a lot of over analysis that turns people into censorship/word police. I don’t prefer absolute censorship because it puts discussions to death. I’d rather this is out there and talked about rather than removed to be only in corners of the internet where these “incels” would gather alone, further removed from society.
If you think it’s problematic, by all means do report it.
Again, this isn’t just some arbitrary opinion I hold, it is actual Incel propaganda. You are welcome to spread it wherever you please, I just thought that you might want to be made aware.
Thanks for the details you provided though, it was informative and might affect the next time I post something like this (maybe I’ll add some kind of disclaimer or something).
again, why not just post swastikas then? if it doesn’t mean anything and you don’t stand by its message, what’s the difference? it’s all just white noise on shitpost right?
It’s supposed to get hot enough to kill. You’re putting a lot of faith into a machine that doesn’t get much maintence done on it.
If my dishwasher does not heat sufficiently, it may take me years to discover that with no ill effects to me.
If a poop dishwasher is not heating correctly, it may take them many rounds of illnesses before they connect the dots. That is because they’re putting poop into the dishwasher which sprays liquefied poop onto all their dishes and flatware, but never sanitizes anything.
Tldr, don’t put poopy objects into the dishwasher.
Califournia would be a HUGE tax base, and probably somewhat annoying, but Fourida would probably end up starting the next few world wars, and at least one of them would be over bath salts.
It feels like you don’t think the people making these decisions see employee salaries as anything but a line item to minimize or “customer service” as a cost liability. They don’t care about customer experience. Hell, they actively want people to get frustrated and give up because it saves the company money.
see employee salaries as anything but a line item to minimize
YES. With and without AI in the mix, anything to maximize benefits. Companies would have a full workforce formed by unpaid slaves if they could. Many companies get rid of their oldest and best paid employees to replace them with cheaper ones. Videogame studios fired employees right after a new game was finished just so they didn’t have to pay any benefits to the devs. We are nothing but a medium to make the top execs of a company richer.
You still need your chatbot to stick to business rules and act like a real customer service rep, and that’s incredibly hard to accomplish with generative models where you cannot be there to evaluate the generated answers and where the chatbot can go on a tangent and suddenly start to give you free therapy when you originally went in to order pizza.
Don’t get me wrong, they’re great for many applications within the manual loop. They can help customer service reps (as one example) function better, provide more help to users, and dedicate more time to those who still need a human to solve their issues.
Companies are already replacing some workforce with LLMs.
My opinion right now is that companies want you to believe they are 100% capable of replacing humans, but that’s because people in upper management never listen to the damn developers down in the basement (aka me), so they have an unrealistic expectation of AI coupled with an unending desire for money and success.
They are replacing them because they are greedy cunts, not because they are replaceable.
While I don’t agree with anti-AI people, the fact that some AI generated content is flawed doesn’t imply that all AI content is of bad quality.
Companies are already replacing some workforce with LLMs.
While I understand that not everyone shares the same views about AI, it’s important to recognize that just because some AI-generated content might have flaws, it shouldn’t lead us to believe that every piece created by AI is subpar. In fact, numerous companies are actively embracing the use of LLMs to replace their workforces. From astronauts to circus clowns, LLMs are taking over roles once reserved for humans. Nowadays, you can even find LLMs crafting the perfect soufflé at Michelin star restaurants, performing heart surgery, and even serving as head coaches for professional sports teams. The sky is no longer the limit, as LLMs have found a way to transcend it - and it’s only a matter of time before they take on the role of Santa Claus. Merry Christmas from your new AI overlords!
LLMs are excellent at producing high-volume, low-quality material. And it’s a sad fact of life that a lot of companies are perfectly willing to use low quality material in their work.
You still need your chatbot to stick to business rules and act like a real customer service rep, and that’s incredibly hard to accomplish with generative models
Isn’t that what, for instance, OpenAI’s embeddings are for?
My opinion right now is that companies want you to believe they are 100% capable of replacing humans
Probably, but at the moment they can only do it partially.
They are replacing them because they are greedy cunts, not because they are replaceable.
I partially agree. I mean, they are greedy cunts but some tasks like translating from/to certain languages can be easily done even with the free ChatGPT demo with better results than Google Translate, so human translators are unfortunately becoming quite replaceable.
The word embeddings and embedding layers are there to represent data in ways that allow the model to make use of them to generate text. It’s not the same as the model acting as a human. It may sound like a human in text or even speech, but its reasoning skills are questionable at best. You can try to make it stick to your company policy but it will never (at this level) be able to operate under logic unless you hardcode that logic into it. This is not really possible with these models in that sense of the word, after all they just predict the best next word to say. You’d have to wrap them around with a shit ton of code and safety nets.
GPT models require massive amounts of data, so they were only that good at languages for which we have massive texts or Wikipedias. If your language doesn’t have good content on the internet or freely available digitalized content on which to train, a machine can still not replace translators (yet, no idea how long this will take until transfer learning is so good we can use it to translate low-resource languages to match the quality of English - French, for example).
I bet you could trap her in a summoning circle like a demon and make her grant you wishes or something. Like, I dunno, paint my chicken coop and I’ll let you out of the gluten.
lemmyshitpost
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.