I shall waste no time pondering its meaning.
You’re assuming that everyone responding to you is from the same species.
What species are you?
That’s not a responsive answer. What it amounts to is “because I say so.” You offer no rational argument to support it.
And it’s also untrue. Whatever you have done in this thread has absolutely no relationship to how “definitions are formed.”
Much of the time, you’re not even defining anything. You’re just drawing random connections between disparate concepts and pretending it’s a definition.
I would suggest something—instead of insisting on your idiosyncratic definitions, use words in a way that your audience already accepts in order to explain your ideas.
The existence of a meme is not proof of its own truth. It’s a kind of hearsay.
Let’s start with the basics. What is meant by “hypocrisy”? Please define that.
I’m 60. And I’m not the oldest Doper here by far. How old are you?
You’ve said a lot about how people other than yourself behave. I am unable to reconcile your claims against reality - so I think it would be interesting to hear your claims about yourself. That’s why I asked this question.
Now, since your perception of everyone else is, apparently, that they’re hypocrites, and given that I cannot make sense of that assertion, your statement that you would behave in a ‘non-hypocritical’ way doesn’t intrinsically mean anything to me.
So please could you unpack the statement a little? What collection of behaviours and actions, in a relationship, do you see yourself actually doing, that constitute ‘non-hypocrtical’?
Quoted for truth. This right here is how you know it’s just straight up nuttery. Non standard doesn’t begin to cover it truly. It’s just word salad where the author has redefined all the words.
Hardly original, been done to death. Far from amusing, just non sensical. And far too laboured to be entertaining. Unless the OP is still in high school, it’s just too sad to engage with, in my opinion.
He is actually less wordy now than he was then. Take a look at his thread on evolution.
He said earlier in the thread that he is 40. (But that doesn’t include his 400 billion years in hell.)
yeah - I thought this shtick was familiar.
Thanks.
I did post number 6 immediately after.
Number 1.) has 2 steps. To be upset that someone has a sexual interaction with your partner, that both you and your partner like, and that like each other, is a contradiction to the same behavior you and your partner use to even be together. I not only discussed the contradiction here, which sadly enough in the case of sexual property like this, I imagine it makes you in some way feel better about yourself that someone has feelings for your partner and doesn’t have this type of relationship with them in some way; which is a second layer of feeling better because someone lost in order for you to win. Just like sports; failure is what causes you to celebrate. The second step is that to the extent you hoard your own sexuality; you are necessarily representing less love being distributed through the human population. I’m not saying sleep with anyone, because as we both know, sex is a matter of deserve, a person who has never raped a person, who is good company, always deserves sex more than a rapist, no matter what the rapist does later; if only raping atoners get sex, and non raping decent people don’t get sex, everyone will want to be a raping atoner.
2.) The nature of the vows are unethical in the first place. The analogy for conspicuous consumption is actually exact in that instance, (analogies seldom are) - weddings are exactly the conspicuous consumption of relationship in the same way that modifying the tailpipe of a truck is the conspicuous consumption of driving a truck down the road. Let me ask you this? Do you really think that somehow the relationship magically changes when you have a wedding; that you are both now closer? That it’s “real”? Was it just fake before? Actually, the wedding itself is fake; a flourish, it is accepting the delusion that the relationship couldn’t have ever been real or wasn’t real until you had it; a lie, a fake. It’s a lie. It’s a hypocrisy. A contradiction.
3.) Existence always exists, because if it ever ceased to exist, we, being a subset of existence, wouldn’t be here to have this discussion. Existence is the definition of perpetual motion. The proof for that is unassailable.
4.) Would you play solitaire if you won every time, or if you lost every time? I honestly 100% doubt it, I think the fact that it can be lost, is what appeals to you; that there are still losers. You can deny it, I don’t believe you.
5.) Heterosexual men don’t flirt with people they won’t have sex with; women do that constantly. I’ve repeatedly stated that in this thread. Flirting for men is approach escalation, approach escalation in a sex dimorphic species is wrong when you are a member of the stronger gender.
6.) I posted immediately after
7.) Life on this planet doesn’t always afford the opportunity in this context to remove the abuser, not everyone is a masochist; and forcing them to be such makes you a sadist, not everyone is a sadist.
8.) Asshole through omission is not speaking about the most serious sexual problems, in order to assure that the person is now informed about the abuse in order to raise awareness, and facilitate also the beginnings of a transparently consensual sexual act. It’s called taking social responsibility. Sexual stratification on the heterosexual male side, is a problem so severe in and of itself, that even if you were to stop all verbal abuse, all disease, all poverty, all starvation, all war, all homicide; women would commit no suicides, and men would still commit mass suicides. If this is not pointed out; the sex is ill-gotten gains. You were a neglect abuser to acquire it.
Miller: Robbing someone at gunpoint is not hypocrisy? Hypocrisy is also when you have a standard that you say other people aren’t allowed to use except you. Think about that.
Reading this, I’m reminded of Carl Sagan, and his brilliant observation: “…they laughed at Bozo the clown, too.”
I don’t think that word means weans what you think it means. “Hypo” means “below” and “Chrissy” was a character on Three’s Company. What does robbing someone at gunpoint have to do with playing cowgirl with a vacuous blonde?
That’s correct-Very good!
And how does that apply to armed robbery?
I want to state a mass confusion people have about their fantasy worlds, and I’m directing it more at heterosexual females, because the situation is more critical to that regard.
In the female fantasy world, people can’t deserve sex more than another person, even though they have the highest stratifying of any sexual group in the human species - which is hypocrisy. They have such a narrow view of this, that in their fantasy world, a raping atoner deserves sex more than non-rapists, and the non rapists, in order to be good guys, aren’t supposed to have any feelings that this is wrong, if they do, obviously they were undeserving of sex, and the female made the right choice.
What females don’t understand, is that it actually does hurt, a lot to have such severe sexual stratification, in and of itself, compounded by the fact that the most deserving males in the species have a zero percent chance of having sex. Zero.
Just like other people are not your robots when it comes to “your” partner, where they all live in this fantasy world where they have to stop being like you, in order to make you happy, the men of this world aren’t just robots when they work hard to deserve sex, in the case that sex is being distributed, and cannot get it.
When I made the comment about, if only raping atoners got sex, then all the men would want to be raping atoners… that’s not actually true, some men have depth of character, and this depth of character, people with real feelings, will simply commit suicide. The things women don’t want men to have, the thing that women claim makes them undeserving (the man having feelings). They’re not stupid, they know females will never have sex with good men.
So nobody is allowed to use armed robbery you? Are you no longer a hypocrite if everyone has a gun, and the new vocation is armed robbery for all 7 billion of us, because that’s the new law?