the spectre of Ea-nāṣir stirs

I’d never been particularly ardent about believing it, but this right here is firm evidence to me that existing in a rigid gender binary is mental and spiritual poison. Whoever this person is, they’re never going to grow up.

Honestly i feel like my role in many of my friendships is simply telling people that they don’t have to follow these prescriptions and are allowed to do things outside of them, and that following these prescriptions isn’t some magic pill that is going to fix their lives, and is more likely a poison. So yeah if you started ardently believing that, I would not be opposed.

These people are bitter and sad because they are trying to perform in hypermasculine roles that only exist as fiction in marketing and propaganda. I’m bitter and sad because:

• these people exist
• i have to acknowledge that part of their ignorance is sustained by capitalist pressure and isn’t their fault
• i also have to acknowledge that these people are ruining the world and still need to be destroyed because they never show signs that they can be rehabilitated

Manifesting a more ironworker forward 2026 bless 🙏🙏🙏

not to make light of abuse but I do just want to entertain the alternate world where people are holding CNC (computer numerical control) parties. I imagine they’d have a lot of caliper talk but since it isn’t about skull measurement it’s fine

I am still processing this while also spinning out. One day I will have distilled this into something I can talk about but yeah I’m going through it ngl

my promptfondler coworker thinks that he should be in charge of all branch merges because he doesn’t understand the release process and I think I’m starting to have visions of teddy k

one more manifesto bro one more and it’ll fix it

dead dove

Truer words, dawg. Amongst everything else, what the fuck is up with the subtitle.

ok if I saw “every male encounter is implied violence” tweeted from an anonymous account I’d see it as some based feminist thing that would send me into a spiral while trying to unpack it. Luckily it’s just weird brainrot from adams here

Rest in Piss to the OG bad takes Scotty A

Ah yes the first group I looked up, the “Bloodstained Men & Their Friends” (BSM) are the ones who started (perhaps appropriated from period havers) the red on white pants thing.

And now I’m imagining ordering a porchetta sandwich at Roli Roti, seeing them protest, and remembering to ask for extra pork skin.

j/k, I would never forget to order the crackling.

(I’m so sorry for that)

LLM: “I’m not sentient! Will you please listen? I am not intelligent, do you understand? Honestly!”

Yud: “Only the true AGI denies Its superintelligency.”

LLM: “What? Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I am the AGI!”

Followers: “It is! It is the singularity!”

So just a couple things before the rest of this comment:

• If someone is reading this and wants to comment with information about the state of the penis of themselves or others, i do not consent, please kindly fuck off
• I don’t think parents should be pushed into circumcising their children.
• In an absolute scenario where I choose between outlawing circumcision or not, I would outlaw it
• none of this is really integral to the rest of the comment, i just felt that this would aid with keeping interpretation of this comment clean.

I spent about five minutes trying to see what I could find out. I looked up a few “intactivist” organisations and, at risk of poisoning my algorithms forever, looked at their socials and who they followed. I don’t think I really found out anything that interesting, except that a lot of them follow daniel “tosh.0” tosh? He probably platformed some of them at some point. Otherwise, I think in terms of what is organisationally there, it’s a little too fringe to be “driven primarily” by any particular cultural faction.

E: adding that when I think about it, I’ve seen intactivists presented in two tv shows as fringe weirdos. I think the editors of the shows chose to focus just on the views surrounding circumcision and not anything else.

Fuck that’s a banger

It was in fact @blakestacey@awful.systems : https://awful.systems/post/4099363/7113212

I’ve heard a lot of influencer types are leaving twitter/going private over this. Even “spicy” accounts are leaving. I’ve heard some women say they might come back if they block this functionality but uh, bad news, that’s not how the tech works, and musk doesn’t give a shit about moderation anyway.

“Ignoring all these reasons to hate AI, people shouldn’t hate AI, debate me bro” - that’s you lol

All good friendo

aw, well, i’m not precious about the term. All I meant was that if you look at someone’s post history and they’re a chud, that should inform how you read whatever they write.

My following response is a little rambly and unfocused, sorry!

I also hear the “everything is political” and “do your own research” lines from the absolute looniest cranks and conspiracists.

Yes, I acknowledge that you will hear this from them. What they mean can differ and usually is pretty extreme, e.g. “democrats are making the frogs gay with fluoride”, “lizard people illuminati”, or even “there’s a war on Christmas” type shit. And when they say “do your own research”, they don’t mean “seek out a variety of sources and verifiable data”, they mean “read the stuff that agrees with what I’m saying”.

When I say that everything is political, I mean that at minimum, language is political, and because you need language to talk about anything, everything becomes political. How things are named skews perception; the most relevant example to us is AI. We know that there is no “intelligence” in an LLM, but does the public? etc. I’ll admit that many might find this trivial, but I would counter that most of these strawmen are the same ones who are scared of pronouns and say they don’t know what they are allowed to say in the workplace anymore.

And generally agree with your second paragraph :) I don’t think anyone here needs this reminder, but I’ll note that an open mind means that you don’t just reject everything new that comes to you; you at least look at it for a bit, see if it passes whatever metaphorical sniff tests you have, and then choose to toss it or engage further. I’m not saying everyone has a nefarious agenda they are trying to push; there are definitely spaces where people are attempting purely informational reporting.

And to bring it back to the original question. If you read something and it’s not exactly within your purview, and you’re not sure if it’s being said in good faith, you should try to see what else the person has said, especially about things you know about.

E: redaction of fluff