posted on August 03, 2019 02:02 AM by
u/RydiaFromMist
37
u/RydiaFromMist25 pointsat 1564798108.000000
There are just so many pseudo-intellectual self-obsessed
yuppie-hipster-technocrat digressions in this that I’ve lived around in
the Bay Area that the interview made me fucking writhe.
We wrote that book five years ago when both Tucker and I were on a
Paleo kick. We hung out at the Paleo FX conference in Austin where
between talks everyone was lifting kettlebells.
I know, it's kind of mind-blowing. When you picture a satire of the id of an evo psych professor, you picture Tucker Max, some awful Chuck Pahlaniuk character come to life.
It's, like, mental health anti-respect, anti-pride. Everyone knows everyone secretly googles everyone famous in their lives. Now some women he dated with BPD will google this and feel nightmarishly terrible. And yes, for a poly person to say that is *fucking disgusting*.
It's the kind of thing if I said it, I would demand it was left out of the interview or live in shame forever, and she just says it like a throwaway. Like some dipshit kid in college calling themselves "so OCD right now". They don't deserve a platform and truly have nothing insightful to say. It's such a simultaneously hideous, boring interview by two people who seem to have the shallowest science knowledge and whose real knowledge base is just easter eggs from Season 48 of Doctor Who.
It's not surprising given [his worst moments](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2335177/NYU-professor-Geoffrey-Miller-tweets-obese-PhD-students-dont-willpower-program.html), either, so they deserve each other.
That was also Geoffrey’s first foray into poly and he was a bit
confused why he’s hanging out with this woman with her boyfriend.
Geoffrey: I just assumed, based on the evolutionary psychology I had
learned to that point, that we would meet for brunch and then fisticuffs
would ensue. Maybe he would bring sabers to defend your honor.
That was your cue that maybe your ideas on ev psych are just bad,
period.
In terms of seduction techniques, people are weird about talking
about the sexuality of children but this happens all the time. Someone
could be ready to slap their kid and the child says, “Mommy, you look so
pretty today” and it works. This is teaching children how to get someone
out of a bad mood or get on someone’s good side with compliments, which
is basically seduction. It’s a very useful skill.
Gross, and illogical. It’s like they said all fruits are
apples–confusing a class with a superclass. What the hell is it with
rationalists that not only are they always wrong, they’re always gross
about it?
Yeah, it's very immature to do the whole "everything is sexual" thing. It's the cheapest analogy and it means the least because the whole point of everything being sexual isn't "ooh, sex," but to simply point out that everything we are doing has that same incessant pleading, aspirational, river-rushing quality to it. It's not "ha ha everything is dicks and vaginas" or, even more edgelord-y, "ha ha everything is rape". Everything they talk about in this interview, all the intellectualisms are tawdry self-aggrandizement.
My guess — they come up with a theory that makes some amount of sense but has a lot of obvious holes and exceptions. They don’t want to admit that the theory isn’t very good, so they paper over it with the rhetorical equivalent of Spackle, hoping that you don’t notice that it doesn’t quite work.
I didn't think the ring was ugly myself (I also have no good taste). But I just think it is all silly. If you know that the diamond rings are all bullshit, and it helps sustain a huge amount blood and suffering. Why get a ring that looks like a diamond ring at all? Just so you can smugly correct people 'achtually it isn't a diamond ring, it is some other stone'. To anybody not in the know you still signal that you keep up with the standard 'give each other diamond rings for marriage bullshit. And this is from people who worry a lot about social signalling, they should know better.
I find it interesting that despite bragging on about it's cheapness and so on, despite it looking a bit like costume jewellery (though part of that is bad photographs) it still cost a jaw-dropping amount of money.
I find them so infuriatingly pedestrian and self-righteous. "I did a multi-page critique of diamonds in my previous book" -- Jesus Christ, shut the fuck up, you have nothing to share. "Why not buy a synthetic diamond" and "Africa is run by cartels" is information on the level of something you'd see in two paragraphs of GQ magazine from 2003.
If they read all this, they would just chuckle to themselves, "these poor fools don't know we are self-aware and laugh at ourselves about all of this". No, if you were self-aware you wouldn't do this awful shit.
Serious question — why wait for gov’t issued sex robots? If washing
away incel status means just plain having sex, why can’t they have sex
with each other?
Because for incels it isn't about sex weirdly enough. Incels could have sex any time they want, they just could visit a sex worker(*), but they will not go because either they think sex workers are beneath them (this is also why incels do not sleep with women who they consider damaged (which can mean, not a supermodel, has had relationships before, has her own free will or whatever)), or they interact with sex workers in such a weird clingy way that the sex worker goes 'ow god, im going to get murdered/robbed/this person is too much effort, or any other reason for a sex worker to decline the transaction'. If you read any incel, or blackpill forums or shit like that often the reason they want sex robots is to take away power from the feminist women. So it isn't even about sex, it is about being entitled. For an incel, not having sex means something like, I do not get the sexual relationship I think I am entitled to. Funnily enough, I also don't think sex robots will fix this (as we already have sex robots, real dolls are a thing, but society looks down on people who use them, so it doesn't give the incel the status he craves). Incels also have damaged minds which makes them think they are way less good looking than they are, and also makes them think the average woman is looking way better than they do irl (so any normal (or even attractive) girl is never good enough), I'm going to guess it is a sort of male version of the young girls who grow up reading girls magazines with only super skinny girls, low self esteem due to damaged perspective on what is normal.
I'm also just going to assume most incels are homophobes, so the idea of having a romantic relationship with another guy will not work for them.
*: please don't suggest this to incels btw, they already are angry enough towards women, en sex work is already dangerous enough.
I think there's a deep answer and a shallow answer. The deep answer is that incels probably all have personality disorders, because essentially a personality disorder is about having a defensive, mal-adaptive identity, and that's what calling yourself incel is. It's an identity based on a pattern of indulgent self-harm. I say self-harm because the identity is around hanging out with people saying terrible things about yourselves on a regular basis, essentially a meetup centered around being left out.
Put it to you this way: what do a bunch of people who aren't getting laid and are all hanging out together *usually* call themselves? *Friends.*
The shallow answer is they're all straight men, so they can't fuck each other.
>The deep answer is that incels probably all have personality disorders
i think [external loci of control](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locus_of_control) explains a lot of incel behavior
The bit about China should also tip you off if you've followed his antics long enough:
https://eastasiastudent.net/china/edge-org-chinese-eugenics-rubbish/
Haha. Amen. It's basically why The Room is so genius. It is somebody barfing up a reality-impaired narcissistic fantasy explanation about dating a borderline (or a not-borderline but very angry) woman.
There are just so many pseudo-intellectual self-obsessed yuppie-hipster-technocrat digressions in this that I’ve lived around in the Bay Area that the interview made me fucking writhe.
Imagine being poly and having your primary partner saying this, and then agreeing with it.
ARgghh
The ring is the least stupid part of this interview
Is this satire? I honestly cannot tell.
Miller has an OkCupid? I’m … kind of curious, I have to admit
That was your cue that maybe your ideas on ev psych are just bad, period.
Gross, and illogical. It’s like they said all fruits are apples–confusing a class with a superclass. What the hell is it with rationalists that not only are they always wrong, they’re always gross about it?
God that ring really is ugly as hell.
Serious question — why wait for gov’t issued sex robots? If washing away incel status means just plain having sex, why can’t they have sex with each other?
I love that I knew who this was referring to by the ring description.
I’ve also never seen somebody so excited to identify as “aspie” as Geoffrey Miller.