r/SneerClub archives
newest
bestest
longest
5

Falkovich argues society is too sex-negative (viewing sex as bad or only focusing on its dysfunctions like harassment etc.) https://mobile.twitter.com/yashkaf/status/1380568379115892736

Not really going to sneer at someone criticizing how society deals with sex. Deffo gonna sneer at the average LWer having an IQ of 139 tweet though. Fucking classic

https://twitter.com/yashkaf/status/1379868073197498376

>doubt

Smart/high-IQ people fall for scams and cults all the time *cough* cryonics *cough* MIRI

"... the average LessWrong reader (139) and the average college professor (115) ..." is that 139 self-reported? :)
Here is some actual sneer material
Just think how many 160+ huge outliers you need to push the average up to 139.
>130+ drastically lowers the difficulty setting on life in ways you're often unaware of, like (...) being able to articulate your thoughts into tweets. good sneer!
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to post tweets. The way thoughts get coverted into language is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of the character limits most of your tweets will go over a typical tweeter's attention span.
Yeah high iq people excel at rationalization, and have the added penalty of thinking they are too smart to fool.
How many of those people have actually taken an IQ test, seriously. Pretty sure most test scores cease being significant beyond the 140-150 threshold because by definition the sample size becomes too small to draw conclusions about it. So how the fuck do you come up with an average of 139? Like, I have reservations about IQ tests by themselves but even a trained psychologist that fully believes in their validity and relevance would sneer at this tweet
So that facebook IQ test lied to them!? *gasp*
I wonder what the average IQ of an investor in Bernie Madoff's fund was

Didn’t understand what this had to do with rationalism until I read the threads other sneerers linked. Now I’m wondering how rationalism and sex-positivity are linked. I nodded along with the first couple tweets, but by the end he had an awfully broad definition of “sex-negative”.

Yeah his extensive series of tweets relating to sex gave me a rather *ahem* sex-crazed impression.
This is what I wad aiming to convey— that his idealization of rationalism is closer to a sex cult than people would like to admit

I’m not quite sure what the point here is? Is that a bad opinion?

Inclined to agree w you. His observations aren’t entirely wrong either (although he does avoid a fair amount of sex-positive culture that certainly does exist... look for “sex” in your podcast app of choice lol) Edit: also think his points about PUAs & incels being sex-negative are largely correct, critical of the far right, and somewhat original
Not quite sure why this is posted here then, or do you mean this guy makes adequate sneers at the people we usually sneer at here?
The latter (if not adequate, at least amusing)
Ah I see, that was absolutely not clear to me,and I guess hence this post doesn't get many replies. Probably would be best next time to write a bit more about why you post something here
I’m not the poster
ah woops lol
It's the Put a Num On It guy, who is usually a dick, but this isn't a bad take.

Idk dude his tweets on IQ are pretty cringe but that one tweet isn’t bad as far as takes go. The worst you can say is that he broadened his definition of “negative” so as to make a series of unrelated criticism that may or may not have a broader point, but lacking eloquence and precision on the 280-character medium that makes everyone insane isn’t specifically worthy of a sneer imo

https://mobile.twitter.com/yashkaf/status/1380578084768915459

idk i don’t think society is actually sex negative, and it definitely isn’t sex-negative when it comes to men. a lot of sex-positive rhetoric that got popular a few years ago has been twisted in a variety of harmful ways (famous-ish teens being pressured to make onlyfans accounts the day they turn 18, the inherently dangerous practice of choking during sex being normalized to the degree that it’s been succesfully used as a defense for men who killed their partners, every woman asking for job advice immediately getting swarmed by a barrage of dudes telling her to just do sex work). but of course a dude with ‘poly’ in his description is most concerned about people talking about sexual exploitation and harassment.

What the guy said was that commodification isn’t sex positive in a true sense, because like all other commodities it can only deliver a hope of being ‘fuckable’ aka validation. Consuming or producing sex positive content does not bring one one step closer to positive sex. Whether you agree or not is up to you. Personally I don’t agree with his characterisation of progressives but I do get an inkling of what he’s saying
Vaguely concerned that someone named "killallconservatives" is posting socially conservative nonsense but go off i guess
How is any of that "socially conservative"
If you think that that kind of shit is genuinely representative of society, rather than the opposite (like people losing their jobs bc its found out they have an onlyfans), you're just throwing up strawmen to further socially conservative viewpoints - a bit like how whining about trans rapists is socially conservative, not bc trans rapists would be cool and good but bc you're making up strawpeople to further an agenda Then shitting on poly people is just an added 'bonus' of social conservatism
>If you think that that kind of shit is genuinely representative of society, Who determines what's representative? >Then shitting on poly people is just an added 'bonus' of social conservatism Well, no, shitting on poly people is just my kink. Nothing to do with conservatism.