Total topics: 396
Ask me to make you a profile pic here.
Describe what you want and describe your personality in your own words.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Shila has made several insulting and aggravating posts to users, that it the trolling style of this user (who sometimes identifies as female but on profile has 'unknown' as gender).
The moderation team have assumed she/they is/are a bot based solely on a rumour. The user interacts in ways that imply 100% sentience and human capacity to interpret things. Shila has even referred to profile pics on profiles in a way that only an extremely advanced AI could infuse into the banter she/they is/are employing.
Shila is wrongly muted and if I were the site president right now, I would be opposing this ban (which may be coming) or mute (at present) as wrong reasoning.
The correct reason to handle Shila is that the user's posts are consistently designed to aggravate other users to severe levels whereby the only way out is to ignore the user.
To prove Shila is not a bot, another aspect to the trolling which is a problematic habit only a human could have is that even if you've blocked her, she/they will quote you and reply to you, proving that it's a human as a bot would be unable to post to the forums since blocking 'backfires' the send button if @ing the user.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I just find the whole idea inhumane, not only the homeless but especially so.
I am absolutely as a cop I'd feel sick inside to have to arrest a desperate person who pissed onto a bush or whatever.
I am not discussing exposing one's genitals in a very public manner, I am discussing specifically the crime of pissing in public, urination in and of itself.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
They have banned several users and removed voting privileges and all sorts and not written any of it in the moderation logs for months.
What is the log for then?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I get to negotiate description and settings.
No shit like making me support pedophilia or racism.
I have no-gos and will not take a suicide topic.
You are free to make it unrated, I have no say in that.
The deal is your 4 votes are there at the end. If you do not have a valid vote on one of the 4 by the end, your count is deducted.
I will be debating often enough that 4 is attainable again and again.
The number can be docked to 3 or even 2 during myself and the site's less busy periods.
There are no strings attached, you pick the side and the topic.
The credit is permanent or until I truly quit (or am incapacitated, extremely stressed irl etc). 4 votes, from 3 days before this on my debates and I debate you on almost anything, rated or unrated.
4 equals 1, rap battles and such are not guaranteed for me to accept, I am refining and climbing debating now.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I understand the following:
- This site is on life support. The dead userbase do not enjoy voting.
- Voters tend to prefer you attacking opponents' ideas so much so that offense is defense because if the opponent stays defensive, voters either do not vote or vote against the defender.
- To launch successful attacks, stick to semantics, get the opponent furious as you gaslight them about what they are really trying to say and tell voters that the opponent has dropped points, constantly, even if the point is shit.
- Learn and practise this method so much so that one can do it across 18 debates at once pote tially. Just read what the opponent says, link it wrongly to definitions, write antithetical contentions and syllogisms even if rebuttals are ruled out. As in make your constructive inherently attack theirs 'accidentally, and never waste effort preemptively defending.
- Over time, you will find that the impulsive members who have the passion to vote, vote for you because they fall in love with your way of attacking.
- Avoid accepting challenges from tough opponents, let them come to you, learn to debate ordinary topics ridicupously aggressive and well. Nearly plagiarise ideas from the cookie cutter round 1s and then just stick to pure offense.
I predict this approach is actually the best.
If you notice, all bad debaters have different things making them bad but all good-rated debaters here are either accidentally or intentionally adhering to this ethos, just focusing less on quantity (except Novice).
I will be surprised if my analysis is proven wrong. Do expect some losses incoming, after that, watch me annihilate.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I was completely illegitinately robbed of several free wins by Bsh1 because Ramshutu cried about me getting them from an alt of Type1.
This also led to a crackpot conspiracy theory later that me, the guy who kept telling the mods who Type1 was on his alts despite they and Ramshutu doubting and ridiculing me as they doubted it was Type1 the entire time, was actually in cohorts with him.
I had easily 7 if not more wins robbed from me.
Right now Novice is getting 12 or so free wins from Mall, whose elo is elevated because Wylted gave him a wrong win by a troll vote on a mutual FF where he gave Mall a win.
How the fuck is that better just because Mall is not a banned user, they are all letting Novice pick the debate topic and sides too?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
STILL HOT AND IN THE OVEN
I will be happy to quote and paste my Round 1 here when it's done to aid this thread's evolution. I've posted something similar a couple times before, people seem to never catch my position so it's time to lay it all out. Juicy rating to take from me if you think the topic is easy for Con.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
I am not sure what the fuck has happened to people today to say it is 'misogyny' to know what being a masculine man and feminine woman is and saying 'I like to live my life this way, I will preach it and help others.'
Andrew Tate was one of the world's best kickboxers in his prime and among the elite Karate practioners, though his exact rank isn't known he is essentially arguably among the greatest kickboxers of all time.
He quit what he was doing, perhaps for physical health preservation (not that he lacked skill but he respected the younger fiercer men showing up with talent and skill could, on a bad day, destroy him) and dedicated to different approaches to life, using the money he'd garnered from tournaments and his start-up sponsorships (which weren't much, relative to sports celebs but were decent) and did his own think, grinding.
He has hinted he did use means of tax evasion and ruthless competing and is a shadow partner in businesses he still refuses to inherently name (I beg one has to do with bugatti cars and another with non-Cuban, legal cigars but who knows, maybe he really does love them). For these things, we can vilify him.
As for the suggestion he's trafficked women and such, I am not one to take a side as I also know how shit gets covered up by unscrupulous smugglers but we have to appreciate evidence for what it is. He vehemently denies it and frankly I believe he's the type of guy who'd, if involved in anything like that, offer the women a way out and beat the shit out of certain pimps and abusive clients.
We don't know the story, yet these are plastered on the forefront of any article that tries to then explain how he is misogynistic enough on the platforms to get shut down.
I am not a diehard Andrew Tate fan, I'm a Progressive who doesn't care too much about this superficial macho muscle, bugatti crap but I agree with Tate on a few things.
He simply asked xQc once a very difficult question; if your house is broken into and some men with weapons and strength are gonna essentially rob you or worse, is it your duty as a man, if with your girlfriend/wife, to protect her and risk fighting?
My answer, unlike xQc's cowardly dodge, would have been a brave 'not necessarily' and the reasoning would be that while I'd absolutely agree in a 1v2 or 1v3 even that I can keep things dark or surprise attack and shit, knowing the house much better than the invaders, BUT my main duty as a man vs say even 3 but definitely 4+ invaders is not even to hide, genuinely you may not believe me but I wouldn't hide, I'd either genuinely take my girlfriend and do ninja shit on the roof risking everything (depends, let's say it's an apartment, I'm not against wrappng some torn/cut blankets or shirts etc around our wrists and ankles to easier grapple down the drain pipe and all sorts but realistically if too high up i'd just surrender and hope.
The problem is that if we observe what he says there, it's one of many examples that he doesn't hate women he is just traditionally conservative about a man's role. In my own opinion, if you can't securely kill and/or harm the invaders, you should be an active coward and flee ASAP frantically. Your entire aim should be survival regardless, whether with them, tied up, beaten and cucked, fleeing or attacking.
Your playstyle doesn't mean shit, instead what defines the man is coming out the other end with a live girlfriend/wife and live self that minimised the punishment towards both. Then to sit there, traumatised and sucking it up in an unhealthy but manageable way, by her hospital bed (only possible as you acted rationally) and letting her bitch at you, hate you and all sorts of shit. Patiently, get friendzoned, get blocked and told to get lost for letting it happen to her if need be. Be the fucking man. Three months later she will send you the biggest apology of her life and thank you for completely being there for her, always be open for anything, be it a late night text or whatever (not too open your life and sleep schedule go to too much shit but you get the idea).
It's not easy being a man. It's not easy being the tougher, more leaderlike gender and to even say this sounds so sexist, rude and all that shit.
That's what men were in every fucking culture you can name, especially in ones that lasted. All Tate does is say to be that, that's all his theme is. He encourages you to be resourceful, protective, tough, honest and patient. If these qualities of 'manliness' are misogynistic to want to possess, what the fuck has the word 'misogyny' come to mean?
He was cancelled wrongly. Find me any fucking proof that what I said here was wrong, it's not up to me to find sources for everything I say he said and prove myself right when all his channels got deleted.
There's still reuploads on YT, do your own homework.
I am pretty sure if he'd asked me, not xQc that question, my answer would have made him go a bit silent and reach a middleground agreement.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Beat/Instrumental to Loop: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAu68YGuZ-0
I wonder when they'll end the ridicule, it's pitiful,
Understand my presence here's a miracle,
Imagine the site without me in its early days... Got banned and yet my presence remains far from minimal,
Banned first week, was it? Hell, that's how I roll, I'm that antivillain you'll love to hate and hate to need like a fraction that's not simplifiable and vigilantly indivisible,
I'm the one to rise to second place on leaderboards and not even contemplate being chill at all,
I want to climb or teach, a primal beast that's here to stay and try to slay me, David, you'll leave miserable,
This aint biblical, it's Luciferan, I'm a monster that's invincible,
I'm the demon Airmax tried to slay that bided time and prayed DDO would find the fate it did, how spiritual?
I'm the one to block then cry and bitch yet witches know I'm true to all my principles,
Also one they mock and knock off a pedestal, but I stay here at the pinnacle,
Amphibian that regrows my limbs, axolotls fear this salamander when he's near at all,
I'm the one to take the hits and systematically recover, oh so clinical,
Some call me a sad man, others whiny little bitch but I prefer RM the unkillable.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Artistic expressions
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
(No singular)/They/their
Those are plural words.
It/those/its
That/these/(no possessive)
Singular but dehumanising
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
She agreed with everything I said, perplexed as to why now even she (or 'they', which she does not care to go by) needs to label herself just to be the tomboy she has been her whole life. To be clear, I picked up on her agreeing by something she said beforehand in the conversation. To have to label and identify as someone who resents labels is a deep irony for her that she does not relate to whatsoever.
I will keep the identity secret ofc but it is someone I genuinely know, won't specify directly irl or not, this person knows who I am irl and could if offended very easily have made drama.
It just goes to show that people still exist that are not politically correct tiptoers and are on the left wing with a passion.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Due to callout thread rules and PM doxxing rules, I am unsure what to do. That is why I made this thread, PM me to find out who it is and what was said.
If a user goes around telling you bad things I said about you, know it is a lie and that the user tried to do it with me and it failed miserably.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Then there is direct precedent for the DART presidency vote of no confidence, forcing a reelection.
Airmax1227 has failed us, he can have any excuse he wants, that is not my business.
I ask there to be held a vote of no confidence, we have so many reasons to host it.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Warning, this is a hot take
I have been a significantly worried left wing progressive due to the increased population and influence of Islamic immigrants in western culture for some time and kept my mouth shut for fear of bigotry calls but it is not just them at all.
The actual cultures and ideologies that the left of US wing defend immigrating heavily to their nations are as far right as it gets.
Who?
Mexico? Syria? Brazil? Argentina? Peru? Puerto Rico? Ukraine? Pakistan, India (which has Muslims and even the Hindus are quite right-wing depending on subculture variation, the Sikhs lean left).
I support the immigration, I do and I love the refugee influx from Ukraine (but resent that Ukraine hasn't allowed its men to surrender and flee, they are trapped for slaughter or capture at this point, I am a realist not a fairytale writer, I loathe Putin but a lost war is a lost war).
I support the immigration, I repeat it to make it clear.
I do not support the lack of direct integration. Only Scandinavia does direct integration, they force the immigrants to study for exams on western, leftist values if they wish to become true citizens at any point and even to do business and long-term work there they need to do it.
This is something the left puke at but do you really think no immigrants are voting for Republicans? These are severely conservative Christians and Muslims, use your damn head!
We must realise that we, the Left, fucked ourselves over by embracing the most homophobic, anti contraceptive, anti-abortion, anti-social-democracy cultures out there.
It is time to seriously sit and consider if it remains a smart idea to amicably be embracing the same ideology that all Sharia nations are based on and the very Christian conservative cultures of South America, which are anti-LGBT, anti,-abortion, brutally anti-feminism and basically anti-left altogether.
I am saying we need to show them respect, not disrespect. We must respect their core values are deeply right wing and conservative and ponder if the right wing has actually been inadvertently been a taboo deterrent to their own agenda's success.
If this offends you, I dont say this irl for a reason. Please let me have a safe space here free from cancel culture.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Three corners, all-seeing eye in the middle.
God is the illuminati leader whom is also the devil.
OT God becomes Satan.
Lucifer becomes Jesus, not Satan yet he is Satan via Trinity.
Holy Ghost becomes Allah.
This is how and why there were three iterations. It explains every plothole including the problem of evil since the god has three personalities.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
I just had a very heated argument with someone/people close to me about Roe v Wade and what the implications are and where things are going. It didn't end friendly or well.
I believe we are developing into a generation where love is just not even a factor anymore. It's not about 'sex is immoral' it's about are you really going sticking your dick in a woman or opening your legs to a man and going 'hmm I can justify killing this conceived being later based on my pleasure, my needs, my everything because I want this pleasure now, me me me me me'?
If you are actually selfish, be smart and disciplined. I can honestly tell you that I don't empathise with or understand people who genuinely can't enjoy foreplay if they have no condom around and are not on the pill, who 'need that risk' to get the thrill. I don't think it's justifiable or 'yeah yeah I get it you were drunk and high and whatever else, maybe you just love each other that much'.
The whole mentality of the left-wing who are pro-unrestricted-abortion is becoming do what you want, when you want and to hell with the consequences. It is the mentality of an impulsive teenager yet I know middle aged people who have it (at least for others) because they feel a 26 year old woman has no way to control how she acts on her urges.
I am not here to say I am anti-abortion in the first trimester or that I am totally against plan B whatsoever but please understand that's a human you just killed and living beings are not to be toyed with.
How the fuck can the left wing say that dependent homeless people, the disabled, the elderly and the poor should be cared for and nurtured at the sake of the rich and then say differently when it's a foetus and the mother has already harbored it inside her for several months? Hell, what the fuck is a woman doing for 6 months to just go 'na let's ditch it'?
I don't say I don't get it, I actually do and I am a passionately progressive guy but progress and libertinism are not the same damn thing and it is clear to me today that I am not a sheer liberal, I am a progressive and they are not the same brand of left wing.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
The theme split is going to be:
Tried to hide their autism (whether directly or indirectly) as the Town trait with Not known to have actively hidden autism as Mafia trait
This clearly has nothing to do with good vs evil, it's a themesplit to increase awareness of asperger's and autism. More autistic people, until very recently, were 'in the closet' than weren't. That is the reality of it and what I also want to highlight.
Being known for one's Autistic Specturm Disorder and hiding it in the time period before it was seriously known about has nothing to do with hiding the name, instead it has to do with masking well in society or not.
This is to allow there to be flexibility to Mafia to both get away with a real claim and choose to research well and pick a good fakeclaim.
Mafia will not be given a fake-claim pool as I predict a small player pool with what you claim being a large way to catch people out.
I will try my best to balance the setup well.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Forum games
This is not a callout. There is a user who can choose to be named or not that runs around telling me I am not a 'real INTP'. While these results can be faked, I am going to screenshot at the end of the quiz whatever I get, meaning at the point of making this OP I have not yet begun the quiz. I will answer completely honestly to the best of my human ability.
I want others to post here too, I am curious if that user will show themselves what the verdict will be.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
He can rate it put of 100 for quality and accuracy after.
I will tell it how he will tell it. I will insert his microbiological personality into every crevice of my description of you.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Everybody who believes that impersonating someone by copying their profile and/or profile pic should be something the mods intervene to prevent, change your profile pic to whiteflame's. Do not reason with him, do not start a referendum of bullcrap.
I want him to learn how it feels, anybody at all who would not want this done to them for an extwnded period of time, show whiteflame how it feels.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I am fucking fed up of these self-help people preaching to either do one of the following:
- Don't ejaculate much because it releases some pure life energy.
- Don't even begin to masturbate because you can get addicted.
If you are addicted to porn, erotic fiction, sexting as well as the masturbation attached to them, your addiction is the problem and not the fact you're masturbating in itself.
I have personally tried to avoid masturbating in the past and hit the lowest point in my life. I had almost no sex drive, I felt like nothing had a point, not even sex and I was empty as fuck.
When I either have sex (won't specify when I have done or how often, it is irrelevant, I am focusing on ejaculation here) and masturbated, I have personally experienced a surge in masculinity and feeling more focused and energetic in daily life. When I masturbate/fuck either super too often or super too little, I experience sex consuming my mind and a feeling of being emasculated, less energetic, less 'oomph' and 'fire' to me, I would not even say it is feminine, it is just emasculating towards and emptiness.
I really wish people did solid scientific research before thinking your sperm doesn't die anyway and even force-releases by wet dreams if you refuse to masturbate (unless you're depressed with barely any libido and sperm production).
As for females and the no-fap movement, I'm not sure how it works and feels for them as I was born assigned and cisgender male.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Personal
Follow the instructions on this website for your browser, you can setup HTTPS forced connection without any extensions for Chromium browsers or Addons for Firefox.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Technology
The Tournament ended with Benjamin defeating me, which I am now happy about as it means I can bring this up without sounding narcissistic. My problem does not stem from the lack of glory and announcement surrounding the tournament ending, it stems from a complete lack of Airmax following through on his singular campaign promise: getting DART popular AF.
He is just seasonally fortunate, the months that lead into the Northern Hemisphere's Summer and Spring type months are linked to more activity on debate forums. I don't even fully understand why what with exams and all but this has been consisten and I've 'been around' sites like this for a while.
The fact is that perhaps the only person who got people to join more to DART was Incel-Chud with his Twitter posting, it may have garnered some attention (this is something he readily let us know he was doing, he even posted the link elsewhere to his Twitter, so don't accuse me of stalking).
I see Lunatic trying, Airmax flaking, Mikal 100% flaking and around 40% of Airmax voters (or more actually) are basically dead af to the website whereas those that voted 3RU7AL are almost all active here.
The thing is I don't care about that ^, I was willing to vote Airmax until things happened later on making me question his character again (from what I thought about him vs his promise to thinking it about him again).
There has not even been any feedback from Airmax during the BrotherDThomas or Incel-Chud bans. We have seen nothing at all, not even with the polytheist-witch ban, where Airmax defends or even makes a post acting as the balancing power to the moderators.
It makes you wonder if he even understands his role. It doesn't matter if he agrees with the bans, he should be publicly defending and making speeches about both sides, primarily focused on being a defendant to the user.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I don't quite know. I am curious.
At this point, I am not sure how to ever present my stance irl or even online outside of here without trans people taking it totally wrong.
My stance is as follows:
- Sex =/= gender, sex is physical and gender is sociological or even psychological
- When 'transitioning gender' one is actually transitioning the characteristics of their physical body (HRT and operation). That is mimicking the sex, not the gender of the one they want to mimic. To mimic the gender, they'd only need to mimic haircuts, clothing, ways of talking and acting as well as hobbies and interests associated with the other gender.
- If both the previous arguments are simulatenously true, one has to wonder what is at the root of transgenderism. Is it feminine males and masculine females or is it more so loathing of one's body they were born into? It follows that we'd only want to enable the former, not the self-loathing latter. We would not give artificial hormones to enable an anorexic to remain less hungry and happy, we would not try to help a depressed person enable their sad, hermitic and toxic lifestyle of social withdrawal and poor health... So on and so forth. Why then would we allow a person who wants to mimic the sex, not gender, they fancy having and enable their self-loathing of their natural, healthy body rather than treat the psychiatric condition that is their hatred and dysphoria?
I don't get it. I can't get it. I am forced to zip my mouth in order to blend in with the left wing of this modern generation. It is so horrible because I am so proudly left-wing in basically all other ways.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Would you consider them to be narcissistic assholes or not?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
I am a huge supporter of food banks (I agree with the left-wing that in the ideal endgame they aren't needed but I am a fan of them for now in all societies that need them) and am curious about the core opposing stance that right-wingers have to everything from welfare through to charities like food banks.
If somebody is so poor they can't eat, they can't have the energy to do a good job at work, decreasing their productivity towards the nation's economy.
This means even a sheer sociopath should not mind people sparing some food and sanitary products to food-bank style charities to help out those with their backs against the wall, in particular in these times where even a commute can wreck their wealth.
This 'they are lazy' concept is bullshit. The vast majority of the severely poor are not lazy, they are perhaps ill-informed on money management that are now doomed due to that but they need help at times to even cope and have breathing room to feed themselves and/or families.
I ask to you, in your ideal solution to poverty without moving towards social democratic benefits, welfare etc how does the society eliminate brutally severe poverty where going severely hungry and without basic sanitary products is necessary for the poor to be able to afford their bills?
Food banks are supposed to cover when the welfare system is falling short on certain families, this question is about both and why the right-wing oppose them.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
It will help you both in casual and competitive debating but is definitely primarily about winning online debates, whether in forums or life.
To prove I am not all talk, I finally am climbing the leaderboards here. I always could have done so skill-wise but many people were intentionally leaving debates tied and the site just didn't have enough going on for periods as well as my real life being busier.
I will take 2 students at a time and it will work as a combination of live coaching (since this site has not ruled that out) during debates and lessons/sessions.
I will like if you have Discord if you want to be a long-term student (more than just 1-2 weeks) and will prove that I get results by how my students do, it will not be a secret who my students are and I will not debate them or allow them to debate each other during the coaching.
I require the following criteria:
1. You were not blocked by me on the website in the past 40 days.
2. You have proven that you have the raw level of activity on the website to be a decently active debater, I need you to be active as I won't get paid, my reward is you doing well as my student.
3. You do not fuck around and troll me thinking I'm all talk or that my methods are bullshit. You do that more than once, you are terminated as a student I won't make a big deal nor will I care if people think I'm petty.
4. You are fluent in the language English.
5. You can participate (not necessarily in live IMs) in regular intervals for at least 2 full weeks or very intensive for 1 week depending how busy I am that week.
6. You do not think we are friends (necessarily) in any shape or form, you don't ask me for any personal details and I give you the same courtesy.
I will not reveal the syllabus publicly and it will be tailored to each student anyway. I will give you homework and teach you things at times that are tweaked to the current climate of voters and debaters.
What I am doing, in competitive gaming is stuff people pay good money for, you can think it's a joke or whatever but I'm doing it for free. I am serious about it if you are.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
The art of debating is not to be openminded to delusions being true and truths being false, the art lies in making your audience fall victim to that and to end up believing your opponent's ideas and opinions are brutally flawed (regardless of your own being true).
My approach has as a foundational idea that debating is far more about destroying and mitigating the opponent's ideas than it is about having good ideas yourself. Once in a while you will lose a debate by following this philosophy of debating but it's not about winning nonstop, it's about playing the game of debating like a bloody canvas on which all blood shed by you had to be shed and all strikes you direct at the enemy demand a lot of time and energy from them to defend against.
I will never be the best debater at just writing a tonne of points/text and coming out a champion from that alone. I am the one to annihilate ten lines of what you wrote with one sentence. It is not easy to debate like this, it just looks easy because it revolves around efficient, minimised effort in actual written debate (the real effort is in the thinking and strategising).
If you step to me in the debating arena, know that I am seasoned, tactical and will rip your ideas to pieces while giving you ideas that are slanted so that you don't quite know how to fight them without putting in a lot of text and effort.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Personal
Do DARTers officially say 'hey it's just Putin defending against NATO aggression' or did they swallow the fucking red pill and get back to reality?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
If you're gonna mimic me, GP, believe me I'll do you better than yourself.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Trigger warning: This analysis presumes cisgenderism in human beings in the sense of brain structure regarding attraction.
There is a trick that many movie directors have mastered over time to make certain movies appeal far more to females and others to males. The trick is to do with fashion, angle, lighting, facial/bodily and expression choices in the actors.
Movies that are designed to attract females actually psychologically are more boring for males to watch because of scenes consistently having colours that blend well together and the actors wearing outfits that, again, fit too nicely together. You will often find that when watching a female-targeted movie or series you almost feel like every episode is too visually similar and/or that the way the actors move during the scenes is almost too 'smooth'. This is because the female brain is, for whatever reason, put off (whether they are aroused or not is irrelevant this is about interest and genuinely grabbing their attention.
What females find makes them unable to look away from something tends to be that it is just so smooth and hypnotic.
Males tend to want something rather different but not the opposite. If you analyse male-oriented movies and series, you will find that the ones that really hit big consist of bursts of fluidity followed by 'bam'. It doesn't have to be fighting and action, it can even be a romance movie/series that happens to somehow still pull in a significant male audience (Suits comes to mind). Furthermore, these male-oriented series and movies consist of strong, bold outfits on main characters with the side characters consistently blending into the background. The male brain seems to like this as it makes it easier for them to know 'oh so that's what I should be focusing on.' It actually is why male series tend to have less eye candy than female series, despite the stereotypes. If you watch a series geared towards women, it's extremely difficult to find characters that are ugly or offputting because they would cause imbalance in the general aesthetic, whereas in series geared towards males or gender-neutral appeal, there is generally a balance between attractive and offputting actors (it's politically incorrect to use the term actresses anymore, 'actor' is gender-neutral now).
The reasoning behind this is still unknown to neurologists but it is very consistent. The strangest aspect of this is that songs geared towards women tend to have strong imbalance where the chorus slaps hard but the verses are tender and inconsistent with the chorus' vibe. In contrast, songs geared towards males tend to have the similar vibe and tonality throughout (chorus similar to the verses etc) so it is not as simple as it being a brain difference in a consistent manner, what is apparent is this is specifically to do with sight. I wonder what the reasoning is.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Science and Nature
Leopards are by far the most psychopathic wild cat. It is not sociopathy, it is sheer psychopathy.
All wild cats have the 'predator instinct' and can potentially turn on one who feeds or regularly interacts with them but despite tigers being so much bigger and actually so ferocious, as well as lions and panthers, leopards take it to a whole new level in terms of frequency and severity of attacks.
There was a model who is really interested in helping wild animals, she knew about wild cats but not specifically about leopards. Due to this, she judged that since the leopard did not act aggressive to her, she could relax a little around it. This is true for almost all wild cats except for leopards. She turned her back on it for less than 30 seconds and this life-altering event has left her face disfigured, her life almost lost to blood loss, she is a drop in the ocean of leopard-kills-expert.
If scientists pinpoint exactly what is different in leopard brains vs tigers, lions etc, we may be able to literally scan brains of high ranking officials in any line of work and know them to be psychopathic, helping us know not to trust them.
This is controversial indeed but I ask you for a flaw in my theory.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Science and Nature
Quite the candidate we had going. I wonder how the site president he dropped put to endorse is going to help.
This is not really calling out the user, I am curious what all his endorsers would say to defend their choice.
He said he is for freedom of speech and used threats of doxxing and direct defamation to pressure a user into silence.
Idgaf if this thread gets locked or not. I want to say this.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
WION is solid as fuck News, only really biased when it comes to reporting on India vs Pakistan type matters. They talk about the whole world regularly, they exposed Pfizer for blackmailing countries and are an absolutely fantastic News source to represent south Asia to the world. It is appalling to me that this was cancelled for something controversial that was said and I am so happy that within 12 hours YT caved in and did the right thing.
Something like FB and Twitter would never have thought twice about keeping them banned. I respect Google no matter what other conspiracy theorists tell mea bout them. Google/YT do engage in cancel culture but I feel it's a much more 'open to negotiation' one. I've seen other examples of this before, such as a channel about children with special needs that kept stopping comments 'just in case' of abuse for almost 2 years until a few months ago where they admitted it was unfair to stop because they're muzzling all the supportive comments.
The channel for the special needs people is this (warning to judgemental pricks, it has people with very unusual facial and bodily conditions and/or mental disabilities on it.
^ the cancelling, over 3 years ago
^ celebrating the long-overdue de-censoring.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
I am not being snarky in a mean way to people like Snowden or some dude/chick who ditches a gang for justice and/or their own wellbeing.
I am telling you that rats are some of the most gang-oriented creatures out there. The rat is deeply loyal and concerned with the wellbeing of their fellow mischief (group of rats) members.
Rats are only violent for three reasons; food, sex and gang/tribal alienation. They take time to ever be truly kind and interactive with others and this includes their human owners. Rats can recognise smells very well and know their regular human feeder or even neighbour of they're wild and being fed now and again.
Unlike racoons or cats, when you feed feral rats they understand that your relationship is only a win-win temporary interaction. They only get cuddly and stuff if they are rather extroverted and sense you keep reaching out to do so. They comprehend social nuance very well and have a depth between best friend to stranger that is so intricate that they are one of the few creatures to successfully maintain social order despite being polyamorous. Sometimes there are brutal fights over jealousy, regarding the polyamory but there is a clever reason why the females are proud nymphos; the male rats never fully know which of the dudes that banged her are the father, leading to all pf the ones that did then protecting the offspring.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Society
The fuck have conservatives ever conserved xD
Like literally, never have they done anything other than destroy, ruin and impede society's wellbeing, let alone the environment's, unless there was something more pressing to destroy for them (like Lincoln destroying the confederacy breaking off).
The progressives conserve society's happiness and wellbeing while progressing, this is not at all a mutually exclusive dynamic.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
All begin their rapper name with S, holy shit.
but to be clear Sa-Roc is on ANOTHER LEVEL you don't even BEGIN TO GENUINELY UNDERSTAND her bars the first time you listen to her tracks.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Show business
Just curious how the double standard runs exactly, is it that since the parents mutilate the child via a surgeon, it's okay to remove the beautiful foreskin the way that God made it?
This applies to you oddball American Catholics and Protestants who circumcise despite it being a Jewish and Islamic tradition, same with some African Christians and even tribal Pagans that took on the tradition.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
The theory is clearly incomplete, given that the most ardent 'do something' people are typically severe fiery conservative or furious far-right incel types. That said, I would agree with Thett3 on something, if you take a moderate left-wing Liberal and moderate right-wing Convervative or Libertarian, the former will have more urge to do something about a situation that displeases them while the latter will try to remain more stoic, instinctively.
The actual theory runs like this, I believe:
If a situation seems to both be morally displeasing and happens to individually displease the person, people who are stronger in their leanings are consistently more likely to burn with the urge to do something about it.
If a situation seems to be morally displeasing but not individually distressing, a left-wing leaning person is much more likely to still have some degree of passion and urge to genuinely spread the word and also do things towards the cause, whereas the right-wing are more inclined to revert to neutrality on a matter unless it directly affects them personally or some people close to them.
If a situation seems to be morally pleasing enough but individually hurts the individual (perhaps you are rich in a left-wing society or you are a harsh right-wing person who happens to be working class and suffering due to the lack of provisions for you and your family), the right-wing are likely to feel a rage that when asked to 'do something' they direct towards the opposition but not towards any productive solution to the problem. When the left-wing face this dilemma they are actually much more likely to remain stoic and be okay with it as long as they feel it is a good protection to them and those close to them if they ever happened to become very poor, vulnerable, isolated etc.
If you had to sum up what I am saying in a simple concept, it works like this:
The 'direction' right-wing mindset, especially right-wing conservative mindset, is to deal with issues directly in terms of negative input to the individual. You will get authoritarian left-wingers who fall into this category though. The idea is that the less close to home the issue is the less of a crap is given and that can literally mean even right next to somebody's house there is a homeless person. The solution of very authoritarian people, especially if they are authoritarian right-wing, is to get rid of the disturbance (do they stink, are they noisy, are they reducing the value of the estate etc) whereas the left-wing approach is more as follows...
The left-wing approach is more wavy, if that makes sense. There is constant flux between the individual's dissatisfaction and lessening that and the urge to pursue the best outcome even if it hurts the individual in some way. The left-wing instinct when faced with a problem whether it's outside their doorstep or on the other side of the world is to be very curious and concerned, this is the actual reason why so many scientists are left-wing, it's because burning curiosity and inability to separate one's own personal issues from a broader system of logical framework and ethical concern runs deep in left-wing thinking. The left-wing liberal has to actively remind themselves to worry about their own sadness and personal issues and insulate themselves from others' suffering because their instinct is to worry about, take interest in and genuinely want to solve everybody's problems.
This is why I have always known that the simple division between left-wing and right-wing people, if we ignore peer pressure in their household and friendship circle, is that those that lean right worry first about avoiding their own sadness and dissatisfaction, whereas the left-wing primarily worry about net happiness and net satisfaction being optimised for all. This is a double-dynamic conflict.
I'd explain more but I don't want all my ideas to be stolen, one day I may publish a book but this sums it up.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
THOUSANDS OF 20 YO Russian men dying in the name of grèed.
Special military operation, not a war.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
These are young men, maximum 27ish, just look at the faces of any that have been captured. These mena re generally 23 and below. It is shocking to me the people don't understand what happened.
Listen to me when I tell you what they were told. The soldiers sent in were tricked by their commanders, told that Ukraine had requested assisted in Kyiv to defend against NATO attacks.
They then rolled in with their tanks and didn't even know they were already crossing hte border, they were firstly tricked into that, then they were told the people ambushing them were neo-nazis opposing the defense operation. This is where confusion began even amongst the Russians tanks and soldiers as clearly they were confused why people were screaming and running if they were there to save them and why absolutely everybody who was armed was attacking them, even the Ukranian official military. This is where some of them had the sense to surrender and that is how we are finding out their side of things bit by bit by prisoner of war interrogations.
Putin is a high functioning psychopath (I don't even believe he's a sociopath, I think it's genuine psychopathy). You need to truly understand this. He does not feel emotions deep, his 'human and kind side' is a carefully constructed act. This man has bullied Russians for his entire rule and rose to power by cunning means as well. He is a spy with a very violent and cryptic past that we still don't fully know and understand.
Anybody supporting him who says they are right-wing libertarians, do not know the first thing about the libertarian aspect of their beliefs. Putin loathes everything about you and what you stand for other than you enabling the rich to get richer. The rich in Russia either serve Putin, are run into the ground or are literally poisoned or brutally beaten the crap out of. You don't understand what kind of person you are worshipping and I couldn't give a shit if this website is owned by a Russian. I am not intending to live in Russia, ever.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
The entire victory was contingent on China backing Russia, so far it played the fence very much but it merely has to shift and it all is over for Russia.
Already from 5-7 days ago their shift to pure neutrality began (as the war escalated, they practically instantaneously flipped on Russia by refusing to actively support them).
China may become the antivillain of the war if it switches to actively condemn Russia. It takes one change of mind and it's done.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
[Insert propaganda quips and satire]
If you think this is a callout thread, then I wonder who I am calling out.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
I edited this from: https://www.reneweuropegroup.eu/news/2022-02-16/renew-europe-firmly-stands-with-the-people-of-ukraine-and-calls-on-the-eu-to-be-determined-and-united-in-case-of-a-russian-attack
I touched up the contrast to make it appear clearer in the format/size this website has it. Use it wherever as your image. I would like to make clear that I am not the uploader of that article and original image, in case some people are feeling doxxy.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Please feel free to contribute but bear in mind that if your suggestion is too silly or unpopular, it's not going to be picked up, feel free to quote others' suggestions that you liked or disliked and say why you like or dislike the topic.
Please avoid any direct help other than to point out a severe flaw in wording of a resolution that rigs it for one side, in your eyes.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
MPs in January gave the green light to make COVID vaccines mandatory and the law set to come into effect from February 3.Fines for non-compliance can be up to €3,600.Introducing plans for mandatory vaccination, Alexander Schallenberg, the then-chancellor of Austria, said it was the only way to avoid fresh waves of the virus.
https://www.euronews.com/2022/02/01/are-countries-in-europe-are-moving-towards-mandatory-vaccination
Greece and Italy are doing it but aiming at 60+ age group for Greece and 50+ for Italy.
This is blackmail of the highest order, do not be confused, everybody 18+ in Austria is being blackmailed against their will (or with their will) to get vaccinated and inject into their body things they do not necessarily want. Let's not downplay what's happening.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
The current theory that Incel-Chud (AKA Wylted) has constructed assumes that people will answer honestly and accurately to a test that hasn't properly wagered uncertainty against suffering with certainty.
I am going to construct his same theory differently in the questioning to see if his theory is correct but questions are merely flawed.
Please answer the following as follows:
1.........strongly the former option
2....moderately f
3...........slightly f
4................slightly latter
5.........moderately l
6..............strongly l
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT I DO NOT AGREE WITH HIS THEORY, instead I agree with something he suggests later on (that authoritarians, not conservatives necessarily, will score higher except I have done this test backwards so authoritarians will score lower).
I have designed my test to continuously juxtapose certain safety with uncertainty at the benefit of potential greater gain.
1. A lover you have partly lied during the entire relationship about her (or his or their) feelings, would you rather they crush you swiftly and privately and that both of you keep the drama relatively low
or that he/she/they keep(s) you in a state of uncertainty, stringing you along so that the let down is softer on your end (as you end up wanting it less) but a longer even for the both of you that most likely ends up more drama-indusive?
2. A pandemic disease has reached and spread throughout your nation and the options have ultimately become an ultimatum; restricting freedoms for certain safety of the populace
or letting them be free to mercilessly and randomly die at the hands of a disease that kills and infects with varying severity, the only certainty being it goes gentle on the very young who have no underlying issues?
3. You are given an offer from the defense on a case where you personally feel certain of the guilt of the perpetrator but rather uncertain that you can convince the Jury of their guilt. The offer is that the defendant will plead guilty but get away with it because they will snitch on another 'bigger fish' in the eye of law enforcement, at most getting community service as their penalty. Everybody in the media will believe their guilt and you will have won on a superficial front. The crime is severe, two people close to you were mutilated and abused before eventually getting killed.
Do you take it or push forth with the uncertainty on a case where your lawyer himself/herself/theirselves is advising you to take the deal? If it goes wrong, the person may get off completely innocent.
4. There is an election between two candidates well-known for their corruption. One was secretary of state previously and proved effective but somewhat war hawk like despite keeping good relations between your nations and even their worst enemies. She is also female and her winning will set a certain precedent that your nation is open to female leadership. While her record is somewhat tainted, she is provably an effective leader and will maintain peace between your nation and the world during her term.
The other is a chaotic chauvinist who is overtly anti-establishment and has espoused a lot of disciminatory and brutally offensive remarks about people of cultures that are known to immigrate to your nation, he is loathed by many internationally already and is well known to be a scumbag with playboy/infidelity tendencies and holds very little family values but is the only hope that the conservative movement in your nation has at success.
5. Rather than copy the D&D type quiz where you are pitted with a lucrative risky job and stable, boring job, I will make more clear about the ultimatum here and make the choice even more close/cutthroat. You are offered a job in the field you've always wanted to work, a lot about it is ideal but it will be brutally demanding on you in terms of not just hours but effort. You are practically guaranteed to love it but also guaranteed to be tired and need to put in 100% effort to maintain it. The wage is slightly lower than the other being offered but definitely is livable for you.
The other job seems better for you in terms of working hours vs pay and also is more recognised in general (can easier show it off to family and be prouder of it on a CV most likely) but your satisfaction at it is uncertain and the crowd there just don't quite seem your 'vibe' or type of people at a first glance. You would most likely succeed at it putting in just 72% effort and it's a very nice stepping stone for your career with only joy/satisfaction being the real risk.
6. Do you feel ultimately more comfortable in situations of conflict between two people that are allied/close to you in different ways when it is very clear who is in the wrong, allowing you to firmly take one's side
or where it is unclear who is in the right/wrong leading you to potentially piss both of them off or potentially keep both and please them?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics