I found the Governing article on insulated urban spaces ironic. Urban elites don't have the stomach for advocating getting tough on criminals and bums, but they admit the need to get away from them. To a conservative, it seems that, once you have admitted the problem, you would be open to solving it or at least greatly lessening it.
As I read the “Lure of Divorce”, I was saddened. Individuals with so much material prosperity are so utterly bankrupt spiritually. And these are the “elites” of the Negative World? They live outside of reality and will collapse due to their rejection of God who is the ultimate Reality.
Why does paganism seem to rise with women? These articles are seemingly written by mostly white, urban, college-indoctrinated women who are spoiled with material wealth. If and when civilization collapses they will truly be victims; not self-made victims.
When it comes to AI porn, a lot of these arguments are already applicable to cartoon/anime porn, and they've started to be hashed out. It's just that right now, I'm pretty sure that stuff is a niche, while it might one day be the dominant form of porn.
Maybe 2-3 years ago, I recall there was a flurry of leftist online activist types arguing that pedophilic cartoon porn should be permissible because it affords a "safe outlet" for those feelings, followed by rightists highlighting this stuff and dunking on them. I think it's tough to argue from leftist first principles that there's anything wrong with this sort of thing, but nature revolts against it -- it disgusts ordinary people, even if they have to search for a harms-based explanation for their disgust. And the harms are real, even if they're not the whole story. Which means you can still try to put together a coalition to resist it.
If you take a look at the just-released previews of OpenAI's Sora, I have no doubt that the capability to generate lifelike AI video porn from a text prompt is here already; it's now just a matter of cost. My first thought is that it would make porn even more addictive, should the day come that you can ask the AI to generate something unique that appeals to your precise sexual tastes. The fantasies in your mind's eye projected onto your nearest digital screen. Which might well be VR! God help us and our young men.
Re: The Boston suburb potentially charging daycares to use city parks.
I'm not sure charging preschools is the best way to handle this, but I will say that when I take my kids to public family places we definitely leave if a preschool or school group comes in. This is because:
a) they bring the children of something like 30-50 families at one time, which almost never happens when parents are taking their own kids. It oversaturates the play areas and equipment.
b) the ratio of adults to children is 1:8 to 1:12, so very, very little adult oversight of very young children who need a lot of constant oversight at their ages.
c) the children parented by daycare are far less parented/regulated than children parented by their own parent the majority of the time. That means they are more aggressive, loud, and rude. Tons of research shows this is the case with kids separated from their parents before age 6 in daycare and "preschool" settings, and it's absolutely true and noticeable IRL.
I just don't enjoy being in a park or at a indoor garden or play space with teeming mobs of largely unsupervised young children. They attack my kids, scream and fight, snatch toys, and generally make the experience extremely unpleasant. We go somewhere else or come back later when there's not a toddler mob around. It's another -- smaller than many others -- way in which urging mothers to work when their children are young is antisocial.
Sounds like I have a Federalist essay to write here, if I can fit the time in. You get the preview. :)
It seems to me that the suburb of Boston is trying to provide an incentive for day cares and preschools to invest in their own facilities. They don't want "We'll just take the kids to the park" to be a factor in financial discussions of whether to build a playground in the back yard of the preschool.
When I saw the headline and did not yet realize that it was specific to day care centers and preschools, I thought it sounded like a terrible idea. After reading the summary, I was a lot more sympathetic. Your experience nudges me along in that direction, also.
Slightly off-topic, apologies if already mentioned. This reflection by Katrina Trinko on the "dating crisis" is reasonable and worth reading, although (understandably, and sadly typical for establishment conservatism, as often discussed here) rather lacking in any acknowledgement that women have some responsibility and can't just blame everything on 'bad guys':
I hope Aaron will review Brad Wilcox's new book on marriage
https://www.thefp.com/p/why-you-should-get-married
I’m going to get him on the podcast
I found the Governing article on insulated urban spaces ironic. Urban elites don't have the stomach for advocating getting tough on criminals and bums, but they admit the need to get away from them. To a conservative, it seems that, once you have admitted the problem, you would be open to solving it or at least greatly lessening it.
As I read the “Lure of Divorce”, I was saddened. Individuals with so much material prosperity are so utterly bankrupt spiritually. And these are the “elites” of the Negative World? They live outside of reality and will collapse due to their rejection of God who is the ultimate Reality.
It was right after another article at Blocked and Reported: https://www.slate.com/articles/life/technology/2015/09/the_first_person_industrial_complex_how_the_harrowing_personal_essay_took.html
The juxtaposition was fascinating to me.
Also, that woman's husband is a sucker.
Why does paganism seem to rise with women? These articles are seemingly written by mostly white, urban, college-indoctrinated women who are spoiled with material wealth. If and when civilization collapses they will truly be victims; not self-made victims.
When it comes to AI porn, a lot of these arguments are already applicable to cartoon/anime porn, and they've started to be hashed out. It's just that right now, I'm pretty sure that stuff is a niche, while it might one day be the dominant form of porn.
Maybe 2-3 years ago, I recall there was a flurry of leftist online activist types arguing that pedophilic cartoon porn should be permissible because it affords a "safe outlet" for those feelings, followed by rightists highlighting this stuff and dunking on them. I think it's tough to argue from leftist first principles that there's anything wrong with this sort of thing, but nature revolts against it -- it disgusts ordinary people, even if they have to search for a harms-based explanation for their disgust. And the harms are real, even if they're not the whole story. Which means you can still try to put together a coalition to resist it.
If you take a look at the just-released previews of OpenAI's Sora, I have no doubt that the capability to generate lifelike AI video porn from a text prompt is here already; it's now just a matter of cost. My first thought is that it would make porn even more addictive, should the day come that you can ask the AI to generate something unique that appeals to your precise sexual tastes. The fantasies in your mind's eye projected onto your nearest digital screen. Which might well be VR! God help us and our young men.
Re: The Boston suburb potentially charging daycares to use city parks.
I'm not sure charging preschools is the best way to handle this, but I will say that when I take my kids to public family places we definitely leave if a preschool or school group comes in. This is because:
a) they bring the children of something like 30-50 families at one time, which almost never happens when parents are taking their own kids. It oversaturates the play areas and equipment.
b) the ratio of adults to children is 1:8 to 1:12, so very, very little adult oversight of very young children who need a lot of constant oversight at their ages.
c) the children parented by daycare are far less parented/regulated than children parented by their own parent the majority of the time. That means they are more aggressive, loud, and rude. Tons of research shows this is the case with kids separated from their parents before age 6 in daycare and "preschool" settings, and it's absolutely true and noticeable IRL.
I just don't enjoy being in a park or at a indoor garden or play space with teeming mobs of largely unsupervised young children. They attack my kids, scream and fight, snatch toys, and generally make the experience extremely unpleasant. We go somewhere else or come back later when there's not a toddler mob around. It's another -- smaller than many others -- way in which urging mothers to work when their children are young is antisocial.
Sounds like I have a Federalist essay to write here, if I can fit the time in. You get the preview. :)
It seems to me that the suburb of Boston is trying to provide an incentive for day cares and preschools to invest in their own facilities. They don't want "We'll just take the kids to the park" to be a factor in financial discussions of whether to build a playground in the back yard of the preschool.
When I saw the headline and did not yet realize that it was specific to day care centers and preschools, I thought it sounded like a terrible idea. After reading the summary, I was a lot more sympathetic. Your experience nudges me along in that direction, also.
Slightly off-topic, apologies if already mentioned. This reflection by Katrina Trinko on the "dating crisis" is reasonable and worth reading, although (understandably, and sadly typical for establishment conservatism, as often discussed here) rather lacking in any acknowledgement that women have some responsibility and can't just blame everything on 'bad guys':
https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/02/13/want-more-marriages-make-dating-less-brutal/