[RD] Toronto van attack

[Kyriakos]

Once we get brain scan tech up to snuff, we should bolt down every male over the age of 14 to a chair, show them pictures of a diverse group of people, and make sure the part of their brain labeled "Human #&#%@!× Being" lights up every time.
If not, we can re-educate them until their brains work properly.

No need; just white males ^_^

(come on; that wasn't a good thing to say; and i don't just mean my own post )

 

[Kaitzilla]

No need; just white males ^_^

(come on; that wasn't a good thing to say; and i don't just mean my own post )

Heh.
No one ever sees women doing any of this crazy stuff.

Strap me down in that future_chair right now.
I'd hopefully pass.

But, what if the chair actually reveals that 100% of us are a little bit racist?
Avenue Q help!

 

[Disgustipated]

The latest Incel attack (yay, another one!) had a woman who rejected the attacker several times and got murdered for it.

I noticed in this latest one he was attracted to a girl out of his league. That's the problem with a lot of guys. They want the pretty girl even though they themselves look like a dirtbag. This guy was overweight and generally looked like a dirtbag. He needed to lower his standards.

No one ever sees women doing any of this crazy stuff.

There's been a lot of female crazy in the news the past 6 months I've seen in the news. You had one female driver her wife and 6 kids off of a cliff. They tend not to kill as many, but they do kill. My city had a couple girlfriends kill their boyfriends recently.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Once we get brain scan tech up to snuff, we should bolt down every male over the age of 14 to a chair, show them pictures of a diverse group of people, and make sure the part of their brain labeled "Human #&#%@!× Being" lights up every time.
If not, we can re-educate them until their brains work properly.

The feminist utopia.

Can we bolt down women and do the same thing? Or are there no problems there in your view?

 

[Yeekim]

Can we bolt down women and do the same thing?

Why shouldn't/ wouldn't we?

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Well I wasn't the one advocating for only doing this to one sex was I

However, I'd say we shouldn't do it to anyone because it sounds repugnant.

 

[red_elk]

Good idea. Men and women should bolt down each other from time to time.

 

[Synobun]

I noticed in this latest one he was attracted to a girl out of his league. That's the problem with a lot of guys. They want the pretty girl even though they themselves look like a dirtbag. This guy was overweight and generally looked like a dirtbag. He needed to lower his standards.

I think 'standards' is a bit of a cop-out. It's fine to shoot for the stars. Not fine to literally shoot the stars when you miss.

 

[Evie]

The problem is that in their mentality (a mentality fueled by large aspect of pop culture), a girlfriend is a status symbol as much as anything else. Accepting an "inferior" girlfriend means accepting an "inferior" status in their view. And they're convinced they are part of the elite, so need to have a girlfriend on that level to prove it.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I honestly doubt most of these incel people think they're part of the elite. I think they're well aware that they aren't and that's the problem.

 

[Kyriakos]

I honestly doubt most of these incel people think they're part of the elite. I think they're well aware that they aren't and that's the problem.

The first rule of incel club is: we do not talk about incel club.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I noticed in this latest one he was attracted to a girl out of his league. That's the problem with a lot of guys. They want the pretty girl even though they themselves look like a dirtbag. This guy was overweight and generally looked like a dirtbag. He needed to lower his standards.

Men and women share this dissonance and it's pretty amazing actually. People expect the "market" value to align with how they value themselves, rather than how they actually stack up against other options for the person they're going after.

To some degree, the incel mindset does reflect the mindset that wants "equality of outcome" with regards to wages/social policy/etc to the point of compelling others to give stuff. Life isn't fair. You can do things that improve your value in the eyes of others, but no matter how much you do you're always to some degree gated by physical appearance, intelligence, resources, etc.

I honestly doubt most people who fall into this category are literally incapable of significantly improving their value perceived by others. I suspect some don't know how. The dangerous aspect of the mindset is the apparent sense of entitlement that they don't need to do so.

On a percentage basis isn't this group committing violence pretty rarely though? Isn't their violence rate is significantly lower than that done in the name of most mainstream religions, standard domestic violence, or even people who are arbitrarily belligerent when intoxicated, both in absolute and relative terms?

 

[Farm Boy]

On a percentage basis isn't this group committing violence pretty rarely though? Isn't their violence rate is significantly lower than that done in the name of most mainstream religions, standard domestic violence, or even people who are arbitrarily belligerent when intoxicated, both in absolute and relative terms?

Yupadup. Hens is as hens does.

Spoiler gross picture, blood. :

 

[Manfred Belheim]

On a percentage basis isn't this group committing violence pretty rarely though? Isn't their violence rate is significantly lower than that done in the name of most mainstream religions, standard domestic violence, or even people who are arbitrarily belligerent when intoxicated, both in absolute and relative terms?

This is precisely why we need to bolt children down, scan their brains, and forcibly "re-educate" them if they show signs of heading this way. Oh wait... no that would be an argument against doing that wouldn't it. Hmm.

 

[Yeekim]

This is precisely why we need to bolt children down, scan their brains, and forcibly "re-educate" them if they show signs of heading this way. Oh wait... no that would be an argument against doing that wouldn't it. Hmm.

"This way"? I thought we were to "reeducate" them if they show signs of complete lack of empathy towards other human beings, i.e. if they're psychopaths.

 

[Kaitzilla]

There's those rational arguments again.

In the future, after we have outlawed guns, knives, forks, bats, sporks, outlawed the ability to drive vehicles that don't have AI overrides to prevent running people over, put the entire population on mind altering peace drugs in the water, and reduced crime a further 75%, what will we do to answer the tearful calls to "do something" in the media?

We will implement the chair.
Or we do the chair first and skip all those steps.

Yes, using it involuntarily on half the population is a violation of most human rights, but is there any kind of right more important than safety?

That's why it should be limited to men.
They commit 75 to 80% of crimes and 90% of murders.
Plus, they don't have any kinds of rights group accepted by the mainstream.
Even that Jordan Peterson guy is a horrifying villain if you read the New York Times.

The mind reading chair of human decency and reeducation will be the final solution to all these crazy acts of violence.
It might even cure school bullying if we apply it to children.
Identify the bad apples and show them the error of their ways.

I could be convinced we should just use it on everyone if that would make everyone happy.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

"This way"? I thought we were to "reeducate" them if they show signs of complete lack of empathy towards other human beings, i.e. if they're psychopaths.

Can people who genuinely lack empathy actually attain empathy, forcibly or otherwise? I wasn't aware this is possible. Maybe with transhuman tech you could simply alter what people want, though this comes with the unfortunate supposition that most people will be made to not want very much of anything.

We will implement the chair.
Or we do the chair first and skip all those steps.

It seems society likes to follow the frog boiling in water analogy, doubtful we go straight to the chair/nerve staples.

That's why it should be limited to men.
They commit 75 to 80% of crimes and 90% of murders.
Plus, they don't have any kinds of rights group accepted by the mainstream.
Even that Jordan Peterson guy is a horrifying villain if you read the New York Times.

Lol. Typically when implementing this kind of plan you don't call it what it is. Rather than "strap men into the chair", the more useful policy statement will be "strap people with these predispositions into the chair". Despite that the predispositions will overwhelmingly target men, and that this such would be more overt targeting than some of the racial/gender stuff that goes on now, the same people arguing against discrimination are likely to be in support of this kind of action based on political affiliation. No worries, the cognitive dissonance required for this has long been solved! Just don't think about it.

 

[Synobun]

Can people who genuinely lack empathy actually attain empathy, forcibly or otherwise? I wasn't aware this is possible. Maybe with transhuman tech you could simply alter what people want, though this comes with the unfortunate supposition that most people will be made to not want very much of anything.

You can learn it. Humans aren't born out of the box with a nuanced perspective on empathy and expressing it.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

"This way"? I thought we were to "reeducate" them if they show signs of complete lack of empathy towards other human beings, i.e. if they're psychopaths.

You can re-educate psychopaths to not be psychopaths?

Anyway, I've realised Kaitzilla is just trolling anyway so forget all that

 

[TheMeInTeam]

You can learn it. Humans aren't born out of the box with a nuanced perspective on empathy and expressing it.

The logic does not automatically follow that every human showing a lack of this development by the age you can determine it is capable of attaining the ability.

It was probably possible to identify that I couldn't gain the athletic ability to break world record speeds in the 100m before I left elementary school. Saying "I could learn to do that" wouldn't be consistent with empirical evidence in reality.

Is empathy different, in those already provably lacking it? Do we have confirmed cases where empathy was provably instilled in someone who we know had none?