@tedthefed.bsky.social
To be fair, coming up with dystopias themed around personal bugbears is a well-established sci-fi tradition. Remember when Bradbury wrote about the guy who got put in jail because he didn't watch TV, or the guy who got put in jail because he wouldn't talk on the telephone?
November 15, 2025 at 11:08 PM
To be fair, coming up with dystopias themed around personal bugbears is a well-established sci-fi tradition. Remember when Bradbury wrote about the guy who got put in jail because he didn't watch TV, or the guy who got put in jail because he wouldn't talk on the telephone?
"Smark" is ambiguous. It can mean "idiot who believes anything as long as there's a hint it's hidden backstage info" or just "person who allows themselves to enjoy kayfabe despite knowing what kayfabe is."
November 12, 2025 at 10:49 PM
"Smark" is ambiguous. It can mean "idiot who believes anything as long as there's a hint it's hidden backstage info" or just "person who allows themselves to enjoy kayfabe despite knowing what kayfabe is."
I have no clue who Dorothy Roe is, but with one sentence she's showing me she's fucking awesome.
November 6, 2025 at 11:35 PM
I have no clue who Dorothy Roe is, but with one sentence she's showing me she's fucking awesome.
Jesus christ, I saw this guy at the comedy store in like 2004. The Black continues to not crack.
November 1, 2025 at 11:26 PM
Jesus christ, I saw this guy at the comedy store in like 2004. The Black continues to not crack.
I don't think these centrists are directly getting it from the right. The issue is: The existence of people on the left who care about race makes centrists feel racist, and they resolve that by concluding only extremists would make 'reasonable people' feel racist.
November 1, 2025 at 9:35 PM
I don't think these centrists are directly getting it from the right. The issue is: The existence of people on the left who care about race makes centrists feel racist, and they resolve that by concluding only extremists would make 'reasonable people' feel racist.
This is because their entire motivation is "wokeness sucks" but they're pretending it isn't.
October 28, 2025 at 6:34 PM
This is because their entire motivation is "wokeness sucks" but they're pretending it isn't.
As a resident of the Research Triangle, I admit to being a bit confounded by our being clustered with Charlotte, much less Atlanta and Birmingham. I mean, I don't know where else you'd put us, but I've never been struck by a huge cultural similarity between Durham, Charlotte, and Atlanta.
October 8, 2025 at 10:44 PM
As a resident of the Research Triangle, I admit to being a bit confounded by our being clustered with Charlotte, much less Atlanta and Birmingham. I mean, I don't know where else you'd put us, but I've never been struck by a huge cultural similarity between Durham, Charlotte, and Atlanta.
I mean, the problem is twitter, right? Klein's mostly having a tailspin because he spends too much time on Twitter, which is both horribly unpleasant and specifically constructed to make the right wing seem ascendant and unstoppable.
October 3, 2025 at 12:09 AM
I mean, the problem is twitter, right? Klein's mostly having a tailspin because he spends too much time on Twitter, which is both horribly unpleasant and specifically constructed to make the right wing seem ascendant and unstoppable.
It's amplified by media, but it's a base psychological thing, first. The right thinks they're correct and good, but they also suspect they're bad and wrong, which means we can't disagree with them without them projecting that inner voice onto us.
September 29, 2025 at 8:11 PM
It's amplified by media, but it's a base psychological thing, first. The right thinks they're correct and good, but they also suspect they're bad and wrong, which means we can't disagree with them without them projecting that inner voice onto us.
So basically, it'll be Tik Tok, but everyone who isn't MAGA is Amber Heard.
September 26, 2025 at 8:53 PM
So basically, it'll be Tik Tok, but everyone who isn't MAGA is Amber Heard.
I think a missing element is that our moral criticism hurts them ("You're racist!"), but their moral criticism doesn't hurt us ("You're not respecting the natural hierarchy!")
Ignore this, and it becomes easy to look at people's reactions and conclude the left is vicious and cruel.
Ignore this, and it becomes easy to look at people's reactions and conclude the left is vicious and cruel.
September 23, 2025 at 6:43 PM
I think a missing element is that our moral criticism hurts them ("You're racist!"), but their moral criticism doesn't hurt us ("You're not respecting the natural hierarchy!")
Ignore this, and it becomes easy to look at people's reactions and conclude the left is vicious and cruel.
Ignore this, and it becomes easy to look at people's reactions and conclude the left is vicious and cruel.
Saw the dude give a talk once. He made the point that conspiracy theories are equally held by those on the right and those on the left. The problem was, his example of the latter was, uh, vaccine denial (which even then was 50/50).
September 23, 2025 at 6:20 PM
Saw the dude give a talk once. He made the point that conspiracy theories are equally held by those on the right and those on the left. The problem was, his example of the latter was, uh, vaccine denial (which even then was 50/50).
I'm assuming she's actually one of the .01% to use the word correctly, to mean "gently compassionate."
September 22, 2025 at 6:20 PM
I'm assuming she's actually one of the .01% to use the word correctly, to mean "gently compassionate."
"Populists?"
September 18, 2025 at 9:07 PM
"Populists?"
The source of everything is that the left can morally criticize the right and it stings ("That's racist"), but the converse isn't true ("That doesn't uphold traditional values").
And deciding it's a manipulative cheat-code is easier than introspection, so.
And deciding it's a manipulative cheat-code is easier than introspection, so.
September 17, 2025 at 10:04 PM
The source of everything is that the left can morally criticize the right and it stings ("That's racist"), but the converse isn't true ("That doesn't uphold traditional values").
And deciding it's a manipulative cheat-code is easier than introspection, so.
And deciding it's a manipulative cheat-code is easier than introspection, so.
What's noteworthy to me is if you look in the comments, the NYT readers, those typically "we're on the left but 2020 went too far don't you think?" folks, are not fucking having it. They're pissed.
September 17, 2025 at 1:23 AM
What's noteworthy to me is if you look in the comments, the NYT readers, those typically "we're on the left but 2020 went too far don't you think?" folks, are not fucking having it. They're pissed.
He legit did good work (about disgust) at the beginning of his career, but that was a long, long time ago.
September 13, 2025 at 12:20 AM
He legit did good work (about disgust) at the beginning of his career, but that was a long, long time ago.
The problem here is that it pushes people to focus on the same themes over and over: free will, choice, inevitability, etc. Some amazing art has been made about this stuff, but it's so hard to incorporate gameplay and NOT go here, it can feel repetitive.
September 10, 2025 at 9:15 PM
The problem here is that it pushes people to focus on the same themes over and over: free will, choice, inevitability, etc. Some amazing art has been made about this stuff, but it's so hard to incorporate gameplay and NOT go here, it can feel repetitive.
I think there's an element of, "Don't push any stance that implies opponents are bigoted in some way," suggesting that's uniquely alienating.
In practice, this of course means "never help marginalized people," so it's clearly unacceptable regardless.
In practice, this of course means "never help marginalized people," so it's clearly unacceptable regardless.
September 3, 2025 at 11:49 PM
I think there's an element of, "Don't push any stance that implies opponents are bigoted in some way," suggesting that's uniquely alienating.
In practice, this of course means "never help marginalized people," so it's clearly unacceptable regardless.
In practice, this of course means "never help marginalized people," so it's clearly unacceptable regardless.
The vastly most salient manner in which it's impressive (it feels like you're interacting with a person) is both an illusion and unsatisfying.
August 14, 2025 at 1:20 AM
The vastly most salient manner in which it's impressive (it feels like you're interacting with a person) is both an illusion and unsatisfying.
For Mamet in particular, he's just one of those people who went crazy because of 9/11. He got racist, and then MORE conservative when people started calling him racist.
August 5, 2025 at 3:11 AM
For Mamet in particular, he's just one of those people who went crazy because of 9/11. He got racist, and then MORE conservative when people started calling him racist.
There is no way around learning, "Huh, nothing has objective value, so what really matters is figuring out what I want." The only way to win the don't-be-a-loser game is not to play, because people can't be objectively ranked, sorry.
August 3, 2025 at 1:00 AM
There is no way around learning, "Huh, nothing has objective value, so what really matters is figuring out what I want." The only way to win the don't-be-a-loser game is not to play, because people can't be objectively ranked, sorry.
The problem is, it misses the point. You talk to these guys, it quickly becomes clear they don't really want sex, per se. What they want is to not feel like losers, and they have decided getting sex is an objective measurement of a man's worth.
What they need is introspective skills.
What they need is introspective skills.
August 3, 2025 at 12:54 AM
The problem is, it misses the point. You talk to these guys, it quickly becomes clear they don't really want sex, per se. What they want is to not feel like losers, and they have decided getting sex is an objective measurement of a man's worth.
What they need is introspective skills.
What they need is introspective skills.
I think it's more competitive than that. These guys want to not feel like losers, and they have decided Getting Laid is an objective, quantitative measurement of a man's worth and status. If you get the most sex, it means you're the best man, which they incorrectly think will lead to happiness.
August 2, 2025 at 11:24 PM
I think it's more competitive than that. These guys want to not feel like losers, and they have decided Getting Laid is an objective, quantitative measurement of a man's worth and status. If you get the most sex, it means you're the best man, which they incorrectly think will lead to happiness.
The advice from the left is probably going to be more INDIRECT. The best "dating strategy" I've seen for men is to form genuine friendships with girls, but that helps you two steps down the road rather than immediately, so it's a harder sell.
August 1, 2025 at 10:53 PM
The advice from the left is probably going to be more INDIRECT. The best "dating strategy" I've seen for men is to form genuine friendships with girls, but that helps you two steps down the road rather than immediately, so it's a harder sell.