Re: I Want To Date A Libertarian

1

You seem to have sobered up dramatically.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 12:13 AM
horizontal rule
2

I typed the posst out very slowly and ran spwlcheck.


Posted by: Becks | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 12:16 AM
horizontal rule
3

Read between the lines, libertarians.

Get Becks drunk and she'll totally want to date you.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 12:21 AM
horizontal rule
4

I dated an Objectivist when I was 18* -- and despite their supposed commitment to reason, Objectivists are unwilling to concede that you might have a reason for wanting them to stay the fuck away from you.

*Of course I ought to have known better. I enjoyed the arguments.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 12:26 AM
horizontal rule
5

Maybe they're just externalists about reasons, and know that there isn't any such reason.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 12:31 AM
horizontal rule
6

Objectivists are unwilling to concede that you might have a reason for wanting them to stay the fuck away from you.

They know that's just your inner second-rater talking.


Posted by: Man-Bot from Alpha Flight | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:06 AM
horizontal rule
7

I dated an Objectivist when I was 18

"A man who is not an objectivist at 18 has no balls. A man who is still an objectivist at 25 gets no pussy."


Posted by: Aristide Briand | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 5:52 AM
horizontal rule
8

That's like telling a religious person it's God's Will that you break up.

Maybe they're just externalists about reasons

Can you explain what this is, in three sentences or less?


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 6:49 AM
horizontal rule
9

I got into Ayn Rand in high school and told my vegan straight-edge socialist boyfriend that he was "anti-life" when I broke up with him. He interpreted that as a death threat and spent the better part of the next two weeks hiding.

I have been dumped by a libertarian for reasons relating to his "discount rate." No lie.


Posted by: Amber | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 7:57 AM
horizontal rule
10

He interpreted that as a death threat and spent the better part of the next two weeks hiding.

Intimidating, fierce-looking people have to choose their words with special care, or people sometimes get the wrong idea.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:28 AM
horizontal rule
11

I have been dumped by a libertarian for reasons relating to his "discount rate."

"Why would I want to go long on a fixed income investment in a rising interest rate environment?"


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:46 AM
horizontal rule
12

Maybe I dated Amber?


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:47 AM
horizontal rule
13

re: 8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externalism#Reasons


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:49 AM
horizontal rule
14

4: Objectivists are unwilling to concede that you might have a reason for wanting them to stay the fuck away from you.

Per usual exhibiting a lack of nuance in their understanding "asymmetric information".


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:49 AM
horizontal rule
15

Suppose that it's against the moral law to steal from the poor, and Sasha knows this. However, Sasha doesn't desire to follow the moral law, and there is currently a poor person next to him. Is it intelligible to say that Sasha has a reason to follow the moral law right now (to not steal from the poor person next to him), even though he doesn't care to do so?

Sasha! No! You don't steal from poor people! You steal from rich people!


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:53 AM
horizontal rule
16

I just voted. My sticker says:
I MADE FREEDOM COUNT
I VOTED EARLY

Noah's says FUTURE VOTER.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:54 AM
horizontal rule
17

You don't steal from poor people! You steal from rich people!

It's certainly a more sustainable business model.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:55 AM
horizontal rule
18

16: So one write-in for Gravel?


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:55 AM
horizontal rule
19

Gravel actually was on the only other guy on the ballet besides Clinton and Obama.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:58 AM
horizontal rule
20

Wow.

"was on the only other guy"


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 8:59 AM
horizontal rule
21

So one write-in for Gravel?

Forgive me if this is a repeat anecdote, but I called my mother just after the 1988 primary, and she informed me that Jesse Jackson had received a total of three votes in our precinct. There was a pregnant pause, and then she said, "Who do you figure the third one was?"


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:00 AM
horizontal rule
22

16: You don't steal from poor people!

Right, you kill the poor.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:01 AM
horizontal rule
23

21: "Who do you figure the third one was?"

The lazy, stupid classmate of your oft-repeated* anecdote?

*Actually, twice, I think.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:02 AM
horizontal rule
24

Would I be less of a bore if I embellished my anecdotes with additional, invented detail upon retelling?* I'm not sure whether it's worse to be considered a bore or a fabulist.

* I suppose the answer could depend on how entertaining/funny the details are; this criterion doesn't necessarily work in my favor.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:06 AM
horizontal rule
25

19: That's interesting, actually. I think he has now officially switched parties. Is he a Libertarian? Should Becks date him?


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:10 AM
horizontal rule
26

23: JP, think of Saturday morning on unfogged like watching television outsid of primetime: it's more efficient to broadcast reruns than to produce fresh programming, and even stale reruns are better than looking at a blank screen.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:15 AM
horizontal rule
27

I once got dumped because of God's will, and I was so pissed off that she was using that reason that I talked her out of it -- which, shockingly, turned out to be a really big mistake.


Posted by: Zippy the Comment Frog | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:16 AM
horizontal rule
28

which, shockingly, turned out to be a really big mistake

God smote her?


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:22 AM
horizontal rule
29

I have to say, KR, that as a noob, I appreciate hearing your stories -- in my case, for the first time. In fact, I'd be grateful if someone would put up a post in which everyone would share their favorite stock anecdotes. It would save me years of work in the archives.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:36 AM
horizontal rule
30

I hadn't heard your anecdote, Knecht.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:37 AM
horizontal rule
31

I recently had a date use the phrase "Dr. Warren Farrell." I considered that the equivalent of breaking up with me.


Posted by: BriefestDelurk | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:49 AM
horizontal rule
32

28: No, she turned out to be crazy.


Posted by: Zippy the Comment Frog | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:54 AM
horizontal rule
33

What a surprise!


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 9:54 AM
horizontal rule
34

33: Because she gave God's will as a reason to break up, or because she dated Zippy?


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:00 AM
horizontal rule
35

I think 33 is complete as it stands, Tim.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:02 AM
horizontal rule
36

I have to say, KR, that as a noob, I appreciate hearing your stories

Consistent with my proposal in 24, the next time I recount this anecdote, look for it to include a thieving Puerto Rican and a jolly Irish drunk.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:04 AM
horizontal rule
37

she gave God's will as a reason to break up

Why is it always God's will to end the relationship? Why do you never hear anything like, "It's God's will that we have butt sex"? (Leaving aside what you hear from Father Flanigan from confirmation class, of course.)


Posted by: KR | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:17 AM
horizontal rule
38

Sometimes it's God's will that 'she's obviously the one for me. The Spirit moved me.' (Funny place to keep the Spirit, I say.)


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:20 AM
horizontal rule
39

My fundie SIL is always going on about "I like to praise Jesus through dance," or "I like to glorify God through music." But somehow you never hear anyone say "I gave him a well-lubed handjob to the glory of the Lord."


Posted by: KR | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:31 AM
horizontal rule
40

Oh, Knecht, you aren't finding the good parts of the interwebz.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:35 AM
horizontal rule
41

39: Actually, some Christian marriage counselors go in that direction, probably without a lot of physiological detail. (The liberal ones and some of the charismatic New Churches. ) The conservative ones work in Christ the Lord and Master and his worshipful servants (Mary and Margaret).


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:36 AM
horizontal rule
42

The Spirit moved me

"The Spirits moved me" is close enough.


Posted by: Gonerill | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:38 AM
horizontal rule
43

I remember warnings about the dangers of idolatry -- Yes, the wife is to serve the husband as though he were Jesus, but she must not allow herself to believe that he actually is God, because that would be some kind of heresy.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:38 AM
horizontal rule
44

Yes, the wife is to serve the husband as though he were Jesus, but she must not allow herself to believe that he actually is God, because that would be some kind of heresy.

But, strangely, His correspondingly self-sacrificial attitude need not apply to the husband. Hub gets to be more Old Testament.


Posted by: Gonerill | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:41 AM
horizontal rule
45

some Christian marriage counselors go in that direction

I must confess that on my wedding night, a smile crossed my face when I realized, "Hey, Jesus is totally cool with this now."


Posted by: KR | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:42 AM
horizontal rule
46

Hub gets to be more Old Testament.

You mean, like when Moses raises his staff?


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:48 AM
horizontal rule
47

Why is it always God's will to end the relationship?

There is no God but God and Emerson is his prophet.


Posted by: NĂ¡pi | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:50 AM
horizontal rule
48

45: A friend at her wedding reception leaned over at one point and whispered to me "Yay! Guilt-free sex!"


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 10:51 AM
horizontal rule
49

You mean, like when Moses raises his staff?

Take the rod and speak ye to the rock, IYKWIM.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:09 AM
horizontal rule
50

44: Yet more evidence that Marcionism continues to be the most widespread heresy.


Posted by: Zippy the Comment Frog | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:10 AM
horizontal rule
51

Speaking of his staff, presenting: His Staff. I'm trying to figure which one is Knecht in the homepage photo.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:17 AM
horizontal rule
52

Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me. Ooh.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:18 AM
horizontal rule
53

re: 48

This has been part 279 in the long-running series, "Reminders that the USA really is an alien land" ...


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:20 AM
horizontal rule
54

I was working curbside voting this morning at an early voting site and heard, while standing with my back turned a good distance away from the extremely elderly couple's car:

Driver: "Who do you want to vote for?"
Voter: (Very loudly) "OBAMA!"
Driver: "You want to hear any of the other names on here?"
Voter: (Still very loudly and without hesitation) "NO!"


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:21 AM
horizontal rule
55

53: My friends may not be representative of the larger US.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:23 AM
horizontal rule
56

My friends may not be representative of the larger US.

Not totally unrepresentative either.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:27 AM
horizontal rule
57

Also, I went fishing for a Christian sex advice site to link in response to KR and grossed myself out without really hitting jackpot. Bleah.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:28 AM
horizontal rule
58

53: My reaction was, "There are still people who feel guilty about pre-marital sex? With their fiance(e)s?" Yet another reminder that I really am an alien in my own land.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:48 AM
horizontal rule
59

53, 58: No, that comment was completely foreign to me as well, and I went to mass every Sunday for 17 years.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 11:59 AM
horizontal rule
60

So who are Cala's friends?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 12:10 PM
horizontal rule
61

57: A pretty mild one.

For instance, a woman could pray, quite explicitly--but in all holiness--"God, thank you that it feels enticing when my husband caresses my breasts." Couples can even pray together, thanking God for the pleasure surrounding marital consummation.

I think this last is honored mainly in the obsevance (for expanded conceptions of "pray").


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 12:13 PM
horizontal rule
62

I linked to Tim and Beverly LaHaye's sex advice book a couple weeks ago, folks.


Posted by: peter | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 12:30 PM
horizontal rule
63

So awesome.

I want to date a libertarian so that when they complain about what a bitch I am I can say, "hey, you chose to date me. Don't start whining about it now."


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 1:28 PM
horizontal rule
64

Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me. Ooh.

An unfogged Christian porn title.


Posted by: KR | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 1:32 PM
horizontal rule
65

Cala's anecdote would be totally alien to me if my crazy-ass husband hadn't been one of those weird Catholics way back when.

Of course, his weird Catholic attitudes about sex were instilled by his Old World European parents, so he's not representative of America.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 1:43 PM
horizontal rule
66

I want to break my no-relationship rule so I can date a Prosperity Christian and break up with them with the excuse that it's God's will the market correct itself.


Posted by: winna | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 1:59 PM
horizontal rule
67

66: WHERE'S YOUR MESSIAH NOW!?


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:02 PM
horizontal rule
68

I linked to Tim and Beverly LaHaye's sex advice book a couple weeks ago, folks.

With over 25 million copies in print, The Act of Marriage has helped thousands of Christian couples maximize their joy in sexual union and saved many marriages.

That isn't a very impressive success rate.


Posted by: Matt F | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:05 PM
horizontal rule
69

well, to "maximize their joy" is kind of a stringent standard for success.


Posted by: peter | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:06 PM
horizontal rule
70

55: Cala's friends are entirely normal. Oudemia is a heretic perv.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:07 PM
horizontal rule
71

The other 24,950,000 customers want their money back, but LaHaye Ministries replies through their lawyers that the introduction to the book clearly states that results may vary based on end users' personal standing with God, which is obviously beyond the control of LaHaye Ministries or any of its subsidiary businesses or vendors.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:09 PM
horizontal rule
72

69: You know a marriage is doomed when they start satisficing their pleasure. Sex is not a satisficing type of activity.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:13 PM
horizontal rule
73

70: oudemia is happily sunning herself the back deck of her ancestral manse. she has walked the dog and chatted with the neighbors. A perv, perhaps, but no heretic.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:16 PM
horizontal rule
74

The other 24,950,000 customers were divided between those who thought that the LaHaye's book was magic, like the bible, and if they just put it under the bed it would instantly transform their sex lives, and those who simply couldn't read at all and picked the book up thinking it might make a convenient door stop.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:19 PM
horizontal rule
75

I'm not sure how the activities recounted in 73 clear one of heresy.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:21 PM
horizontal rule
76

75: I think the phrase "ancestral manse" imply that she has bought an indulgence.


Posted by: peter | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:22 PM
horizontal rule
77

Friend in question was some form of Baptist, not Catholic, and not terribly devout, just raised that way.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:28 PM
horizontal rule
78

if they just put it under the bed her pelvis it would instantly transform their sex lives


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:28 PM
horizontal rule
79

Right, no aspersions on Catholics really intended, since most of us fuck around before marriage just as much as anyone else. My husband was weird.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:29 PM
horizontal rule
80

Oh, none taken, just clarifying for the sake of being a little bitch.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:32 PM
horizontal rule
81

75: Oh, it made no sense at all! I'm just feeling very "I am America and so can you!" right now.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:32 PM
horizontal rule
82

69: well, to "maximize their joy" is kind of a stringent standard for success.

Yes, their technique was only valid for couples with a real analytic joy function.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:36 PM
horizontal rule
83

I thought the analytic joy function was something you only needed if you lived up north, like undercoating on your car.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:38 PM
horizontal rule
84

I take it that "joy function" here refers to some function whose codomain is hedons. But what is the domain?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:38 PM
horizontal rule
85

Cohedons, Ben. I should think that much is obvious.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:40 PM
horizontal rule
86

"cohedons" produces one Google result. And it's from Google Books. And quite perplexing.


Posted by: peter | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:42 PM
horizontal rule
87

79: Since most of us fuck around before marriage just as much as anyone else.

Quantify that and we'll tell you whether it's true.

I don't think that any American Christian denomination is much less puritanical than any other. I think that the difference is in emotional repressiveness and suppression of affect, with the Lutherans and some New England sects being the champs.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:47 PM
horizontal rule
88

84: But what is the domain?

The fuck if I know. Besires maybe?


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 2:52 PM
horizontal rule
89

Harper's ran side-by-side excerpts a while back of the same technique detailed in a hot-selling Christiany sex book and Charles Mingus's autobiography.


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 3:50 PM
horizontal rule
90

Maybe this one

Sexual sensations that are intense, frequent and spiritual...including orgasms that are so overwhelming that you will both be amazed that such pleasure exists in this world... If this is what you desire, my book, Sexual Skills For The Christian Husband, is the solution.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 3:58 PM
horizontal rule
91

Ahem.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 4:00 PM
horizontal rule
92

Yes, their technique was only valid for couples with a real analytic joy function

I take it that "joy function" here refers to some function whose codomain is hedons. But what is the domain?

Cohedons, Ben. I should think that much is obvious.

I dunno guys, this theory sounds a bit half-baked to me. Are y'all sure you've got your foundations worked out right? I gotta tell you, I'm far from convinced this thing'll fly.

For one thing, if it's real analytic the codomain will, strictly speaking, have to be the set of real numbers.

Oh, but okay, the cohedons can then be acts, decisions, or attitudinal states of being, over which the couple has control and upon which their level of joy depends.

The real analytic joy function itself would presumably result from starting with some more primordial joy function from the space of cohedons into the space of hedons, then postcomposing with the function from hedons into reals that you get by choosing a unit of measurement, and simultaneously precomposing with some representation of the space of cohedons in some R^n.

Hmm, ... maybe. But you've got
a ways to go here. Kids these days, always going off half-cocked without doing the spadework ...


Posted by: Amit | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 6:04 PM
horizontal rule
93

I don't think that rats have cohedons, just hedons. There's probably a hunger-horniness curve decide whether the stronger rat makes love to, or eats, his or her partner. That's why the rat orgasm is the standard hedonic unit; cohedons just ruin everything.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 6:24 PM
horizontal rule
94

For one thing, if it's real analytic the codomain will, strictly speaking, have to be the set of real numbers.

Have a little charity. The joy function is real-valued but it measures hedons.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 6:26 PM
horizontal rule
95

Re 93:
See, that's just what I mean. Before you apply your theories to humans you need to test it on
rats first.

Re 94:

I kid, I kid.


Posted by: Amit | Link to this comment | 04-19-08 6:45 PM
horizontal rule
96

For more information on devout Christians enjoying sex (heterosexually! monogamously!), see this.

The author there is the mother of a co-worker of mine. Some conservative radio nut named Hal Tur/ner sent death threats her way after that article. No, not for talking positively about religious people having sex. For promoting miscegenation.


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 04-21-08 7:31 AM
horizontal rule