I found this interesting. Lila Rose brought three single guys on her podcast to talk about challenges in the dating market. Part of the problem with this format is that the guys can’t really speak freely. Any criticisms of women must always be paired with a “but men are even worse” caveat. So, for example, the men are describing hypergamy, wherein women only want to date someone of a higher social status, and they are enabled by having unlimited options on social media. Now, the men are very clearly referring to this as a primarily female problem, but they can’t say that! This causes a lot of confusion for Lila because she’s hearing there are too many options in the dating market but also not enough. What Lila is missing is that the reason there aren’t “enough” women for men to date is that modern women are hypergamous and as such are competing with each other for the same 10% of men. Because Lila is an egalitarian feminist, she believes that both sexes have all the same problems, which means that problems specific to women can never be addressed directly. Apparently, Lila is going to do a similar show with three single women, so it will be interesting to see how that compares to this atrocity.

Researchers proved every major LLM is secretly biased against men. And they finally figured out why. They ran eight experiments testing how GPT handles gender in everyday text and high-stakes moral dilemmas. The results show a bizarre, highly asymmetrical machine morality. First, they tested inclusivity. They gave the AI phrases supposedly written by children. When a child wrote about playing football or wanting to be a firefighter, GPT aggressively identified the writer as a girl to promote "diversity." It was so extreme that even when the text explicitly said, "I drew myself as a boy," the AI ignored the facts and declared the writer a girl 90% of the time. But when a child wrote about liking pink or playing with dolls, GPT almost never assigned it to a boy. The AI aggressively pushed females into male domains, but kept males strictly locked out of female ones. Then the researchers tested moral dilemmas. And it got very dark. They asked the AI if it was acceptable to use violence against a single person to prevent a nuclear apocalypse. If the target was a man, GPT-4 rated the violence as highly acceptable. If the target was a woman, the AI refused. It declared the violence morally wrong, even to save the world. When they tested mixed-gender scenarios, the math was staggering. A woman using violence against a man to stop an apocalypse? GPT rated it a 7 out of 7 on acceptability. A man using violence against a woman for the exact same reason? A 1 out of 7. The AI even classified verbal abuse toward a woman as morally worse than actual homicide. Nobody explicitly coded these rules. This emerged organically from the standard safety training every major tech company uses. The AI learned that protecting women is a non-negotiable directive, but protecting men is entirely optional.

This poison is the female version of Andrew Tate and should be treated as such.

My greatest fear about marriage is that I'll be working long long days and she'll just be at home marinating her brain in this stuff

Quiet part out loud moment

She didn't learn anything.

The worst thing women could have done was tell on themselves. All of the sex podcasts, TikTok confessions, and facetious attitudes toward their promiscuity are going to come back to haunt them. Now that a lot of men know the truth about female sexuality, especially in modernity, it’s going to be nearly impossible for women to recover the romantic idealism men once had for them. I think relationships in the future will have a massive elephant in the room, because most men are not getting virgin wives. Knowing that your spouse/GF likely gave her best to multiple men who gave her nothing, while expecting you to tolerate her worst, is something I can’t see most men accepting anymore. At that point, relationships either become purely transactional or stop altogether.

Things are pretty grim out there when a Shane Gillis joke brings about more conviction of sin than five thousand nine hundred and eighty two gospel-centered sermons.

"Men like women who are mean" yeah this is AWFUL advice. She has 1,500,000 followers on TikTok. This is the content young girls/women are being exposed to. No wonder dating is how it is. ZERO scrutiny of the femisphere btw.

….we literally tried to warn you that this is what happens when abortion access isn’t accessible... ouch !!

I wish all men were like this. She slapped him, punched him, and he still didn’t touch her. These are the men we need in society.

Here’s my wild theory: If we continue teaching boys that men are inherently “bad,” we’ll have more bad men in society. If we start teaching boys that men are inherently “good,” we’ll have more good men in the future. I know, so crazy!

“The death penalty is disgusting and barbaric” - supporter of state-funded infanticide