[ExI] simulation as an improvement over reality

Darren Greer darren.greer3 at gmail.com
Tue Dec 28 20:27:42 UTC 2010

>"my only prospects have been offered by homosexual men! =\": I find that
faintly offensive.<

I had actually missed that before posting my
all-is-well-for-homosexuals-in-extropian-land missive, but it still doesn't
change my opinion or my good humor. I did want to mention one curious
characteristic of some some homophobic straight men that I've noticed and
always get a kick out. They assume that all gay men they meet will
immediately try to sleep with them. As if we, because we are gay, have
utterly no personal preferences or specifically tailored desires. I was
twenty when a sixty-year-old man said to me, "Don't hit on me, and I'm OK
with with you."

My reply was: "Don't insinuate that I'm automatically going to hit on
someone three times my age and not at all to my taste or preference, and I'm
OK with you too."

The problems with discussions like these is that they invariably stray into
highly emotive areas governed by the mid-brain.

I'm not the most analytical of people. My emotions gets in the way a lot,
but in this area I have to try really hard to be rational.


On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:

> On Dec 26, 2010, at 9:41 AM, Alan Grimes wrote:
> > Ben Zaiboc wrote:
> >> Alan Grimes <agrimes at speakeasy.net> wrote a bunch of rather impolite
> and inflammatory things.
> >
> >> There is an analogous absurdity in someone who claims to have 'never
> even been on a date' proclaiming
> >> on the sexual motivations of transhumanists. You know nothing about
> > the mental states of the people who
> >> frequent Extropia Core, and I can say this with a good deal of
> confidence.
> >
> > They express themselves quite plainly. The ones that don't are merely
> > being properly modest.
> >
> >> "my only prospects have been offered by homosexual men! =\": I find that
> faintly offensive.  Not that I
> >> blame you, and I acknowledge that the offense is my own
> > responsibility. But I'm pointing out that it can
> >> cause offense (in case you didn't realise).
> >
> > THAT?!?!??! IMPOSSIBLE!!! If me talking about my own sexual frustrations
> > offends *ANYONE* then there must be something profoundly wrong with that
> > person.
> That was not all you did. You talked about other people's sexuality and
> gender and their expressions thereof in uncalled for highly derogatory
> terms.   You demeaned their sexuality, gender and relationships and suggest
> they feel ashamed enough to hide it.  You also totally bit the hand that has
> kept you from getting banned or rescinded some existing bans you were under
> in SL - mine.  Not in the least acceptable, smart or giving any indication
> at all you are a sane being worth dealing with given a choice.   Don't now
> pretend you were not grossly out of line.
> >
> > I'm turning 33 next week... I have a house, a pile of gold and silver,
> > no debt (even mortgage!), My physical appearance is actually rather
> > good. But no, I couldn't get a date to save my life. I'm trying to talk
> > a girl into being my first date on OKCupid, it's almost scary how well
> > matched we are. We were talking about anime so I called us both Otaku,
> > but she seems to have taken offense to that. =( If I can't get her to
> > date me once, for even ten minutes, ending with a slap to my face, then
> > it simply isn't going to happen in my lifetime. =(
> >
> Totalistic thinking leading to despair.  Read "Feeling Good" and the
> romantic life follow on book.  Sounds like you could use it.   Don't call
> those books (or anything else) "gay" if you don't like, understand or feel
> comfortable with them.
> >> Come on, you're an extropian (I presume).  You know the drill.  Find
> what works, use it. If it doesn't
> >> work for you, try something else.
> >
> > I have a null feedback signal. There is no way to apply any kind of
> > hill-climbing algorithm. It's still purely monte-carlo for me. =(
> >
> It might, for your consideration, have something to do with your apparent
> lack of civility or impulse control to avoid  doing or blurting out whatever
> is on your mind.    Think on it.
> >> Rinse and repeat until success. Then raise the bar a step.  And with
> >> something as universal and basic as sex, success is guaranteed!
> > Everybody (almost everybody) wants sex.
> >> Especially with someone who's sympathetic (but not sycophantic),
> > attentive (but not clingy) and
> >> understanding (but not obsessive).
> >
> > Recently, I'd been harboring the hypothesis that women don't actually
> > have sex drives at all. The only reason they bother with men at all is
> > that they need to have someone strong around the house to open vacuum
> > sealed bottles for them.
> Women have quite keen sex drives.   So somehow you must be doing a mixture
> of:
> 1) not getting out where likely possibilities are;
> 2) self-programming it is never ever going to happen;
> 3) sending signals that women should avoid you by all means possible.
> >
> >> Come back when it's no longer a big deal, and *then* talk about the
> sexual motivations of
> >> transhumanists.
> >
> > That is functionally equivalent to saying "don't come back". =(
> >
> If the shoe fits then consider yourself kicked in the posterior with it.
> - samantha
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

*"Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20101228/11e4c3b1/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list