The Foundation Of A Lot Of Conservative Thought Is That There Is Some Kind Of Magical Force Keeping The

the foundation of a lot of conservative thought is that there is some kind of magical force keeping the amount of suffering in the world constant, and that any effort that would broadly reduce suffering a great deal can be safely dismissed as being useless or untenable without examining it very closely.

This goes along with a very deep fear or intuition that something very very bad will happen if people do not suffer enough. It is a belief that the innately corrupt aspects of human nature will run rampant without "punishment" both in the strict sense and in a bigger, more general sense of "being taught a lesson" about how the world is harsh and cruel.

Conservatives who aren't, like, openly sadistic monsters can only resolve the cognitive dissonance by placing a very sharp dividing line between "kind/good/compassionate behavior as an individual" and "things that would improve society."

You, as a conservative individual, can donate to a charity or do something nice for someone, but this cannot be part of any responsibility you have as a member of your society. An individual can be kind, but it is either necessary to make sure the society individuals belong to is cruel, or at least necessary not to try to make it less cruel.

Conservative folks that don't consciously embrace cruelty must rely on historical illiteracy to call upon a monolithic " The Good Old Days" where the cruel and coercive aspects of society were stable and accepted enough that they were tempered by the benefits of true absolute conformity to traditional morality and gender roles+ the pleasures of a Simple Homesteading Life.

They rationalize coercive social standards through the argument that it only FEELS like coercion if you are introduced to another possibility, and if you immediately go limp in the jaws of the role predetermined for you, you will never want anything else. Women for instance were all perfectly happy being submissive housewives, back when there was no choice socially or legally. Everyone would be straight if no one was ever exposed to a happy openly gay person.

There is also a deep conviction that the human brain can only handle a small amount of pleasure or happiness above a neutral baseline, and "too much" sexual pleasure or mercy or relief from pain always either comes from or causes something grotesquely evil.

Their view of pleasure and happiness is very cynical and economic Law of Equivalent Exchange type stuff. Often, lots of sexual things are evil in the eyes of these people basically because they offer a suspicious amount of pleasure with no obvious "cost." They will SAY that sexual deviance is all these terrible things, but they believe that "deviant" sex feels good—too good, in fact, that's why it's that much more evil.

A lot of "trad" losers believe masturbation is from Satan because their schema for understanding the world can't accommodate the idea of something that gives you pleasure for "free," without hurting someone else or hurting you. For that pleasure to be "given" to you, it has to be "taken" from somewhere else (your soul or whatever)

It also works in reverse: the more you suffer in the present, through Hard Work or whatever, the more Good you will reap. It's a big reason why war and dying in combat are so romanticized by these people: that kind of Extreme Bad unlocks a level of Good not accessible otherwise (Freedom🎆🇺🇸)

real turd of an ideology all things considered

I am actually legitimately going apeshit over the fact the department of justice funded an entire project to use an algorithm to determine someone’s Likelihood of Overdose and the medical community readily adopted it to the point that if they disobey the Computer Algorithm that thinks this actual cancer patient is a Drug Seeker, their license could be threatened. And it does not take into account things such as chronic illness, rare illness, people moving, people living in rural areas, or terminal cancer, and also doesn’t seem to consistently log whether a prescription came from a MD/DO or DVM?! Or else just generally treats the veterinary use of controlled substances (of which there are many) as suspicious and potential drug seeking. And also cops can access that shit whenever they want. Without a warrant. And they openly bragged on their HOMEPAGE about how their software could identify PTSD and calculate a higher risk of drug abuse based off that. I figured something like this was in use but I should have known it was going to be as cartoonishly evil and dystopian as fucking possible. Like holy fuck.

I am begging you guys not to drink standing water that is so dangerous

I have a yeti cup that I fill with water every day. It does have a taste after a while. Lol

Water 💧

One of the most unexpectedly and unintentionally amusing interactions I've seen on reddit was while browsing through the comments of a very predominantly female community. Not being specifically LGBT-focused, it was also naturally predominantly cishet just because that's how population statistics work. There was a conversation there about how men just don't understand how dangerous life can be as a woman, they've never had to play russian roulette with going out on dates and hoping they'll have a great night instead of ending up on a missing persons list.

Someone lamented how draining and exhausting it can be, starting a new relationship always means having to explain to another guy about why she needs to know where the security cameras are in places where she'll have to go alone at times when there aren't any other people there, and sometimes they just refuse to get it, because the only part of "sometimes men assault people" they hear is "men", and they'll immediately start defending themselves, that he personally would never assault anyone.

Then someone suggested to her, has she tried dating trans guys? Plenty of them are straight, have about the same range of personalities and interests as cis men do, and depending on her preferences essentially the only difference is that they get it. The original person hadn't considered that, and thanked for the suggestion.

And I know none of this is funny in any way, but it was so hilariously unexpectedly neutral. Neither fetishising nor invalidating, just a casual "have you tried this other type of dude", like someone had lamented how they want a dog but wouldn't want dog hair everywhere, and someone else suggesting dog breeds that don't shed.

Took me until his Arrival to realize there were 4 people-