Musing2Myself

Writer. Analyst. Facts or Fuck Off.
Reposts are not endorsement.

[Musing2Myself @Musing2Myself]

https://t.co/MA0If0KSbo

[Musing2Myself @Musing2Myself]

Another piece of a different project. Lyrics are mine, composition is mine. AI used to bring it all together.

[Musing2Myself @Musing2Myself]

One of the many creative projects working on using a blend of my original work and ai.

[Musing2Myself @Musing2Myself]

@chillcryptworld I do love a good creature feature.

[Chris Bowden @ItsChrisBowden]

Good of them.

[Luckey Faraday @luckeyfaraday]

AI slop is everywhere.

So is human slop.

The difference is that we’ve convinced ourselves that spending 40 hours producing garbage is more respectable than producing it in 40 seconds.

[Musing2Myself @Musing2Myself]

We don't hate these subhumans enough...

[Deep Leaks @DeepLeaksHQ]

HOLY SHIT….So today it becomes law that muslims and minorities are to be given lesser sentences than white British people, you couldnt make this shit up. But here it is in parliament today.

[Musing2Myself @Musing2Myself]

@andrewc44104127 Tony Blair.

[Musing2Myself @Musing2Myself]

@grisasexual Can confirm. Some of the stories I was requested/commissioned to write by female readers back in the day.... There was a reason I left it.

[Basil the Great @BasilTheGreat]

The UK Government will tell you there is no Sharia Law in the country and then set up an entire new system just to comply with Sharia Law

Anyone else sick of this?

[Musing2Myself @Musing2Myself]

@stonetoss China’s ‘innovation’ model: steal it, subsidise it, undercut it. Their own patent office calls the system ‘rich in quantity but uneven in quality.’ Made in China 2025 isn’t an innovation strategy.

[Musing2Myself @Musing2Myself]

China’s ‘innovation’ model: steal it, subsidise it, undercut it. Their own patent office calls the system ‘rich in quantity but uneven in quality.’ Made in China 2025 isn’t an innovation strategy — it’s an acquisition strategy with state characteristics.

[The English Crusader @andrewc44104127]

🚨TWO TIERED POLICING

This is Emily Geer. She captured her own assault on camera and handed it to Greater Manchester Police, only to be told officers dropped the case because the suspect simply ignored their letters and knocks at his door.

Emily Geer, 33, was walking along Oxford Road on her way to study at the University of Manchester when she noticed a man following her and another woman.

When the man kept stopping and looking back at her, the Master's student started filming on her phone and asked him why he was staring.

The video footage captured the man appearing to lash out and strike her.

Emily handed the video over to Greater Manchester Police immediately, gave a full statement from her home, and received a crime reference number.

Officers initially told her they were pleased with the footage and spoke positively about the evidence.

Yet seven months later, Emily received a text message from the investigating officer confirming the entire case had been closed with no further action taken.

The force explained that they had tried to set up a voluntary interview without arrest, but the suspect refused to engage with letters, phone calls, or visits to his house.

Officers then requested his arrest, but told Emily that "ongoing operational demand and resource pressures" meant those attempts were limited and unsuccessful.

The six-month statutory time limit to prosecute the offence then ran out, forcing police to shut down the file entirely.

Emily says the decision has left her terrified because the man knows she tried to have him arrested and still frequents the area.

"It just seems as though they have just given up," she said.

Greater Manchester Police admitted the case fell short of acceptable standards, stating: "We acknowledge that in this case, the investigation fell short of the standards our communities should expect. Learnings will be taken from it to ensure that investigations are progressed quickly to ensure the best possible outcome for victims."

[ApoStructura @ApoStructura]

Reminder that the “datacenters use too much water” problem is fake.

[Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_]

One of the amusing things about women is that one will walk past a conversation that isn't about her, has nothing to do with her, and immediately interrupt it to say "Hey everybody! This does not sexually arouse me! In fact quite the opposite!"

And then she'll wonder why everyone seems to find that response incoherent.

It's only funny, however, until you truly understand why it's happening. Then it's kinda... existential.

Pick up a popular book, written by women, for women. At random. We all know that the odds are it's going to be porn.

In fact, it's gonna be porn about the medium-height, slightly clumsy, brown-haired protagonist girl being kidnapped and ravished by a werewolf pirate billionaire warlord. And if you're wondering what "ravished" means, it's like rape, but sexier.

So what's going on here? Why are modern women so porn-brained, and simultaneously so contemptuous of every actual male within their line of sight?

This actually all fits together quite neatly. Women are not lying. They are telling us the truth. They are telling us exactly how they feel about all the things they see. They're just not very good at introspection. So they don't know why they feel that way.

If we read their werewolf rape porn, we can immediately see what turns women on... men who have power over them.

And the reason that women are reading werewolf rape porn is that actual men who have power over them are in short supply, and there's not enough to go around. Desperate for male dominance, they are mainlining a hypernormal stimulus in fictional form.

This is also the reason women don't care about any harm they are doing to men with their newfound political and social power. To them, any man who doesn't have power over them, and especially a man who they have the power to hurt, is viscerally disgusting. He is an unperson, useless to them, and they don't care what he is experiencing.

This is why they try to hurt men in the first place. Because they resent the fact that they can. They want us to be powerful, invincible, untouchable, and they lash out in frustration when we aren't, seeking to punish us for being vulnerable instead.

Funny thing is, it's not even their fault. This is genetic programming, after all, not a choice. Ovaries want what they want.

The bit they don't quite understand, however, the bit they haven't thought through, is that this doesn't work with the whole "equality" thing. A man can be more powerful than you, or he can be an equal. Can't be both.

And, of course, men really do have power over women. Not only are they unable to defend themselves against us, they need us to feed, clothe, shelter and protect them. If we were collectively willing to take their civil rights away again, we could do so immediately.

Women's rights exist only when and where men say they do.

In the book 1984, which many women will be unfamiliar with because it doesn't contain any werewolf rape, George Orwell describes a process called "doublethink", which is defined as "sustaining two contradictory ideas by not ever thinking about both of them at the same time."

In this case, the two ideas are "make me equal to you in power throughout society at large", and "have so much more power in our personal relationship that I am unable to hurt you no matter what I say or do".

Eventually, men are simply going to have to come to a consensus over what to do about this, and decide which of these requests to fulfill.

We can either be liberals, and accept perpetual female contempt as the price of that, or we can be vilified as reactionaries, but have women love us again.

What is never going to happen is that you are never going to get a majority of women to see the contradiction here, and agree that this makes no sense.

Which means we are going to have to make this decision on our own.

[Basil the Great @BasilTheGreat]

🚨BREAKING: It has been revealed that the Home Office have basically ignored over 20,000 deportation orders for foreign criminals

That's right, these people are criminals and yet the Home Office didn't bother deporting them on purpose

We all know why

[The English Crusader @andrewc44104127]

This is what they really think of us!

[kwilliam @kwilliam111]

Why were no Rotherham councillors charged?