Home   |         NEW: (hypothetically starring) VIC REEVES as LUKE SKYWALKER .. in "Waiting for Godot, the hollywood version".

The Numberwang files continue.   Share:  
Thrust of argument: Moving, for the moment only, on from where individuals selectively call out racism, but support other racism, nullifying any value in any calling out they may do - eg where people who vote for Islamophobic Johnson and Trump pretend to stand up against white racism when aimed at someone they like (ie not a muslim) I'd like to look at another form of virtue signalling and numberwanging, something I've noticed in one or other form over the years but which you'll admit in any honest thought experiment represents the status quo very fully and, as Feynman would say, modernly. Direction of resistance / implied resistance: The latest manifestation was an advertising slogan outside a hair do merchant (ie a 'hairdresser') - it said "Love is in the hair". Touching on this only briefly, for now, with my alopecia totalis beginning to be behind me again, having appeared about 10 years ago and been reversed only in the presence of extremely good housing, very recently, lust is in the external characteristics - 'love is in the hair' is a motto of how banal sick ecocidal genocidal people think and live. Love is not in the hair, or the clothes, or the wallet, or the diamonds, or the smooth tongue, or anything else of this nature. But that 'innocent' 'joke' 'love is in the hair' - is not really as innocent as anyone defending it is bound to pretend.

More importantly if we agree that lust is in the hair and that a good hair do can inspire lust and 'pull' the girls or boys, also note, from observation and evidence, that a lack of hair, depending on the shape of the head, or a virtual-lack (ie a very close cut), can also be just as 'good looking' and inspire lust.

Nonetheless, perhaps for this society two points at the same time is too many and one should focus on the easily-comprehensible fact that love is love and little tricks to make others want to fuck you are nothing at all to do with love.

 

 

Enter your DOMAIN NAME to
collect this point:

 

Removal of resistance: And so let us also now, despite my admission that many readers are incapable of handling even two points, let alone three, imagine an elderly Gujurati aunt who out of 'love' and 'kindness' showers her nephews and nieces with treats, but the treats are a plethora of high fat high sugar diabetes obesity cancer causing things which on top of all else taste quite sick, and at least half of it is more than 6 months stale when given as gifts (it is bought during discount periods and hoarded or similar situations) - that when you consume this stuff it basically harms you, that the aunt herself has been in and out of hospital and people are concerned about her extreme thinness in later life, inability to eat very much, as though her entire digestive system is fucked up, with doctors unable to do anything about it - and her slightly less warped in some ways and slightly more in others American-based sister coming to visit and trying to force feed her large amounts of chapati and macdonalds food including a macdonalds veggie burger (I mean look for the sickest thing you can and it's BOUND to be cheap) - and also bear in mind that maybe all these aunts are millionaires, very very rich some of them, overloaded with money - and the one trying to force feed the thin one is herself 40 pounds overweight.

What then? What is this action of 'being kind' - when such a person gives you a 60 day past its sell-by date chocolate made with GMOs and non organic milk and anything else corporations use to addict people to digestive-system-destroying crap? It is a virtue signal. IT IS NOT MUTUAL AID - mutual aid is absent. It is the same when companies sell those goods to your aunts or to anyone else. NO MUTUAL AID - the basis for SURVIVAL is gone and these acts, the aunts' "kindnesses" (but cheapness and hostility with regard to letting anyone purchase organic food, whole food, anything healthy and 'expensive' - ie not dirt cheap) are anti-survivalistic, same as when corporations fill our young with gluten and dairy and all sorts of preservatives and dodgy crap.

To sum up - kindness is if that aunt gives you something you need or something that is good for you, or even a treat which isn't harmful - whereas to give you stuff which is shit and bad for you and so on, which tastes sick, but is cheap, this is virtue signal, unconscious of course, it is a desire to show kindness, to feign kindness without delivering the IMPACT of real kindness.

This is just a little taster of the aunts you will find running amok in the stories of Rajeev and Wooster, coming soon, in the first two books, being planned right now: firstly, "The lost hat of Mo Wooster" and secondly, "Aunts R U.S.", the latter involving the devastating incident of one of Mo Wooster's least tolerable aunts, an American aunt, and her pursuit of the U.S. presidency.
Unification: Anyway, for now I recommend reading the work in progress, the first Numberwang doc, so far, via the link in the references below.
Rebut this point   Support this point   Edit this point

(TVhobo's estimated size of readership since 2013, mainly in the UK and USA, with Germany in third place:
over 200,000 readers across approximately 200 cities/towns

 

Copy/paste point into your work:

Type: Open statement

4 versions:

1. Server time: 14:3:9 on 24/2/2020
2. Server time: 14:13:10 on 24/2/2020
3. Server time: 23:49:29 on 24/2/2020
4. Server time: 0:56:41 on 25/2/2020

Related points:

References:

Read more about all this stuff in the numberwang doc: http://opinion.tvhobo.com/owenjones_israel_numberwang.html (And even more to come, plus a new doc, all about virtue signalling).

 

 

previous point on the grid   |   next point on the grid

 

Click here to read about Shams Pirani, the editor and chief author on this grid - note, if you can actually prove anything written above wrong, I would gladly, if the proof is sufficient, correct what I've written and what I think - if I could, however, prove your attempted proof wrong, then I would accordingly say so and maintain whatever point of view is completely based on fact and proof.

Simple text version.

The Numberwang files continue.

Moving, for the moment only, on from where individuals selectively call out racism, but support other racism, nullifying any value in any calling out they may do - eg where people who vote for Islamophobic Johnson and Trump pretend to stand up against white racism when aimed at someone they like (ie not a muslim) I'd like to look at another form of virtue signalling and numberwanging, something I've noticed in one or other form over the years but which you'll admit in any honest thought experiment represents the status quo very fully and, as Feynman would say, modernly.

The latest manifestation was an advertising slogan outside a hair do merchant (ie a 'hairdresser') - it said "Love is in the hair". Touching on this only briefly, for now, with my alopecia totalis beginning to be behind me again, having appeared about 10 years ago and been reversed only in the presence of extremely good housing, very recently, lust is in the external characteristics - 'love is in the hair' is a motto of how banal sick ecocidal genocidal people think and live. Love is not in the hair, or the clothes, or the wallet, or the diamonds, or the smooth tongue, or anything else of this nature. But that 'innocent' 'joke' 'love is in the hair' - is not really as innocent as anyone defending it is bound to pretend.

More importantly if we agree that lust is in the hair and that a good hair do can inspire lust and 'pull' the girls or boys, also note, from observation and evidence, that a lack of hair, depending on the shape of the head, or a virtual-lack (ie a very close cut), can also be just as 'good looking' and inspire lust.

Nonetheless, perhaps for this society two points at the same time is too many and one should focus on the easily-comprehensible fact that love is love and little tricks to make others want to fuck you are nothing at all to do with love.

And so let us also now, despite my admission that many readers are incapable of handling even two points, let alone three, imagine an elderly Gujurati aunt who out of 'love' and 'kindness' showers her nephews and nieces with treats, but the treats are a plethora of high fat high sugar diabetes obesity cancer causing things which on top of all else taste quite sick, and at least half of it is more than 6 months stale when given as gifts (it is bought during discount periods and hoarded or similar situations) - that when you consume this stuff it basically harms you, that the aunt herself has been in and out of hospital and people are concerned about her extreme thinness in later life, inability to eat very much, as though her entire digestive system is fucked up, with doctors unable to do anything about it - and her slightly less warped in some ways and slightly more in others American-based sister coming to visit and trying to force feed her large amounts of chapati and macdonalds food including a macdonalds veggie burger (I mean look for the sickest thing you can and it's BOUND to be cheap) - and also bear in mind that maybe all these aunts are millionaires, very very rich some of them, overloaded with money - and the one trying to force feed the thin one is herself 40 pounds overweight.

What then? What is this action of 'being kind' - when such a person gives you a 60 day past its sell-by date chocolate made with GMOs and non organic milk and anything else corporations use to addict people to digestive-system-destroying crap? It is a virtue signal. IT IS NOT MUTUAL AID - mutual aid is absent. It is the same when companies sell those goods to your aunts or to anyone else. NO MUTUAL AID - the basis for SURVIVAL is gone and these acts, the aunts' "kindnesses" (but cheapness and hostility with regard to letting anyone purchase organic food, whole food, anything healthy and 'expensive' - ie not dirt cheap) are anti-survivalistic, same as when corporations fill our young with gluten and dairy and all sorts of preservatives and dodgy crap.

To sum up - kindness is if that aunt gives you something you need or something that is good for you, or even a treat which isn't harmful - whereas to give you stuff which is shit and bad for you and so on, which tastes sick, but is cheap, this is virtue signal, unconscious of course, it is a desire to show kindness, to feign kindness without delivering the IMPACT of real kindness.

This is just a little taster of the aunts you will find running amok in the stories of Rajeev and Wooster, coming soon, in the first two books, being planned right now: firstly, "The lost hat of Mo Wooster" and secondly, "Aunts R U.S.", the latter involving the devastating incident of one of Mo Wooster's least tolerable aunts, an American aunt, and her pursuit of the U.S. presidency.

Anyway, for now I recommend reading the work in progress, the first Numberwang doc, so far, via the link in the references below.



Read more about all this stuff in the numberwang doc: http://opinion.tvhobo.com/owenjones_israel_numberwang.html (And even more to come, plus a new doc, all about virtue signalling).