Category: internet culture

2009 anarcho-escapist manifesto

This piece has been reproduced here with the permission of the author, who no longer supports the proposals of this document, for historical reasons.


We strive for a world that implements the promise of libertarianism: freedom for everyone who wants it. The closest possible implementation of an extreme personal autonomy, freedom to do whatever one wants, no matter who disapproves. “As long as it doesn’t affect other people?” With that caveat, this project is impossible. So we must modify the premise.

Everyone will be able to pretend to do whatever they want.

On first inspection, this may seem laughable, a parody of freedom. It is. But we propose that it can be a satisfying surrogate anyway. To introduce an important technological element and to reformulate the statement:

Everyone will be able to do whatever they want in simulation.

Simulation. Like videogames. The expressive and immersive powers of simulation will increase, growing toward a perfect mirror image of reality. Information technology will eventually interface directly with our brains. Assuming the inevitability of technological progress, the privacy of one’s thoughts will not be guaranteed. Same goes for self-determination/free will/volition, to the extent that that’s not illusory. It will be possible for the kernel of individual autonomy to fall under dictatorial or democratic domination. We find this idea detestable. Partly to stave off this dystopia, we hold to an absolutist, uncompromising assertion of individual freedom of thought.

We unreservedly oppose any efforts to impose coercive controls over the activity of escapism. This includes any compulsory censorship of fictional material, written, drawn, or moved from the imagination of the author to any media by any method. Production of fiction and publication to free adults will be unrestricted, no matter how disgusting, degrading, obscene, pointless, or gratuitous the material seems to someone else. As to the possibility of fiction and simulation encouraging undesirable behaviour in the real world, we hold that a freer, more compelling virtual world will lessen the appeal of doing anything ‘bad’ in reality. Laws may be required to suppress harmful actions in reality, but we advocate anarchy for the realm of escapism.

We oppose controls to make anything prohibited or mandatory in simulation, for example: forced time limits to prevent excessive use of MMO games. Game developers will be free to choose the rules and content for their games, and their decisions may include self-censorship to satisfy some ‘social responsibility’. Their deliberations will be free from fear of punishment.

Thanks to the Internet, getting away from the world doesn’t mean one is necessarily alone. Solitude is an option, of course. People are free to communicate with who they want, and free to ignore who they want. This can be seen as workable implementation of freedom of association.

So are we advocating that people play videogames all day? If they want to, sure. Don’t we still have to deal with the real world? Of course. Making hardware and generating the power to run it requires work in the real world.

How will the real world be run? Do we expect the Free Market to produce efficient, accessible simulation technology, or should videogame development be Government funded, or what? As far as this ideology is concerned: we don’t care. This ideology is concerned primarily with the realms of fiction and simulation. Individual proponents of these views may strongly advocate a particular mode of production, or they may be ambivalent. Regarding the method of implementation of the positive freedom of escapism, this movement (if it ever becomes anything like a movement) will necessarily become fragmented. That’s just fine. If you empathise with these views, and you’re a socialist, talk with your comrades about the importance of universal community-funded Internet access. If you’re an environmentalist, argue for the efficiency of digital distribution over shipping packages of plastic and paper across the world. If you’re a capitalist, invest in profit-seeking tech companies that are advancing simulation technology.

Crypto-anarchy is a feasible method for simply ignoring Government. But it is dangerous for many. Cryptography is illegal in some countries, surveillance technology will keep getting better, and the culture of control will only grow more suffocating if it isn’t fought.

We believe a more unified approach can be taken in the struggle for negative freedoms. That is, to establish the necessary cultural/social/legal groundwork: rejection of coercive mind control. We don’t see a need for revolution, not the violent kind anyway. We need creative propaganda. Use democracy to limit the powers of democracy, promoting autonomy instead. Campaign to change specific laws in your country. We see ways to leverage the Western zeitgeist: there’s the historical ‘right to freedom of expression’, and the modern trend of encouraging tolerance. These principles are often set against one another, but they fit a culture of escapism like a glove.

Version 1.0.1, released 22 July 2009, released under the WTFPL


Sex robots vs. feminists

Sex robots are coming! Well, they’re already here, but they’re kind of shitty. But our glorious industrial-technological society’s entrepreneurs are working on improving them, and their valiant efforts have recently earned the attention and, probably, admiration, of the tireless mainstream journalists. Here’s a Guardian piece.

Continue reading “Sex robots vs. feminists”

Gifting: psychosexual dynamics of a new monetisation angle for dating services

For all those in the dating app industry, have this one for free.

I present an idea whose time has come.

OKCupid, Tinder, Bumble, etc. have a freemium model. They are free to use. You can pay for extra premium features.

Here’s my genius idea: gift functionality. Paying for the premium functionality, not for oneself, but to pass on to someone else in the userbase, for anyone who wants to extend a kind gesture and help a bro/sis out.

Now, what would the consequences be?

Beta schmucks trying to use gifting as a method of getting girls’ attention. It’s a terrible idea for a tactic. And it’ll totally get used. So an increased number of girls on the app will be running in premium mode.

The specific consequences of that depend on the particular features the individual apps/sites offer.

Back to the wretched betas.

And I hope it’s understood that I’m not bashing these poor fellows in the spirit of cruelty. I want to help them. Really, when I speak of them, I mean us. I’m no paragon of masculinity, nor a seduction expert. I’m still on the road to wizardry. I want us to help each other. What I’m doing is trying to raise awareness…

Anyway. The wimpy, naive betas.

Blackhearted, manipulative witches will exploit their soft, weak hearts and tempt them into gift-giving, with false promises of reciprocal affection.

In this age of megacuckoldry, they could effectively spin their enticements as an invitation to join them in a polyamorous situation. This way, there’s no need to hide the fact that the point of them receiving the gift is to make it easier to meet other dudes.

The strategic choice will be to offer a long distance  fake polyamorous relationship. Maximise safety by keeping a maximal distance between the witch and the exploited.

So. That’ll happen. Some of the victims will wise up, after a while. Some will need an intervention, some convincing, some confrontation. Some will keep pissing away their cash. Oh well.

Can I really begrudge these (still hypothetical) witches? They’re enterprising! And their interactions with their victims might wake some of them up, help them learn a useful lesson about how the world works, and dislodge some stupid ideas they have about the supposedly morally superior sex.

Premium date app plans will be another gift that pornstars and webcam performers receive from their fans. At least that’s a more honest sort of transaction. A gift from a fan in exchange for a little attention, no false promises of a ‘real’ relationship. You could be the one who helps your favourite camslut to get some really good dick, and she might tell you about it!

But this isn’t the sort of stuff that these dating app companies really want to be associated with…

Do these downsides outweigh the potential increased revenue? Does anyone actually do this already? Like, sites aimed at the promiscuous, fetishists, and so on? Haven’t looked into it yet.

Go on, app-makers, you know it makes sense. Give us an option to send the gift anonymously, too.

I’ll probably fucking use it myself. Fuck.



Tinder and male sexual entitlement

Men on Tinder think they have a “licence to use women as they see fit” if their date’s appearance is less attractive than her profile photograph, research says.

Dr Jenny van Hooff, senior lecturer in sociology at Manchester Metropolitan University, carried out a study of the use of Tinder among men in Manchester and Cheshire.

From PsyPost, Some Men on Tinder think they have a ‘license to use unattractive women as they see fit’

This article discusses sociological research involving interviews with men who use Tinder. These interviews reveal, according to the received interpretation, attitudes of sexual entitlement when meetings with women who have, in their judgement, tricked them with a deceptively attractive profile.

I found this article via my YouTube subscriptions: Deceived Males Shamed (video) by Bernard Chapin.

A 29-year-old man told her: “I’ve been very misled by very selective pictures, angles when the person isn’t as attractive or as slim or sporty as they make out on pictures. I try to swerve if possible, or get something out of it.”

The writeup doesn’t explicitly advocate a particular ethical or political position. Maybe the researcher does, in her own writing or presentation. I don’t know. But from the article, I get the sense that the respondents’ quoted statements are viewed as problematic. There is no outright suggestion, in the article, that these men are dangerous, abusers, or criminals. But there’s this insinuation…

The field of sociology has a lot of feminist influence. And feminism has a big problem with the notion of male sexual ‘entitlement’. It’s seen as strongly connected with selfish disregard for the interests of women, particularly around the need for sexual consent. So this is understood as a precursor for rape, and condemned as dangerous.

Here’s a different perspective, admittedly an amateur one. My view as a masculinist and sex realist.

We’re looking at confidence, self-esteem, even cockiness. And these attributes are perfectly compatible with a healthy concern for consent (i.e. that it’s an absolute necessity for sex). And they are conventionally understood as making a guy more attractive.

So no wonder some of these Tinder dudes, meeting up with women who aren’t as attractive as advertised, are getting laid. The guys are less intimidated by them. They’re emboldened to act with more courage and forthrightness, and the women like that, evidently, cause they’re having sex.

Sexual ‘entitlement’ is an ideologically loaded notion which too easily equivocates harmful attitudes and potentially positive male characteristics.

None of the above should be taken as an endorsement of casual sex. On that topic, I’ll just reference Doc Love now.

More thoughts on flirting

I forgot to cover some points in my first post on flirting.

The trickiness of flirting, in safely navigating its vague boundaries, causes some confused, frustrated people to throw their hands up in dismay, and renounce the whole practice.

To call it a ‘basic instinct’, as the otherwise fantastic SIRC guide does, makes it seem more of an opaque mystery to to those of us who are inept. As if it confers some powers of perception or persuasion that are inexplicable, unanalysable, unlearnable, and you’re either born with it or not.

I have a feeling that if they understood the utility and wisdom of its necessary intricacies, and got a steer on the basics, they would be receptive to it. They’d see that it’s possible to study it, practice and improve one’s skill. That’s precisely what the SIRC guide does. It’s really great, again, I exhort everyone to read it.

Although it talks about the ‘unwritten laws of etiquette’ in the area, it doesn’t fundamentally explain why these intricacies are necessary. Why not just straight up ask people for sex? Much has been written on this elsewhere, but I don’t have any particular links to recommend. The basic reason seems to be that flirting, as practised with its indirectness and incremental approach, lessens the need for explicit rejection. So embarrassment is reduced.

Now, with the wonders of technology, it’s possible to make explicit advances in a mediated fashion, so only mutually interested partners will be made aware of the expression of interest from the other person. I’ve briefly discussed services like this, but we need to go deeper.

Launching the Moonpod

These are my writings, about  myself and about the world.

For a while, this blog will be pseudonymous, because I will write things of a rather personal nature.

Here are some topics I can see coming up:

  • self-development, mindset, stoicism
  • attraction, dating, sex
  • social justice, feminism and masculinism
  • culture and internet subcultures
  • virtual reality
  • social networks and communications technology

It’s going to be wild ride.

Notes on comments

I won’t enable WordPress comments. Managing an online community is a large responsibility, especially one centred around the controversial topics that I will be discussing. ‘If your website’s full of assholes, it’s your fault’. My corollary: if your site’s full of morons, it’s your fault.

But I believe online, pseudonymous dialogue around these topics can be valuable.

You can email me feedback. I’ll read it, and sometimes reply directly. I plan to periodically feature interesting ones in posts here, along with pieces of discussions I’ll collect from external sites, be they tweets or imageboard replies or blog post excerpts.

So this blog will include comments, but in a curated, controlled manner.

A bit about myself

I’m a rather introverted and introspective 2X year old guy, working full time and living in London. This blog will document me on a journey of self-development via the dissecting of my anxieties and self-defeating beliefs, building new good habits, while overcoming bad ones. Like porn addiction (nofap at 10 days and counting, yay me).

One goal I’m working on: getting laid. I’ve never had sex. That alone probably gives you a good impression of where I’m at.

In documenting my ascent to higher forms of consciousness (it’s not all about sex, honest), I intend to use this blog as a sort of outreach project to my brothers in the struggle. I’m starting from square zero too. I want to help, but I’m not qualified to give out advice as a primary source. What I know is this: I know nothing.

So what good am I? I can be a gateway. I can examine, contextualise, and put theory into action and report back with results, in my peculiar manner of analysis.

Here I should quickly state I’m not trying to lead anyone into the realm of Pick Up Artists (PUAs). They aren’t what I’m trying to be about.

I will mention two recommended teachers on the dating topic:

I use them in theory, but not in practice. So far. I have criticisms or reservations about both of them, and maybe their lessons are in conflict… but we’ll return to them later.

Next, I’ll post about one stronghold of internet loser subculture, 4chan’s /r9k/ board. I was there in the beginning. I left and returned several times. The environment resonated with me. Most recently, I’ve returned and seen that its culture has degenerated in a rather saddening way.

I’ll discuss what it was, what it became, and what it could be.

In the meantime, here’s an overview of its worst.