I have a hypothesis that every area of society every arm of the state, the judiciary, the executive, the legislature, is set up to gaslight unattractive and thus low value men in society.
This hypothesis is predicated on the premise that every one of these institutions fail at a basic level a most fundamental level, to structurally encompass human nature and the in built biases that they have especially the acknowledgement of the HALO effect of Lookism, and also Lookism itself (encompassing heightism also), self serving bias, and humans propensity to view favorably people they see as being like them or people they "look up to".
If we even take politics at a fundamental level, even with all its complexity geopolitically, governmental departments running every facet of a country from travel to healthcare systems to housing its population and social welfare. All of this complexity and really semantically hard science that REALLY FUNDAMENTALLY AFFECTS PEOPLES LIVES AT A DAY TO DAY LEVEL. How is this multifaceted EXTREMELY IMPORTANT JOB DETERMINED WHAT IS THE JOB INTERVIEW FOR SUCH A POSITION OF POWER. IT IS REDUCED TO A CATCH ALL POPULARITY DRIVEN BASE LEVEL RACE FOR VOTES FROM THE PUBLIC WHERE SHORT TERMISM RULES.
How is this not missing the point, how can any government formed in this manner serve the people in a manner that is most effective and productive IT MAKES UTTERLY NO SENSE, IT CANT EVER WORK, ITS INCEPTION IS SET UP FOR CORRUPTION AND SHOT TERM GAIN LONG TERM FAILURE.
The public almost everytime fall for the LOOKS HAILO, HEIGHTIST HALO if we see the avaerage american presidents height is over 6 feet, circa the top 10% of the US male populations height.
At another level, in life anyone with a brain knows, it is not what is said by people but how people treat you and the respect they show in their actions that ACTUALLY MATTER AND COUNT FOR ANYTHING.
If we now go to the courts, this element is so lacking in the analysis, so lacking in the formulation of the law and the interpretation of the law its pathetic. The element of bias and discrimination based upon Lookism and the effect this lookism can have on a persons perception of events, perception of intent, the depths of deception a human can go to obfuscate this discrimination eg gaslighting and misdirection, are so UTTERLY UNDERDEVELOPED IN THE LAW AND THE COURTS ITS ABSOLUTELY BAFFLING. The myriad of case of precedents of convoluted language prima facie, ex facie, in limine, tort etc, becomes UTTERLY REDUNDANT IF THE APPLICATION OF THESE ELEMENTS IS PUT IN PLACE IN THE WRONG CONTEXT. It becomes complexity for the sake of complexity just mere convention for the sake of it, as discovering "THE TRUTH" in a case, the element that has to be uncovered and explored FIRST IS THE DISCRIMINATION, IS THE NATURE OF THE DEFENDANT AND THE PLAINTIFF, THIS IS THE WHOLE FUCKING CAKE. Everything else is absolutely tiny in importance to a case and discovering the truth and thus who is guilty or innocent in any disagreement, everything else thus gets dwarfed by this element. Yet THIS IS THE MOST UNDERDEVELOPED ELEMENT OF LAW, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INSANE AND PATHETIC.
This begs the question for me that as very very bright minds have been involved in law, the conclusion is that Lookism is so inherent to humans, so intrinsically woven into our nature, looks based discrimination, CANNOT BE LEGISLATED FOR. THE LAW LITERALLY CANNOT CREATE A FRAMEWORK TO DEAL WITH IT, IT IS LITERALLY NOT A GOOD ENOUGH INSTITUTION TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND CREATE A GOOD ENOUGH SOLUTION TO, SO THEY PRETEND IT IS A MINIMAL ELEMENT.
@PPEcel as you are a man of the law is this the case and if not, what framework is there to quantify and qualify this form of discrimination and its effect on a case how does this element get handled, is it even acknowledged as being in play and a factor in the theme of a case.
This hypothesis is predicated on the premise that every one of these institutions fail at a basic level a most fundamental level, to structurally encompass human nature and the in built biases that they have especially the acknowledgement of the HALO effect of Lookism, and also Lookism itself (encompassing heightism also), self serving bias, and humans propensity to view favorably people they see as being like them or people they "look up to".
If we even take politics at a fundamental level, even with all its complexity geopolitically, governmental departments running every facet of a country from travel to healthcare systems to housing its population and social welfare. All of this complexity and really semantically hard science that REALLY FUNDAMENTALLY AFFECTS PEOPLES LIVES AT A DAY TO DAY LEVEL. How is this multifaceted EXTREMELY IMPORTANT JOB DETERMINED WHAT IS THE JOB INTERVIEW FOR SUCH A POSITION OF POWER. IT IS REDUCED TO A CATCH ALL POPULARITY DRIVEN BASE LEVEL RACE FOR VOTES FROM THE PUBLIC WHERE SHORT TERMISM RULES.
How is this not missing the point, how can any government formed in this manner serve the people in a manner that is most effective and productive IT MAKES UTTERLY NO SENSE, IT CANT EVER WORK, ITS INCEPTION IS SET UP FOR CORRUPTION AND SHOT TERM GAIN LONG TERM FAILURE.
The public almost everytime fall for the LOOKS HAILO, HEIGHTIST HALO if we see the avaerage american presidents height is over 6 feet, circa the top 10% of the US male populations height.
At another level, in life anyone with a brain knows, it is not what is said by people but how people treat you and the respect they show in their actions that ACTUALLY MATTER AND COUNT FOR ANYTHING.
If we now go to the courts, this element is so lacking in the analysis, so lacking in the formulation of the law and the interpretation of the law its pathetic. The element of bias and discrimination based upon Lookism and the effect this lookism can have on a persons perception of events, perception of intent, the depths of deception a human can go to obfuscate this discrimination eg gaslighting and misdirection, are so UTTERLY UNDERDEVELOPED IN THE LAW AND THE COURTS ITS ABSOLUTELY BAFFLING. The myriad of case of precedents of convoluted language prima facie, ex facie, in limine, tort etc, becomes UTTERLY REDUNDANT IF THE APPLICATION OF THESE ELEMENTS IS PUT IN PLACE IN THE WRONG CONTEXT. It becomes complexity for the sake of complexity just mere convention for the sake of it, as discovering "THE TRUTH" in a case, the element that has to be uncovered and explored FIRST IS THE DISCRIMINATION, IS THE NATURE OF THE DEFENDANT AND THE PLAINTIFF, THIS IS THE WHOLE FUCKING CAKE. Everything else is absolutely tiny in importance to a case and discovering the truth and thus who is guilty or innocent in any disagreement, everything else thus gets dwarfed by this element. Yet THIS IS THE MOST UNDERDEVELOPED ELEMENT OF LAW, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INSANE AND PATHETIC.
This begs the question for me that as very very bright minds have been involved in law, the conclusion is that Lookism is so inherent to humans, so intrinsically woven into our nature, looks based discrimination, CANNOT BE LEGISLATED FOR. THE LAW LITERALLY CANNOT CREATE A FRAMEWORK TO DEAL WITH IT, IT IS LITERALLY NOT A GOOD ENOUGH INSTITUTION TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND CREATE A GOOD ENOUGH SOLUTION TO, SO THEY PRETEND IT IS A MINIMAL ELEMENT.
@PPEcel as you are a man of the law is this the case and if not, what framework is there to quantify and qualify this form of discrimination and its effect on a case how does this element get handled, is it even acknowledged as being in play and a factor in the theme of a case.
Last edited:
