there were around 15 people, all white except maybe one person, very nebbish and unkempt and nerdy looking, one or two girls, one of which was very fuckable if you're into the crazy eyed polish nerd look (I am).

when I first got there, I introduced myself to the polish chick, acted like I was a little too cool for them all (I am) and leaned chil-ly against a wall observing mostly. some skinny nerdlet with long hair and a huge baldspot who was something of a leader there was welcoming people and said to me "what makes YOU interesting?" in an aggressive way. thought about punching him in the face and breaking his glasses but didn't, so i just ignored him and walked away.

they talked about science and artificial intelligence stuff, lots of Elon Musk cock-sucking going on, and how we need to buy malaria nets for africans for some reason. Every single one of them believes that robots are going to take over the planet and kill humans (with no evidence to back it up) and they need to figure out how to protect people or something. extremely autistic.

we then went down into the basement where they had lots of beanbag chairs and listened to some armenian jewwy looking guy explain some computer science algorithms and talk about formulas. another dude talked about the possibility of long distance space travel and rocket/antimatter engine design, which was genuinely interesting for about 3 minutes.

one really awkward fat blonde faggot wanted to talk about cuddle puddles and initiating social contact and how it was hard for "us", i was cringing internally and felt like running, but no one else was obviously weirded out.

did i mention there was some small dude wearing a skirt and everyone acted like it was completely normal? clown world.

we then went out for bubble tea and gook food where i aggressively flaunted my career success relative to the loserish nerds there, and I spent some time talking to a guy who used to be in my field, who seemed kind of chill despite his clear asperger syndrome, and he told me to come back next time, I said I would, but I never did.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3706564&forum_id=2#34030022)

thought of this today out of nowhere and lolled

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3706564&forum_id=2#34325343)

Well done

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3706564&forum_id=2#35049414)

you're an XO poaster

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3706564&forum_id=2#35062593)

Me: 2

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3706564&forum_id=2#35055153)

What did I think I would find at rationalist events?

I might have guessed discussions about using monte carlo methods for estimating probabilities in complex situations. Maybe discussions about adjusting policy to behave in more logically consistent ways. Perhaps reviews of neat research in behavioral economics and even gossip about dangerous machine intelligence â—”_â—”.

But, in my experience, this is not what these meetups were for. These things presumably get discussed sometimes but only off in corners with those few who were really interested.

A sampling of headlines from regular rationalist events includes:

Group cooking

Meditation

Singing and supper

Board games

Movie night

My experience is that out there 'rationalist' appears to be primarily a social identity for (aspiring) wealthy young sexually-liberal intellectuals.

There is little discussion about Rationality seemingly because there is not much for community participants to do and say that advances a coherent cause in a way that an 'environmental' group might. But if some participants had substantial experience in statistics, game theory, or formal decision making I did not see it.

REACH is a meeting space for rationalists in Berkeley (lovely except it smells like a well used college dorm). The only seating available there is a set of sad couches which can only take five or so without stacking. We were forced to stack.

Other events were crammed into tiny bay area homes and apartments.

Because of this it is impossible to participate in these venues without being forced into awkward physical contact with others and without overhearing highly personal gossip.

Public displays of affection were common at events I attended, so were all manner of other highly intimate and unprofessional behavior including passing people around to sit on each others laps, massages, frequent hugging, dress adjusting, hand-holding, "head scratching", lewd comments, and touching my hair. At one get together it appeared that some guests left to go have sex elsewhere in the house during the event. At least they did not ask me to come with :-P but I did not feel like it would have been scandalous if they had.

I doubt it is an accident these meetup activities feel like recommended activities for casual dates. Reading, needlepoint, gardening, and couponing would be just fun as off-topic 'church events', but would not work so well for dates. One event had a intro section of intensely personal questions which probably came from some speed-dating site.

These meetups seem to largely act as a hookup scouting venue for the majority polyamorious intellectuals and their friends. "Rat adjacent", wonderful dog-whistle. What I thought was just an odd fringe of online rationality turns out to be central to in-person rationality.

(Polyamorious mostly appeared to be code for polygynous because the predominant power relationship appeared to be a tech employed male and multiple much younger economically dependent women.) [CALLING BULLSHIT ON THAT PART -ed.]

At these meetups "polyamorious by default" seems to have undermined the normal social structures which separate sexual relationships from professional and hobby interest. Letting it be known I was married did not seem to discourage them from (politely) hitting on me, embarking on an unwanted monologue about the advantages of polyamory, or inviting me to live with them while my partner looked for employment remotely (wow!). These advances, which also included unsolicited physical contact were flattering (but unwelcome) and I was not traumatized by them or afraid for my safety. But they resulted in an awkward conversation with my spouse which I would have rather not had. Nor was this behavior confined to a few "bad apples" (nor 'autism') but was highly normalized, witnessed by others and not remarked on. People I met universally seemed friendly and interesting (if somewhat amusingly naive). But they also seemed to have no personal boundaries, awareness, and odd expectations about acceptable conduct. Although everyone (?) in attendance was technically an adult (ignoring some participants' young kids) yet there appeared to be no "adult supervision". I assume everyone uninterested in these activities has quickly run away unless they were completely oblivious.

I would not have been surprised and made to feel so uncomfortable by the conduct if my visit was to a group for "rationalist singles".

After reflection I do not believe this is focus dilution from community growth. The few names in the rationalist community I recognized also participated in/lead the same activities. I think if they want to discuss rationality the best place to do it is online. At physical meetups their main interest is finding interesting persons to physically contact (ahem).

This prevalence of nominal polyamory creates an environment were everyone is assumed to be available and where I found it challenging to deflect interest without constant effort and risk of insult. I also felt an undertone of "anyone in a committed relationship is in need of 'help' to improve their rationality". It felt gross, not cute.

In my experience their events were largely a relationship-finding group substantially populated by a very sexually progressive (to state it politely) population, but they were operated under a banner of meeting for purposes unrelated to relationships and sex.

This mismatch of expectations generates drama.

I can not imagine this community becoming more about either instrumental or epistemological rationality because few participants seemed to have much interest in either, except rather shallowly ("Gosh wasn't that an interesting article?" "You betcha"). Nor can I imagine it changing to adopt more honest labeling since even in the open minded Bay Area thinking we are spending our evenings with "our singles/swinging group" will not make us feel very high status compared to "our rationality meetup".

https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/avu24t/the_bay_area_rationalist_community_can_not_escape/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3706564&forum_id=2#37878096)

https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/avu24t/the_bay_area_rationalist_community_can_not_escape/ehk8ra1/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3706564&forum_id=2#37879463)

They really don't. As much as I'd love to see them called out, they never quite cross the line. People warn about them, but no one can really justify doing anything that sticks.

But they're gross. There is something there, and it has nothing to do with heteropatriarchy (or whatever). They're a queer, enby AFAB, who preys on scene newbs, mostly baby-transes.

Short version: I know a couple who embodies het-normative kink behavior, and who both seem like solid folks. I know a queer-as-fuck person, who is an expert on kink/feminist/queer lingo, but who is an almost-abuser. Accusing the latter of being "heteropatriarchal" would be laughable. It's something else.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3706564&forum_id=2#38324370)

I’ve had exactly one mildly weird incident a couple years ago (guy put his finger in my mouth in a cuddle party without asking), and nothing since. Last year, I accidentally ended up sharing a bunkbed in a private room with a male stranger in a group house for a few nights. I wasn’t apprehensive about it, and the dude was totally cool. I know other people can’t say this and that’s also real and important, but I gotta insist that this has been a really nice community for me.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3706564&forum_id=2#38322584)