makes no sense. applying make-up is a routine. automatic for females. it just takes time, esp. if a female has plans. they probably combine getting ready for something and creating content.

It's the woman version of "supervillain casually eats an apple while decapitating the vanquished with the other hand" but women's power comes from getting men to do the dirty work and makeup is part of this engine

Its to signal that they're high effort

>>84367925
Why are you watching these videos to begin with?

women have things to do so they multitask. They do it online because self care is a science and every girl is out there looking for some holy grail in makeup for their face, so they know is useful information too.

Troons are fucking shit so they do a piss poor imitation. They belong in bodybags

>>84367925
Doing a mechanistic side activity while you do something cognitively engaging can actually help you focus by keeping the background hum of your brain busy.

>>84367958
>women have things to do so they multitask.
Crazy how women work 100+ hours a week and only have time to record themselves talking while applying makeup.

>>84367925
Preformative casualness and femininity. Makes it seem like what they're saying is "off the cuff" and helps market it to their intended audience

>Ziontra
didn't think he had any fans left

File: file.png (22.5 KB)

22.5 KB PNG

>>84367925
Women engage with the world in the abstract. Their felt agency is in manipulating the unseen and the implicit. Women manage tribal politics and childcare with each other by dint of yapping. This is why little girls play with dolls and young women get addicted to social media, it's because dolls and social media are simulacra of childcare and yapping; i.e. exercising female agency.

Men engage with the world in the concrete. Their felt agency is in manipulating the seen and the explicit. Men change the world around the tribe according to its interests, by protecting from other tribes, hunting, prophylactic offenses against other tribes. This is why boys play with action figures, make imaginative weapons out of sticks, like climbing and throwing stuff, and young men get addicted to sports and video games, it's because these are simulacra of male agency.

>Why do foids and troons alike do the "applying makeup while lecturing the camera" thing?
The same reason that ancient foids things like weaved and picked berries while yapping. Although in the case of faggotry, it's a monkey-see-monkey-do sort of thing.

>If you're not taking what you're saying seriously, why should I take it seriously?
When a man deals with abstract concepts, he does so concretely and laboriously; he racks his brain and goes through syllogisms in his head over and over until he has something that is of immediate concrete use/reference because its rationale is thoroughly defined. You are expecting a field manual with a bulleted list of actionable steps to take to solve a problem or to understand a dilemma.

Likewise, when women deal with the concrete, they're abstract and lackadaisical. This fucking baffles you because you're a man and your business isn't in the inner tribal nurseries, gardens etc. When a woman lectures while applying makeup, she's just being a woman. When a man records himself doing the same thing, it's obviously deliberately trying to imitate female behavior.

>>84368155
What an abysmally shit post to wake up and read in the morning. Just a classical no true scotsman

>>84367925
women are narcissists and need to always be the center of attention. its not enough to just share an opinion, they NEED everyone to know it came from them specifically

>>84368183
It's true though. Ancient women spent a vast, often near-constant amount of time weaving and engaging in related textile work, essentially working from "sun to sun" to produce clothing and textiles for their families. Textile production was a central, time-consuming aspect of daily life that often spanned the entire year. Not many people know that, it seems like he has at least a rudimentary understanding of history and psychology

>>84368202
>Because women do spinning and weaving, contra putting on makeup in a video is because she's a man
Youve lost the ability to use reason!

>>84367925
Contra is such a cutie man

>>84368183
Good morning. You can call it abysmal, you can call it shit, you can insinuate that it's unwelcome and a disappointment to you, you can call it fallacious with some reddit buzzword, but you won't subject it to scrutiny, because you couldn't even if you wanted to.

>>84368202
I just used things like weaving, childcare, cleaning etc to describe mundane, feminine tasks that were nonetheless necessary for survival of a tribe.
>it seems like he has at least a rudimentary understanding of history and psychology
I don't. Maybe some history but I have no interest in conforming to ideological apparatuses. Everything I say is rational. I only will use empiricism for illustrative purposes.

>>84368218
That's not even remotely the case I originally made in the first place.
You can't even articulate what was put forth properly. Handwave away, be my guest, but do it honestly. I only care about articulating actual truths in the world, I don't care about consensus or rhetorically persuading you. Those with an interest in the truth are already persuaded to my side.

they do it because its a trend and thats as far as it goes, they are social media trend cattle

>>84367925
they lack any originality whatsoever, they are NPCs, i've started some videos but i could never get through them because of how generic everything was about them, it's like someone asked early chatgpt to direct, dress and script the whole thing.

the first time i noticed this, it was some big true crime YouTuber. the Ray William Johnson jumpcuts were already bad enough, but why are you talking about a murderer while applying foundation...?
i'd get it if it was an audio podcast, but you think you'd have all this cool shit to put on the screen. almost like it's a video.

>>84368631
>it's like someone asked early chatgpt to direct, dress and script the whole thing.
it's because they're 'video essays' and they're written in the 'essay voice'. the internet's switch to video as a whole is stupid. it takes less time to read an article than it takes to watch a 2-hour video.

but a fun game you can play is to imagine their script as text, and realise how terrible it is. go read some old vidya magazines: the articles are genuinely entertaining to read. you can tell the authors were having fun.

a 1-page review of Croc for the PlayStation has more jokes AND useful information in it than an hour of ContraPoints occasionally saying:
>btw i'm in love with myself, that's the joke.
>anyway, in this essay, i aim to explore...

File: file.png (2 MB)

2 MB PNG

>>84368710
>but a fun game you can play is to imagine their script as text
You don't have to imagine it. You can use the transcript feature and then copy and paste it into a txt file. It would look even more pathetic if you formatted it like an old play.

File: time...png (347.3 KB)

347.3 KB PNG

>>84368893
>left
did fucking Ulillillia write this?