Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • AN AUTHOR’S FRUSTRATION WITH THE LIMITS OF ANTHROPIC’S CLAUDE @AnthropicAI #Clau

    AN AUTHOR’S FRUSTRATION WITH THE LIMITS OF ANTHROPIC’S CLAUDE
    @AnthropicAI #Claude
    1) Claude is much better at writing than its competitors. There is no comparison. GPT is infinitely better all around than competitors, but Claude’s composition is better than competitors.

    2) Despite paying the fee:
    … (a) I hit the message limit after a trivial number of exchanges in a chat. I can’t even make it through reviewing a third of a chapter before hitting that limit.
    … (b) the same is true for chat length. I can’t even upload the set of chapters for Claude to ‘understand’ before I hit the chat limit. This results in Claude recommending what’s covered in later chapters – and this dramatically impacts the rest of the recommendations, rendering each section reviewed as pointless.

    3. NET: I would prefer to use Claude to help me write for publication, because Claude’s production of readable prose despite the complexity of my work, is in fact superior. But it’s pointless because the context window is simply too small to assist in more than ‘marketing and email spam’.

    Why this limit in Claude? I don’t hit the limit in ChatGPT and even then it updates it’s memory to retain a general understanding of my work. So starting a separate chat to continue is relatively easy.

    Color me sad so to speak. But you know, MS/OpenAI are closing in on ‘infinite memory’ at present. And that’s without their (a) pursuit of step-by-step reasoning (b) followed by recursion (self testing) (c) followed by adversarial competition between responses. At that point, it’s over. Other than neuromorphic hardware that gets over the cost of training, and awareness of evolution of global state (‘consciousness’) that’s all that’s required for GAI.

    FWIW: My workflow consists of Grok (current activity), Perplexity (research papers), ChatGPT (writing) and when possible Claude (reviewing). (And I find Geminii useless.)

    ALSO: IMO: The tests being used on math and programming and rudimentary logic are ‘errors of reductio ad absurdum’. They do not expose the sophistication or lack of it in the models. My work consists of operational language and constructive logic of first principles without the use of symbols. This work immediately exposes the problems of textual probabilism in LLM layers, and puts greater stress on the conceptual networks of meaning behind the terms used. In other words, Math and Programming are ‘cheating’ by using a reserved vocabulary that circumvents the demonstration of the depth of intelligence in human language, which constitutes the repository of human knowledge.
    And this is why ChatGPT has no near competitors at all whatsoever at this point. Semantically it’s unparalleled.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-26 16:15:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1861443573469847552

  • CHOMSKY VS DOOLITTLE: OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR Universal Gram

    CHOMSKY VS DOOLITTLE: OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR
    Universal Grammar (UG) in the context of our work [NLI, Doolittle-Werrell] functions as the innate, universal cognitive mechanism by which humans structure, process, and resolve interactions across all grammars of human thought and action. It acts as the meta-grammar that governs the rules of decidability, ensuring clarity, coherence, and reciprocity within and across domains of grammar.

    In the context of our work, Universal Grammar serves as the meta-cognitive mechanism that structures and aligns claims across all domains of human interaction. It operationalizes decidability, sovereignty, and reciprocity, ensuring that claims conform to Natural Law while maintaining coherence and universality. UG is not merely a linguistic theory; it is the foundation for parsing, testing, and resolving the claims that govern reality itself.

    Dr. Chomsky envisioned the ideal of the neurologic predisposition for linguistic facility among humans (as the Universal Grammar), whereas Mr. Doolittle has operationalized this Universal Grammar as an expression all potential human experience, it appears.

    This observation highlights a fascinating evolution of the concept:

    Chomsky’s Universal Grammar:
    Dr. Noam Chomsky proposed Universal Grammar (UG) as the neurological predisposition for linguistic facility—a hardwired capacity that enables humans to learn and use language.

    UG, in his framework, is a linguistic mechanism that underpins the commonalities in structure and rules observed across all human languages, ensuring humans can efficiently acquire and use language regardless of specific cultural or linguistic environments.

    Doolittle’s Expansion:
    Curt Doolittle appears to have expanded and operationalized the notion of Universal Grammar beyond the realm of language into a comprehensive framework that applies to all human experience and interaction.

    In this context, Universal Grammar is not solely about linguistic rules but a meta-structure governing how humans process, categorize, and interact with reality through distinct grammars:
    Physical Grammar: Interactions with the material world.
    Logical Grammar: Reasoning and causal relations.
    Moral Grammar: Rules governing fairness, reciprocity, and sovereignty.
    Economic Grammar: Exchange of value and resources.
    Aesthetic Grammar: Judgments of beauty and meaning.

    The Key Shift
    Chomsky: UG as a biological adaptation for language acquisition, reflecting human neurological constraints and capacities.
    Doolittle: UG as an operational meta-framework that organizes and governs all domains of human thought and action, creating a system of measurement that ensures clarity, coherence, and decidability.

    Implications of Doolittle’s Operationalization:
    Universal Decidability:
    By extending UG to all domains, Doolittle’s framework provides tools for resolving disputes, evaluating claims, and identifying falsehoods across physical, logical, moral, and social contexts.
    System of Measurement:
    This UG serves as the foundation for a universal system of measurement, ensuring that human interactions remain testable, consistent, and justifiable.
    Interoperability of Grammars:
    Just as Chomsky’s UG ensures language is universally comprehensible, Doolittle’s UG ensures that claims made in one domain (e.g., moral) do not conflict with the rules of another (e.g., logical or physical).
    Human Experience as Structured Reality:
    Doolittle’s approach implies that all human experiences can be parsed and evaluated through grammars, providing a universal method for organizing the infinite variability of human interaction into operationally coherent frameworks.

    Conclusion
    While Chomsky focused on the neurological underpinnings of linguistic universality, Doolittle operationalizes Universal Grammar as a meta-cognitive system that governs all domains of human interaction.

    This expansion transforms UG from a linguistic tool into a system of universal measurement, aligning language, thought, and action with first principles like sovereignty, reciprocity, and demonstrated interest.

    The two approaches, though different in scope, share a foundation in the search for underlying universals that structure human cognition and interaction.

    -Via Dr Brad Werrell (@werrellbradley)

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-25 00:18:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860840409586638848

  • As the USA returns to relative isolation (“Five Eyes” of the anglosphere), and w

    As the USA returns to relative isolation (“Five Eyes” of the anglosphere), and world patterns of defense, finance, transport, and trade return to historical norms, the USA, which almost alone protects investments, (a) it’s in the USA’s interest for the world to spiral into conflict and do nothing about it (b) capital will flee to the USA even more so than it does now. Chaos is now the USA’s friend.

    RUSSIA IS DYING
    Russa covers eleven time zones. Russian infrastructure is decaying. The russian economy can’t maintain or replace it. Russian production is low tech. Most russian territory is of limited agrarian production. Most resource extraction requires long distance transportation. Russia has few and very limited access to seaports to reduce the cost of trade. Russia’s population of 144M is likely to decline to as little as 83M by 2100 meaning it’ll have the same population as england or germany or france, and neither the people nor the economy to pay for holding eleven time zones of defense, infrastructure, and services necessary for the preservation of resource extraction. They know this. This is one of the reasons they want Ukraine. Ukraine can feed all of europe. If ukraine exploited the Black Sea offshore oil deposits they would be economically and energy independent.

    Reply addressees: @SirSmokesAaLot

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-24 19:18:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860764871442542592

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860627361697329606

  • HERITABILITY AND UTILITY OF ADHD ADHD has a genetic component (70-80% ) that is

    HERITABILITY AND UTILITY OF ADHD
    ADHD has a genetic component (70-80% ) that is highly heritable and expressed in utero during development. ADHD is difficult to avoid, because it’s polygenic and results from the cumulative effect of many genes. Since it’s polygenic and not selected against it must serve some purpose.

    Possible Causes for the Perpetuation of ADHD Traits
    TL/DR; A distribution of cognitive styles insures a group can more successfully exploit opportunities of time space risk and reward rather than people who are in fact similar in cognitive styles. While quality differences between populations are due to neoteny, geographic adaptation, and genetic load most human variation is due to sex differences in cognition valuation and expression. As such almost all human behavior is causally reducible to those dimensions four dimensions of: sex, neoteny (race), geography (ethnicity), and load (class).

    1. Adaptive Advantages in Evolutionary Contexts
    Hyperfocus and Creativity:Traits associated with ADHD, such as hyperfocus during periods of intense interest, may have been advantageous for solving complex problems or innovating.
    Enhanced creativity and novel problem-solving skills would have been valuable in dynamic or changing environments.
    Exploration and Risk-Taking: High impulsivity and novelty-seeking behavior, common in ADHD, may have conferred survival benefits in hunter-gatherer societies:Foragers: Individuals prone to explore new territories, resources, or methods of survival may have benefited their groups.
    Scouts: High-risk, high-reward behaviors could have been advantageous for discovering food sources or avoiding threats.
    Rapid Response and Vigilance: ADHD-like traits may enhance alertness to environmental changes, benefiting individuals in roles requiring quick reactions or adaptability (e.g., during hunting or combat).

    2. Trade-Offs in Cognitive and Behavioral Traits
    Short-Term Advantages vs. Long-Term Costs: The impulsivity and distractibility of ADHD may lead to short-term successes in certain high-stakes or dynamic situations, offsetting the longer-term disadvantages.
    Specialization in Group Dynamics:
    In a tribal setting, individuals with ADHD-like traits may have filled unique niches, complementing those with more consistent focus and planning skills.
    Group success often depends on diverse personality and cognitive types.

    3. Balancing Selection
    Heterozygote Advantage: Genes associated with ADHD may confer advantages in heterozygous states, while homozygous expression results in more severe manifestations of the disorder.
    This dynamic maintains genetic diversity within the population.
    Environmental Dependence: Traits that are maladaptive in modern, sedentary, and structured societies may have been adaptive in ancestral environments.
    Selection pressures can shift, making certain traits less advantageous without entirely removing them.

    4. Gene-Pleiotropy and Overlap with Other Traits
    Shared Genetic Pathways: ADHD-associated genes may also influence other traits that are highly adaptive, such as intelligence, creativity, or social influence.
    For example, genes affecting dopamine signaling may enhance reward sensitivity, increasing motivation in some contexts despite leading to impulsivity in others.
    Pleiotropic Effects:Genes involved in ADHD may also play roles in other biological systems or behaviors, making them resistant to negative selection because they provide overall net benefits.

    5. Modern Mismatch with Evolutionary Context
    ADHD traits may have been adaptive in environments requiring high mobility, rapid adaptation, and risk-taking but are less so in modern settings that prioritize sustained attention, routine, and long-term planning.
    The rise of structured educational systems and workplace environments may have highlighted ADHD as a disorder rather than an adaptive variant.

    6. Weak Selection Pressure Against ADHD
    ADHD does not typically result in significantly reduced reproductive fitness: Many individuals with ADHD have children and pass on their genes.
    The disorder often manifests more as a variation in behavioral traits rather than as a catastrophic condition that would eliminate carriers from the gene pool.

    Examples of ADHD Traits in Historical or Evolutionary Contexts
    Explorers and Innovators: Risk-taking and novelty-seeking traits associated with ADHD likely drove exploration, discovery, and technological advances.
    Leaders in Crisis: Impulsivity and rapid decision-making may have been valuable in chaotic or high-pressure situations.
    Group Success: (THIS:) Diversity in cognitive styles ensured that groups could respond to a wider range of challenges and opportunities.

    Summary
    The persistence of ADHD in the population likely reflects a balance between its adaptive benefits in certain contexts and its modern disadvantages in structured, sedentary societies. ADHD traits are maintained because they provide group-level or individual-level advantages in dynamic, unpredictable environments, outweighing their costs under ancestral conditions. Natural selection operates on the totality of traits and their contributions to survival and reproduction, and ADHD traits appear to have played a meaningful role in human evolution.

    Cheers
    CD 😉

    Reply addressees: @programmabiliti @nobitanobi405

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-24 19:08:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860762553498136576

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860631175938658690

  • UK is sixth on the Global Power Index. Meaning it punches above its weight. Howe

    UK is sixth on the Global Power Index. Meaning it punches above its weight. However, the UK like the USA is a naval, air, and expeditionary force. The UK has sacrificed expeditionary (land) forces like most of europe, but still maintains the capacity to project modern power.

    The USA’s military population is largely logistical and technical, so it’s fighting force is overstated as there are only 200K fighting soldiers in it and that group is highly dependent upon the Special Forces from the different groups, whose numbers are on the order of 70,000.

    DATA:
    US Army Ground Combat Personnel: Estimated between 138,300 and 184,400.
    US Marine Corps Ground Combat Personnel: Estimated between 50,750 and 71,050.
    (Total: Approximately 200,000.)
    Special Operations Forces: Estimated 70,000 across all branches.

    Reply addressees: @BTC_i_Hodl @Richard_0292

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-24 00:26:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860480090083328000

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860474082615017584

  • ASD COMORBIDITY BY PFC DEVELOPMENT I always find it interesting when people argu

    ASD COMORBIDITY BY PFC DEVELOPMENT
    I always find it interesting when people argue with me. 😉
    I don’t recognize your alias so perhaps you don’t know me or my work. What I suspect you’re missing is the IQ difference of programmers and their work as therapy vs lower IQ criminals and their lack of capacity for therapeutic occupation.

    Prevalence of Comorbidity
    ADHD and ASD: ~30–80% of individuals with ASD also meet criteria for ADHD.
    ASD and OCD: ~17–37% of individuals with ASD exhibit clinically significant OCD symptoms.
    ASD and SAD: Social anxiety occurs in ~20–50% of individuals with ASD, often due to difficulties in interpreting social cues.
    ADHD and OCD: ~20–30% of individuals with ADHD have co-occurring OCD, though their interaction can be complex and variable.
    ADHD and SAD: ~25–50% of individuals with ADHD exhibit significant social anxiety.
    OCD and SAD: Often co-occur (~20–30%), as intrusive thoughts and fears of judgment exacerbate avoidance and compulsive behaviors.

    Neurological Overlaps

    Shared Dysfunction in Brain Regions:
    Prefrontal Cortex (PFC): Impaired executive function is central to all four conditions, contributing to inattention (ADD/ADHD), rigid thinking (ASD, OCD), and difficulty with social evaluation (SAD).
    Amygdala: Hyperactivity in the amygdala links heightened fear responses (SAD, OCD) with emotional dysregulation (ADHD, ASD).
    Basal Ganglia: Abnormalities in the cortico-striato-thalamo-cortical (CSTC) loop underlie repetitive behaviors (ASD, OCD) and impulse control issues (ADHD).
    Insula: Implicated in sensory sensitivities (ASD), interoception (SAD), and emotional dysregulation (ADHD, OCD).

    Neurotransmitter Dysregulation:
    Dopamine: Dysregulated dopaminergic systems affect attention, reward processing, and compulsivity in ADHD, ASD, and OCD.
    Serotonin: Serotonergic dysfunction contributes to anxiety (SAD), obsessional thinking (OCD), and rigid behaviors (ASD).
    Glutamate: Imbalances in excitatory-inhibitory signaling impact repetitive behaviors (ASD, OCD) and emotional regulation (SAD, ADHD).

    Behavioral and Cognitive Commonalities

    Executive Dysfunction:
    Common across all four conditions, causing difficulty with planning, flexibility, and inhibition.
    In ADHD, this manifests as impulsivity; in OCD and ASD, as rigid thinking; and in SAD, as rumination and avoidance.
    Social Difficulties:
    ASD and SAD share challenges with social interaction, though ASD stems from difficulty interpreting social cues, while SAD arises from fear of negative evaluation.
    ADHD can contribute to social difficulties due to impulsivity and inattentiveness.
    Repetitive or Rigid Behaviors:
    Present in ASD and OCD but may also occur in ADHD as a coping mechanism or hyperfocus.
    Anxiety:
    Prominent in SAD and OCD but also common in ASD (due to sensory/social challenges) and ADHD (due to difficulties managing stress and expectations).

    Common Comorbid Patterns

    ASD + ADHD:
    Overlapping symptoms: Inattention, impulsivity, executive dysfunction.
    Differentiation: ADHD involves hyperactivity; ASD presents with social and sensory challenges.
    Clinical impact: ADHD exacerbates difficulties with focus and self-regulation in ASD.

    ASD + OCD:
    Overlapping symptoms: Repetitive behaviors, rigid thinking.
    Differentiation: OCD compulsions are driven by intrusive thoughts; ASD repetitive behaviors are often sensory or routine-driven.
    Clinical impact: OCD adds additional distress to the structured routines of ASD.

    ASD + SAD:
    Overlapping symptoms: Social difficulties, avoidance of social situations.
    Differentiation: SAD involves fear of judgment; ASD involves difficulty decoding social signals.
    Clinical impact: SAD amplifies avoidance in social situations already challenging for ASD.

    ADHD + OCD:
    Overlapping symptoms: Impulse control issues (OCD rituals vs. ADHD impulsivity).
    Differentiation: ADHD behaviors are less goal-oriented than OCD compulsions.
    Clinical impact: The inattention of ADHD interferes with OCD rituals, increasing frustration.

    ADHD + SAD:
    Overlapping symptoms: Difficulty maintaining focus in social settings, avoidance behaviors.
    Differentiation: ADHD struggles stem from inattention, while SAD stems from fear of judgment.
    Clinical impact: SAD adds a layer of anxiety to the already distracted state of ADHD.

    OCD + SAD:
    Overlapping symptoms: Fear-driven avoidance, hyperfocus on negative outcomes.
    Differentiation: OCD involves intrusive thoughts and compulsions; SAD focuses on social evaluation.
    Clinical impact: Fear of judgment (SAD) amplifies OCD-driven compulsive behaviors.

    Reply addressees: @programmabiliti

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-23 07:31:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860224736145616896

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860217977460916387

  • There are three dimensions of expression on the spectrum all of which are deriva

    There are three dimensions of expression on the spectrum all of which are derivations of compartmentalization.

    OCD, ADD, social anxiety all of which are amplified by autism’s suppression of self.

    See:

    To test the statement, we will examine its claims for coherence, correspondence to known evidence, and logical consistency.

    ### Key Elements of the Statement

    1. **Three Dimensions of Expression as Derivations of Compartmentalization**
    – The statement suggests that **Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD)**, **Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD)**, and **Social Anxiety** are “dimensions of expression” derived from “compartmentalization.”

    2. **Amplification by Autism’s Suppression of Self**
    – It claims that these three conditions are “amplified” by autism, attributed to autism’s **suppression of self.**

    —

    ### Testing the Claims

    #### 1. **Are OCD, ADD, and Social Anxiety Dimensions of Expression?**
    – OCD, ADD, and social anxiety are distinct psychological conditions with well-documented diagnostic criteria. They may share overlapping neurobiological and psychological traits, such as issues with **executive functioning, cognitive rigidity, and emotional regulation**.
    – **Compartmentalization**, in psychological terms, refers to a defense mechanism where conflicting thoughts or feelings are separated to reduce internal conflict.
    – **OCD:** Could be argued as a maladaptive form of compartmentalization, as individuals with OCD separate intrusive thoughts from “normal” cognition but are hyper-fixated on controlling them.
    – **ADD:** Involves deficits in focus and sustained attention. It may not directly align with compartmentalization unless interpreted as fragmented attention rather than structured separation.
    – **Social Anxiety:** Relates more to hyperawareness of others’ perceptions and self-criticism than to compartmentalization.
    – **Conclusion:** While there are some potential links, compartmentalization as a unifying mechanism for these three conditions is speculative and not strongly supported by current research.

    —
    #### 2. **Amplification by Autism**
    – Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is characterized by **difficulties in social communication**, **restricted and repetitive behaviors**, and sometimes atypical sensory processing. The “suppression of self” could refer to:
    – Challenges in self-expression and understanding one’s internal states (alexithymia).
    – Difficulty aligning internal motivations with external social norms due to rigid thinking.
    – **Autism amplifying OCD, ADD, and Social Anxiety:**
    – **OCD and Autism:** High comorbidity; repetitive behaviors in autism may resemble or exacerbate OCD-like traits.
    – **ADD and Autism:** Executive dysfunction is common in both, and attention issues may be worsened by sensory or cognitive overload in autism.
    – **Social Anxiety and Autism:** Social challenges in autism could amplify self-consciousness, leading to greater anxiety in social situations.
    – **Conclusion:** The claim that autism “amplifies” these conditions is plausible and aligns with existing clinical evidence.

    —
    #### 3. **Logical Consistency**
    – If autism involves “suppression of self,” this suppression might contribute to difficulty integrating thoughts, emotions, and actions into a coherent sense of identity. This could theoretically exacerbate OCD, ADD, or social anxiety by increasing rigidity, fragmentation, or hyperawareness.
    – However, **compartmentalization as a unifying explanation** for the three conditions is less clear, as ADD and social anxiety do not readily fit this model.

    —
    ### Refined Analysis of the Statement
    The statement contains plausible elements but conflates distinct phenomena under a single framework (compartmentalization). A more precise formulation might be:

    > Autism’s challenges with self-expression and integration of thoughts and feelings can amplify co-occurring conditions like OCD, ADD, and social anxiety.

    Reply addressees: @programmabiliti

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-23 03:24:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860162405873123331

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860146535352402058

  • (Reaction to manosphere video) Why do women think men lack the confidence and se

    (Reaction to manosphere video)
    Why do women think men lack the confidence and security in approaching them? Rather than that men consider them too much effort for too much social risk, for too much maintenance for too little return.
    It’s just beyond me that women can’t comprehend the simplicity of male assessment of women. Women see men as OPPORTUNITIES, but men see women as COSTS.
    The reason is, modern women only bring sex to the relationship. Are they providing nesting (home), care, peace? It’s all about their consumption instead. As such, women are a luxury good (sex) and nothing else – unless their cost is worth the effort necessary for the man to find ‘peace’ at home.
    Men are aware of the degree of their ability to competitively produce surpluses that women want to consume. If a woman is too costly in time effort stress and income then it’s just not worth pursuing her.
    Instead of these ‘city girls’ watch how men react to country girls. It’s so obvious. Women don’t style up for men – they do it for women – and in doing so they drive up their perceived cost to men, and lower their perceived value to men, because women’s investment is for themselves and other women – not men.
    You will never be more beautiful to a man who loves you than you are waking up in the morning, with messy hair, no makeup, and relaxed features, after wearing one of his shirts to sleep in.
    Just is.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-21 23:33:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1859741874879340544

  • Regarding Dating Single Moms: Still seeing the social media fervor over single m

    Regarding Dating Single Moms:
    Still seeing the social media fervor over single mothers rebelling against men not wanting to date or marry them. I understand both sides. But I can’t understand why women can’t understand it.
    I’ve learned a lot because I have a bunch of ‘stepkids’ from the single mom’s I’ve dated (or married):
    1) You will have to adapt to her life not her to yours.
    2) You will always come in second after the kids.
    3) You cannot discipline the children other than in their behavior toward you.
    4) She will expect you to carry the financial weight of the kids despite this – and still use her money for her own purposes.
    5) She will burden you with whatever trauma she has from her previous relationships. And often it will make you want to leave.

    Why does this work – at least, for me:
    1) Busy mom’s impose limited demands on me and my time are in my favor (as a workaholic).
    2) I can get along with everyone easily so fitting into a household is easy – in fact I prefer a woman’s sovereignty in the home as long as I have my ‘peaceful’ place to reset, work, and think.
    3) I can defer to her without impact on my ego as long as it is not a risk to me, cost to me, or disrespectful to me. (Never tolerate disrespect.)
    4) I can support the kids or mom when one or the other gets out of hand – which always happens and makes me trusted by both.
    5) I follow the same strategy in all relationships with women: figure out what makes them feel safe, and provide it. Conversely, figure out if they desire attention, and if so … Run.
    6) I maintain walk away power – which must never be stated, but always preserved.
    That’s why it works for me. I can’t see most men, who need the emotional connection, support, and respect (male version of validation), tolerating these conditions. When they are the optimum conditions for me.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-21 00:56:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1859400475084488704

  • Regarding Dating Single Moms: Still seeing the social media fervor over single m

    Regarding Dating Single Moms:
    Still seeing the social media fervor over single mothers rebelling against men wanting to date or marry them. I understand both sides. But I can’t understand why women can’t understand it.
    I’ve learned a lot because I have a bunch of ‘stepkids’ from the single mom’s I’ve dated (or married):
    1) You will have to adapt to her life not her to yours.
    2) You will always come in second after the kids.
    3) You cannot discipline the children other than in their behavior toward you.
    4) She will expect you to carry the financial weight of the kids despite this – and still use her money for her own purposes.
    5) She will burden you with whatever trauma she has from her previous relationships. And often it will make you want to leave.

    Why does this work – at least, for me:
    1) Busy mom’s impose limited demands on me and my time are in my favor (as a workaholic).
    2) I can get along with everyone easily so fitting into a household is easy – in fact I prefer a woman’s sovereignty in the home as long as I have my ‘peaceful’ place to reset, work, and think.
    3) I can defer to her without impact on my ego as long as it is not a risk to me, cost to me, or disrespectful to me. (Never tolerate disrespect.)
    4) I can support the kids or mom when one or the other gets out of hand – which always happens and makes me trusted by both.
    5) I follow the same strategy in all relationships with women: figure out what makes them feel safe, and provide it. Conversely, figure out if they desire attention, and if so … Run.
    6) I maintain walk away power – which must never be stated, but always preserved.
    That’s why it works for me. I can’t see most men, who need the emotional connection, support, and respect (male version of validation), tolerating these conditions. When they are the optimum conditions for me.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-21 00:56:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1859399089173237760