The Proto-Indo-European pantheon includes well-attested deities such as *Dyḗus Pḥatḗr, the god of the daylit skies, his daughter *Haéusōs, the goddess of the dawn, the Horse Twins, and the storm god *Perkwunos. Other probable deities include *Péh2usōn, a pastoral god, and *Seh2ul, a Sun goddess.
Well-attested myths of the Proto-Indo-Europeans include a myth involving a storm god who slays a multi-headed serpent that dwells in water, a myth about the Sun and Moon riding in chariots across the sky, and a creation story involving two brothers, one of whom is sacrificed by the other in order to create the world. The Proto-Indo-Europeans may have believed that the Otherworld was guarded by some kind of watchdog and could only be reached by crossing a river. They also may have believed in some kind of world tree, bearing fruit of immortality, either guarded by or gnawed on by a serpent or dragon of some kind and tended to by three goddesses, who were believed to spin the thread of life.
“Aesir-Asura correspondence” refers to the relation between æsir, an Old Norse word meaning “gods” (the plural of the singular word áss “god”) and ásuraḥ, a Sanskrit word referring to certain warlike and aggressive demons. Also related is the Avestan word ahura, found as the title of the god Ahura Mazda.
The Proto-Germanic form of Old Norse áss, deduced by comparison to other Germanic languages, living and dead, is *ansuz. The plural of this Proto-Germanic word was *ansiwiz, which by regular sound changes into æsir.
The word ásuraḥ can be postulated to come from Proto-Indo-Iranian *n̩suras, where *n̩su- is the zero-grade form equivalent to the Gemanic *ansu-, both from a Proto-Indo-European root *H2ensu-. In Sanskrit, ásuḥ (PIIr *n̩sus) means “vital spirit” or “life”, and is presumably related, suggesting a common meaning “spirit”.
Both words describe a family of divine beings, the Æsir is the pantheon of the principal Norse gods, and Asuras are a group of Hindu deities. Each group is set up against another group of gods; the Æsir warred with the Vanir, whereas the Asuras oppose the Devas. In Norse mythology the Æsir are generally approved of (and worshipped) while the asuras have a more negative reputation in the Indian religions. However, the use of ahura to refer to the greatest god of Zoroastrianism implies that the word once had more favorable connotations. In the earlier Vedic literature also those we know of as Devas, like Indra, are called Asuras.
The relationship between the Æsir and Vanir parallel the Asuras and Devas in another way; like the Æsir, the Asuras were associated in Vedic myth with human phenomena (contracts, the arts, fate), while the Vanir, like the Devas, are associated with natural phenomena (such as Njord and Freyr, associated with fertility).
The Meteorological School holds that Proto-Indo-European religion was largely centered around deified natural phenomena such as the sky, the Sun, the Moon, and the dawn. This meteorological interpretation was popular among early scholars, but has lost a considerable degree of scholarly support in recent years. (I see this everywhere)
The Ritual School, on the other hand, holds that Proto-Indo-European myths are best understood as stories invented to explain various rituals and religious practices. Bruce Lincoln, a member of the Ritual School, argues that the Proto-Indo-Europeans believed that every sacrifice was a reenactment of the original sacrifice performed by the founder of the human race on his twin brother. (CD: I don’t see this, I see reference to some historic conflict. )
The Functionalist School holds that Proto-Indo-European society and, consequently, their religion, was largely centered around the trifunctional system proposed by Georges Dumézil, which holds that Proto-Indo-European society was divided into three distinct social classes: farmers, warriors, and priests. (I don’t see this.)
The Structuralist School, by contrast, argues that Proto-Indo-European religion was largely centered around the concept of dualistic opposition. (I see this as utter nonsense.)
CD: Mindfulness requires myth(rules), ritual(costs), and feast(rewards). All peoples have rituals. All rituals justify metaphysical value judgements. Myths and rituals develop together. The feast is a universal ritual. There is some ancient event that involved brother murder. (It is possible that this is the division between east and west.) The flood occurred and was in memory. There is no reason that brother murder did not remain in memory. There is the replacement event. But for indo europeans, they were the replacers. Just as their gods replaced older gods.
Form: Mini Essay
-
Our Original Religion
The Proto-Indo-European pantheon includes well-attested deities such as *Dyḗus Pḥatḗr, the god of the daylit skies, his daughter *Haéusōs, the goddess of the dawn, the Horse Twins, and the storm god *Perkwunos. Other probable deities include *Péh2usōn, a pastoral god, and *Seh2ul, a Sun goddess. Well-attested myths of the Proto-Indo-Europeans include a myth involving a storm god who slays a multi-headed serpent that dwells in water, a myth about the Sun and Moon riding in chariots across the sky, and a creation story involving two brothers, one of whom is sacrificed by the other in order to create the world. The Proto-Indo-Europeans may have believed that the Otherworld was guarded by some kind of watchdog and could only be reached by crossing a river. They also may have believed in some kind of world tree, bearing fruit of immortality, either guarded by or gnawed on by a serpent or dragon of some kind and tended to by three goddesses, who were believed to spin the thread of life. “Aesir-Asura correspondence” refers to the relation between æsir, an Old Norse word meaning “gods” (the plural of the singular word áss “god”) and ásuraḥ, a Sanskrit word referring to certain warlike and aggressive demons. Also related is the Avestan word ahura, found as the title of the god Ahura Mazda. The Proto-Germanic form of Old Norse áss, deduced by comparison to other Germanic languages, living and dead, is *ansuz. The plural of this Proto-Germanic word was *ansiwiz, which by regular sound changes into æsir. The word ásuraḥ can be postulated to come from Proto-Indo-Iranian *n̩suras, where *n̩su- is the zero-grade form equivalent to the Gemanic *ansu-, both from a Proto-Indo-European root *H2ensu-. In Sanskrit, ásuḥ (PIIr *n̩sus) means “vital spirit” or “life”, and is presumably related, suggesting a common meaning “spirit”. Both words describe a family of divine beings, the Æsir is the pantheon of the principal Norse gods, and Asuras are a group of Hindu deities. Each group is set up against another group of gods; the Æsir warred with the Vanir, whereas the Asuras oppose the Devas. In Norse mythology the Æsir are generally approved of (and worshipped) while the asuras have a more negative reputation in the Indian religions. However, the use of ahura to refer to the greatest god of Zoroastrianism implies that the word once had more favorable connotations. In the earlier Vedic literature also those we know of as Devas, like Indra, are called Asuras. The relationship between the Æsir and Vanir parallel the Asuras and Devas in another way; like the Æsir, the Asuras were associated in Vedic myth with human phenomena (contracts, the arts, fate), while the Vanir, like the Devas, are associated with natural phenomena (such as Njord and Freyr, associated with fertility). The Meteorological School holds that Proto-Indo-European religion was largely centered around deified natural phenomena such as the sky, the Sun, the Moon, and the dawn. This meteorological interpretation was popular among early scholars, but has lost a considerable degree of scholarly support in recent years. (I see this everywhere) The Ritual School, on the other hand, holds that Proto-Indo-European myths are best understood as stories invented to explain various rituals and religious practices. Bruce Lincoln, a member of the Ritual School, argues that the Proto-Indo-Europeans believed that every sacrifice was a reenactment of the original sacrifice performed by the founder of the human race on his twin brother. (CD: I don’t see this, I see reference to some historic conflict. ) The Functionalist School holds that Proto-Indo-European society and, consequently, their religion, was largely centered around the trifunctional system proposed by Georges Dumézil, which holds that Proto-Indo-European society was divided into three distinct social classes: farmers, warriors, and priests. (I don’t see this.) The Structuralist School, by contrast, argues that Proto-Indo-European religion was largely centered around the concept of dualistic opposition. (I see this as utter nonsense.) CD: Mindfulness requires myth(rules), ritual(costs), and feast(rewards). All peoples have rituals. All rituals justify metaphysical value judgements. Myths and rituals develop together. The feast is a universal ritual. There is some ancient event that involved brother murder. (It is possible that this is the division between east and west.) The flood occurred and was in memory. There is no reason that brother murder did not remain in memory. There is the replacement event. But for indo europeans, they were the replacers. Just as their gods replaced older gods. -
OUR ORIGINAL RELIGION The Proto-Indo-European pantheon includes well-attested de
OUR ORIGINAL RELIGION
The Proto-Indo-European pantheon includes well-attested deities such as *Dyḗus Pḥatḗr, the god of the daylit skies, his daughter *Haéusōs, the goddess of the dawn, the Horse Twins, and the storm god *Perkwunos. Other probable deities include *Péh2usōn, a pastoral god, and *Seh2ul, a Sun goddess.
Well-attested myths of the Proto-Indo-Europeans include a myth involving a storm god who slays a multi-headed serpent that dwells in water, a myth about the Sun and Moon riding in chariots across the sky, and a creation story involving two brothers, one of whom is sacrificed by the other in order to create the world. The Proto-Indo-Europeans may have believed that the Otherworld was guarded by some kind of watchdog and could only be reached by crossing a river. They also may have believed in some kind of world tree, bearing fruit of immortality, either guarded by or gnawed on by a serpent or dragon of some kind and tended to by three goddesses, who were believed to spin the thread of life.
“Aesir-Asura correspondence” refers to the relation between æsir, an Old Norse word meaning “gods” (the plural of the singular word áss “god”) and ásuraḥ, a Sanskrit word referring to certain warlike and aggressive demons. Also related is the Avestan word ahura, found as the title of the god Ahura Mazda.
The Proto-Germanic form of Old Norse áss, deduced by comparison to other Germanic languages, living and dead, is *ansuz. The plural of this Proto-Germanic word was *ansiwiz, which by regular sound changes into æsir.
The word ásuraḥ can be postulated to come from Proto-Indo-Iranian *n̩suras, where *n̩su- is the zero-grade form equivalent to the Gemanic *ansu-, both from a Proto-Indo-European root *H2ensu-. In Sanskrit, ásuḥ (PIIr *n̩sus) means “vital spirit” or “life”, and is presumably related, suggesting a common meaning “spirit”.
Both words describe a family of divine beings, the Æsir is the pantheon of the principal Norse gods, and Asuras are a group of Hindu deities. Each group is set up against another group of gods; the Æsir warred with the Vanir, whereas the Asuras oppose the Devas. In Norse mythology the Æsir are generally approved of (and worshipped) while the asuras have a more negative reputation in the Indian religions. However, the use of ahura to refer to the greatest god of Zoroastrianism implies that the word once had more favorable connotations. In the earlier Vedic literature also those we know of as Devas, like Indra, are called Asuras.
The relationship between the Æsir and Vanir parallel the Asuras and Devas in another way; like the Æsir, the Asuras were associated in Vedic myth with human phenomena (contracts, the arts, fate), while the Vanir, like the Devas, are associated with natural phenomena (such as Njord and Freyr, associated with fertility).
The Meteorological School holds that Proto-Indo-European religion was largely centered around deified natural phenomena such as the sky, the Sun, the Moon, and the dawn. This meteorological interpretation was popular among early scholars, but has lost a considerable degree of scholarly support in recent years. (I see this everywhere)
The Ritual School, on the other hand, holds that Proto-Indo-European myths are best understood as stories invented to explain various rituals and religious practices. Bruce Lincoln, a member of the Ritual School, argues that the Proto-Indo-Europeans believed that every sacrifice was a reenactment of the original sacrifice performed by the founder of the human race on his twin brother. (CD: I don’t see this, I see reference to some historic conflict. )
The Functionalist School holds that Proto-Indo-European society and, consequently, their religion, was largely centered around the trifunctional system proposed by Georges Dumézil, which holds that Proto-Indo-European society was divided into three distinct social classes: farmers, warriors, and priests. (I don’t see this.)
The Structuralist School, by contrast, argues that Proto-Indo-European religion was largely centered around the concept of dualistic opposition. (I see this as utter nonsense.)
CD: Mindfulness requires myth(rules), ritual(costs), and feast(rewards). All peoples have rituals. All rituals justify metaphysical value judgements. Myths and rituals develop together. The feast is a universal ritual. There is some ancient event that involved brother murder. (It is possible that this is the division between east and west.) The flood occurred and was in memory. There is no reason that brother murder did not remain in memory. There is the replacement event. But for indo europeans, they were the replacers. Just as their gods replaced older gods.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-25 18:23:00 UTC
-
OK. So…. In the end, Testimonialism is not all that complicated. Sensibility (
OK. So…. In the end, Testimonialism is not all that complicated. Sensibility (intelligibility) and logic consist of constant relations. Constant relations provide commensurability. To say two statements are commensurable and consist of constant relations is a tautology. Dimension: a series of terms (states) consisting of constant relations, organized in a scale – preferably from lower to upper limit. Language: Language consists of descriptions of all phenomena by intersection of dimensions. (yep). All languages develop paradigms of constant relations. Paradigms: Paradigms can consist of relations correspondent with reality, correspondent with ideals, correspondent with myths, or correspondent with occultisms (experiences) – and less. Some paradigms are more correspondent with reality and some less, and some non. Definitions: Definitions by dimensions: definitions in series (deflated) in operational language, illustrating constant relations. We describe counts, distances, areas, spaces, changes in space, equilibrial forces and changes in space, all the way up to pure ‘meaning’ consisting of a handful of constant relations across statements, sentences, paragraphs and narrative. *and those relations are all open to analysis, and enumeration*. We know this because english is constructed as a high precision, low context analytic (not a low precision high context synthetic) language whose dimensions are well understood ( and limited in number). Great complexity emerges from the combined interactions of a small number of root causes. 0-Point (Referent)(Identity, anchor referent)(quantity) 1-Line (Distance)(Relations) 2-Area (Ideal)(Sets) 3-Object (Ideal Object) (Space) 4-Time (Velocity) (Change) 5 – N – Pure Relations 6 – N vs. N’ Relations, (Forces) (Equilibria) 7 – N vs. N’ Intermediate Relations, (Symmetries) 8 – N vs N’ relations between symmetries (Paradigms) 9 – (N vs N’)’ hierarchies of symmetries ad infinitum. (Reality) And we have mathematical techniques for such dimensions. 0 – Correspondence (referents, identity) 1 – Positional names, Arithmetic, Accounting. 2 – Mathematics and algebra (Ratios) 3 – Geometry (Space) 4 – Calculus, Finance, Economics. (Change) 5 – Algebraic Geometry (Math of sets of constant relations) 6 – Physics and Economics (equilibration) 7 – Lie Groups, (Symmetries, Externalities, Future of Economics) Operational Prose = constant relations (commensurability) between by universal measurement of possible and subjectively testable human actions. Operational prose forces constant relations with reality. Man is the measure of all things testifiable by man. Logical and True = Preservation of Constant relations across dimensions.. Decidable = Decidable with the information present without appeal to information not present in the statement. CHANGES: We will need to organize dictionaries by those constant relations. So future dictionaries will be closer to the organization of a thesaurus. (or rather, will combine the two). Such dictionaries will require the falsification of some uses of terms as ‘colloquial’ or ‘out of range’ definitions because they violate the dimensional series. Many(or at least some) terms consist of the intersection of multiple dimensions will have to be modified to specifically falsify conflation. Our contracts tend to make use of global variables. Our contracts do not require definition of all global variables (although some attorneys are better than others). Our contracts often require limits. Our laws require neither definitions nor limits. Our laws do not require construction from first principle of reciprocity. Our definitions do not require proof (construction from constant relations). More later… -
OK. So…. In the end, Testimonialism is not all that complicated. Sensibility (
OK. So…. In the end, Testimonialism is not all that complicated. Sensibility (intelligibility) and logic consist of constant relations. Constant relations provide commensurability. To say two statements are commensurable and consist of constant relations is a tautology. Dimension: a series of terms (states) consisting of constant relations, organized in a scale – preferably from lower to upper limit. Language: Language consists of descriptions of all phenomena by intersection of dimensions. (yep). All languages develop paradigms of constant relations. Paradigms: Paradigms can consist of relations correspondent with reality, correspondent with ideals, correspondent with myths, or correspondent with occultisms (experiences) – and less. Some paradigms are more correspondent with reality and some less, and some non. Definitions: Definitions by dimensions: definitions in series (deflated) in operational language, illustrating constant relations. We describe counts, distances, areas, spaces, changes in space, equilibrial forces and changes in space, all the way up to pure ‘meaning’ consisting of a handful of constant relations across statements, sentences, paragraphs and narrative. *and those relations are all open to analysis, and enumeration*. We know this because english is constructed as a high precision, low context analytic (not a low precision high context synthetic) language whose dimensions are well understood ( and limited in number). Great complexity emerges from the combined interactions of a small number of root causes. 0-Point (Referent)(Identity, anchor referent)(quantity) 1-Line (Distance)(Relations) 2-Area (Ideal)(Sets) 3-Object (Ideal Object) (Space) 4-Time (Velocity) (Change) 5 – N – Pure Relations 6 – N vs. N’ Relations, (Forces) (Equilibria) 7 – N vs. N’ Intermediate Relations, (Symmetries) 8 – N vs N’ relations between symmetries (Paradigms) 9 – (N vs N’)’ hierarchies of symmetries ad infinitum. (Reality) And we have mathematical techniques for such dimensions. 0 – Correspondence (referents, identity) 1 – Positional names, Arithmetic, Accounting. 2 – Mathematics and algebra (Ratios) 3 – Geometry (Space) 4 – Calculus, Finance, Economics. (Change) 5 – Algebraic Geometry (Math of sets of constant relations) 6 – Physics and Economics (equilibration) 7 – Lie Groups, (Symmetries, Externalities, Future of Economics) Operational Prose = constant relations (commensurability) between by universal measurement of possible and subjectively testable human actions. Operational prose forces constant relations with reality. Man is the measure of all things testifiable by man. Logical and True = Preservation of Constant relations across dimensions.. Decidable = Decidable with the information present without appeal to information not present in the statement. CHANGES: We will need to organize dictionaries by those constant relations. So future dictionaries will be closer to the organization of a thesaurus. (or rather, will combine the two). Such dictionaries will require the falsification of some uses of terms as ‘colloquial’ or ‘out of range’ definitions because they violate the dimensional series. Many(or at least some) terms consist of the intersection of multiple dimensions will have to be modified to specifically falsify conflation. Our contracts tend to make use of global variables. Our contracts do not require definition of all global variables (although some attorneys are better than others). Our contracts often require limits. Our laws require neither definitions nor limits. Our laws do not require construction from first principle of reciprocity. Our definitions do not require proof (construction from constant relations). More later… -
OK. So…. In the end, Testimonialism is not all that complicated. Sensibility (
OK. So…. In the end, Testimonialism is not all that complicated.
Sensibility (intelligibility) and logic consist of constant relations.
Constant relations provide commensurability. To say two statements are commensurable and consist of constant relations is a tautology.
Dimension: a series of terms (states) consisting of constant relations, organized in a scale – preferably from lower to upper limit.
Language: Language consists of descriptions of all phenomena by intersection of dimensions. (yep). All languages develop paradigms of constant relations.
Paradigms: Paradigms can consist of relations correspondent with reality, correspondent with ideals, correspondent with myths, or correspondent with occultisms (experiences) – and less. Some paradigms are more correspondent with reality and some less, and some non.
Definitions: Definitions by dimensions: definitions in series (deflated) in operational language, illustrating constant relations.
We describe counts, distances, areas, spaces, changes in space, equilibrial forces and changes in space, all the way up to pure ‘meaning’ consisting of a handful of constant relations across statements, sentences, paragraphs and narrative. *and those relations are all open to analysis, and enumeration*. We know this because english is constructed as a high precision, low context analytic (not a low precision high context synthetic) language whose dimensions are well understood ( and limited in number). Great complexity emerges from the combined interactions of a small number of root causes.
0-Point (Referent)(Identity, anchor referent)(quantity)
1-Line (Distance)(Relations)
2-Area (Ideal)(Sets)
3-Object (Ideal Object) (Space)
4-Time (Velocity) (Change)
5 – N – Pure Relations
6 – N vs. N’ Relations, (Forces) (Equilibria)
7 – N vs. N’ Intermediate Relations, (Symmetries)
8 – N vs N’ relations between symmetries (Paradigms)
9 – (N vs N’)’ hierarchies of symmetries ad infinitum. (Reality)
And we have mathematical techniques for such dimensions.
0 – Correspondence (referents, identity)
1 – Positional names, Arithmetic, Accounting.
2 – Mathematics and algebra (Ratios)
3 – Geometry (Space)
4 – Calculus, Finance, Economics. (Change)
5 – Algebraic Geometry (Math of sets of constant relations)
6 – Physics and Economics (equilibration)
7 – Lie Groups, (Symmetries, Externalities, Future of Economics)
Operational Prose = constant relations (commensurability) between by universal measurement of possible and subjectively testable human actions. Operational prose forces constant relations with reality. Man is the measure of all things testifiable by man.
Logical and True = Preservation of Constant relations across dimensions..
Decidable = Decidable with the information present without appeal to information not present in the statement.
CHANGES:
We will need to organize dictionaries by those constant relations. So future dictionaries will be closer to the organization of a thesaurus. (or rather, will combine the two).
Such dictionaries will require the falsification of some uses of terms as ‘colloquial’ or ‘out of range’ definitions because they violate the dimensional series.
Many(or at least some) terms consist of the intersection of multiple dimensions will have to be modified to specifically falsify conflation.
Our contracts tend to make use of global variables.
Our contracts do not require definition of all global variables (although some attorneys are better than others).
Our contracts often require limits.
Our laws require neither definitions nor limits.
Our laws do not require construction from first principle of reciprocity.
Our definitions do not require proof (construction from constant relations).
More later…
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-25 16:19:00 UTC
-
Tolerance: Virtuous Or Thief?
In the Western Pagan and Pagan-Christian ethic, we do not say people are equal. We do not say we should be tolerant. We say only that we must exhaust all reasonable attempts to cooperate – just as we would our own kin – before treating others unequally, and intolerantly. This is our faith. It’s also the science. Abrahamism-Marxism-Postmodernism is just another lie. Exhausting one’s attempt at cooperation – one’s tolerance – yet retaining the militia’s responsibility, and bearing the cost for the defense of the commons, and claiming one’s well earned virtue, is very different from simply abandoning responsibility for defense of the commons, and thereby escaping the costs of defending the commons, while claiming virtues – when in fact, one is merely a free rider and a thief. It all begins with the militia. That is the source of the uniqueness of western civilization. -
Tolerance: Virtuous Or Thief?
In the Western Pagan and Pagan-Christian ethic, we do not say people are equal. We do not say we should be tolerant. We say only that we must exhaust all reasonable attempts to cooperate – just as we would our own kin – before treating others unequally, and intolerantly. This is our faith. It’s also the science. Abrahamism-Marxism-Postmodernism is just another lie. Exhausting one’s attempt at cooperation – one’s tolerance – yet retaining the militia’s responsibility, and bearing the cost for the defense of the commons, and claiming one’s well earned virtue, is very different from simply abandoning responsibility for defense of the commons, and thereby escaping the costs of defending the commons, while claiming virtues – when in fact, one is merely a free rider and a thief. It all begins with the militia. That is the source of the uniqueness of western civilization. -
TOLERANCE: VIRTUOUS OR THIEF? In the Western Pagan and Pagan-Christian ethic, we
TOLERANCE: VIRTUOUS OR THIEF?
In the Western Pagan and Pagan-Christian ethic, we do not say people are equal. We do not say we should be tolerant. We say only that we must exhaust all reasonable attempts to cooperate – just as we would our own kin – before treating others unequally, and intolerantly.
This is our faith. It’s also the science.
Abrahamism-Marxism-Postmodernism is just another lie.
Exhausting one’s attempt at cooperation – one’s tolerance – yet retaining the militia’s responsibility, and bearing the cost for the defense of the commons, and claiming one’s well earned virtue, is very different from simply abandoning responsibility for defense of the commons, and thereby escaping the costs of defending the commons, while claiming virtues – when in fact, one is merely a free rider and a thief.
It all begins with the militia.
That is the source of the uniqueness of western civilization.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-25 10:41:00 UTC
-
In the studies I have seen, the average man experiences 20% decline in the stand
In the studies I have seen, the average man experiences 20% decline in the standard of living by trading income for sex, companionship, and residency with a woman. This amounts to the average free capital generated by all men (about 1/5). It requires about 20% free capital for humans to change ‘routines’. Men are a bit more expensive to feed, but otherwise cheaper to maintain than women. Men have a shorter working life (We accumulate the species’ cellular damage on behalf of women and children). We mature intellectually and emotionally fairly slowly in exchange for specialization. But that specialization, which can lead to superior incomes, but also leads to limited adaptability in the work force where regimentation is lacking and social fitness is required (the modern white collar work force). So for men, the problem with late maturity, specialization, and limited work life means that failures to capture higher earnings means old age poverty. Now, if the woman is working, and the couple save that 20% in equity for seven years on a 15 year mortgage they can somewhat offset the loss. Friends, good work, and an anti-depressant will offset the demand for sex, and increase a man’s ability to build a business or portfolio. Girlfriends are the most inexpensive sex you can obtain, and if rotated every 9-12 months the cost of marriage can be avoided. A woman trades her fertile years for increased income. A man trades his productive years for later term care. A working woman externalizes the cost of raising her children to the state, and by proxy to others. This is the trade that no longer exists. And it’s rather obvious what must be done about it: convert men’s short term productivity to long term savings, and permanently isolate it from attachment or taxation, as the most important investment. In other words, restore the order that has existed since the dawn of time. Common property requires common productivity, risk, and reward. Statistically speaking women are an extraordinarily privileged class.