I depend on women all the time in personal, private, and political life, and that I find that women (and gays) provide valuable insight.
I see no harm in this model, since, (as simon stated above) it would be impossible for women to use ‘female’ (deceptive) speech in public, and that this would cause a change in our women that is both desirable and necessary. So I see it as a means of completing the domestication of women – long since accomplished in men.
The fact that I want to limit their excesses does not mean that I do not want their inputs. No CEO of merit ever does that. No king of merit ever does that. Leadership involves exhaustively collecting ideas until no novelties can be found.
So where you see empowerment, I see constraint. Where you see risk, I see training. That is why. Produce a market for the signals and speech that is true, and provide punishment for the alternatives, and let the market do its thing.
A married woman with three children, who can be legally punished for gossip and “scolding”, will be a fairly rare thing.
if you don’t think that’s optimum. Thats fine. However, If I want to create a universal political consitution for every human group I have to include the options.
What people do with them is their own choice.
Source: Original Site Post
-
“And if we all took care of our own people rather than exporting costs onto othe
—“And if we all took care of our own people rather than exporting costs onto other people by any form of colonization (conquest, religion, immigration), then the world would be a more decent place.”— Quote Repeated by Howard Van Der Klauw -
“And if we all took care of our own people rather than exporting costs onto othe
—“And if we all took care of our own people rather than exporting costs onto other people by any form of colonization (conquest, religion, immigration), then the world would be a more decent place.”— Quote Repeated by Howard Van Der Klauw -
The Only Sovereignty
The only sovereignty, is the militia, of all men of property, who provide one another with reciprocal insurance of sovereignty under the natural law of reciprocity. -
The Only Sovereignty
The only sovereignty, is the militia, of all men of property, who provide one another with reciprocal insurance of sovereignty under the natural law of reciprocity. -
by Simon Ström —“I need to comment on the differential distribution of traits
by Simon Ström —“I need to comment on the differential distribution of traits between races, because although I agree with it otherwise, I don’t think Curt’s model is complete. Genetic traits are not merely more or less frequent among different groups; they are often also entirely fixed (everybody in group X has it) or completely weeded out (nobody in group X has it), especially if a trait consistently proves to have an evolutionary advantage (or disadvantage). Skin color is a very trivial but powerful example: you will never find a black-skinned European except in rare cases of de novo mutations (diseases) and subsequent familial heredity. There are millions of SNPs that are fixed among all humans as a species, and even among all mammals, etc, because they are crucial for fetal development, for properly working coagulation systems, neuronal communication, oxygen transport, etc.”— Correct. Although, again, I always prefix my statement with “meaningful” or “substantial” differences. And I mean this ONLY in the context of everyone’s ability to suppress their underclasses and produce higher trust polities by doing so. So by ‘meaningful’ I mean only that any existential human group that produces a distribution above 100 (or 105, more likely), under rule of law by the common natural law of reciprocity, should be able to construct a sovereign (libertarian) high trust polity. That ashkenazi will always be better with language, east asians better at math, and aryans (europeans) better at invention(creativity), and africans better at socialization, is just what the data tells us. I can’t levy judgment on the hindus because what ‘keeps them down’ (at least appears) to be cultural. There exist two great races that I know of: the Japanese and the Germanic. One that has potential (the russian). And I am certain the japanese have chosen survival. India will get there with time. I think China will get there with time. The rest of the world depends entirely on demographic shifts, and how successful the market is at reallocating reproduction upward. -
by Simon Ström —“I need to comment on the differential distribution of traits
by Simon Ström —“I need to comment on the differential distribution of traits between races, because although I agree with it otherwise, I don’t think Curt’s model is complete. Genetic traits are not merely more or less frequent among different groups; they are often also entirely fixed (everybody in group X has it) or completely weeded out (nobody in group X has it), especially if a trait consistently proves to have an evolutionary advantage (or disadvantage). Skin color is a very trivial but powerful example: you will never find a black-skinned European except in rare cases of de novo mutations (diseases) and subsequent familial heredity. There are millions of SNPs that are fixed among all humans as a species, and even among all mammals, etc, because they are crucial for fetal development, for properly working coagulation systems, neuronal communication, oxygen transport, etc.”— Correct. Although, again, I always prefix my statement with “meaningful” or “substantial” differences. And I mean this ONLY in the context of everyone’s ability to suppress their underclasses and produce higher trust polities by doing so. So by ‘meaningful’ I mean only that any existential human group that produces a distribution above 100 (or 105, more likely), under rule of law by the common natural law of reciprocity, should be able to construct a sovereign (libertarian) high trust polity. That ashkenazi will always be better with language, east asians better at math, and aryans (europeans) better at invention(creativity), and africans better at socialization, is just what the data tells us. I can’t levy judgment on the hindus because what ‘keeps them down’ (at least appears) to be cultural. There exist two great races that I know of: the Japanese and the Germanic. One that has potential (the russian). And I am certain the japanese have chosen survival. India will get there with time. I think China will get there with time. The rest of the world depends entirely on demographic shifts, and how successful the market is at reallocating reproduction upward. -
“I think Curt attempts to bully those who construct a narrative by pointing at a
—“I think Curt attempts to bully those who construct a narrative by pointing at any given hostile minority and signalling low agency: “They did this and they are responsible for that – but I refuse to take stock of my own inventory of active measures, and my history of not using them properly.” And rightly so. The stoic man fights his enemy but does not hate him. You don’t sit around on the playing field complaining about the other team when they score a goal – you act.”– Simon Strom. (CD: Correct. “Own It.” ) -
“I think Curt attempts to bully those who construct a narrative by pointing at a
—“I think Curt attempts to bully those who construct a narrative by pointing at any given hostile minority and signalling low agency: “They did this and they are responsible for that – but I refuse to take stock of my own inventory of active measures, and my history of not using them properly.” And rightly so. The stoic man fights his enemy but does not hate him. You don’t sit around on the playing field complaining about the other team when they score a goal – you act.”– Simon Strom. (CD: Correct. “Own It.” ) -
RE: “You’re either a soulless heartless ‘man’ that ignores all female manipulati
RE: “You’re either a soulless heartless ‘man’ that ignores all female manipulation, or an easily manipulable tool (good man), or a sexual predator.” —“Why not all three? Set limits as necessary. Indulge as possible. And unleash the predator when it’s appropriate.”– Eli Harman