You are more desirable if you have a pack – even if it is purely physical exercise or sport, purely friendship and relaxation, purely familial, purely business, purely intellectual, purely political, purely military.
Men join packs. More is better.
Exercise body, socialization, competition, mind and aesthetics.
Loyalty – just showing up and helping is enough.
Learn to be less self, and more pack, and more calm.
Everything else good emerges.
Sitting in school listening, rather than competing, caused you harm. You must undo that harm.
The Female Mind Joins the Herd’s Frame, the Masculine Mind Makes A Frame His Own. This is why I (we) spawn so many variations on propertarianism. Men make it their own.
Men who make it their own to exploit or pursue similar ends, ally together.
WHY DO WOMEN HATE MEN WHEN THEY END A RELATIONSHIP?
—“Curt I must ask about something you related a while back. About how a woman can detach and so hate a man, viewing him as a subhuman worthy of almost any Ill. Yet men like you or I cannot bear such a notion, even to these very women after having deeply caring for them. Why do you feel that is?”—GS
1) Males are dependent upon the success of the tribe. Females on the success of their offspring. Mates are Temporary Alliances, while Tribe and Offspring are Permanent Genetic Necessities. For this reason, Male love is driven by loyalty, Female by devotion. Absent devotion women have no loyalty. Loyalty (infrequent exercise of) is more durable but less costly than devotion (constant exercise). This is the explanation. The rest is consequence.
2) Females evolved for their children not men. Men ‘rotate’, lose their value, or die off. Children remain. … forever. Males evolved to rotate women and monogamy is a … norm, not a necessity. Men will kill over mates more so than any other reason. We retain ‘value’ to retain ‘opportunity’.
3) Poisoning the well (socially) for a lost or discarded man forces a cost on him and trains him that losing a woman is costly in future opportunities – so stay with them. It also eliminates the cost of keeping him ‘away’ (resisting his advances) and creating an opportunity for new or other males to make advances without fear of violence or conflict.
4) Women ‘fight’ to the death because they are so comparatively vulnerable to ostracization, but they fight by reputation destruction to CAUSE ostracization (from opportunity) – so women engage in wars of reputation destruction, with the vehemence of it determined by the social status (social and sexual market value) differences providing ammunition. Upper not caring. Lower not caring as much, but peers caring greatly.
5) (This topic is harder to understand) Men are more dependent upon their economic, political, and military value for less of their lifetimes. (think sprinting) Men are faster and stronger but cheaper and more disposable. Women are more dependent upon their sexual, caretaking, and social value for three generations. (think marathoning). Women are generally a good bet for men. Men are a riskier investment for women. Women are more expensive and less disposable. Losing a man by choice or accident is a kind of failure for women. It’s a Loss for men, less so a failure. A Failure for Women far more so than a loss.
6) Women’s hatred of men is a way of controlling their impulsive emotions so that they do not have to bear the cost of unpleasant feelings, and anger, hatred, blame, allow the intentional suppression of those feelings. Men don’t have the problem of emotional lack of agency.
I hope that helps.
-Curt
—“This explanation in such terms is both troubling on an emotional level, but that will pass and help me with the knowing of it. Moreover its immensely pleasing on a visceral level to have it laid out in such an orderly way, as a fellow autist I genuinely appreciate it. Please do post this if you haven’t. Thank you for this and all you do.”—GS
THE GOAL OF MEMORY IS TO OPTIMIZE DECISION-MAKING.
—“The predominant focus in the neurobiological study of memory has been on remembering (persistence). However, recent studies have considered the neurobiology of forgetting (transience). Here we draw parallels between neurobiological and computational mechanisms underlying transience. We propose that it is the interaction between persistence and transience that allows for intelligent decision-making in dynamic, noisy environments. Specifically, we argue that transience (1) enhances flexibility, by reducing the influence of outdated information on memory-guided decision-making, and (2) prevents overfitting to specific past events, thereby promoting generalization. According to this view, the goal of memory is not the transmission of information through time, per se. Rather, the goal of memory is to optimize decision-making. As such, transience is as important as persistence in mnemonic systems.”— Neuron, The Persistence and Transience of Memory
—“The postmodernists say that agency is a comforting falsehood. How does one adjudicate between you and them?”— John Tangney
They are correct – for them. Agency is demonstrably the entire problem. And postmodernists, feminists, women, and the underclass are completely correct: they don’t have it. On the other hand, enough ‘men’ do if trained in what IS (the conservative empirical) rather than what SHOULD BE (the consumptive ideal), to govern in everyone’s interests despite the lack of agency by the vast majority of peoples.
The question is why someone some group or some class would consider rule if one was in fact lacking agency — and worse, if both lacking agency and f–king aware of it.
Stoicism regresses through patience, endurance, submission, sacrifice, surrender.
The alternative is radical self-love, love of country and love of kin. Radical as in roots-based (thanks Daniel Roland Anderson for reminding me that “radical” refers to roots.)
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47386298_10156819070207264_2562801672648654848_n_10156819070202264.jpg LOVE – AND NO, I’M NOT GOING TO TRANSLATE IT INTO PROPERTARIAN TERMS. lolBrandon Hayeshttps://propertarianism.com/2018/08/19/human-brain-regions-functions/Dec 2, 2018, 1:55 PMIgor SurkanovWas thinking about colors a few weeks ago and came to the conclusion that cyan is the color of the unknown future.Dec 2, 2018, 2:06 PMTrent FowlerKind of looks like an update to Aristotle’s Doctrine of the Means.Dec 2, 2018, 2:06 PMCurt Doolittlethe old man was pretty good at a lot of things.Dec 2, 2018, 2:46 PMTrent FowlerHe was indeed. I’ve started Nichomachean Ethics, anything else you recommend?Dec 2, 2018, 3:41 PMCurt DoolittleI don’t really …. I sorta avoid the whole philosophy thing. I think he’s important as the founder of science. But history, war, economics, law, physics, logic mathematics. Aside from austrian econ I haven’t found anything that tries to create a unified psychological and social science, and I ended up with propertarianism as that unified social science. My reading list is what it is. I don’t think it’s possible to do better. I’ve also included Jayman’s reading list as a link from mine, and that takes it down into biology.Dec 2, 2018, 4:28 PMKevin WuAvid readers of yours can fill in the terms themselves. Maybe that’d be a decent exercise for a workbook, come to think of it.Dec 2, 2018, 5:35 PMMark Di RussoI admit to being an admirer of Thucydides, he understood human nature, and the relationship between man, war and peace, and man aspiring for the masculine (powerful, raw, physical) and the soft (artistic / poet / cerebral) concurrently. He was absolutely on point in my view.Dec 3, 2018, 6:43 AMAlex Mackeyhttp://voxkoshkavisual.tumblr.com/image/89748964246Dec 3, 2018, 9:35 AMKari Anne DorstadNice ChartDec 3, 2018, 3:15 PMKari Anne DorstadNow I get it !Dec 3, 2018, 3:16 PMLOVE – AND NO, I’M NOT GOING TO TRANSLATE IT INTO PROPERTARIAN TERMS. lol
