Curt Doolittle

Theme: Sex Differences

  • “On #VeteransDay remember that all wars were evil projections of male aggression

    —“On #VeteransDay remember that all wars were evil projections of male aggression, except the Civil War, which was a noble battle for justice.”— Alice Teller

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-11 13:21:00 UTC

  • Women are wonderful. Expensive but wonderful. Sometimes I wish we could have as

    Women are wonderful. Expensive but wonderful. Sometimes I wish we could have as many women as women have children. 😉

    (Mischief) 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-10 09:42:00 UTC

  • WE STILL JUSTIFY THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT? (feminist trigger warning)(individualist

    https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/3phro9/renegotiating_the_marriage_contract/CAN WE STILL JUSTIFY THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT?

    (feminist trigger warning)(individualist trigger warning)

    RE: (https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/3phro9/renegotiating_the_marriage_contract/ )

    1) Pretty good analysis. I’d recommend reading the origin and development of the family and property by Engels. That is a more accurate history. It’s short and well written.

    2) Biologically, females were treated as (and therefore were) our property under hostile competition, they were an exchange of property between males in the pastoral era’s development of formal property, and ‘love’ (mate selection by attraction) is historically, a luxury good (and rare) – even if terribly eugenic for selection purposes. The development of property is what allowed males to re-take control of reproduction from females.

    3) Polygamy was and is practiced by the majority of cultures, but all major religions and philosophies attempted to break this practice in order to ‘soak up’ the majority of ‘troublesome’ males who otherwise failed to reproduce (something like 30% of males failed to reproduce – although I have seen estimated numbers as high at 70%). And even once we encounter monogamy (property), something like 20-25% of births are caused by mates outside of marriage (which is a dirty secret that is showing up now that we have massive databases of family trees combined with genetics.)

    4) Human Females still demonstrate r-selection behavior, much less in-group protection (more cheating), and lower loyalty. They are practical creatures. For most of history women were considered the root of all evil, and it was only in the victorian era that we stated otherwise – although this compromises the majority of our current literature.

    5) One can position marriage as a compromise between reproductive strategies; or as a social convenience necessary for peace and prosperity; or as a epistemological necessity for the purpose of meritocratic calculation of reproductive utility, required of an advanced society and economy; Or all of the above. My standing concern is that women have more CONTROL than men do, and men higher RISK and shorter LIVES than women do. So to some degree, for us to persist, women remain a herd men control, or a herd other men control. Women are a resource – an expensive resource.

    6) So under INDIVIDUALISM it is difficult to make take the position that marriage is beneficial for either man or woman. Under NATIONALISM (or tribalism or kinship) it is difficult to conceive of a condition under which males retain access to females without the cooperation, assistance, defense, of other males.

    7) I want to protect my genes and my relations so I want my female kin to be free to do the best they can WITHOUT betraying my male relations control of the reproductive resource of women. In other words, private benefit of free reproduction is limited by public harm from free reproduction, because organization into groups matters.

    I think the last is the least pleasant most accurate analysis.

    And (unpleasantly) that is where I end up.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-10 07:50:00 UTC

  • INTERNET MALE-NESS Most males on the internet are seeking dominance-expression t

    INTERNET MALE-NESS

    Most males on the internet are seeking dominance-expression through argument. The internet is a safe place to fail. And they learn through increasing tests of their abilities. Some learn the first year over and over again. Others progress every year. But it is merely combat practice – training, in an effort to both vent the stress if powerlessness and rejection, as well as the stress of being surrounded by ignorance and error, as well as an attempt to transcend the boy and become the man. So while I would prefer that such gladiators prefer to improve, than prefer to justify their failure to improve, or merely seek attention by discounted means, I also see the rattling of cages, positioning and threats, and the trowing of feces as mere, learning by doing. And I would rather see men learn than not. My advice is to help those years behind you. And together as a group we all advance.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-09 06:10:00 UTC

  • The R-Selection Hierarchy (The Female Reproductive Strategy)

    R-SELECTION HIERARCHY (The Female Reproductive Strategy) —————————————————————————————— Women, Socialists + Communists Libertine Libertarians Ashkenazim Gypsies Tinkers Career Criminals Incompetents Invalids

    TECHNOLOGY: (LIARS AND THIEVES). —————————————————————————————— Lie, Gossip, Rally, Shame, Obscure Conflate, Load, Frame, Overload. PURPOSE —————————————————————————————— Given that the only moral cooperation one can engage in is productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of imposition of cost by externality, then the purpose of the GOSSIPERS is to obtain a discount by imposing costs upon others. Women bear a high cost of reproduction long term and men bear a high risk of death long term. With voluntary exchange this relationship is symmetric. Without voluntary exchange this relationship is predatory. If a relationship is predatory then it is not cooperation it is predation. Neither men nor women may obtain their perfect preferences. We must conduct exchanges that function as compromises between our different strategies and preferences. Granting women equal property rights allowed voluntary exchange between the genders with opposing reproductive strategies. But granting women political privileges empowered them to destroy rule of law, and meritocracy and the compromise between the genders. As such it is a choice for males whether we allow this predation instead of voluntary exchange to persist. He who can destroy a thing controls a thing. We can destroy the government and return to voluntary exchange. We need only choose to. (This ought to get me into trouble all over the place.)

  • The R-Selection Hierarchy (The Female Reproductive Strategy)

    R-SELECTION HIERARCHY (The Female Reproductive Strategy) —————————————————————————————— Women, Socialists + Communists Libertine Libertarians Ashkenazim Gypsies Tinkers Career Criminals Incompetents Invalids

    TECHNOLOGY: (LIARS AND THIEVES). —————————————————————————————— Lie, Gossip, Rally, Shame, Obscure Conflate, Load, Frame, Overload. PURPOSE —————————————————————————————— Given that the only moral cooperation one can engage in is productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of imposition of cost by externality, then the purpose of the GOSSIPERS is to obtain a discount by imposing costs upon others. Women bear a high cost of reproduction long term and men bear a high risk of death long term. With voluntary exchange this relationship is symmetric. Without voluntary exchange this relationship is predatory. If a relationship is predatory then it is not cooperation it is predation. Neither men nor women may obtain their perfect preferences. We must conduct exchanges that function as compromises between our different strategies and preferences. Granting women equal property rights allowed voluntary exchange between the genders with opposing reproductive strategies. But granting women political privileges empowered them to destroy rule of law, and meritocracy and the compromise between the genders. As such it is a choice for males whether we allow this predation instead of voluntary exchange to persist. He who can destroy a thing controls a thing. We can destroy the government and return to voluntary exchange. We need only choose to. (This ought to get me into trouble all over the place.)

  • The Fallacy Of Higher Female Cost of Reproduction

    (worth repeating) (interesting contrarian argument) —**While incorrectly stated as a difference in *COST* of reproduction – since male deaths from production and defense of the tribe are higher than female deaths in birth, and male lifespans are shorter from accumulated injury and cellular damage – the genders differ not in cost but in the *CONTROL* over reproduction. Females can directly control their reproduction, nurture offspring, and rally males and females to her defense, while men can kill or prohibit other males from access, gain access to additional females, and defend females and offspring in order to propagate their and their brother’s genes.**—

    —The female reproductive economic strategy (r-selection) is to bear as many children as she can, to place their cost upon the tribe, and to advocate for their success regardless of their merit. The male economic reproductive strategy is to capture as many females by killing as many opposing tribe’s males, then pairing off with female mates so that all brothers maintain incentives to preserve the group. This paring off is the most effective compromise between the genders (which is institutionalized in marriage). If combined with creative ‘cheating’ by males and females, both social alliance and reproductive improvement can be achieved.— Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Fallacy Of Higher Female Cost of Reproduction

    (worth repeating) (interesting contrarian argument) —**While incorrectly stated as a difference in *COST* of reproduction – since male deaths from production and defense of the tribe are higher than female deaths in birth, and male lifespans are shorter from accumulated injury and cellular damage – the genders differ not in cost but in the *CONTROL* over reproduction. Females can directly control their reproduction, nurture offspring, and rally males and females to her defense, while men can kill or prohibit other males from access, gain access to additional females, and defend females and offspring in order to propagate their and their brother’s genes.**—

    —The female reproductive economic strategy (r-selection) is to bear as many children as she can, to place their cost upon the tribe, and to advocate for their success regardless of their merit. The male economic reproductive strategy is to capture as many females by killing as many opposing tribe’s males, then pairing off with female mates so that all brothers maintain incentives to preserve the group. This paring off is the most effective compromise between the genders (which is institutionalized in marriage). If combined with creative ‘cheating’ by males and females, both social alliance and reproductive improvement can be achieved.— Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • FRANCE LOSES 4 POINTS OF IQ DUE TO DYSGENIC REPRODUCTION In France, are secular

    FRANCE LOSES 4 POINTS OF IQ DUE TO DYSGENIC REPRODUCTION

    In France, are secular IQ losses biologically caused? A comment on Dutton and Lynn (2015) Original Research Article

    Pages 81-85 Michael A. Woodley of Menie, Curtis S. Dunkel

    •Dutton and Lynn have identified a 4 point decline in French IQ.

    •Dysgenics and replacement migration are proposed as causes.

    •French IQ losses are found to be associated with the Jensen effect (ρ = .833).

    •A common factor of g loadings and 3 biological variables loads on the loss-vector.

    •This supports biological causation.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-08 07:32:00 UTC

  • We Ask Too Much of Men – I Am Happy With Specialization Rather Than Equality

    [I]n propertarianism I refer to three coercive technologies, and three classes that master them. I am perfectly happy mastering my class’s technology (violence: law and war, and to a lesser degree remuneration: production distribution and trade, and to a lesser degree gossip/morality.). But if I had my ‘druthers’ I would master only law and war, and let better men master remuneration and gossip. We ask too much of men under equality. It is hard enough to specialize in one thing. Why must we master three? If we cooperate we need not. And that would make most of us much happier. Men love to be in their role and respected for it. The common man care less about our position than success in that position.