Curt Doolittle

Theme: Sex Differences

  • CRIME STATISTICS: THE CRIMINALIZATION OF MASCULINITY? –“…40% of white males i

    CRIME STATISTICS: THE CRIMINALIZATION OF MASCULINITY?

    –“…40% of white males in their early 20s having been arrested at least once and 49% of black males in their early 20s having been arrested at least once … obviously this is due to increasing criminalization of activities that should not be criminalized.”–

    (Peter Boettke )

    MASCULINE OFFENSES

    It’s pretty obvious that if you take drugs, alcohol, traffic, ‘fighting’, and ‘regulatory violations’ because of they’re just too poor to comply, that between the ages of 17 and 25, the chance that any given male violates at least one one of those prohibitions, suggests that the 40% number is reasonable.

    They don’t keep age data at Justice, (just juvenile vs adult) But given that the numbers are almost evenly distributed, we can make good guesses: drugs, alcohol and ‘consensual testosterone driven reproductive age nonsense’ mean that masculinity has been criminalized.

    Loosely speaking this means that under 5% of young males are affected annually, but cumulatively we end up with 40% of males affected.

    In other words “victimless crimes” in an effort to suppress masculine signaling account for most male arrests.

    ABOUT THE DATA

    The data is collected from individual county ARREST records, and the Justice department applies a little normalization for different terms, and differences in data collection. However, I believe that this is in fact ARREST not CONVICTION data. Those are the only two types of data we have. Because ‘crime’ data has no meaning, and no empirical test we can apply.

    Now, I can be wrong in how I interpret the sources of data given what Justice says, but to my knowledge (without making some phone calls from the other side of the planet) this is about as accurate as we can get.

    VICTIMLESS CRIME ISNT BROAD ENOUGH OF A CRITICISM

    And I think my analysis is more informative that the simple victimless crime argument. It is more accurately stated that these statistics represent the systematic suppression of voluntary, mutually consensual, masculine expression.

    (I do agree with the three strikes rule in general, and I am not sure that suppression of drunk driving is, at least in american, not justifiable using libertarian propertarian reasoning.)

    SUPPRESSION OF MASCULINITY AS THE MAJOR FOCUS OF THE STATE

    If anything these victimless crimes:

    (a) Marijuana offenses;

    (b) victimless driving offenses;

    (c) victimless regulatory conformance and fees;

    and most probably :

    (d) consensual ‘fighting’;

    constitute an unnecessary avenue for the state to expand and interfere in our lives.

    And it is through this organized suppression of masculine signals that the state has justified intrusion.

    HEARTBREAKING

    It is heartbreaking to sit in a court room and watch male after male permanently removed from the possibility of employment, losing work, losing pay, and criminalized for the accident of being poor, or institutionally forced into poverty for the celebration of youth, or the defense of what little honor poor males have. My most exasperating example being punishment for credit that they have been given as a means of entrapment, or having driving revoked and employment prohibited for an offense unrelated to crime. The most criminal is the subjugation of young males to permanent poverty by child support they cannot possibly pay and survive on. In an era of 3% unemployment and postwar miracle of underclass privilege that might have seemed to make sense, but in a world where 15%+ unemployment and 25-50% youth unemployment is the norm, and world competition for labor puts extraordinary pressure on the lower classes, it is no longer possible to expect young males to either break out of poverty, refrain from crime, or even retain even sustainable respect for society, its myths, traditions, norms and laws.

    I AM NOT SOFT ON CRIME

    Just the opposite. I’m hard on both crime, and hard on the state for prosecuting non-crimes.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-07 10:20:00 UTC

  • DIFFERENCES (quotes from ukrainian women) “Judge a woman by her feelings, judge

    DIFFERENCES

    (quotes from ukrainian women)

    “Judge a woman by her feelings, judge a man by his behavior.”

    “A woman needs four hours, and man needs two days. Women think about everything at once. A man thinks about one thing at a time.”

    “Feminism for Ukrainian women is.. ‘We are the same. I am woman. If you want relationship you must work for it.’

    (I translate this roughly as “Men are not above us. We are free. We can live without you. We have dignity. The choice is ours. So if you want us, we expect you to earn us.” And that is a game men actually love to play.)

    THE MATING THING IS SO FREAKING AWESOME WHEN YOU DON”T FIGHT IT.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-06 08:14:00 UTC

  • MARRIAGE STRUCTURES AMONG NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES (Note: basically what we get ou

    MARRIAGE STRUCTURES AMONG NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES

    (Note: basically what we get out of history is that women are in greater control when we combine both property rights and high male morality due to warfare. You’d think if the feminists figure this out they’ll renew the draft and vote to send us off to war in large numbers. lol )

    “Exclusive monogamy was the rule among the Iroquois and a few of their neighbors. This is to be expected in cultures in which matrilineal descent and matrilocal residence were coupled with female ownership and control of agricultural land and houses, not to mention the unusual authority of women in political affairs. Here the men literally moved in with their wives, who could divorce them merely by tossing their personal effects out of the door of the longhouse….”

    “The only other area where female dominance approached this level was that of the western Pueblos in the Southwest. Here the picture was similar, and exclusive monogamy prevailed. The other instances of exclusive monogamy were scattered and occurred in both bilateral and patrilineal societies. They do not lend themselves to any ready explanation.”

    “Sororal polygyny — that is, the marriage of a man to two wives who were sisters — probably occurred wherever polygyny was to be found. A number of Plains tribes had no other form. A man in this society was especially anxious to acquire an eldest sister as a first mate, with an eye on acquiring her younger sister if and when he could afford them…. [I]t is easy to see that polygyny had more utility in societies where male mortality in hunting and warfare was high. The Plains was one of these areas. Among the Eskimos, where a man had more difficulty in supporting multiple wives, the extremely high male mortality was offset by female infanticide. This partially explains the more modest amount of polygyny present in the Arctic.”

    (Note: Equilibria in everything)

    -HBD CHICK

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-05 17:03:00 UTC

  • CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS : I love how men and women are portrayed in the media here

    CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS :

    I love how men and women are portrayed in the media here versus in the states. Men are, frankly manly, mature, and women are elegant and beautiful, and the sexuality is not crass like hollywood videos, but beautiful.

    We celebrate the hedonism of peasantry as a vehicle for marketing with baser instincts. They celebrate their aspirations.

    It makes me realize how ‘cheap’ americanism is. Another packaged good for the proles.

    Aristocracy died with the first world war. It just took this long for the proles to tear down the castles and use the stones to build their hovels.

    Just like it always has been.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-31 07:02:00 UTC

  • If a man must pay for a child at great personal cost to himself, and a woman and

    If a man must pay for a child at great personal cost to himself, and a woman and the child have a right to the standard of living prior to divorce, and he cannot export this expense to the state, then why does a woman have the right to export the cost of her single motherhood to the state?

    A man cannot chose whether or not he is to father a child. Women are no longer economic victims, but have both saturated their distribution in the economy, and forced men out of the economy such that more women are both voters and workers than are men. So we cannot say that women are disadvantaged. Just the opposite. It is true that men dominate the upper margins, but men dominate nowhere else in society.

    This is an inequality of justice. A double standard. Given the dissolution of the family, and our emphasis on individualism, it is only jus that men export their children’s cost to the state just as women export their children’s cost to the state. No?

    I don’t really see any moral case for child or spousal support. There isnt any evidence that it’s necessary. It is disproportionally more punitive to men, who have shorter working careers, and endure disproportionate economic risk.

    I mean, if we have universal socialized health coverage, why not universal socialized child coverage. Why not a minimum guaranteed income?

    In that world, men can contribute to a household or not, but they carry their productivity with them. So any woman whose nest he shares, gains from his productivity, but loses at his departure. His income is a luxury. A perk. A benefit, not a necessity.

    The point of my argument is that property rights in a world where the individual, not the family, is the rule, and where all costs are highly socialized, will be one in which it will be increasingly difficult for us to treat evolutionary norms and morals dependent upon previous economic political and social means of production and reproduction, as criteria for predicting human behavior.

    I wouldn’t mind a world where women could not become vampires on males, and where all rights were in fact, equal.

    I also realize that this is the only way to restore male-female relations. But I suspect it is too late. And that the more likely development will be a caste system like we see in the northeast, with white/jewish/asian elites and mixed and brown everyone else – with token representatives of those groups permitted into the upper castes as a means of preserving the illusion of meritocracy.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-30 15:13:00 UTC

  • The single political action that provides the greatest return for any people, is

    The single political action that provides the greatest return for any people, is to suppress the breeding of the unproductive and expand the breeding of the productive.

    The only answer that I can come up with is that while harsh cold climates facilitated this eugenic process, in modern era, we must simply pay unproductive people not to bear children, and punish them severely with the withdrawal of funds if they do.

    The institution of private property is a method of self defense. Then institutional cost of eugenic reproduction is again, simply a method of self defense.

    Unfortunately, due to the errors of christianity, the enlightenment, and the socialist state, we do precisely the opposite.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-27 03:09:00 UTC

  • “…among male voters, support for Democratic candidates has gone from 46% in Oc

    “…among male voters, support for Democratic candidates has gone from 46% in October to just 35% now.” –Gallup

    The movement away from the democrats has been entirely male. (Duh).

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-26 17:43:00 UTC

  • UNCONSTRAINED BY RELIGIOUS AND FEMINIST MORALISM” “In today’s punitive atmospher

    http://ideas.time.com/2013/12/16/its-a-mans-world-and-it-always-will-be/#ixzz2nev5pBy8″ROLLICK UNCONSTRAINED BY RELIGIOUS AND FEMINIST MORALISM”

    “In today’s punitive atmosphere of sentimental propaganda about gender, the sexual imagination has understandably fled into the alternate world of online pornography, where the rude but exhilarating forces of primitive nature rollick unconstrained by religious or feminist moralism.”

    Read more: It’s a Man’s World, And It Always Will Be | TIME.com http://ideas.time.com/2013/12/16/its-a-mans-world-and-it-always-will-be/#ixzz2nev5pBy8″

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-16 12:15:00 UTC

  • PAGLIA: ON MEN AND THE MAN’S WORLD (PLEASE SHARE) Thank you Camille!!!!

    http://ideas.time.com/2013/12/16/its-a-mans-world-and-it-always-will-be/#commentsCAMILLE PAGLIA: ON MEN AND THE MAN’S WORLD

    (PLEASE SHARE)

    Thank you Camille!!!!

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-16 12:12:00 UTC

  • ON FEMINIST (female), POSTMODERN(male), SOCIALIST PHILOSOPHY Creating a polity b

    ON FEMINIST (female), POSTMODERN(male), SOCIALIST PHILOSOPHY

    Creating a polity by words for the purpose of rent-seeking and free riding.

    Feminist Philosophy questions the foundations of ETHICS, not LOGIC. And that Feminist Rhetoric, with whom Postmodern, Totalitarian, and Socialist authors share identical tactics:

    1) the purpose of their language:is not to construct categories which can be measured, but to conflate categories so that they cannot be measured. This is perhaps the most important insight that we can use to deflate totalitarian claims. The attempt to claim a group where there is diversity, in an attempt to seek rents and free ride.

    2) is to create ‘unity’ or ‘group’ out of involuntary participants in that group, by loading, overloading, framing, shaming, and obscuring the differences between individuals. The purpose of this unity is so that feminists can seek extractive policies by the state, against individuals outside their group. In other words so that women can seek free riding and rents on males.

    3) While it is true that in the workplace, in the aggregate, men and women are equally productive, the statement is an artifact of above-said logic of aggregation: the fact is, that 1% of people, produce almost all the material value in a society, 10% apply those insights, and another 10% communicate them effectively to all others. This is why the Pareto Rule applies to all human behavior: 20% of people own and do everything. The rest are engaged in production and consumption. And they must be. Because they can’d do anything else. And the data is the data, the upper ten percent is dominated by males, because males dominate the upper regions of intelligence by no less than four to one. Female solipsistic reasoning is solipsistic and nothing more.

    4) THE PURPOSE OF FEMINIST LOGIC IS TO LIE. While I tend to keep track of feminist writing, because much of it is interesting, the fact is that women are biased much more solipsistic, just as men are biased much more autistic. And the division of knowledge and labor is painful for many women who feel isolated and unable to function in the division of knowledge and labor. Philosophy in the pursuit of truth is one thing. It is a precursor to measurement, and therefore the precursor to science. Philosophy in the pursuit of feeling better about the world we live in is something else: religion. I don’t criticize religion, simply because we ARE unequal, and I don’t feel it is my right to deny people solace. However, religion is not science, it does not correspond to reality, and we must, in science, commerce, and politics, correspond to the constraints that reality places upon us.

    I wish I was six inches taller. I’m not. I can’t play basketball. I wish a lot of the time, my Aspiness wasn’t such a burden for me to constantly carry. I wish I hadn’t been born into a family with so many internal problems. I wish I hadn’t lost my first three fortunes, and each time had to make a new one.

    Fantasies are fantasies. And fantasies have no place in economics and politics. We all live better lives because of science, economics and those aspects of politics that are scientific: the common law. Religions are not scientific.

    Feminist philosophy as put forth in this article is just another secular religion of totalitarianism like postmodern and socialist influences that it draws from.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-15 07:43:00 UTC