Theme: Sex Differences

  • I can’t imagine not doing it. I’d be as situationally unaware as women are

    I can’t imagine not doing it. I’d be as situationally unaware as women are.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-26 12:40:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706649907124171250

    Reply addressees: @JayMan471

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706643475435864077

  • Men practice objectivity. Women practice subjectivity. And you aren’t even self

    Men practice objectivity. Women practice subjectivity. And you aren’t even self aware to recognize you just did.

    You are unfit for public discourse,


    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-26 12:26:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706646526133432426

    Reply addressees: @FrauCadoux @EricMorganCoach @schizarella

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706599982638203379

  • RT @JaredAberach: @curtdoolittle @HighFivesMirror @D__2__3 @uberboyo It’s astoun

    RT @JaredAberach: @curtdoolittle @HighFivesMirror @D__2__3 @uberboyo It’s astounding that people accept the outlawing and punishing of male…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-26 12:24:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706645974926410097

  • RT @J58039716: @NotMaryAnnObv It’s not equal citizenship that is the problem. It

    RT @J58039716: @NotMaryAnnObv It’s not equal citizenship that is the problem. It’s that politics was formed by men, for men. And so it is b…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-26 00:28:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706465812561662142

  • IS CHRISTIANITY THE FOUNDATION OF WOKE? (More correctly, it is the feminine > Je

    IS CHRISTIANITY THE FOUNDATION OF WOKE?
    (More correctly, it is the feminine > Jewish Abrahamic> Marxist-to-woke evolution of warfare by social construction from within – war by feminine sedition.)

    Correct interpretation:
    The woke movement (race Marxism) is the product of the…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-25 22:35:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706437304460390527

    Reply addressees: @D__2__3 @uberboyo

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706379276067500398

  • IS CHRISTIANITY THE FOUNDATION OF WOKE? (More correctly, it is the feminine > Je

    IS CHRISTIANITY THE FOUNDATION OF WOKE?
    (More correctly, it is the feminine > Jewish Abrahamic> Marxist-to-woke evolution of warfare by social construction from within – war by feminine sedition.)

    Correct interpretation:
    The woke movement (race Marxism) is the product of the following sequence of seditious movements:

    1. Female Instinct: The female means of warfare by undermining using social construction of false promises of freedom from the laws of the universe under claims of plausible deniability of innocence, by blaming people, particularly men, and mainly European aristocracy, for the consequences of genetic differences between the sexes, classes, and populations – as oppression. Sexes differ not only in our means of warfare (men direct, physical, and political vs women indirect, verbal, and social).

    2. Abrahamic Sequence: The Jewish separatist revolt against the aristocratic peoples (the indo-european spectrum on the one hand and their ‘trainers’ the Egyptians on the other) adopted the feminine strategy, and over time, especially in response to their defeat, dislocation, and conquest, this evolved into the sequence of abrahamic religions: a slave revolt – which is why they used the symbol of the cross. The sequence is an application of the social construction of the female false promise of freedom from the laws of the universe – resulting in the dark ages in Europe and the destruction and reduction to ashes by the Muslims of every great civilization of the ancient world other than China, and nearly India.

    3. Marxist Sequence: The Jewish separatist revolt by the reformation of supernatural, theological religion into pseudoscientific and ideological marxist to woke sequence of cults – again, the social construction of a fraud, promising freedom from the laws of the universe: scarcity, self-interest, and natural selection – as well as the means of describing those laws: testimonial truth and logical consistency.

    Abrahamic Synthesis of Sex Differences in Deception
    The abrahamic invention that took place after the Roman conquest, resulting in Christianity and rabbinical Judaism, and only later that heresy of Christianity we call Islam – was the product of an innovation in lying that is horrific in consequence, even if fascinating in technical analysis.

    The Jewish people are not innovators in other than what we call ‘mythicism’ but should be translated as storytelling or historical revisionism, which attempts to seduce by suspension of disbelief into an empathic agreement on “feels”, instead of a systematic agreement on “reals” (truth). A deception that is the polar opposite of the European male method of testimony and systematizing or what originated as ‘military reporting, court testimony, and eventually confession’, creating the unique Western tradition of truth before face regardless of cost – as well as our ability to invent reason, logic, empiricism, science.

    So the unification of the feminine means of seduction, deception, storytelling mythicism, loading, framing, suggestion, and obscurantism, with the masculine European system of systematizing was as great an innovation in lying as the European sequence of reason-to-science was an innnovation in testimonial truth.

    The Seditious Sequence of Feminine-Abrahamic War:
    Marxist(LowerClassMarxism) >
    … NeoMarxist(CulturalMarxism) >
    … … Postmodern(TruthMarxism) >
    … … … Trotsky-NeoConservatism >
    … … … … Feminism(SexMarxism) >
    .. … … … … Libertarian(MiddleClassMarxism) >
    … … … … … … Friere’s-Woke (EducationalMarxism) >
    … … … … … … … PC-Woke(Race Marxism)

    Sedition and Treason:
    Using Feminine > Abrahamic > Marxist Warfare by Fraud. Or what we technically refer to as seduction into the false promise of freedom from the four sets of laws of the universe, by the accusation of men as oppressors instead of their DOMESTICATORS and CIVILIZERS, hiding under the moral pretense of plausible deniability that their actions are moral rather than seditious warfare that spreads the feminine instinct of irresponsibility for the commons, such that it overwhelms the incentive for men to take responsibility for the commons – and therefore build civilization.

    Sex Differences:
    The male form of warfare is bad and recoverable. The feminine method of warfare is evil and unrecoverable. Hence the historical reputation of, and treatment of women.

    The Undoing of our Compromise Between the Sexes
    And the left and the feminists have just undone two thousand years of our efforts to domesticate women into civilization such that we could reverse the historical understanding and universal perception of women as childish, impulsive, shallow, greedy, hyper-consumptive, attention-seeking, disloyal, seditious, treasonous, harpies and wh–res for whom Pandora was but a gentle reflection – that men must protect society against by constraining women from public exercise of their natural, almost universally uncontrollable, criminality if not constrained by social pressures to domesticate and limit them.

    Audience
    I cannot control for the IQ and knowledge of my readers, so I can only hope to educate those who have the ability and knowledge to recognize the patterns of causality across the sciences and history I explain to them. That said, I can claim with certainty that this string of causality is the most parsimonious, accurate, explanatory power available now or ever. In other words, this is the science of the evolution of the institutionalization of deception using the feminine means of sedition. I can likewise explain the same arc of male deception. Which is boring by comparison. 😉

    I usually end with ‘cheers’, but there is nothing to cheer here.

    Sincerely

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation


    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-25 22:35:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706437303957123072

  • (which many women will admit in safe company)

    (which many women will admit in safe company)


    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-25 21:04:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706414355036676110

    Reply addressees: @EgregoresGalore @schizarella

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706385670586110260

  • BTW: I love women. Which is why this whole catastrophy of feminism to woke is so

    BTW: I love women. Which is why this whole catastrophy of feminism to woke is so frustrating.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-25 02:56:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706140579606692349

    Reply addressees: @schizarella

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706039167145123939


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    “MEN SHOULD BE PROTECTING WOMEN – BUT FOR SOME REASON THEY”VE GIVEN UP”

    Women are irrational actors, live in imaginary and often magical world, but men are rational actors. We live in the real world, and the world we struggle to make real by our efforts.

    You tell men you hate them 24 hours a day, in every single way possible, and you wonder why entire generations are giving up on you en masse? You (collectively), are out of control, hyper-privileged, hyperconsumtive, irresponsible, selfish, neurotic, magical thinking, attention addicts with only about one percent of women tolerable enough for marriage and long term trust and investment, in a legal political and court system that is entirely for the benefit of women, and entirely at the expense of men, despite that women spend seventy percent of the money, incurr most of the debt, do so for selfish reasons, and consume seventy percdent of government services.

    So what is it precisely that the anti-enfranchisement men and women had wrong about women in commerc and government?

    It took a while. But it turns out – they had nothing wrong. And that surprised even those of us who were optimists.

    So now that you’ve destroyed dating, mating, relationships, the family, replacement reproduction, the education system, the legal system, and the government, and you’ve driven us to the bring of civil war between irresponsible urban and responsible rural, what do you think is going to happen? It’s happening. And if you are under 25 today there aren’t going to be children to pay for your health care, your social security, or to producde enough workers with enough global competitive advantage to ensure that you are other than living your life on the edge of poverty even more so than people are now.

    Youi’ve destroyed the very concept that democdracy is possible. And you’ve reversed the two thousand years we’ve spent, particularly the chivalric and victorian efforts to reframe women as virtous in stead of selfish trivial shallow vain harlots underminers gossips and shrills. Which is precisely why women were contained to the home and second class citizens or les until the industrial revolution gave teh promise of freedom to participate with equal responsibility to the private and common.

    Only to realize that the primary difference between the sexes is male proucition of and responsibilty for common comons and female selfish hyperconsumption and irresponsibility for commons. That’s what feels vs reals means.

    I”m out of the game at my age, but what’s occurring is obvoius cause and consequencde. All life equilibrates to satisfy the needs of sexes and ages and abilities, and the family was the first institution that produced a compromise exchange between the sexes, the ages, and the abilities.

    Women killed the family. Worse. THat was the INTENTION of the feminist movement. To destroy the family. Just as the leftist movement’s ambition is to destroy the family, the classes, the nobility and aristocracy, and reduce us all to children and peasantry.

    Cheers.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1706039167145123939

  • “can we really have opposite-sex friends?”– Short answer: Yes, as long as you a

    –“can we really have opposite-sex friends?”–
    Short answer: Yes, as long as you are both in secure relationships or you’ve been friends for a very long time.

    I’m a Man not a Guy. And I’m career Tech CEO and very minor public intellectual.
    I talk to all sorts of women I’m not at all attracted to or interested in, and would never be. (Although young women today are obviously almost univerally broken – so I avoid them.)
    I do spend business time in public with women. It’s a necessity. Especially employees, salespeople, vendors, customers, activists and almost anyone who wants to speak with me.
    I have generally had executive assistants I spend a lot of time with and value deeply. (Work WIfe).
    I do not spend ‘friendship’ time with women unless in public, and only for coffee, lunch, or dinner.
    I have generally had female friends who provide good advice. Women have a different perspective and I value them.
    I prefer to spend time with a woman I am friends with along with her significant other – and mine. I would never make any man uncomfortable in any way – it would be ‘wrong’.
    I suspect this is because I am gregarious and confident and am totally uninterested in any woman other than the one I’m married or almost married to. 😉
    I used to make use of the girl-gossip network in my companies because the admins know everything and a good relationship with them means they alert you to potential problems. And that provoked some odd suspicion I had more than professional interests.
    Every time its been suggested that I have an interest in a woman in the workplace (or out of it for that matter) it’s been false. And I’ve even taken the heat for a business partner that was ‘enjoying’ one of my assistants.
    It’s very very common for younger women to pursue older successful male execs, and while it’s sometiems flattering it’s largely annoying. 😉 I can’t believe some of the things women have said to me despite knowing I have a long term girlfriend, or am married. Not all women are timid.

    Reply addressees: @datepsych


    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-25 02:55:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706140288639496192

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706132235156418784

  • We men didn’t and don’t fail to protect you from men. We just can’t always and e

    We men didn’t and don’t fail to protect you from men. We just can’t always and everywhere do it if you take our protection for granted.
    Men built all of civiiization and almost all of it for the benefit of women, or rather so that we could benefit women and attract them.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-09-24 22:25:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706072277001945559

    Reply addressees: @Omelett24733001 @schizarella

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706045420974047524