Not an aragument. Cognitively feminine disapproval as pretense of argument. Proving my point.
Source date (UTC): 2023-06-17 19:08:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1670146307640393728
Reply addressees: @helenfromhel
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1670145121327751171
RT @curtdoolittle: @_markenau @digitildream @realdanstilwell (Eugenics is about race? Thats not true. Eugenic reproduction benefits every r…
Source date (UTC): 2023-06-17 17:36:05 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1670123162355265538
(Eugenics is about race? Thats not true. Eugenic reproduction benefits every race. The difference is that given race differences in average IQ (a lot, except between east asians(105) and western europeans(103)), some populations require radical reduction of their ‘unfit’. So all races are affected, but some races are affected more than others – but that just means the benefit for those more affected is greater than the benefit of those less affected.)
Reply addressees: @_markenau @digitildream @realdanstilwell
Source date (UTC): 2023-06-17 17:36:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1670123138586140673
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1670120079986421762
Great question.
(a) oddly enough I don’t argue it I just assume it
(b) because I HAVE written a lot about “genetic pacification” (capital punishment) and soft eugenics.
So it’s an argument I’ve included a spot for in the law but it’s so obvious that I haven’t devoted time to writing it yet.
If you think it’s valuable I will. But fundamentally we need to do a LOT of it – as long as it’s for repeat offenders and the evidence isn’t coincidental (beyond reasonable doubt) but incontestable.
Reply addressees: @FlorianRose_
Source date (UTC): 2023-06-16 19:28:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669788984212332544
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669785812362485760
REASONS FOR MALE DEMAND FOR LOWER BODY COUNT
(Biases are distributed in both sexes, so we are merely talking about those men who possess this bias)
Given marriage and divorce are the highest lifetime risk a man experiences:
1. Differences in the population distribution of the disgust response (disgust, purity, loyalty): STDs but disgust purity and loyalty are all the same emotional foundation, so high body counts violate all three.
2. Tendency of Male loyalty over time vs Female devotion in time. (Women seek to consume now, men to capitalize over time).
3. Female status and quality (reputation) are indicative of man’s status and quality, and high body count women are of lower status and value – status and income risk.
4. Female need for attention(consumption) as cheap stimulation by others, vs productive occupation, socialization, and hobbies, means higher relationship risk.
5. Accumulated Trauma and, therefore, relationship risk.
6. Bonding capacity and, therefore, relationship risk.
Simple version: risk mitigation.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
Source date (UTC): 2023-06-16 18:44:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669777945999671307
“ON WOMEN: KNOWLEDGE THAT CAN RUIN YOUR DAY”
Demonstrated behaviors exist and are invariant across time and place. Ergo they exist. I don’t have to will them into anything.
Instead, I, we, all moral people, need only prevent lying – which is what you’re doing. But lying is natural to women because women can’t tell the difference between truth and desirability: it’s the female instinct for the social construction of desirable falsehoods regardless of their correspondence with reality (magical thinking) in order to generate demands from men to satisfy them either directly or indirectly through institutions that they trade for sex, affection, care, and attention, at the minimum cost.
All female behavior is reducible to this simple algorithm. All female speech is negotiation or posturing to achieve that extraction from men’s production. Which is fine in exchange for reproduction – but that’s largely not happening. Women are just exhausting all possibilities for hyperconsumption and undermining all male attempts to preserve capitalization and the Western advantage of institutionalizing maximum individual responsibility for the benefit of all by reducing common costs for all.
What Neomarxism, Feminism, and Woke have achieved, is the reversal of twenty five hundred years of western attempt to create intersexual harmony by constraining male aggression and female undermining (particularly sexual), and this is exposing the natural female character when free of those civilizational constraints: and restoring the ancient world’s description of and treatment of women as the source of all sedition and evil. It turns out that men are bad, yes, but women are seditious and evil, and it took thousands of years to reciprocally domesticate each other, largely by religion (which is a feminine institution).
Be careful what you ask for when you think an equilibrium can be spun to your advantage: there will always be an equal and opposite reaction. And the present one – largely because women are vulnerable to the false promises of the magical thinking of the left, is producing the greatest threat to civilization since the Christian destruction of the ancient world, and the Muslim use of it to destroy the other seven great civilizations of the ancient world, and reduced them to ignorance and decline.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation
Reply addressees: @theelegantbomb
Source date (UTC): 2023-06-15 18:11:50 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669407381644558343
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669386580102901760
Take it to its causal origins: all female behavior is reducible to the maximization of consumption (including attention, status, resources) at the minimum responsibility for the truth and the commons, whenever there is any potential for conflict that might put any of those resources at risk. Women hide behind the pretense of care, but the origin of the pretense of care is selfish: evasion of responsibility.
Reply addressees: @OtonielFilho5 @theelegantbomb
Source date (UTC): 2023-06-15 17:58:46 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669404093788372995
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669403206705717248
The truth doesn’t have anything to do with approval. One of the properties of the feminine mind, is the confusion (conflation, reversal) of true/false with approval/disapproval. In fact, most women can’t tell the difference whatsoever. Same with NAXALT/AXALT fallacy, and female hyper-consumption and attention seeking vs male capitalization and responsibility seeking.
Economies, demographics, the universe, nature, and evolution don’t care whether you like laws of the universe or not.
Reply addressees: @theelegantbomb
Source date (UTC): 2023-06-15 16:21:47 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669379687796047874
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669362100580360192
Earl.
(a) there aren’t many, despite our desperate search for them. We can’t find a single woman that’s theoretical rather than empirical.
(b) There has been a postwar (really post-1960) decline in scientific thought brought about by the introgression of pseudoscience and ‘mathiness’ (the mathematical equivalent) and we appear to just be coming out of it.
(c) I’ve done extensive work on civilizational differences in thought – more than any other – by studying civilizational differences in argument and lying. So Europeans aren’t just W.I.E.R.D., we really do think differently. And high trust oddly makes you think differently too. And even so subtle a thing as English language being evolved for law and as such for science has an effect on cognition, and particularly for innovative cognition.
(d) I can’t verify (yet) if the claims that the northern European gene pool is biased to the autistic end of the spectrum (Systematizing). But we’ll know within a decade or so.
So pre-war claims that people in different civilizations thought differently were only overstated. They weren’t false. Which… has been surprising to all of us.
Reply addressees: @MrEarlG @humanfranklin
Source date (UTC): 2023-06-15 00:17:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669136976375697409
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1668053859766337537
ANOTHER REASON WHY YOU CAN”T WIN HEARTS AND MINDS OF THE LEFT
The difference between left and right is just the feminine search for hyperconsumption, dependency, and evasion of responsibility for the commons because of the potential for conflict, and the masculine search for capitalization, freedom, and responsibility for the commons regardless of the potential for conflict.
There is no aspect of the left, no matter what disposition, that is not the use of lying and deception for the purpose of evading all responsibility for self, others, and commons by extracting or stealing from those who are productive.
The right requires high trust, and the left is untrustworthy, because the left is criminal. You can’t win hearts and minds of people who are criminal, even if those criminals console their criminality with claims of caretaking – at others expense.
The only solution is national divorce. The right can then raise the standard of behavior again, and the left can lower the standard of behavior further, and people will sort into high-trust and low-trust states and city-states. And the left will turn into favellas and the right will struggle to retain a high-trust civilization as once again those who are unfit for advanced civilization seek to migrate to an advanced civilization without adopting the behaviors that make advanced civilization possible.
Ergo. Full integration or forcible exit.
Cheers
Source date (UTC): 2023-06-14 23:17:47 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669121988638523392