Curt Doolittle

Theme: Sex Differences

  • hmmm…. that’s only true in certain agrarian circumstances, and esp where the w

    hmmm…. that’s only true in certain agrarian circumstances, and esp where the women do the farming work. And usually the most impoverished. For the simple reason most men can’t afford them. In fact most societies both past and even present allow polygamy, but (a) few men can afford it, (b) and where men die a lot in war, so surplus women are economically safer.

    Natural form is serial monogamy, with lots of cheating. 😉
    The reason is simple: access to mate is the principle reason men kill. So serial monogamy with lots of (or at least frequent) cheating is the natural equilibrium.

    Reply addressees: @MiranteDaniel @WoodworkerBear

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-04 12:12:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643225109337980930

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643189087505874944

  • KINGDOM OF WOMEN I’ve written about this group before. But there are very narrow

    KINGDOM OF WOMEN
    https://t.co/JDH17V8eOQ

    I’ve written about this group before. But there are very narrow conditions under where this works.
    (a) extreme poverty where women can do the physical labor (b) lack of competitors (c) export of men for labor or the death of men in war.
    In these communities, women run the household with sons, brothers, uncles etc, and men ‘visit’ between women’s households. The men take care of the heavy work like the animals, and women the rest.
    Now, if you’re an even vaguely competent economist, explain why this works for this rare circumstance and why it doesn’t work anywhere else? 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-03 22:53:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643023928921653249

  • Disagree (relucantly) Lefties want irresponsibility for self and commons Rightie

    Disagree (relucantly)
    Lefties want irresponsibility for self and commons
    Righties want responsibility for self and commons

    Why? Reduction of all sex differences in cogntion prouctes a reduction of all human differences in cognition:

    Feminine: Prey bais, Empathic prediction, Interpersonal, Temporal, Verbal, hyperconsumptive, irresponsible for commons (responsible only for offspring) as status.
    vs
    Masculine: Predator bias, Systemic prediction, political, intertemporal, Space-Time, Hypercapitalizing, responsibile for commons as status.

    If you deconstruct any political or sex difference it will result in consumption vs capitalization, responsibility vs not, and status by those two means.

    Humans really are, algorithmically, biologically, physically,r eally that simple. The rest is narrative we use to broadcast non aggression on the one and and compatibilities on the other for the purpose of negotiation acquisition, retention, consumption, of demonstrated interests, and the status that results, because status drives opportunity costs.

    People are just bots.
    Most of history, and certainly theology and philosophy, are just evolved means of virtue signaling means of achieving those two sex differences in ends.

    Truth isn’t always comforting. Sometimes I don’t like my job. 😉

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-03 22:34:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643019147662458885

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1642985723245502466

  • Disagree (relucantly) Lefties want irresponsibility for self and commons Rightie

    Disagree (relucantly)
    Lefties want irresponsibility for self and commons
    Righties want responsibility for self and commons

    Why? Reduction of all sex differences in cogntion prouctes a reduction of all human differences in cognition:

    Feminine: Prey bais, Empathic prediction, Interpersonal, Temporal, Verbal, hyperconsumptive, irresponsible for commons (responsible only for offspring) as status.
    vs
    Masculine: Predator bias, Systemic prediction, political, intertemporal, Space-Time, Hypercapitalizing, responsibile for commons as status.

    If you deconstruct any political or sex difference it will result in consumption vs capitalization, responsibility vs not, and status by those two means.

    Humans really are, algorithmically, biologically, physically,r eally that simple. The rest is narrative we use to broadcast non aggression on the one and and compatibilities on the other for the purpose of negotiation acquisition, retention, consumption, of demonstrated interests, and the status that results, because status drives opportunity costs.

    People are just bots.
    Most of history, and certainly theology and philosophy, are just evolved means of virtue signaling means of achieving those two sex differences in ends.

    Truth isn’t always comforting. Sometimes I don’t like my job. 😉

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute.

    Reply addressees: @SRCHicks

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-03 22:34:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643019147528339458

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1642985723245502466

  • Never happen. Number one reason men kill is over mates. So, historical is (a) se

    Never happen. Number one reason men kill is over mates.
    So, historical is (a) serial monogamy (b) anonymous fathering and maternal households.

    Both create poverty.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-03 22:27:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643017458532360194

    Reply addressees: @WoodworkerBear

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643016002521948160

  • You could (probably ) claim that yes these tend to be sex differences in aesthet

    You could (probably ) claim that yes these tend to be sex differences in aesthetics vs utility.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-03 01:05:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1642694812741541888

    Reply addressees: @Eggggggg_ggggg

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1642694379327324161

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    Well the general trait is innovation, where creativity in the sense of an aesthetic component is a specific application.

    Creative: relating to or involving the imagination or original ideas, especially in the production of an artistic work.
    Innovative: relating to or involving new and origingal ideas especially as related to products.

    In other words they’re synonyms.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1642694379327324161

  • “For civilizations to survive, the bad people (masculine) must contain the evil

    –“For civilizations to survive, the bad people (masculine) must contain the evil people (feminine).”–

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-02 15:57:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1642556803492839425

  • For a guy that mass produces magical thinking on a daily basis, pretends knowled

    For a guy that mass produces magical thinking on a daily basis, pretends knowledge and understanding he doesn’t possess, engages in feminine social construction, using the feminine techniques of seduction into false promises, using the Jewish Marxist techniques of pilpul, critique, and personalizing, heaping undue praise and undue criticism, is a serial cheater on his wives, and LARPS for the dysfunctional lost boys with room temperature IQs, and who certainly can’t grasp even the basic foundations of my work, you’re just demonstrating I’m correct in the most exemplary fashion possible.
    In fact you’re the canonical example of the feminine, Jewish, Abrahamic, Marxist method of seduction and fraud by selling false promise, with magical thinking, sophistry, and critique to an alienated underclass who can sit at home and LARP that they’re virtuous, rather than the powerless, cowardly, weak, incompetent losers that deserve their low status in life. Playing savior to the vulgar peasantry.
    I don’t come after you out of respect for our past conversations which I viewed positively despite our differences. I expect the same treatment in return, or out of reciprocity I’ll return the treatment you give me.
    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @GonzaloLira1968 @kontherad1

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-01 17:21:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1642215552541237251

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1642059519265058817

  • For a guy that mass produces magical thinking on a daily basis, pretends knowled

    For a guy that mass produces magical thinking on a daily basis, pretends knowledge and understanding he doesn’t possess, engages in feminine social construction, using the feminine techniques of seduction into false promises, using the Jewish Marxist techniques of pilpul, critique, and personalizing, heaping undue praise and undue criticism, is a serial cheater on his wives, and LARPS for the dysfunctional lost boys with room temperature IQs, and who certainly can’t grasp even the basic foundations of my work, you’re just demonstrating I’m correct in the most exemplary fashion possible.
    In fact you’re the canonical example of the feminine, Jewish, Abrahamic, Marxist method of seduction and fraud by selling false promise, with magical thinking, sophistry, and critique to an alienated underclass who can sit at home and LARP that they’re virtuous, rather than the powerless, cowardly, weak, incompetent losers that deserve their low status in life. Playing savior to the vulgar peasantry.
    I don’t come after you out of respect for our past conversations which I viewed positively despite our differences. I expect the same treatment in return, or out of reciprocity I’ll return the treatment you give me.
    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-01 17:21:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1642215552713195521

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1642059519265058817

  • (human humor) I dunno. I wanna give this man a medal. He’s spreading good dutch

    (human humor)
    I dunno. I wanna give this man a medal. He’s spreading good dutch genes. A one man eugenics movement. 😉

    –“A Dutch musician and prolific sperm donor who has fathered about 550 children around the world is being sued for allegedly increasing the risk of accidental incest.
    Jonathan Jacob Meijer, 41, has donated sperm to at least 13 clinics, including 11 in the Netherlands, where he was blacklisted in 2017 for fathering 102 children”–

    Science: Sorry, but 500 children – especially worldwide – for one man is nothing. He has a looooong way to go to catch up with his predecessors.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-31 15:44:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1641828943790497803