Correct. There are two cognitive elites producing systematic thought projects: Europeans for the masculine and Jewish for the feminine. It’s rather fascinating how accurately these two groups of people reflect the genetic and biological biases of the different sexes, rather than…
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 22:32:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635771020047970306
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635737307209760787
FEMALE AND JEWISH METHODS OF THINKING VS MALE AND EUROPEAN
(science, testimony, sovereignty, and reciprocity are male concepts.)
Women are just as aggressive and warlike as men, they just express aggression and war differently from men: by parasitism, special pleading, relativism, undermining, social construction, seduction (baiting into hazard), sedition, treason.
So if we study male and female differences we observe that the Jews conduct warfare as do women. Why? Weakness, empathizing, verbal acuity: devotion, nepotism, seduction (baiting into hazard), double standards, pilpul(sophistry) and critique(undermining), social construction, sedition, and treason.
Why? I wont’ get into this in detail but there are pretty large differences between the races in subtle expression. And ingroup traditions accelerate group selection.
So to some degree (and once you see it you can’t unsee it) the semitic peoples as a trend, jews in general somewhat, and the ashkenazi in particular have either narrowed or reversed cognitive sexual dimorphism.
We can see this in race differences in expression of mental illness and antisocial behavior, as well as means of expression (langauge) means of argument (aggression), occupational selection (talking, ‘shopping’, ‘hazarding’), family organization, political affiliation, and religious or cultural literature (critique).
So, personally I find it fascinating. And professionaly I find it allowed me to solve most of our problems by minor reform to the law, that prohibit female antisocial to warfare behavire, as thoroughly as male antisocial to warfare behavior.
And you know what? That let me understand what’s wrong with the world regardless of sex. Lots of baiting into hazard – everywhere.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 17:30:23 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635694879706689548
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635691424258699281
FEMALE AND JEWISH METHODS OF THINKING VS MALE AND EUROPEAN
(science, testimony, sovereignty, and reciprocity are male concepts.)
Women are just as aggressive and warlike as men, they just express aggression and war differently from men: by parasitism, special pleading, relativism, undermining, social construction, seduction (baiting into hazard), sedition, treason.
So if we study male and female differences we observe that the Jews conduct warfare as do women. Why? Weakness, empathizing, verbal acuity: devotion, nepotism, seduction (baiting into hazard), double standards, pilpul(sophistry) and critique(undermining), social construction, sedition, and treason.
Why? I wont’ get into this in detail but there are pretty large differences between the races in subtle expression. And ingroup traditions accelerate group selection.
So to some degree (and once you see it you can’t unsee it) the semitic peoples as a trend, jews in general somewhat, and the ashkenazi in particular have either narrowed or reversed cognitive sexual dimorphism.
We can see this in race differences in expression of mental illness and antisocial behavior, as well as means of expression (langauge) means of argument (aggression), occupational selection (talking, ‘shopping’, ‘hazarding’), family organization, political affiliation, and religious or cultural literature (critique).
So, personally I find it fascinating. And professionaly I find it allowed me to solve most of our problems by minor reform to the law, that prohibit female antisocial to warfare behavire, as thoroughly as male antisocial to warfare behavior.
And you know what? That let me understand what’s wrong with the world regardless of sex. Lots of baiting into hazard – everywhere.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
Reply addressees: @superkanga @KiwiBreeder
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 17:30:23 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635694879543111680
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635691424258699281
Are you saying that the universe, or god, is hotile to the feminine mind, whether women or jewish? Becuase if we construct argumetns from the first principles of the laws of nature. And if the laws of nature are so. And you require social cosntruction of falsehood to evade them, deny them, and subject others to harm by doing so, that’s simply an admission that women and jews are criminals? Is that what you’re arguing?
Is that right? 😉
I’m not anti anyone.
I’m anti lying and denying for psychological sedation instead of maturing into full adulthood and behaving consistently within the laws of nature, so that no one other than children and the mentally defective export harms on the rest of mankind.
If you are born with extra neurosis, as both of these groups are, then therapy is beneficial for you and mankind while lying and denying and magical thinking are harmful.
-Cheers 😉
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 17:12:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635690318371643394
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635688735630303237
Are you saying that the universe, or god, is hotile to the feminine mind, whether women or jewish? Becuase if we construct argumetns from the first principles of the laws of nature. And if the laws of nature are so. And you require social cosntruction of falsehood to evade them, deny them, and subject others to harm by doing so, that’s simply an admission that women and jews are criminals? Is that what you’re arguing?
Is that right? 😉
I’m not anti anyone.
I’m anti lying and denying for psychological sedation instead of maturing into full adulthood and behaving consistently within the laws of nature, so that no one other than children and the mentally defective export harms on the rest of mankind.
If you are born with extra neurosis, as both of these groups are, then therapy is beneficial for you and mankind while lying and denying and magical thinking are harmful.
-Cheers 😉
Reply addressees: @BigTParker @KiwiBreeder
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 17:12:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635690318266789888
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635688735630303237
What do individual women in history, have to do with all women postwar?
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 14:27:03 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635648739967639558
Reply addressees: @WillCarver15 @FrailSkeleton
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635630123197124609
What an odd question.
Of course not.
I’m just doing my job of stating the obvious medium and long-term consequences.
We can create artificial eggs
We can’t quite create artificial wombs.
Is that a solution?
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 02:44:05 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635471835625140224
Reply addressees: @AuthorCreekmore @FrailSkeleton
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635470371078938624
(Meredith: given your age and family I assume you’re out of the dating market. And certainly not in the GenZ market. (At least I hope not – that’s creepy.) But if you look at what’s happening in the dating, mating, marriage and reproduction market, especially in the cities and…
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 00:49:50 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635443080617766912
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635439232809328640
It’s not a question of ‘blame’.
It’s a simple problem of the intersection between population (reproductive) demand, present levels of taxation and redistribution, and men and women’s incentives.
The 12K years of agrarian incentives just don’t exist any longer. Why wouldn’t we return to pre-agrarian norm of a household of three generations of a woman, her sons and daughters, and roving men for sex and reproduction?
Why wouldn’t men, or at least a large percentage of them, do as in pre-feminist-activism return to producing large numbers of men’s organizations, clubs, dorms, businesses, and men and women return to living almost entirely separate lives again?
Why wouldn’t the historical norm of marriage as a means of securing property and inheritance among people with those assets, and serial monogamy or polyamory for the rest. The Irish only stopped serial monogamy in the 1800’s and the Ashkenazi serial monogamy and polyamory in the 1500s. There are still places in Africa where men live in one ‘village’ and women in another.
My point is, that we aren’t anywhere near working through the experiment we’re conducting, and it’s increasingly clear that women are following a consumption curve (maximization) and men are presently seeking a new social economic model. And while your generation and mine don’t matter so much. And while it varies from region to region. We are seeing total reproductive collapse among educated urban women.
I know you’re trying to make moral arguments, but I work in the spectrum of economics(cooperation) and law(conflict) and it’s not a moral question to me. I don’t care. But the consequences of our actions are what they are.
You won’t like this but while men are unconscious of the burden of children upon women, women are equally unconscious of and even blind to the burden of the commons on men.
Reply addressees: @KiwiBreeder @ThruTheHayes @TheAutistocrat @TSSuppository
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 00:42:59 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635441357442490369
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635438016931020801
It’s not a question of ‘blame’.
It’s a simple problem of the intersection between population (reproductive) demand, present levels of taxation and redistribution, and men and women’s incentives.
The 12K years of agrarian incentives just don’t exist any longer. Why wouldn’t we return to pre-agrarian norm of a household of three generations of a woman, her sons and daughters, and roving men for sex and reproduction?
Why wouldn’t men, or at least a large percentage of them, do as in pre-feminist-activism return to producing large numbers of men’s organizations, clubs, dorms, businesses, and men and women return to living almost entirely separate lives again?
Why wouldn’t the historical norm of marriage as a means of securing property and inheritance among people with those assets, and serial monogamy or polyamory for the rest. The Irish only stopped serial monogamy in the 1800’s and the Ashkenazi serial monogamy and polyamory in the 1500s. There are still places in Africa where men live in one ‘village’ and women in another.
My point is, that we aren’t anywhere near working through the experiment we’re conducting, and it’s increasingly clear that women are following a consumption curve (maximization) and men are presently seeking a new social economic model. And while your generation and mine don’t matter so much. And while it varies from region to region. We are seeing total reproductive collapse among educated urban women.
I know you’re trying to make moral arguments, but I work in the spectrum of economics(cooperation) and law(conflict) and it’s not a moral question to me. I don’t care. But the consequences of our actions are what they are.
You won’t like this but while men are unconscious of the burden of children upon women, women are equally unconscious of and even blind to the burden of the commons on men.
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 00:42:59 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635441357572407301
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635438016931020801