Theme: Sex Differences

  • Joyce. This is false because interpersonally you can judge merit vs cost. Like m

    Joyce.
    This is false because interpersonally you can judge merit vs cost. Like most female intuition it doesn’t scale up. Conversely as I am sure you’ve experienced, male intuition scales well but doesn’t scale down well. This is why men and women shake their heads at each other’s incompetence outside of their scales.

    Women are a disaster in voting, higher education, industrially competitive business, most management, judicial and political office for this reason.

    Empathy that suppresses behavioral change,competitive advantage, responsibility, and accountability.

    As we see in the younger generations.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-11-12 02:39:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1988436472396128513

  • Slavic Women and Apologies. Been there. So true. 😉 https:// youtube.com/shorts/

    Slavic Women and Apologies.
    Been there. So true. 😉

    https://
    youtube.com/shorts/f4WDhcX
    fGOs?si=WEBA55z-E9zAPYhP
    … via
    @YouTube


    Source date (UTC): 2025-11-09 02:32:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1987347493160669362

  • The problem is serious however since female cognitive emotional bias is strong a

    The problem is serious however since female cognitive emotional bias is strong and pre-rational, and women rely on emotion (empathy) and discount or ignore responsibility, cost, and consequence under the instinct not to be left behind, particularly necessary for children. However like all female neuroticism it is merely projection more so than empathy.

    So the question isnt rights because one has no right to harm just because of projection, empathy, ore feelings. Instead, how can women learn reason over instinct and reason. We know the answer: three or more children.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-11-09 00:43:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1987320052820201483

  • (I’m almost afraid to share this) Brad Werrell on the overton window of women’s

    (I’m almost afraid to share this)
    Brad Werrell on the overton window of women’s suffrage…


    Source date (UTC): 2025-11-06 19:51:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1986521720908620098

  • The question is whether the world you wish for is possible. It isn’t. We must go

    The question is whether the world you wish for is possible. It isn’t. We must govern with the humans that exist, not those we wish existed. So the evidence is that women influencing politics kills civilization. Every. Single. Time.

    Every single time.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-11-06 14:22:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1986438957736075442

  • Of course. ;). Though my research in sex differences in cognition ad deceit, and

    Of course. ;). Though my research in sex differences in cognition ad deceit, and deep economic history were more influential on my understanding..


    Source date (UTC): 2025-11-06 13:50:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1986431076357841280

  • It’s your effeminacy. (Really)

    It’s your effeminacy. (Really)


    Source date (UTC): 2025-11-03 20:03:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1985437636153209237

  • The distribution of neoteny, intelligence, agency, ability, and personality trai

    The distribution of neoteny, intelligence, agency, ability, and personality traits, in particular between the sexes, and classes and races means that libertarianism is only possible for and rational for, a minority of exceptional individuals. So the people least desirous of political power are the people most suited to it – only if they have a practical understanding of human nature and experience in managing populations. Ergo it is rule of law by the natural law that enables those people with such constructive biases to deliver value to themselves as well as the polity.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-10-31 19:38:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1984344290127200587

  • RACES I share this kind of thing with regularity. But why is it necessary? The f

    RACES
    I share this kind of thing with regularity. But why is it necessary?

    The feminine cognitive attempt to rewrite history in teh same manner the semitic civilizations promoted mythicism instead of history: loading, framing, and deceiving.

    There are three primary actors in the pseudoscientific attack on human differences.
    1) Boaz and boazian anthropology all of which is, as stated above, mythicism – there is no science behind it.
    2) The frankfurt school of social science, which, as stated above, produced mythicism – again, they literally ‘made it up’ – there is no science behind it.
    3) Perhaps most importantly, Lewontin, and lewontin’s fallacy of the non-existence of race because of statistical fictionalisms (mythicism) he invented and which have no logical or scientific foundation.
    All of these people were jewish, meaning, of semitic genetic and cultural extraction. Jewish culture is the most advance culture using the feminine strategy, just as europeans are the most using the masculine strategy.

    I shouldn’t perhaps have to illustrate the female tendency to storytell (semitic mythicism) vs the male tendency to testify (european history). Nor point out that the intellectual elites in the middle east copied what they could of european thought, but used it to advance their feminine strategy (authoritarian falsehood) over the extant and obviously more successful masculine strategy (rational and empirical truth).


    Source date (UTC): 2025-10-30 17:09:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1983944261675708653

  • Men and women navigate social structures with distinct priorities that shape the

    Men and women navigate social structures with distinct priorities that shape their behaviors in powerful ways.

    Men are driven by a relentless pursuit of status within hierarchies, where their focus on achievement and influence often overshadows attachment to specific roles. This competitive drive explains why men may relinquish formal power when their position in the pecking order is secure—think of historical figures like George Washington, who stepped down after cementing his legacy. For men, the hierarchy is the ultimate arena, and their energy is channeled into climbing it through ambition, alliances, or sheer grit.

    In contrast, women excel at building expansive social networks but face unique challenges in forming deep, lasting friendships. Societal pressures often pit women against one another in subtle competitions for status, attention, or resources, fostering behaviors like relational aggression—think gossip or exclusion—that can erode trust. Studies, such as those by psychologist Nicki Crick, highlight how women may prioritize personal advantage in certain contexts, making broader connections more common than intimate bonds. Yet, when competition is minimized, women forge powerful, supportive friendships, proving their relational strength.

    These differences aren’t absolute but reflect trends rooted in social and evolutionary pressures. Understanding them unlocks deeper insights into human behavior, urging us to rethink how we navigate our own social worlds.

    In other words, wolves vs hens.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-10-24 23:41:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1981868581790081119