Theme: Sex Differences

  • 3) The incorporation of women into democratic majority rather than their own hou

    3) The incorporation of women into democratic majority rather than their own house, or into the house of the family.
    4) The rapid immigration of underclass europeans, especially catholics, for the first time after the civil war, and especially thru the depression.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 16:45:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189584203589001217

    Reply addressees: @natrolleon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189583750369366017


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @natrolleon 1) Failure of the church(es) to solve the problem presented by darwin by reforming (splitting) into theological, philosophical, and empirical sects.
    2) Failure to create a separate House of the Family when the church failed to reform

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1189583750369366017


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @natrolleon 1) Failure of the church(es) to solve the problem presented by darwin by reforming (splitting) into theological, philosophical, and empirical sects.
    2) Failure to create a separate House of the Family when the church failed to reform

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1189583750369366017

  • WHAT ‘TRADITIONAL’ MEANS, WHAT TO SAY INSTEAD, AND HOW TO RESTORE RECIPROCITY BE

    WHAT ‘TRADITIONAL’ MEANS, WHAT TO SAY INSTEAD, AND HOW TO RESTORE RECIPROCITY BETWEEN GENDERS.

    Advice to Libertarian(ideology), Constitutional (rule of law), Right(normative tradition), and… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=496045784325650&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 16:27:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189579625053245441

  • THE PAST CHALLENGE OF BRINGING WOMEN INTO, AND KEEPING THEM IN, PROPERTARIANISM

    THE PAST CHALLENGE OF BRINGING WOMEN INTO, AND KEEPING THEM IN, PROPERTARIANISM

    —“Enjoying your posts”— A very kind woman ๐Ÿ˜‰

    Awesome.

    It’s very hard for us to keep women interested, so… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=496038987659663&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 16:18:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189577288695848960

  • “The crazy notion that overlapping distributions can still have divergent centra

    —“The crazy notion that overlapping distributions can still have divergent central tendencies and dispersion. Itโ€™s almost as if statistical reasoning doesnโ€™t stop at the door just because we want it to.”—Duke Newcomb


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 16:17:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189577137272975361

  • THE “CREEPY” WORD I swear. From the time I was in HS I had at least one female s

    THE “CREEPY” WORD

    I swear. From the time I was in HS I had at least one female stalker all the f—king time. They’re all nuts. Social media just makes the current batch visible to everyone. And they all use the same female weaponry. Sex. (Which is fine when your in HS.) Sex has not been a problem. Women like me. Always. Any charisma at all will attract some range of women. Charisma has to be demonstrated. Unfortunately it attracts the crazies. and no, it’s not flattering. It’s creepy. And yes, women do not have a monopoly on judging the opposite sex as creepy. Women are just waaaaay better at hiding it, and men are just waaaaay more willing to take the freebies.

    And yes, they do send you the female equivalent of d-ck pics.

    And it’s just as creepy to men as it is to women.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 16:06:00 UTC

  • MEN EVOLVED FOR ANALYTICS (POLITICS) AND WOMEN FOR EMPATHY (CHILDREN) (sarcastic

    MEN EVOLVED FOR ANALYTICS (POLITICS) AND WOMEN FOR EMPATHY (CHILDREN)
    (sarcastic humor warning)

    Yes, the ability of the Academy to sell non-stem courses in and emotional sedation to women… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=496028290994066&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 16:00:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189572857434660864

  • You do: – approval or rejection (feminine) – desirable or undesirable (feminine)

    You do:
    – approval or rejection (feminine)
    – desirable or undesirable (feminine)
    – proportional or disproportional. (feminine lef)
    – moral or immoral (christian right)
    – right or wrong…. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=496027297660832&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 15:58:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189572406828064771

  • WOMEN EVOLVED to make use of the market for sovereignty, particularly sovereignt

    WOMEN EVOLVED to make use of the market for sovereignty, particularly sovereignty from males seeking to limit their choice of reproduction and limits to their consumption.

    Conversely, men in… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=496026580994237&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 15:57:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1189572138233221120

  • WHAT ‘TRADITIONAL’ MEANS, WHAT TO SAY INSTEAD, AND HOW TO RESTORE RECIPROCITY BE

    WHAT ‘TRADITIONAL’ MEANS, WHAT TO SAY INSTEAD, AND HOW TO RESTORE RECIPROCITY BETWEEN GENDERS.

    Advice to Libertarian(ideology), Constitutional (rule of law), Right(normative tradition), and Religious(theological tradition): Avoid “Traditional” as it’s indefensible. (FWIW; it means ’empirically successful in pre technological history because of the division of labor necessary under intergenerational agrarianism.’)

    Better argument is “Biological gender roles constitute the optimum Nash equilibrium under which all of us do the best we can even if none of us or few of us do as well as we’d wish, without imposing irreciprocal hardship upon one another.”

    This is why we evolved paring off and serial monogamy, and only developed long term monogamy as (a) we lived longer (b) we developed property and productivity and (c) were able to perform intergenerational care in exchange for intergenerational inheritance.

    Because of the narrower distribution of desirable men, and the wider distribution of desirable women and the increase in the division of labor such that women are freed from manual household labor like men are (largely)freed from manual environmental labor, we can no longer expect postwar rates of marriage, and will return to pre-industrial rates of marriage – preserving it more commonly among the better classes who have greater interests in property and its returns, and the working and laboring classes who possess sufficient in-class sexual social market value, and sufficient conscientiousness and reciprocity, and returning to serial or parallel relations around maternal households living on the edge of self sufficiency.

    However, we can eliminate ir-reciprocity for MEN in the current era, by (a) ending marriage to the state (redistribution); (b) ending community property, alimony, child support, (c) restore liability for interference in a marriage; (e) restore voluntary disassociation so that men can reform paternal institutions of reciprocal support in lieu of marriage; and (d) forcible savings for retirement that is unattachable by anyone and everyone as insurance by and for the polity from your moral hazard of self insufficiency.

    In other words, we can restore reciprocal interest in the returns on investment in a partnership, by restoring the disincentive to parasitically live off others permitted by their intuition of reciprocity against moral hazard.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 12:27:00 UTC

  • THE PAST CHALLENGE OF BRINGING WOMEN INTO, AND KEEPING THEM IN, PROPERTARIANISM

    THE PAST CHALLENGE OF BRINGING WOMEN INTO, AND KEEPING THEM IN, PROPERTARIANISM

    —“Enjoying your posts”— A very kind woman ๐Ÿ˜‰

    Awesome.

    It’s very hard for us to keep women interested, so that makes me (and the leadership) very happy.

    Three reasons it’s challenging: (I need a reason to post this so I’ll seize the opportunity you’ve created. ใ€€ )

    The general strategy of restoring the compromise between the genders that makes raising children, family, civil society, harmonious society, possible tends to attract men falsifying the excesses of marxism, feminism, postmodernism, and denialism (political correctness) when masculine men always and everywhere think in systems and politics, and women in empathy and relationships means that if we don’t find women who’ve had strong fathers and brothers, that they too often cannot translate male systematizing and political speech(aggregates), and interpret it as personal speech, or and interpersonal speech and find this offensive.

    Worse, we can attract men with bad experiences making it worse. SO this is why I spend time writing about male and female relationships in economic terms so that we can return to a compromise between the genders rather than a see-saw of conflcit between extremes.

    Worse, I teach in the masculine method of competition using king of the hill games, taking positions i agree with, disagree with, or can go other way with, or which can be interpreted by me advocating both ways. This generates lots of masculine huffing and chuffing and flexing and dominance, which is how men love to learn and will value what they learn. And very few women like to play the king of the hill game. Most women tend to referee the men instead. And that’s probably our natural dispositions.,

    So a woman has to be able to say ‘thats just silly man talk’ the same way men say ‘thats just silly women talk’ because we’re both expressing our genetic impulses instead of working on compromise through trades. The difference is that is almost universal for masculine men to say ‘men and women engage in silly man talk, and silly women talk and that’s ok’. And for evolutionary reasons – men fear only of force not words, and women primarily concerned with words, both for their own protection from other women, and for protection of their children on many levels – including preventing them from ‘learning what they can’t yet make use of’.

    I think part of our transition out of the more analytic content and more into the religious, social, and political application of p-law is helping our expansion. Very few people want to understand testimonial truth – and I’m not sure how many can. lol )


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-30 12:18:00 UTC