Theme: Sex Differences

  • “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. It’s almost as if statistical reasoning doesn’t stop at the door just because we want it to.”—Duke Newcomb


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-25 17:32:00 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 😉

    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.   )

    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): 2019-10-25 16:01:00 UTC

  • Training, Intuition, bias, and predisposition are two different things, yet most

    Training, Intuition, bias, and predisposition are two different things, yet most of the gender-neutral literature measures the results of training not disposition, impulse, and bias.

    Why? Measurements evolved for measurement of men.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 15:17:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187387544234803206

  • The brain functions by a market for attention. Differences in brain structure es

    The brain functions by a market for attention. Differences in brain structure especially between genders, provide increases or decreases in attention achievable by different regions, with… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=491857614744467&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 15:15:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187387197403607041

  • THE ECONOMICS OF DATING AFAIK, both women and men want to obtain a premium, but

    THE ECONOMICS OF DATING

    AFAIK, both women and men want to obtain a premium, but a premium they can afford (not lose their investment); Women want to insure they bias the attention in the… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=491841378079424&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 14:47:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187379977861435392

  • So, women seek an equilibrium under which they increase access to in-group socia

    So, women seek an equilibrium under which they increase access to in-group social opportunity, have the resources to do so, but are able to control the source of resources, through control of attention. Men with money monopolize attention, and increase women’s competition.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 14:41:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187378497934761987

    Reply addressees: @DegenRolf

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187377992516984833


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @DegenRolf AFAIK, both women and men want to obtain a premium, but a premium they can afford (not lose their investment); Women want to insure they bias the attention in the relationship, or that through a relationship they increase their attention. Attention = Access to social opportunity.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1187377992516984833


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @DegenRolf AFAIK, both women and men want to obtain a premium, but a premium they can afford (not lose their investment); Women want to insure they bias the attention in the relationship, or that through a relationship they increase their attention. Attention = Access to social opportunity.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1187377992516984833

  • AFAIK, both women and men want to obtain a premium, but a premium they can affor

    AFAIK, both women and men want to obtain a premium, but a premium they can afford (not lose their investment); Women want to insure they bias the attention in the relationship, or that through a relationship they increase their attention. Attention = Access to social opportunity.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 14:39:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187377992516984833

    Reply addressees: @DegenRolf

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187233189569421312


    IN REPLY TO:

    @DegenRolf

    Do women find wealthy men more attractive in a dating context? Not if they come straight out with their bank account. https://t.co/KzOp9GO7Uo https://t.co/UlMPr43Vhf

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187233189569421312

  • DIFFERENCES IN GENDER NEUTRAL MEASUREMENT Training, bias, intuition, impulse, an

    DIFFERENCES IN GENDER NEUTRAL MEASUREMENT

    Training, bias, intuition, impulse, and predisposition are a spectrum of very different things, yet most of the gender-neutral literature measures the results of training not disposition, impulse, and bias. Why? Measurements evolved for measurement of men trained to fulfill roles in a hierarchical distribution.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 11:16:00 UTC

  • GENDER AND THE BRAIN AS A MARKET FOR ATTENTION The brain functions by a market f

    GENDER AND THE BRAIN AS A MARKET FOR ATTENTION

    The brain functions by a market for attention. Differences in brain structure especially between genders, provide increases or decreases in attention achievable by different regions, with urgent attention provided by fears, and long term attention provided by incentives. Attention is easier for men because we compartmentalize our brains with less interaction, and harder for women because their brains are more integrated. Worse, the ability to suppress impulse from the frontal region and back to the hippocampal region and own to the thalamus varies by individual regardless of gender. Worse, men are more dominant and less agreeable by a bit, and as such are more likely to express physical urgencies, where women verbal urgencies.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 11:15:00 UTC

  • THE ECONOMICS OF DATING AFAIK, both women and men want to obtain a premium, but

    THE ECONOMICS OF DATING

    AFAIK, both women and men want to obtain a premium, but a premium they can afford (not lose their investment); Women want to insure they attract the majority of attention in the relationship (are consumers of attention), or that through a relationship they increase their attention. Attention provides discounts on access to social opportunity – particularly for status signaling and verbal coercion.

    So, women seek an equilibrium under which they increase access to in-group social opportunity, have the resources to do so, but are able to control the source of resources, through control of attention. Men with money garner attention, put men in an advantageous position in relation to the woman, and increase women’s competition.

    Women want to buy with attention, words, and affection (low cost). Men want to buy with resources (high cost). The problem is women’s attention is scarce, and desirable, so it’s costly.

    There is nothing in psychology, sociology, ethics, politics, or group strategy that is not readily expressible in economic terms – emotions and intuitions are nothing more than evolution providing us with information on how to acquire some sort of resource discounting our costs.

    Any theory in metaphysics, psychology, sociology, ethics, politics, or group strategy must be constructable from rational incentives to acquire some sort of discount or premium, or the theory is false. It’s no different from any other of the logics: all logic is falsificationary.

    The principle problem facing the transformation of linguistic (metaphysical), psychological,social, legal, political, economic, and military disciplines is a failure to adopt the full accounting in those disciplines using economic equilibration = entropy in the physical sciences.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 10:46:00 UTC