—“Men find their place in the competence hierarchy. Women either deny the hierarchy or insist on its instability.”—Megan Kusui
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-13 19:50:00 UTC
Theme: Sex Differences
-
THE OTHER UNNAMED GENDER-SPECIFIC COGNITIVE BIAS (response) How long have you be
THE OTHER UNNAMED GENDER-SPECIFIC COGNITIVE BIAS
(response)
How long have you been following me? Because if you don’t know when and why I use the imperative form, it cant be long.
I don’t have a name for your particular form of “disapproval by shaming” – as distinct from an appropriate argument against falsehood – but it is strangely a behavior as gender-specific as NAXALT.
I should name it.
Agency requires we can separate the preferable, from the good, from the true. And address each accordingly as a personal preference, shared preference, or truth independent of preference or good.
Whatever we call it, it’s one of the gender-specific cognitive biases that conflates preference, good, and truth, such that there is no distinction between the preferable, the presumption of knowledge of the good and the disregard for the true.
Using this form of disapproval means one lacks Agency. It means that one is not fully human, but still a mammal lacking reason, but able to speak – even if not sensibly.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-09 19:39:00 UTC
-
Untitled
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/08/how-white-women-use-strategic-tears-to-avoid-accountability???
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-09 19:22:00 UTC
-
The vast majority of Women try to reduce or eliminate social threats, so they co
The vast majority of Women try to reduce or eliminate social threats, so they conform to whatever power they perceive. It’s not rational from a male perspective because if there is an external threat women will rapidly and easily undermine the men (their host).
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-09 19:01:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/994291396101238784
-
The vast majority of Women try to reduce or eliminate social threats, so they co
The vast majority of Women try to reduce or eliminate social threats, so they conform to whatever power they perceive. It’s not rational from a male perspective because if there is an external threat women will rapidly and easily undermine the men (their host).
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-09 15:01:00 UTC
-
—“why Are We Not Seeing a Shock from Gender Asymmetry in India and China?”—
1- Economic opportunity is masking conflict – as it always does. The return of economic limitations restores group conflicts. 2 – Substantial underclass populations still preserving family. 3 – So there is sex pressure but still hope. 4 – And there is marriage retention and still hope. 5 – Unlike the west, they are not wealthy enough to destroy the economic security of the family. 6 – Japan is the … oddity. (Low testosterone in asian men is not a good thing) In any society where the woman are capable of both single motherhood and middle class (technological) workplace substitution of men, we should see a retreat to serial marriage and excess males. Males are cost to a woman while raising children if they are working. This same effect won’t occur in populations with IQ’s below 95 (massive underclasses). And the upper classes will always find greater competitive and status value in dual incomes or high male income with supported females. Without eugenics either environmental, agrarian, or political, it is very hard to maintain human advancement.
-
—“why Are We Not Seeing a Shock from Gender Asymmetry in India and China?”—
1- Economic opportunity is masking conflict – as it always does. The return of economic limitations restores group conflicts. 2 – Substantial underclass populations still preserving family. 3 – So there is sex pressure but still hope. 4 – And there is marriage retention and still hope. 5 – Unlike the west, they are not wealthy enough to destroy the economic security of the family. 6 – Japan is the … oddity. (Low testosterone in asian men is not a good thing) In any society where the woman are capable of both single motherhood and middle class (technological) workplace substitution of men, we should see a retreat to serial marriage and excess males. Males are cost to a woman while raising children if they are working. This same effect won’t occur in populations with IQ’s below 95 (massive underclasses). And the upper classes will always find greater competitive and status value in dual incomes or high male income with supported females. Without eugenics either environmental, agrarian, or political, it is very hard to maintain human advancement.
-
—“Do you have to be right-Wing and emotionless to be a masculine / real man ?”—
Um. I dunno about emotionless, but if that means “not open to femininemanipulation or argumentative sophistry”, then yes. As far as I know to be a left wing man requires you’re effeminate in temperament, suggestible under effeminate manipulation, a practitioner of argumentative sophistry, and you are completely ignorant of demographics, genetics, economics, and the behavior of people in organizations and groups. I mean. That’s pretty much on the mark.
-
—“Do you have to be right-Wing and emotionless to be a masculine / real man ?”—
Um. I dunno about emotionless, but if that means “not open to femininemanipulation or argumentative sophistry”, then yes. As far as I know to be a left wing man requires you’re effeminate in temperament, suggestible under effeminate manipulation, a practitioner of argumentative sophistry, and you are completely ignorant of demographics, genetics, economics, and the behavior of people in organizations and groups. I mean. That’s pretty much on the mark.
-
“That’s a [gender here] problem”
Curious. Men both consciously and unconsciously demarcate their responsibilities an interests by “that’s a woman’s problem”. In other words, women are better suited, more interested, and more able to solve that category of problems. Do women do the same thing? Do women demarcate their responsibilities by saying “that’s a man’s problem”? If so, on what?