Curt Doolittle

Theme: Sex Differences

  • JUST USE THE WORD: INFANTILIZATION I really don’t understand why we don’t just s

    JUST USE THE WORD: INFANTILIZATION

    I really don’t understand why we don’t just state the obvious, that the female mind of reproductive necessity biases heavily to that which she can control: infatilism. And this is why women take such great fascination with babies, and prefer their children are born with properties that make them pliable and their ‘friends’ rather successful competitors. Because women must be strong and possess agency to raise those who are strong and with agency. And women who are weak an lack agency wish children who they can control despite their weakness and agency.

    Abrahamism, Marxism, Feminism, Postmodernism: they advocate infantilism.

    Because their followers have infantile minds.

    And I suspect that like everything else, that’s because in 80% of cases they have infantile brains.

    And that during the great transformation, buddha came close, but only Epicurious, Zeno and Aristotle got it right.

    Meaning, living in correspondence with reality without submitting to it, by making the mind as strong as the body, ether by Achilles/Alexander(aristocracy), Zeno/Aurelius (Middle class), or Epicurious (Working Class), but never by abandoning reality to a fictionalism (underclass).

    These are adulthoods. Agency. Whether for the powerful, the influential (middle class), or the valuable (Working Class).

    And just as we can train people in reading, writing, math, accounting, and physics – we can train people in stoicism, epicureanism, and heroism.

    But that is counter to the infantile: because all of them require agency, and the infantile is still an undomesticated animal, neither genetically able, nor sufficiently trained, to be included in that label of sentience and agency we call ‘Human’.

    The infantile, is equal to, the animal.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-01 13:25:00 UTC

  • “men make endless informational videos, arguments, and trade false insults and t

    —“men make endless informational videos, arguments, and trade false insults and true compliments. Women make selfies, give false compliments, and disapprove, shame, and ridicule anything that implies depreciation of their status, impulses, or emotions.”—

  • “men make endless informational videos, arguments, and trade false insults and t

    —“men make endless informational videos, arguments, and trade false insults and true compliments. Women make selfies, give false compliments, and disapprove, shame, and ridicule anything that implies depreciation of their status, impulses, or emotions.”—

  • “men make endless informational videos, arguments, and trade false insults and t

    —“men make endless informational videos, arguments, and trade false insults and true compliments. Women make selfies, give false compliments, and disapprove, shame, and ridicule anything that implies depreciation of their status, impulses, or emotions.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-29 19:11:00 UTC

  • My answer to Why has there been so much debate recently about race and IQ?

    My answer to Why has there been so much debate recently about race and IQ? https://www.quora.com/Why-has-there-been-so-much-debate-recently-about-race-and-IQ/answer/Curt-Doolittle?srid=u4Qv

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-28 17:27:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/957666472079364096

  • Conservatives Are More Attractive Than Liberals

    (we’ve known this forever, but yet another study) Effects of physical attractiveness on political beliefs Rolfe Daus Peterson (a1) and Carl L. Palmer (a2) Access Volume 36, Issue 2 Fall 2017 , pp. 3-16 https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2017.18Published online: 27 December 2017 Abstract Physical attractiveness is an important social factor in our daily interactions. Scholars in social psychology provide evidence that attractiveness stereotypes and the “halo effect” are prominent in affecting the traits we attribute to others. However, the interest in attractiveness has not directly filtered down to questions of political behavior beyond candidates and elites. Utilizing measures of attractiveness across multiple surveys, we examine the relationship between attractiveness and political beliefs. Controlling for socioeconomic status, we find that more attractive individuals are more likely to report higher levels of political efficacy, identify as conservative, and identify as Republican. These findings suggest an additional mechanism for political socialization that has further implications for understanding how the body intertwines with the social nature of politics.

  • Conservatives Are More Attractive Than Liberals

    (we’ve known this forever, but yet another study) Effects of physical attractiveness on political beliefs Rolfe Daus Peterson (a1) and Carl L. Palmer (a2) Access Volume 36, Issue 2 Fall 2017 , pp. 3-16 https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2017.18Published online: 27 December 2017 Abstract Physical attractiveness is an important social factor in our daily interactions. Scholars in social psychology provide evidence that attractiveness stereotypes and the “halo effect” are prominent in affecting the traits we attribute to others. However, the interest in attractiveness has not directly filtered down to questions of political behavior beyond candidates and elites. Utilizing measures of attractiveness across multiple surveys, we examine the relationship between attractiveness and political beliefs. Controlling for socioeconomic status, we find that more attractive individuals are more likely to report higher levels of political efficacy, identify as conservative, and identify as Republican. These findings suggest an additional mechanism for political socialization that has further implications for understanding how the body intertwines with the social nature of politics.

  • CONSERVATIVES ARE MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN LIBERALS (we’ve known this forever, but y

    CONSERVATIVES ARE MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN LIBERALS

    (we’ve known this forever, but yet another study)

    Effects of physical attractiveness on political beliefs

    Rolfe Daus Peterson (a1) and Carl L. Palmer (a2)

    Access Volume 36, Issue 2 Fall 2017 , pp. 3-16

    https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2017.18Published online: 27 December 2017

    Abstract

    Physical attractiveness is an important social factor in our daily interactions. Scholars in social psychology provide evidence that attractiveness stereotypes and the “halo effect” are prominent in affecting the traits we attribute to others. However, the interest in attractiveness has not directly filtered down to questions of political behavior beyond candidates and elites. Utilizing measures of attractiveness across multiple surveys, we examine the relationship between attractiveness and political beliefs. Controlling for socioeconomic status, we find that more attractive individuals are more likely to report higher levels of political efficacy, identify as conservative, and identify as Republican. These findings suggest an additional mechanism for political socialization that has further implications for understanding how the body intertwines with the social nature of politics.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-27 16:20:00 UTC

  • “QUESTION: IF WHITE PEOPLE CAME FROM NEANDERTHALS WHY DO THEY HAVE SUCH NICE FEA

    —“QUESTION: IF WHITE PEOPLE CAME FROM NEANDERTHALS WHY DO THEY HAVE SUCH NICE FEATURES?”— White features, like East Asian features, are due to paedomorphic selection (read about it). Largely by decreasing testosterone, it appears. Which is also how we domesticate and produce paedomorphic traits in domesticated animals. The difference is that east asians evolved from an earlier branch out of africa, and progressed even farther (hence reduced sexual development) and migrated from the south while whites evolved (apparently) either from a later group, a different group, or as the product of groups interacting between africa, the levant, and europe, causing greater competition than was available in east asia. White people do not come from Neanderthals. A very small number of West Eurasians PRIOR TO BEING WHITE reproduced with Neanderthals – and most likely in the Levant. White skin developed around 20K years ago, and Neanderthals were extinct long before that. White people in their current condition developed sometime before the indo european expansion (the inventors of Horse, Chariot, and Bronze) around 4000BC, and likely in the european plain between poland and european russia (the urals) in that borderland that is now Ukraine. 1 – West Asian europeans with darker skin were exterminated in europe. 2 – White people with black hair were almost exterminated in europe. 3 – White people with brown eyes were partly exterminated in northern europe. In other words, (the data from last year confirms) the Yamna expansion appears to have not been one of continuous integration, but outright replacement. Whites – at least northern european whites (North Sea) – are super-predators, even among humans. Which is why everyone fears them. (See Hansen). Probably because of our relatively high detachment compared to other genetic groups. (Which accounts for certain psychological benefits and defects common in Europeans: psychopathy and neuroticism in the extremes.) The only people close to europeans in evolutionary progress are east asians and they have lower verbal acuity in exchange for higher non verbal acuity. (We tend to think of the japanese as at least equals – and that is ‘rare’.) Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • What Are Physically Strongest And Weakest Races In The World?

    That is a great question, but I don’t know … hmm.. Certainly Africans have the physique that evolved in harshest conditions requiring the greatest durability, and in all tests in the real world they are certainly the most durable. Certainly some native south americans have extraordinary cardiovascular capability. And as far as I know they are the strongest per cm of height. Certainly southeast asians appear to be the smallest and finest other than the Pygmies. I’ve seen massive strength from every gene pool. The greatest weight lifting isn’t a good measure because it appears to be a matter of training. And the training requires a certain kind of mind, and those minds are produced by cultures. So I would expect that definition of strength to come from ethnic anatolians-persians or ethnic germans-scandinavians-slavs. Arabs have been breeding with africans since they diverged from indo-iranians. But given their extreme poverty and lack of military tradition we haven’t seen them in the ranks of competitors.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-physically-strongest-and-weakest-races-in-the-world