14881
Anna Craycroft -- The Agency of the Orphan
'...a common psychological process found in adults and children alike whereby a given individual develops as an individual through identification with a fictional child character lacking parents or parental models.'
psychology  children  orphanhood  agencyvspatiency  individuation  archetypes 
16 hours ago
The BMJ -- [on-screen death of important characters in children’s animated films versus dramatic films for adults]
'As has been recently noted in the media, parental absence, because of death or other factors, is a common theme in children’s animated films. Of course, such absence often serves a dramatic purpose, providing child protagonists with adversity to overcome and allowing the adventure story to unfold unhindered. Indeed, parental death has long been a common theme in children’s literature. For example, the collected works of the brothers Grimm (on which many children’s animated movies are based) are rife with gruesome deaths, parental and otherwise. It is unclear how the inclusion of off-screen death could have influenced our study; given the high incidence of “orphanhood” in animated films, however, we might have underestimated the prevalence of death in animated films and its implications on viewers.' == The Agency of the Orphan: http://agencyoforphan.com/
psychology  children  separationanxiety  orphanhood  agencyvspatiency  individuation  archetypes 
16 hours ago
YouTube -- TEDtalks: Carol Dweck: The power of believing that you can improve
'Carol Dweck researches “growth mindset” — the idea that we can grow our brain's capacity to learn and to solve problems. In this talk, she describes two ways to think about a problem that’s slightly too hard for you to solve. Are you not smart enough to solve it … or have you just not solved it yet?'
psychology  motivation  learning 
16 hours ago
Psychology Today -- Emotional and Physical Pain Activate Similar Brain Regions by Alan Fogel
'...So, with this kind of logic, we can come back to the neural similarities between emotional and physical pain. If the similarity is not just in the brain but in the body, it’s perfectly reasonable to ask: Where does an emotional pain hurt? If there really is an economy of pain networks that includes both physical and emotional pain, and if physical pain has a body location, then this simple syllogism leads to the conclusion that emotional pain must have a physical location in the body. -- In what way might emotions be embodied? All emotions have a motor component. Even if we try to hide our feelings, there will be micro-momentary muscular activation. The anterior cingulate is located right next to the premotor area, which begins the process of forming an emotional expression in the body. The premotor area connects to the motor cortex above it, and then back to the specific muscles of expression. -- Emotional pain may be located in the body in those places where an expression was meant to happen but failed to materialize... -- The studies cited at the beginning of this post were about social rejection. Where is that felt in the body? A broken heart? Downhearted? Is love and its loss more than metaphorically connected to the heart and chest? Yes, says research from behavioral medicine and health psychology. The sense of safety that comes from being in the company of loved ones is partly created by vagal-parasympathetic activation which promotes an easy and relaxed integration of breathing and heart rate, both of which are located in the chest. -- Feelings of insecurity get the heart and the breath out of synch and activate the sympathetic nervous system as if we were dealing with a threat (elevated heart rate and blood pressure), and can create a sense of unease in the chest, and even pain. People who have been hurt by others often have retracted chests and downcast postures, which are muscular ways of protecting the heart and closing off the self from fully engaging with others for fear of being hurt again. And people in insecure relationships are more likely to have cardiovascular (and other health) problems than those who are more secure.'
psychology  body  trauma  rejection  shame 
23 hours ago
Psychology Today -- Ole Time Religion: Why your Spirit needs your Body (and vice-versa) by Alan Fogel
'Religion has found a need to enshrine the body sense of moving and feeling within ritual practice as a pathway to the spiritual growth of believers. The ancients discerned, and those who followed verified, that particular embodied practices led to a renewed closeness to God and to all living things, a cleansing purification of the body and soul, or a lifting of the weight of hopelessness and despair. These practices teach us that our body sense can contribute profoundly to mental and physical health, and to the expansion of what it means to be human. -- The epic tenacity of ritualized embodied practice is one source of evidence about the importance of paying attention to the body for a human life of engagement and restoration. One could say that practicing body sense awareness on a regular basis is a spiritual quest, or that practicing body sense awareness leads to greater awareness of things deemed spiritual: feelings of connection, compassion, love and gratitude, forgiveness, surrender, and acceptance. -- ...research shows that the direct participation of the body in religious ritual and practice helps individuals to remember and finally feel suppressed emotions from loss and trauma, which enhances embodied self-awareness, which in turn promotes healing of physical and emotional wounds. The ability of religious practice to evoke memories of emotionally salient experiences has been linked specifically to the body sense neural networks that are known to be activated during meditation. -- The research on the importance of religion and spirituality has turned up another important finding: recovery from traumatic life events leads to a greater involvement in spiritual or religious life pursuits regardless of whether or not spiritual practices were used in the treatment of trauma. Religious converts report a greater number of traumatic events during childhood than non-converts and a majority of people who suffered trauma reported that religion and spirituality became more important to them after recovery. -- In the process of recovery, we come to realize that the events surrounding the trauma and the body's protective response to the threat of those events are beyond our control. The "I" of our conceptual self-awareness - who we think we are, what we think we can do - has to be revised to more accurately reflect what we actually did and felt and lost in that fateful assault by a chunk of the universe much bigger than that "I." Recovery and restoration occurs at the point when the "I" directly and profoundly – in the body sense – feels, accepts, and forgives human frailties. This is a spiritual experience, the heart of compassion.'
psychology  body  ritual  trance  trauma  falseself  trueself 
23 hours ago
Psychology Today -- When bad is good by Alan Fogel
'The question is why does just a little bit of getting knocked around by life help us grow stronger and more resilient? I think this happens because pain, threat, and distress acts like a wake-up call. If we are sleepwalking through our lives, taking things for granted and not really paying attention to our own body function, sensations, and emotions, the sudden loss of easy freedoms can bring us back to our body sense. We can't take our bodies for granted anymore. We have to feel our pain and distress and come to terms with injury, disease, and possible impairment. If there is no adversity, we just keep sleepwalking. If there is too much, we are overwhelmed and our bodies will activate defensive suppression responses to keep us from feeling ourselves. This is an instinctive reaction to threat: we need all our resources directed to countering the threat and none are left over to nurture ourselves.'
psychology  body  stress  anxiety  stoicism 
23 hours ago
Psychology Today -- The body has a mind of its own by Alan Fogel
'...Rosen Method has not taken away all of my anxieties but I now have a heightened awareness of how anxiety feels in my body (including that very uncomfortable feeling of chest tightening). This gives me an opportunity to "label" it for myself and to observe it happening to my body without judgment. Without body sense, we are more likely to have a secondary stress response: we become threatened by our own body and fight against that, further draining our resources and persisting in a vicious cycle of high sympathetic arousal and elevated stress hormones which is ultimately toxic to the brain and body, compromising our mental and physical health.'
psychology  stress  anxiety  body  defencemechanisms 
yesterday
Psychology Today -- Strength Training Using Motor Imagery by Alan Fogel
'...In order to do an imaginary muscle contraction well, you have to pay attention to your body. Try it now. Imagine doing an isometric contraction without actually moving or tensing your muscles. It might be easier if you did a few real ones first, after which you would have a better body memory of how it feels. The clincher for me was that this study also found that the student's reported vividness of the motor imagery was correlated with strength gains. In other words, the better a person is at feeling the sensations of muscle movements in their body, the more likely the imaginary work will help to build their muscles. -- Past research on motor imagery shows that the same brain areas are activated when imagining a movement compared to actually doing it. These motor areas overlap with mirror neuron areas in the motor cortex, making us very adept at imitating another's movements or feeling an empathic response in our own bodies when watching someone move expressively. It also follows that being more in tune with our own body sense actually enhances our ability to sense into another person's body.'
psychology  body  empathy 
yesterday
Psychology Today -- Slow Movement with Awareness: Better than Exercise? by Alan Fogel
'...links between parasympathetic and immune systems are amplified and strengthened via neural circuitry that connects peripheral sensors and effectors in the body with brain-based limbic-prefrontal-sensorimotor networks for embodied self-awareness (body sense) and self-regulatory prefrontal areas. Moving slowly and with awareness promotes all of these benefits. Cardiovascular exercise with body sense has more benefits than exercising while otherwise preoccupied. Interval exercise, with frequent rest periods giving time to pay attention to the body, has benefits over and above long workouts. Slow movement is like Slow Food in which all acts related to eating - shopping, preparing, ingesting, and digesting - are done with awareness and presence. Paying attention to the body is like shining a direct spotlight on areas of pain. Not such a great idea, to focus on pain? Actually, it is the best cure for pain because the attention spotlight helps to direct the body's own healing resources to the affected areas. Body sense is medicine. It is nature's perfect blend of psyche and soma in which the practice of attention regulation promoted by slow movement practices combines with the body's readiness to direct its resources toward healing. It can only do that if we reduce stress, slow down, and pay attention.'
psychology  body  meditation  stress  stoicism 
yesterday
Psychology Today -- Embodied Exercise Part II by Alan Fogel
'...I'm convinced that active use of the body sense and its ability to boost regulatory body function is the "hidden" explanation for why interval training is so successful at enhancing performance. Four minutes, or whatever approximation of that works for your body, is probably the time it takes for us to feel deeply into our bodies; Deeply enough to activate those regulatory networks and long enough to feel their effects on speeding up or slowing down our arousal and exertion.'
psychology  body  brain 
yesterday
Psychology Today -- Embodied Exercise by Alan Fogel
'...activating the body sense during exercise enhances its benefits. This occurs because the body sense in turn activates neural networks that link the brain to the body for the purpose of self-regulation. Suppose you are working out on an exercise machine (or running, walking, swimming, playing tennis, or whatever you do) and you are sensing deeply into your body. You should be able to feel your breath, your heart rate, your temperature, movement trajectories, impacts with the environment, as well as muscle tension, pain, and relaxation. Along with this may be emotions related to potency or inadequacy or frustration or pleasure - it doesn't matter so long as you let yourself feel those feelings completely. -- Your ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC, see previous blog post) – which is activated during states of body sense awareness – opens up links between the regulatory-executive areas of your prefrontal and insular cortices, your limbic system which connects to cortical areas of sensation and movement, to glands that secrete stress and relaxation hormones (cortisol and oxytocin), to the immune system, and also to the brain stem autonomic areas that regulate heart rate, digestion, respiration, and whole body energetic states (activity vs. rest). -- Simply put, if you are paying attention to your body, this helps you to adjust motor activity, heart rate, blood pressure, digestive function, immune function, and breathing in optimal ways. Your limbic system and brain stem can do some of this regulatory work without your undivided attention. We could not survive without this mostly automatic guidance system. But by fully attending to your body, prefrontal and higher brain areas become involved which can activate more powerful self-regulatory circuits to do their best to maximize the health benefits of exercise. -- Put another way, when you pay attention to your body (not thinking about it but feeling it) more or your whole brain and nervous system becomes available to link to more parts of the rest of your body. This whole body activating is probably the origin of the "buzz" or "high" following exercise well done. You may have to put aside your mp3 player and video monitor so you can focus more on yourself. The more you allow time for your body sense, the more that whole body activation gets established, and the easier it becomes to access all those good feelings and health benefits in the future.'
psychology  body  meditation  brain 
2 days ago
Psychology Today -- Letting your Body be your Guide by Alan Fogel
'Body sense is the ability to pay attention to ourselves, to feel our sensations, emotions, and movements on-line, in the present moment, without the mediating influence of judgmental thoughts. Body sense, or embodied self-awareness, occurs in the "present moment" while its counterpart, conceptual self-awareness, is abstract and distant from the present moment. -- Body sense is our physiological internal guidance system: It can lead us toward self-regulation, pain reduction, and improved health. If we use it regularly it can lead us into states of peace and calm, a safe shelter from the storms of life's incessant demands and obligations. Body sense feels like coming home to ourselves each time we access it. -- Unfortunately, staying in our body sense is not as easy as it sounds. Those demands, real and imagined, also have a powerful effect on our physiology. Our body interprets these as threats to the self and keeps us in conceptual self-awareness. Even mild threats, if they continue to press us into action, stimulate the same neurotransmitters and neurohormones and the same brain regions as traumatic threats. And these physiological processes are radically different from those that occur in embodied self-awareness which is connected to feelings of safety and at-home-ness. Threat networks lead to drains on metabolic resources and ultimately to cellular damage and disease. Safety networks are fundamentally restorative to mental and physical health, allowing the body to rest, recover, and heal.'
psychology  attachment  trauma  affectregulation 
2 days ago
Psychology Today -- Comments on "Men Make Gangs, Women Make Quarrels?"
Comment: Ziggy: '...in any disagreement between a man and a woman, female bystanders invariably hasten to side with the woman against the man, but other men almost never show solidarity with the man in the argument, even if they agree with his point-of-view.' -- Comment: Anonymous: 'I think that's juxtaposed with the female tendency for own-group preference: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15491274 I see the reasoning for saying that men will form gangs, groups, clubs, troops, etc. But men do not automatically side with other men for the sake of being a man, this would inherently negate their sexual availability in the mating market (saying that you'll take the man's side over the woman's side is akin to saying you'd never provide for her).' -- Hyperagency cannot care.
men  women  agencyvspatiency  victimhood  sacrifice 
7 days ago
The Rational Male -- Hysteria
'As I’ve noted in prior posts, perceptions are the overriding imperative of the feminine psyche. It’s not that women on an individual level don’t possess the faculties to discern legitimate social proof, it’s that on a social level they want to believe in that social proof. The estimation of the collective feminine mindset is a powerful influence on the individual woman since it plays on that non-abstract, instinctual need for a pre-verification of optimal hypergamy. -- In other words, the effort of sexual-selection vetting has already been done for them by the feminine hivemind. -- Verifying legitimate social proof takes individual time and effort. Perhaps not as much as men have a rational capacity for (the New York stunt fooled more than a few tag-along guys affirming the pseudo-social proof), but for women that opportunity for meeting a hypergamously ideal man supersedes the mental efforts needed to verify social proof. The greater mass of women already believe in the preselection and the intersexual competition is on and overt. -- This social proof dynamic extends to the perceptions of women in a collective peer group, as well as men for whom they have no sexual interest in, but serve their material interests nonetheless. -- The current cultural atmosphere of male suspicion and autonomous rape-threat assessment of men is another variation of this perceptual, hysterical, collective belief dynamic. Women want to believe in the presumption that every man outside of their preselected, collective approved, hypergamous ideal is a potential rape threat. In other words, a man who might, by force or coercion, assume control of her hypergamous sexual selection. -- The narrative, the perception, is all that matters. -- And like the women who never had an afterthought as to whether “Thomas Eliot” was the real deal, likewise women become so ego-invested in the certainty of their collective perceptions that, even in light of contrary evidence, the only acknowledged verification of that perception is how it makes them feel. -- This contradiction of a collective feminine hysteria is what many luminaries of the Feminine Imperative are now being forced to confront. It’s important to remember during this UVa / Rolling Stone rape debacle that women, and more than a few enabling male sympathizers, wanted to believe this travesty was true in spite of the vaudevillian outlandishments and still refuse to accept that it isn’t.' -- Comment: Johnycomelately: 'Rape is so traumatic and devastating to women precisely because that is the only time when a sexual copulation is not a female choice. All the other instances of sexual intercourse are treated and perceived differently because they are always a female choice. ” -- Men ... (display) and females choose, all game is based on improving or imitating high value... -- Anything that violates fully informed female choice, whether by inducing self delusion, mimicking, omission, deception, contriving or guile is seen as rape by a low status male. Drunken sex is viewed as the removal of capacity to choose and therefore rape. -- That is why being ‘tricked’ or ‘taken advantage of’ seems to be so prevalent in female discourse, I guess that is why game is so villified. -- The hysteria isn’t about genuine rape but the innate fear of having sex with low value men, the prevalence of ‘game’ simply adds to the hysteria.' -- He/she who controls the price controls the victory.
men  women  hypergamy  socialproof  truebelieversyndrome 
8 days ago
Owning Your Shit -- False allegations are "rare" by girlwriteswhat
'The quasi-religious nature of feminism regarding how people psychologically identify with and attach to it, makes it such that those who believe will be VERY reluctant to ever concede that the goals have been achieved. To concede that means letting go of the religion. It is at this point that you see feminists claiming that universities that report many rapes through the Clery Act are hotbeds of rape and misogyny, while universities that report few or no rapes are hotbeds of rape, misogyny and underreporting. Rape is there, and rampant, just like sin--they KNOW it. And when they've all but stamped it out, it's still there and still rampant, because they KNOW it. -- When the inquisition runs out of real witches and sinners and heretics, it will begin to invent them to justify its own zealotry and its continued reason to exist. Just as the world will always be filled with sinners and heretics, it will always be filled with misogynists and rape apologists, even if it isn't. -- This is the one reason I see religion as in some ways less dangerous than secular utopian ideologies like feminism. Religion promises that the utopia will come when you're dead. The utopia is guaranteed to the chosen, no matter how imperfect the corporeal world is. Feminism desires a utopia on earth, where it is utterly unattainable even if it is (heck, even if it already exists!), due to the very nature of religious thinking. They could bring about perfect equality, but to justify their continued ideological zealotry, they will still perceive it as "a hell of inequality on earth". -- "The comments on any article about feminism justify feminism." All this translates to is, "The more people disagree with me, the more righteous I am. The more people claim women are already equal, the more I know they are not." -- There are numerous parallels between feminism and theism, not least of which is that its adherents integrate it into their individual personal identities. It possesses an orthodoxy, a set of doctrines, an etherial malicious force (Patriarchy), a way to "salvation" (feminist ideals), a definition of "sin" (sexism), aspects of the confessional ("I'm a straight, white male, and I acknowledge my privilege..."), and a utopian (yet ever-shifting) set of goals. -- The more evidence you put in front of them that women are not oppressed, the more they will scream women are as oppressed as ever, maybe even more so. -- The OECD's "Better Life Index" clearly indicates that in nearly every country in the west, women live longer, healthier, happier, safer lives than men. They have better access to health services, safety, education, work/life balance and housing, among other things. -- http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/ (click on the "gender differences" button) -- Strange, when you think about it. According to feminism, the oppressed live longer, healthier, happier, safer lives than their oppressors. -- Yet the feminist machine churns away, heaping guilt and shame on men all while screaming that the most privileged class of people in the history of humanity (western women of nearly any race or socioeconomic class) are systemically oppressed in every facet of their lives. Show them evidence to the contrary, and all they'll do is scream louder, because they've integrated a false belief system into their identities, and because they don't want to admit they've wasted their lives on bullshit.'
feminism  ideology  truebelieversyndrome 
8 days ago
Thought Catalog -- 6 Ways That Feminism Insults And Demeans Women While Claiming To Protect Them by Janet Bloomfield
'#2. Trigger Warnings: Trigger warnings are the most ridiculous, patronizing and infantilizing creations ever to come out of feminism. The general idea is that individuals who have experienced some particular issue (rape, fat-shaming, street harassment, papercuts, etc.) might confront an article called “I Got a Papercut and Was Fat-Shamed by a Street Harasser Two Days After I Was Raped,” have absolutely no idea what the article might be about, proceed to read said article and subsequently require medication to deal with the PTSD triggered by the memories of the traumatic event(s). Exactly how pathetic do you have to be to confront words describing situations you might find upsetting and require authorial permission to stop reading? Know what I hate? Reading about adults who kill infants. It makes me feel sick to my stomach, so when I see headlines like “Mother Microwaves Baby,” I don’t read them. -- In the era of clickbait journalism, it’s incredibly rare to see headlines like “Unusual Situation Happened Last Night” or some other misleading or elusive headline that downplays the actual events. Quite the opposite. But feminists adore trigger warnings because it reinforces the idea that women are ruled by their emotions, are incapable of recovering from trauma and are just generally hysterical nitwits unprepared to confront adulthood and reality. How encouraging! How supportive! No thanks. -- #5. Microaggressions: If trigger warnings are the dumbest thing to come out of feminism, microaggressions are a close second. The very definition of pettiness, microaggressions are teeny-tiny irritations that women are encouraged to nurture into long-standing grudges until they spill out into hysteria and mania. Did you once go for coffee with a guy and it led to sex? Any time a guy asks you for coffee, it automatically means he wants to fuck you! Were you one time slightly uncomfortable in an elevator with a guy you sort of knew but not really? Men on elevators will attack you! Did a guy on an elevator ask you for coffee? Sexual harassment! Alert the presses! Asking women for coffee is a way to remind them that elevators are perfect places to rape! -- What feminists refer to as microaggressions, the rest of us sane adults call life. Getting cut off in traffic, having someone snap at you because they’re having a shitty day, a socially awkward moment with a colleague, a stranger rushing past you and inadvertently bumping your coffee—these are not things meant to point out your meaningless existence and your powerlessness in the face of others. They’re just life. -- The concept of microaggressions encourages women to think that every single thing in the world is, or should be, about them. It encourages breathless levels of narcissism, solipsism and just plain delusion. You know who else thinks that everything in the world is about them? Two-year-olds. Feminism encourages women to believe that they have the same reasoning and coping abilities as toddlers. No thanks.'
women  feminism  predation  victimhood  agencyvspatiency 
8 days ago
Honey Badger Brigade -- 6 six things you might not think are harassment but actually are... by Alison Tieman
'#TELLING SOMEONE TO “SMILE” -- ...there’s an inherent dynamic within our culture that (even subconsciously) makes men believe: A man’s autonomy exists only in so far as he is pleasing to female proclivities... as the ultimate owner of the male body, the woman is within hers rights to dictate to him how he should be conducting himself within it.'
men  women  sacrifice 
8 days ago
Honey Badger Brigade -- Murdergasm: Sarkeesian’s gleeful attention grab by Hannah Wallen
'It seems that these social justice warriors are just so accustomed to exploiting other people’s experiences that they’re comfortable using a yet uncertain body count as a podium at which to spout their hateful rhetoric. They feel so entitled to it that they resent criticism and are inclined to treat expressed outrage over their crass and insensitive approach as an illegitimate response. It does not matter to them that their claims project one individual’s clear dysfunction onto millions of innocent, unrelated, and unconnected individuals. It does not matter to them that human dysfunction is influenced by a multitude of factors, not limited to characteristics they wish to disparage. Like any other bigot, they do not care about the impact or inference of their prejudiced statements on the group they’re generalizing. Why be concerned that one is dehumanizing a group that one considers less than human already? -- Calculatingly bigoted, callously opportunistic, pitifully whiny, and transparently hypocritical: this is what toxic feminism looks like. Thanks, Anita, for once again putting your movement’s nature on display.'
feminism  victimhood  predation 
8 days ago
The Daily Bell -- The Rape Culture Hysteria by Wendy McElroy
'...many PC feminists are attacking The Rolling Stone, the state of journalism and anyone who is skeptical of Jackie. Her story was becoming the centerpiece of a new crusade against the rape culture on campus, which would have almost certainly tried to close down the fraternity system. The rape culture zealots must champion every accuser or their worldview begins to crumble. Their onslaught needs the face of a victim in order to appear righteous; otherwise, it's revealed as vicious.' -- Hypoagency cannot care.
feminism  victimhood  agencyvspatiency 
8 days ago
PaulCraigRoberts -- Guest Article by John Pilger: War by media and the triumph of propaganda
'...What then happened to Halliday was instructive. He was airbrushed. Or he was vilified. On the BBC’s Newsnight programme, the presenter Jeremy Paxman shouted at him: “Aren’t you just an apologist for Saddam Hussein?” The Guardian recently described this as one of Paxman’s “memorable moments”. Last week, Paxman signed a £1 million book deal. -- The handmaidens of suppression have done their job well. Consider the effects. In 2013, a ComRes poll found that a majority of the British public believed the casualty toll in Iraq was less than 10,000 – a tiny fraction of the truth. A trail of blood that goes from Iraq to London has been scrubbed almost clean. -- Rupert Murdoch is said to be the godfather of the media mob, and no one should doubt the augmented power of his newspapers – all 127 of them, with a combined circulation of 40 million, and his Fox network. But the influence of Murdoch’s empire is no greater than its reflection of the wider media.The most effective propaganda is found not in the Sun or on Fox News – but beneath a liberal halo. When the New York Times published claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, its fake evidence was believed, because it wasn’t Fox News; it was the New York Times. -- The same is true of the Washington Post and the Guardian, both of which have played a critical role in conditioning their readers to accept a new and dangerous cold war. All three liberal newspapers have misrepresented events in Ukraine as a malign act by Russia – when, in fact, the fascist led coup in Ukraine was the work of the United States, aided by Germany and Nato. -- This inversion of reality is so pervasive that Washington’s military encirclement and intimidation of Russia is not contentious. It’s not even news, but suppressed behind a smear and scare campaign of the kind I grew up with during the first cold war. -- Once again, the evil empire is coming to get us, led by another Stalin or, perversely, a new Hitler. Name your demon and let rip. -- The suppression of the truth about Ukraine is one of the most complete news blackouts I can remember. The biggest Western military build-up in the Caucasus and eastern Europe since world war two is blacked out. Washington’s secret aid to Kiev and its neo-Nazi brigades responsible for war crimes against the population of eastern Ukraine is blacked out. Evidence that contradicts propaganda that Russia was responsible for the shooting down of a Malaysian airliner is blacked out. -- And again, supposedly liberal media are the censors. Citing no facts, no evidence, one journalist identified a pro-Russian leader in Ukraine as the man who shot down the airliner. This man, he wrote, was known as The Demon. He was a scary man who frightened the journalist. That was the evidence.'
america  empire  journalism  statism  minitrue 
14 days ago
YouTube -- Charles and Ray Eames: Day of the Dead (1957)
'Day of the Dead explores the special objects and rituals of the annual Mexican celebration of All Souls' Day, which is observed on the first day of November. The film examines the Mexican philosophy of death and the ways in which people have come to terms with mortality. A rich variety of folk objects, created each year for the celebration are shown in detail.'
existentialism  death  life  documentaries 
14 days ago
Goodreads -- Quote by Samuel Beckett
“You're on Earth. There's no cure for that.”
existentialism  death  life  quotes 
14 days ago
YouTube -- TEDxStGeorge: Caleb Wilde: Embracing death
'The North American leap from a culture of healthy death acceptance to a culture of death denial has been no leap at all. It’s been a journey of small steps. And this journey has, in part, been enabled by both the professionalization of death and the funeral industry. In this talk, Caleb explores options that help us pursue death acceptance by taking back death care responsibilities.' -- "The further we move away from death, the further we move away from humanity. Death is that sacred space where we embrace our silence. Death is that sacred space where we embrace the doubt; where we we embrace the fact that we are limited, that we are mortal, that we are human. When we embrace death we embrace that part of humanity that we all share: We all share in connection, we all share in some type of love, and we all share in grief. Death, in separating us from loved ones, binds together those that remain in community and love."
existentialism  death  life 
14 days ago
The Progress Report -- Forbes: Half of Earth's Billionaires are Landlords
'Ed. Notes: Note the role of government, how the Chinese army created a landholding company that an officer managed to take over. And the role of location, the need to be in LA to be in the movies. Also, as Hong Kong’s tax on land (and buildings) rose, the price of value of land there fell. That’s how a land tax or land dues makes land affordable — and of course anything built upon it. -- It seems land is not irrelevant as some modern people believe. It still creates fortunes and political power. Expand the definition of land to include all natural resources, not just the planet’s surface, and you’d include the oil billionaires; the number of nature-related tycoons would grow. -- Two things make land so profitable. One is we can’t do without it. Two is it costs nothing to make.'
geoism  economics  land  rentseeking  landlordism  "capitalism" 
14 days ago
The Progress Report -- 1/3 of Jobs that Humans Do Now, Robots Will Do in 10 yrs.
'Ed. Notes: Is this the right time to extend vacations and shorten the workweek? To achieve those goals, people better figure out how to receive an income apart from their work. And the way to do that is to get a share of society’s surplus. -- What’s that? It’s all our spending for land and resources, which grow more costly as technology advances — see Silicon Valley. Land and resources do not require any labor to exist so there is no producer to compensate. People can pay for sites and resources to their community and the sites and resources will still be there, growing in value. -- At the same time that government, on behalf of society, recovers the socially-generated value of land, it should also de-tax people’s efforts, to be fair. Out from under, while getting a Citizen’s Dividend, people will prosper quite nicely with robots doing much of the work.'
geoism  economics  land  automation 
14 days ago
The Progress Report -- The Case Against the Case Against the Single Tax by Fred Foldvary
'Johnson correctly stated that a tax on the entire rent of land would bring the purchase price down to zero, but he expressed it as: “the value kernel of landed property will have been seized by the state.” In policy analysis, we need to examine inflamatory vocabulary. The moral case for land-value taxation rests in the proposition that the benefits of nature belong to all humanity equally, that the creation of local land values by population and commerce belongs in equal shares to the members of those communities, and that the rentals generated by public works may be used to pay the providers, including government when it is the provider. None of this is confiscation or seizing by the state. -- The people own the rent, not the chiefs of state. A government may justly act as the agent of the people to protect their property, such as the atmosphere, from damage, and a government may, as the agent of the people, collect the rent to distribute it among them, or to use to pay for public goods. The premise that the rent belongs to the people implies that the rent is not being seized from the landowners as though these title holders are the morally legitimate owners, but rather that the state is facilitating the collection of the rent to the proper owners, the people. Hence the terminology used by Johnson taints his analysis and begs the question of the proper ownership of land rent. -- Johnson continues his attack by calling the single tax on land value “propaganda for the universal confiscation of land.” Henry George had unfortunately stated in Progress and Poverty that “It is not necessary to confiscate land; it is only necessary to confiscate rent.” The Latin origin of “confiscate” is “confiscare,” from “fiscus” meaning the government’s treasury. Fiscal policy is about governmental revenue and spending. Thus in linguistic origin, to confiscate means simply to tax, to transfer assets to the public treasury. But in modern popular usage, to “confiscate” means to take by force, with the implication that the state is seizing property that was legitimately owned. And despite George’s statement that it is only the rent, not the land itself, that is being “confiscated,” Johnson attacks the single tax as confiscating the land. -- Moreover, by dismissing the theory behind the single tax as “propaganda,” Johnson denigrated the logic and evidence for land-value taxation in an anti-scholarly manner, and thus he himself indulged in propaganda.'
geoism  economics  land  landlordism  "capitalism"  FredFoldvary 
14 days ago
The Progress Report -- It's Been Nearly 200 Years Since Inequality Was This Bad
'Ed. Notes: Obviously, machines and factories produced more wealth and more income for more people. But that extra money in the pocket let people bid up the price of land. That’s how success sows the seeds of its own failure; as spending for land goes up, spending for goods and services must go down.'
geoism  economics  land  landcycle  businesscycle 
14 days ago
The Progress Report -- Corporate Taxes Higher in US than other Industrial States
'Ed. Notes:...Better than trying to take profit from successful companies would be to not give them so much money in the first place. That means an end to corporate welfare. That also means an end to most taxes as we know them, since they tilt the playing field in ways that favor Big Business. For example, the tax on wages helps make hiring employees less affordable. So jobs are fewer and workers more desperate, too desperate to negotiate higher wages. -- Conversely, the absence of a tax on land, or of land dues, lets owners and speculators and lenders do things like withhold prime sites from use and flip buildings and collusively bid up their prices. A tax on land, or land dues, would wipe out these practices and spur owners to put and keep prime locations at best use, which would also require work, generate jobs, and raise wages. Thus as labor got a bigger share of the pie, capital would get a smaller share and would not be such big targets of envious taxists. -- Further, much profit is not exactly a return to capital but a return to land or to privilege. McDonald’s, for example, does not make its fortune from selling hamburgers but by leasing franchises to fast-food restauranteurs at busy locations. Thus most of McDonald’s income is actually land rent. Other companies gain not by beating their competition with a better mousetrap but by using patents and regulations to prevent other companies from competing with them at all. Governments need to get out of the business of granting such favors to so-called rent-seekers. -- One more factor: Presently, since land is not taxed much nor are there land dues, individual and corporate owners can use land as collateral and qualify for fat loans. Not only does their borrowing awash the economy in debt and de-stabilize the economy with the boom/bust cycle, it also creates this “heads I win, tails you lose” phenomenon whereby they rake in inflated profits during booms and rake in massive bailouts during busts. It’s these unearned gains that corporations shelter and taxists target. -- All these problems become non-issues in a just economy. Simply repeal counterproductive and taxes and replace them with land dues and other user fees. Abolish biased subsidies and replace them with dividends to citizens. Putting geonomics into practice means government, business, workers, and even those beyond the economy would be pulling on the same end of the rope.'
geoism  economics  land  rentseeking  "capitalism" 
14 days ago
The Progress Report -- Drones Over Buenos Aires Catch Wealthy tax Dodgers
'Ed. Notes: Usually the rich in corrupt countries do not have to worry about tax collectors. Perhaps these are the nouveau riche who have not yet formed close ties with government officials. Governments really do not have the right to punish people for having mansions and pools anyway. -- Maybe this invasion of the privacy of tax evaders will push them to support replacing taxes on property with a tax or fee or dues on the value of locations. Then landowners can build all the mansions and pools they want and still not pay any greater amount to government. And drones are not needed to assess or appraise the annual rental value of locations — that can be done from the street and government can save its millions for something else. -- In a corrupt country, it is likely the rich acquired their wealth by corrupt means. However, rather than demand a cut later, government should quit being corrupt, keep its hands of private property, and instead recover the socially-generated value of land and resources. All parties need to get clear on what’s mine, what’s yours, and what’s ours.'
economic  land  geoism 
14 days ago
The Progress Report -- Financial Times: Time Now to Levy Land Big Time?
'Ed. Notes: Because a tax on your land can make you landless and thus houseless, it is rational for people to not exactly warm up to it. So how to make land taxes or land dues more palatable to land owners? A couple of things. #One, repeal stupid taxes on our efforts so owners have more wherewithal to pay the tax or dues. #And two, disburse the raised revenue back to citizens as a dividend. -- Most people — not owning any downtown blocks or oil fields — will come out way ahead. Not only that, but any good that making people pay rent to their community can do, sharing those recovered rents with everyone can do better. It’s fairer; government does not create land value, community does. And it’s more efficient, enabling people to leave pristine sites alone and to live in small towns if so inclined. So put the horse before the cart and promote land dividends; land dues will come along automatically.'
economics  land  geoism 
14 days ago
YouTube -- Fred Harrison: The Bullet
'Scotland’s mission was a financial revolution that would have transformed the UK economy. A bullet in the Balkans terminated the quest for economic justice. Professor Roger Sandilands answers the question: “What would have happened, if the reform hatched in Glasgow had been implemented?”'
history  economics  land  geoism  FredHarrison 
15 days ago
The Freeman -- What Gave Bitcoin Its Value? by Jeffrey A. Tucker
'...As time passed—and I read the work of Konrad Graf, Peter Surda, and Daniel Krawisz—finally the resolution came. I will cut to the chase and reveal it: Bitcoin is both a payment system and a money. The payment system is the source of value, while the accounting unit merely expresses that value in terms of price. The unity of money and payment is its most unusual feature, and the one that most commentators have had trouble wrapping their heads around. -- It took 10 months to build confidence. It took another 18 months before bitcoin reached parity with the U.S. dollar. This history is essential to understand, especially if you are relying on a theory of money’s origins that speculates about the pre-history of money, as Mises’ regression theorem does. Bitcoin was not always a money with value. It was once a pure accounting unit attached to a ledger. This ledger obtained what Mises called "use value." All conditions of the theorem are thereby satisfied. -- To review, if anyone says that bitcoin is based on nothing but thin air, that it cannot be a money because it has no real history as a genuine commodity, and whether the person saying this is a novice or a highly trained economist, you need to bring up two central points. One, bitcoin is not a stand-alone currency but a unit of accounting attached to an innovative payment network. Two, this network and therefore bitcoin only obtained its market value through real-time testing in a market environment. -- In other words, once you account for the razzle-dazzle technical features, bitcoin emerged exactly like every other currency, from salt to gold, did. People found the payment system useful, and the attached accounting was portable, divisible, fungible, durable, and scarce. Money was born. This money has all the best features of money from history but adds a weightless and spaceless payment network that enables the entire world to trade without having to rely on third parties. -- But notice something extremely important here. The blockchain is not only about money. It is about any information transfers that require security, confirmations, and total assurance of authenticity. This pertains to contracts and transactions of all sorts, all performed peer-to-peer. Think of a world without third parties, including the most dangerous third party ever conceived of by man: the State itself. Imagine that future and you begin to grasp the fullness of the implications of our future. -- Mises would be amazed and surprised at bitcoin. But he might also feel a sense of pride that his monetary theory of more than 100 years ago has been confirmed and given new life in the 21st century.'
bitcoin  markets  money  assurance  internet  cryptoanarchism 
15 days ago
YouTube -- RT: Selfie Surgery: Craze for perfect pic boosts demand for nip ‘n’ tuck
'These days, people are so obsessed with taking the perfect selfie on their mobiles, that there's a host of apps to help them tweak their photos once taken. But some are taking it much further and are opting for plastic surgery as Marina Portnaya reports.'
socialmedia  performance  simulacra 
15 days ago
Psychology Today -- Men Make Gangs, Women Make Quarrels?
'...female coalitions are almost nonexistent. Of all the studied cultures, rarely were “gangs of women” identified, while “gangs of men” can be found everywhere [Potts, 2006]. What is the cause of this phenomenon? First of all, women didn’t have the aggressive and defensive motivation that men have, which would require the creation of militant groups. Their physical condition and mission of “future mothers” didn’t allow them to engage in acts of aggression and defense. -- One of the explanations is that women, no matter how unexpected this sounds, show a greater degree of hierarchical discrimination than men. That is, women prefer to establish social relationships with other women of the same status, avoiding those with a lower status, according to the results of a Harvard study. Therefore, it is harder for women to form coalitions because women are more selective and less tolerant of each other in terms of hierarchical stratification. They are even less open to networking in large co-operations. It’s curious that, even from preschool age, boys demonstrate a desire for communication and group games, whereas girls usually prefer being friends with only one or two girls [Benenson et al., 2014]. -- At the same time, when women quarrell with each other, it takes more time for them to reconcile than it typically takes for men. They are less prepared to deal with an intrasexual conflict [Benenson et al., 2014(2)]. -- Men’s ability to cooperate with individuals of different ranks allows them to create coalitions without difficulty; this advantage considerably benefiting them on a social level. The psychology of coalition has allowed men to dominate on political, military and administrative levels. The lack of a native psychology of coalition in women could be a cause of their subordination on social and political levels, despite the high performance of each woman individually.' -- Groups vs The Group: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15491274
men  women  groups 
15 days ago
The Onion -- Moron Stepfather Takes Care Of Child Who Doesn’t Have His Genetic Material
'“Tim is Meg’s child from her first marriage, but I honestly think of him as my own son,” said the vacuous simpleton, whose low-functioning brain cannot grasp that he is wasting precious time and money on feeding, clothing, and looking after a boy who does not share his DNA and will do nothing to further his bloodline. “I actually see some of myself in the little guy [and must be a complete imbecile to spend my days raising what is, effectively, a parasitic stranger who seeks only to leech off of my resources for his own genealogical gain]. I just want to give him the best life I can.”'
TheOnion  men  sacrifice  satire 
15 days ago
The Onion -- Woman Launches Into 4-Minute Self-Deprecating Preamble Before Speaking Mind
'Issuing a flurry of apologies, equivocations, and statements downplaying her intelligence, local 28-year-old Jessica Knoll reportedly launched into a four-minute self-deprecating preamble Tuesday before sharing her thoughts with a group of colleagues.'
TheOnion  women  agencyvspatiency  satire 
15 days ago
McLuhan Galaxy -- Narcissus as Narcosis: A Contemporary Media Example
'A great example of McLuhan’s “Narcissus as Narcosis” ( as are “selfies” especially). My thanks to Malcolm Dean for sharing this. Alex -- “The Greek myth of Narcissus is directly concerned with a fact of human experience, as the word Narcissus indicates. It is from the Greek word narcosis or numbness. The youth Narcissus mistook his own reflection in the water for another person. This extension of himself by mirror numbed his perceptions until he became the servomechanism of his own extended or repeated image. The nymph Echo tried to win his love with fragments of his own speech, but in vain. He was numb. He had adapted to his extension of himself and had become a closed system. Now the point of this myth is the fact that men at once become fascinated by any extension of themselves in any material other than themselves….” -- The Gadget Lover, Narcissus as Narcosis, Chapter 4, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man (1964), p.41, MIT Press ed.'
mcluhan  narcissism  numb 
15 days ago
Ribbonfarm -- Don’t Surround Yourself With Smarter People
'The trick is to surround yourself with people who are free in ways you’re not. In other words, don’t surround yourself with smarter people. Surround yourself with differently free people.'
psychology  probabiltyspace  possibilityspace 
21 days ago
Ribbonfarm -- How to Fall Off the Wagon
'Self-help ideas generally belong to one of three schools of thought, whether the originators realize it or not: values-first, goals-first or process-first. -- #Goals-first people are idealists. They tend to get fixated on long-term goals that they are neither able to give up, nor work towards. This is the degeneracy of utopianism. To get unstuck, they need to either get moving (clockwise) or quit (anticlockwise). #Process-first people are doers. They tend to get stuck on degenerate processes that have stopped working. This is the degeneracy of blind ritualism. To get unstuck, they need to either question the process in light of values (clockwise) or break the process in service of goals (anticlockwise). #Values-first people are emulators. They tend to get stuck on identity issues where there is no leader offering a clear model of virtues to emulate. This is the degeneracy of leaderlessness. To get unstuck, they need to either find a new leader (clockwise) or sacralize certain new processes, in lieu of a leader (anticlockwise). -- The interesting case is stuckness: when you fall off a vertex because something derails you, you need to be at one of the other two vertices and are instinctively failing in a particular direction, but keep going back to the comforting home vertex where you were, instead of rolling with the fall towards the next one. This means you have to complete a circuit before you can get back to your current vertex in a productive way or return via a shorter path that feels unnatural. For example, if you are the kind who likes translating goals into systems and processes for achieving them, you are unlikely to also like hacking an existing process to achieve a goal. If your system fails to work, chances are, you won’t just improvise a patch, but proceed to re-examining values and reformulating goals and then reworking your system in a systematic rather than ad hoc way. -- #1 Investigator: Process-oriented reformer, figures out what is broken. They get stuck at habits. #2 Holy warrior: Values-oriented reformer, figures out what to do about broken things. They get stuck crying wolf. #3 Operator: Goal-oriented reformer, figures out how to do it. They get stuck defending the indefensible. #4 Hacker: Habit-oriented disruptor, breaks things to get something done. They get stuck in chaos. #5 Contrarian: Goal-oriented disruptor, fights to prove that the hacked thing is better than the original. They get stuck at visions. #6 Legalist: Values-oriented disruptor, makes the broken thing a beautiful thing. They get stuck in traditionalism.'
archetypes  systems  panarchy 
21 days ago
Norm Friesen -- McLuhan’s 1960 Report on Project in Understanding New Media
This text reflects McLuhan’s then-coalescing thought as it relates to both education and to multiple media forms; and the text serves as relatively direct and clearly-written precursor for the 1964 Understanding Media. The full text of this report is available as a 7.5 Mb PDF file. http://blogs.ubc.ca/nfriesen/files/2014/11/McLuhanRoPiUNM.pdf
media  McLuhan 
21 days ago
Broader Perspective -- Blockchain AI: Consensus as the Mechanism to foster ‘Friendly’ AI
'#Only Friendly AIs are able to get their Transactions Executed - One of the real benefits of consensus models is that they could possibly enforce friendly AI, which is to say cooperative, moral players within a society. In decentralized trust networks, an agent’s reputation (where agents themselves remain pseudonymous) could be an important factor in whether its transactions could be executed, such that malicious players cannot get their transactions executed or recognized on the network. (It does not matter if malicious players masquerade as bonafide players since the reputation requirement and network incentives elicit good behavior from all players, malicious and bonafide alike). Some of the key network operations that any digital intelligence may want executed are secure access, authentication and validation, and economic exchange. Effectively, any network transaction that any intelligent agent cares about to conduct their goals will require some form of access or authentication that is consensus-signed, which cannot be obtained unless the agent has a good (benevolent) reputational standing on the network. This is how Friendly AI could be effectuated in a blockchain consensus-based model.'
bitcoin  consensus  trust  reputation  artificialintelligence 
21 days ago
The New Inquiry -- Social Media Is Not Self-Expression
'Social media structure creative effort (e.g., Barthel’s list above) ideologically as “self-creating,” but they often end up as anxiety-inducing, exposing the self’s ad hoc incompleteness while structuring the demand for a fawning audience to complete us, validate every effort, as a natural expectation. Validation is nice, but as a goal for creative effort, it is somewhat limited. The quest for validation must inevitably restrict itself to the tools of attracting attention: the blunt instruments of novelty and prurience (“Kanye West in a balloon chair”). The self one tries to express tends to be new, exciting, confessional, sexy, etc., because it plays as an advertisement. Identity is a series of ads for a product that doesn’t exist. -- ... The alternative would seem to be a sort of deep focus in isolation, in which one accepts the incompleteness that comes from being apart from an audience, that comes from not seeking final judgment on what one is doing and letting it remain ambiguous, open-ended, of the present moment and not assimilated to an archive of identity. To put that tritely: The best way to be yourself is to not be anybody in particular but to just be.'
socialmedia  identity  theadvertisedlife 
21 days ago
ROUGH TYPE -- Desperate scrapbookers
'Inherently retrospective — a means of preemptively packaging the present as memory — the scrapbook is a melancholy form. Pressed insistently forward, we spend our time arranging the bits and pieces of our lives into something we think looks something like us. If the material scrapbook of old was familial and semiprivate, the new scrapbook is social and altogether public. It’s still a melancholy form, but now it’s an anxious one, too. It’s one thing to construct an idealized life, a “best self,” for your own consumption; it’s another thing to construct one for all to see.'
socialmedia  kipple  identity  self  parts 
21 days ago
The Daily Bell -- Confronting the C-Word by Wendy McElroy
'The flow of PC logic is as follows: #Nothing is personal because everything affects society. The distinction between the private and the public spheres is erased. #Everything formerly in the private sphere – from sexuality to religious belief – are proper subjects of public and political action. #Objectionable behavior and attitudes should be politically discouraged; correct ones should be encouraged. In short, there should be social control. -- #Declaring War Between Various Categories of People. Men versus women, whites versus blacks, heterosexuals versus homosexuals, the religious versus everyone else. There is no sense of shared humanity. And no action or expression of goodwill can exonerate an individual who belongs to the 'oppressor' category. But actions and opinions can cause individuals in the 'oppressed' category to be excoriated. A black who opposes entitlements is "self-hating." A woman who is conservative is beneath contempt. -- #Celebrating Victimhood. An automatic hush of respect falls over a discussion whenever someone declares himself or herself to be a victim. I know. I was severely beaten by a boyfriend and my victimization – if announced – makes me an expert on domestic violence. Only it doesn't. Being on the wrong end of a fist doesn't make me an expert on anything except how much it hurts. I know no more about domestic violence – and arguably less – than a woman who choses to walk out at the first signs of physical abuse. But PC advocates need to celebrate the victim because it is in her name that they fight a holy war. -- #Demanding Respect While Giving None. PC feminists make hateful, vicious comments about men under the guise of humor, comments they would not tolerate about blacks, Jews or other 'protected' categories. Yet the same feminists are loud in voicing offense at any man whose words can be twisted into being the slightest bit demeaning.' -- Muh feels.
marxism  culture  illiberalism  feminism  predation  victimhood  politicalcorrectness  thinkpol 
21 days ago
Global Guerrillas -- The Silk Road, the FBI, and Misplaced Priorities
'...In short, by taking down the Silk Road, the FBI just made the world safer for the Cartels.' -- (Still not getting it...) Competition is a sin!
statism 
22 days ago
Center for a Stateless Society -- Detroit, Disaster Capitalism and the Enclosure of the Water Commons by Kevin Carson
'The so-called “privatization” of government assets, as it’s carried out under “actually-existing free market reform,” is really just the latest example of a phenomenon as old as history: the enclosure of commons by state-connected rentiers. As Michael Hudson stated, in an interview on Thomas Piketty’s Capital: "…let’s look at Forbes’ list of the richest people in Russia, China, the Ukraine or the post-Soviet economies. I can guarantee you that they didn’t make this wealth by saving up income, they didn’t earn a higher income; they stole the property by fraud and internal bribery, the same way that the great fortunes were made in the United States. The History of Really Great American Fortunes by Gustavus Myers shows how the railroad land grants made fortunes by bribing congressmen and by privatising the land. The great fortunes are made by privatising natural resources, land and the public domain, and since 1980, when the concentration of wealth and income have really taken off, as Piketty shows, this is the age of privatisation, of Margaret Thatcher, of Ronald Reagan, and Boris Yeltsin in Russia." -- But this goes back way further than Thatcher and Reagan, or even the Gilded Age railroad barons. As Henry George noted, most of the political conflict within the Roman Republic took the form of the patrician classes “privatizing” (enclosing) lands in the public domain, and land-poor and landless peasants periodically rising up to demand land reform. -- And the same basic pattern applies to all kinds of public service “privatization,” under the kind of “free market reform” that’s carried out by neoliberal vultures feeding on one prostrate country or another.'
geoism  economics  commons  land  landlordism  parasitism  "capitalism" 
22 days ago
LVTC Campaign -- Economic effects of immigration
'...Note that the savannah in the story is unbounded. Land is always freely available at the margin. The minimum wage is fixed by what can be earned at the margin. What if land is not freely available at the margin? Those without land are forced to work for others or pay rent to another, and wages fall to a lower value, as labour is willing to work for the least it will accept. -- ...lower wages will lead to higher profitability and this will tend to drive up rents. An influx of people will also drive up residential rents in response to increased demand.'
geoism  economics  land  rentseeking 
22 days ago
YouTube -- Fred Harrison: Revolution Danish Style
'How did Denmark become the No 1 happiest nation on the planet? The secret history is revealed by Fred Harrison, so that other nations may adopt the formula for prosperous communities.'
history  economics  land  geoism  FredHarrison 
22 days ago
YouTube -- Emmy van Deurzen: Art of dying
'Emmy van Deurzen talks about the art of dying, as she ponders on the importance of living life in such a way that we ready ourselves and steady ourselves for our final moments.' -- It comes so soon, the moment when there is nothing left to wait for. ~ Marcel Proust
existentialism  death  EmmyvanDeurzen  * 
27 days ago
[Alison Armstrong] -- Understanding Women: Unlock the Mystery
"...what's happened in our culture is what I call the masculinization of women. That because the workplace is a masculine paradigm – which it is: it's all about producing results and goals and producing – women, who are highly adaptable, that's one of our biggest strengths is our adaptability; we are just naturally pulled into being masculine...and we get really good at it. Unfortunately, women's masculinity is not tempered by the distinctly male qualities – they're not masculine qualities - the distinctly male qualities of team and honour and loyalty and strong self of self. So a masculine woman will be way more ruthless than a man. Because she has no honour. It's all about the result no matter what and there's no honour or team or loyalty to temper what she's willing to do to produce that result. The masculinization of women has also caused a lot of difficulties in our romantic relationships. Because we're so highly adaptable, and we want to please, and we can sense what is of the most value, so we can become whatever is of the most value – and masculinity is highly valued, so we become these incredible producers...we sense that self-sufficiency and independence and capability and competence – that these are all valued so we want to be them. And then we wonder why a man doesn't want us as a mate. 'Look how self-sufficient I am; look at all the resources I bring; look how little I need you. Marry me.' *Laughter* And it's very confusing for women because we thought those were the values, we thought we'd become what's really important so why don't you want me? Because we don't know that what men crave is femininity. That's what completes you, that's what feeds you, that's what nurtures you, that's what gives you life, is a woman's femininity. But we don't know that. So our femininity has gone underdeveloped, unexpressed, unnurtured...In our culture, femininity has become devalued. And what's interesting is, it hasn't become devalued by men; it's become devalued by women."
men  women  feminism 
5 weeks ago
[Alison Armstrong] -- Understanding Women: Unlock the Mystery
"Women have no honour. We have no honour...That's not insulting to a woman. See, by definition, honour is doing the right thing no matter how you feel about it. It's doing the right thing no matter how you feel about it. And as a man, protecting your loved ones is the right thing no matter how upset you are with them at the moment – it doesn't matter. You could be completely ticked off, you would still risk your life. Honour has you do that. So, honour is doing the right thing no matter how you feel about it. Women, because of our relationship to our feelings, we can't act counter to our feelings. That's why we have no honour. Because honour is doing the right thing no matter how you feel; how we feel determines the right thing. This is why we have no honour. Now, that doesn't mean we have no integrity...It doesn't mean we don't have courage...We just don't have honour. We're not built with honour...Because I have no honour, I don't know I can trust yours...I don't know that it doesn't matter if you're pleased with me right now, you'll still save me – not because of something I do but because of who you are – who you are will have you save me – not whether or not I'm being pleasing at this moment. But because women don't know that, this constant monitoring of our safety, this constant concern for will you provide for and protect us has us always paying attention to: 'Am I pleasing you? Am I pleasing you? Am I pleasing you? Am I pleasing you?'"
men  women  honour 
5 weeks ago
[Alison Armstrong] -- Understanding Women: Unlock the Mystery
"Instinct has [women] look for a provider and protector...When you, as a man, are perceived as a threat: that you perceived as either unwilling to provide for me or protect me, or, God forbid, you're not doing it 'right'...the reaction that women have is that your power needs to be reduced. You need to have less power. And, so, what a woman will do is emasculate you. So, you seem threatening when you don't do something 'right' - when you don't do something that way a woman would do it...you seem threatening when you raise your voice. When you raise your voice, to us, that is a precursor for force. And since you're bigger and stronger, you can force. And when you raise your voice, you're reminding us that you can force, and that's very threatening to us. And we will emasculate you....Women have something we call a testosterometer, and part of [a woman's] multitasking diffused awareness is monitoring the environment, and when a man gets all pumped up and has a testosterone spike, the testosterometer goes 'DANGER! DANGER! DANGER!' And that's when she'll come out with the snide remarks and the criticisms and the sneers and the rolled eyes, and all the things that steal power. A woman will perceive a threat by a man; her reaction will be to emasculate him, and then the moment after she emasculates him, she's like, 'Oh, no! I just alienated my protector.'"
men  women  testosterone 
5 weeks ago
[Alison Armstrong] -- The #1 Myth Intimidating Women Believe and an Illusion-Busting Insight ~ Led By Shadee Ardalan, featuring Ken Bechtel
"Man-Mode" vs Feminine Receptivity -- Shadee: "Intimidation is inherently adversarial: someone is weaker and the other person is stronger. And that is the illusion that women are going under. That it is their strength that makes them intimidating to men. It's their successes, it's their intelligence, their competencies that makes them intimidating to men. And that because they're so intimidating, they are attracting men who are weaker. And what women will say is: 'I need a man who is man enough for me.' 'I need him to Man Up!' That's what you'll hear a woman say. So, the number one myth is that women actually believe they are intimating and that's what's keeping men away. And that's not the case...Men are not made timid or fearful by your successes, by your strength, by your capabilities and capacities. No. They're not avoiding that woman because she is all that. They are avoiding her because she's not what he needs to be attracted to her. Men are repelled because of the *attitude* not the accomplishments of these women. They avoid these women, not out of fear of her, but out of a fear of wasting resources on her. She doesn't actually threaten him; men have a much stronger sense of self than they are given credit for. They also have a much stronger relationship to their limited amount of time, energy and resources than a woman does. They are the calorie-conservers of the universe, and they're always assessing whether or not whatever they are going to take on – whether it's making dinner or installing the DVR or pursuing a relationship with someone – is worth it. Is it worth it? Is it worth his considerable amount of time, energy and resources?" -- Ken: "From a masculine viewpoint: if it's already being done, we're not going to fight you for it; it's not a good use of our energy. So if you're already making all the plans and taking the lead on everything, well, okay, if it's getting done, it's getting done. It doesn't make sense to us, as men, to spend extra energy either trying to do it twice or fight you for it...There's no reason to be there if [she] is taking all the roles and there's no place for me...When there's a space for receptivity and we can step forward and provide the things that we're compelled to do, then we're being received...And that makes a huge difference, because as men, that's what we're about, we're providers." -- Shadee: "So, whether it's opening the door, or carrying the box up the flight of stairs or driving you around, when a woman is like, 'No, I've got this; I don't need you; no thank you very much; I am strong and I am capable' what's happening is, you're not giving him the opportunity to provide...The attitude is one of 'I don't need you; I'm going to prove that I don't need you; I'm going to prove that I'm better than you!' None of those attitudes are going to work to create partnership with men. Because what's still going on is leaving the [man] feeling in some way inadequate: they're inadequate to provide for you; they're inadequate to be of service you to; they are inadequate to be of service in your life. And the problem with a woman who believes she is intimidating is she thinks that he needs to prove that he is good enough for her, and that he will work harder based on failure and criticism. Again, this is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how men are designed and how they work. So, being capable, confident, being independent and self-sufficient – these are all good qualities. Yet, in order to be able to partner with a man, especially if you want him to be a masculine man – a man who is committed to providing and protecting, who is looking for opportunities to be your hero – what you need to do is give up the attitude, the attitude of: 'What do I need you for? I've got this. You're going to have to be more than me in order to be worthy of me." -- If you don't *need* me, I can't *want* you (and so I'll spend my resources on a woman that does).
men  women  relationships  sacrifice 
6 weeks ago
Freedomain Radio -- Emotional Dumping: Dangers of Taking Empathy Hostages (MP3)
"Is there empathy for the listener to the childhood horrors?" "Are you allowed or encouraged to bring your direct emotional experience to the interaction?" "Can you challenge the victim narrative?" "Are you allowed to suggest therapy?" -- My mother? Let me tell you about my mother.
psychology  trauma  empathy  RTR  emotionalintelligence  StefanMolyneux 
6 weeks ago
Dr. Robert Glover -- Is Living a Great Life Demeaning to a Woman?
'What healthy woman would be attracted to a guy whose greatest passion is her?'
men  women  relationships 
6 weeks ago
Alison Armstrong -- How Men and Women Relate to Money - May 21 2014 (MP3)
Alison Armstrong: "Women emasculate men to reduce their power. They do that out of fear. And then, that triggers another primal reaction of fear because, yes, we want a man who is going to protect us and provide for us, and women have...there's this terrible thing that happens to a woman, and it's the most profound cavewoman response in her relationship, and it's the thought: 'I'm better off without him.' That's when it's all coming apart. When she thinks: 'I'm better off without him.' And so this is why every women is instinctively looking for a man that's bigger than her, stronger than her, and has more resources than she does. So that she will be better off with him than without him. And when women start to make more money, it can contribute to: 'I'm better off without him.' And this is why she starts pulling for he's got to do more housework. -- Dennis Prager: "...Because on the one hand, women fear – and this is all primal – fear male power, because he can hurt me. On the other hand, they fear him not being powerful because then he can't protect me...Men are confused by women: 'I want you to be more powerful but if you are I'll be frightened by you, so I'll try to make you less powerful, and if you are less powerful then I'll be frightened by the fact that I'm more powerful than you." -- Alison Armstrong: "What women are most afraid of is their own nonsense. So, we mostly don't want you to be more powerful than me except for when I know...I'm full of [BS]. I need you to stand up to me; I need you to tell me 'That's nonsense; cut it out' because that's what truly makes me safe. Women, we're afraid we're crazy. We're really afraid we're crazy, and that's something we never talk about. So, when we're feeling crazy and you guys stand up to us...*swoons*"
men  women  emotionalintelligence  relationships  psychology 
6 weeks ago
Alison Armstrong -- Men, Women, and Happiness - July 18 2014 (MP3)
Dennis Prager: "...An unhealthy woman will attack a happy man." -- Alison Armstrong: "It's worse than that, unfortunately. And it's because of the power part. Because happiness and power go together in men. And most women are terrified of men having power. When a man is happy, a woman will emasculate him. It's predictable that women will attack a happy man. I wish it were the exception, but it's actually predictable. We're afraid of that surge of power, and what you're going to do with it. Because we don't understand that you fundamentally want to protect us and provide for us, and that you'll use that power for good, most women attack men when they're happy. It's awful." -- "The good news is that it's curable. The impulse to emasculate men is triggered, unfortunately, very often in women. So whenever a man doesn't do what a woman would have done, her reaction will be to take that personally: it means he doesn't love me or respect me – and she'll have a reaction that might include that she wants to punish him or that she wants to weaken him. And this is really normal in our culture, that women are afraid of men being in power so they have a systematic way of just going around and disempowering men, all the time. It's like they're slashing tires...And it has to do with that way our brain works in terms of something that can be called trauma memory. And for survival purposes, whenever we hear about something terrible happening to another person, our brain records that as if it happened to us. And the more detail given in that story of that terrible thing that happened, the clearer and more vivid and long-lasting the memory is. So, women, for example, the percentage of the first world population of women that has been raped is very low. But almost all women approach all men as potential rapists, as if they had a personal experience of that...There's a shift that needs to happen for women that in order to appreciate the value of men being happy where they need to shift from: men are dangerous; to: there are some dangerous men...Since I gave up emasculating men in 1991, I have an experience of being safe in the world because I know it doesn't matter if I know a man; it doesn't matter if I know him, it doesn't matter if he likes me, it doesn't matter if he thinks I'm pretty, it doesn't matter even if he's mad at me; he will protect me because that's who he is. That's who men are. We can count on men to be that...That surge of men have when they're happy, we need you to have that. Because it's actually...when a man has that surge of power, he has a surge of testosterone. And women are always knocking testosterone and thinking it's a bad thing – but actually, men do bad things when they have low levels of testosterone. Men are depressed and mean when they have low levels of testosterone, not when that have high levels of testosterone. It's the opposite of what women are afraid of. So, we want you – we need you to have that surge of power, that's when you feel capable and able and your reaction is: 'What else can I do for you?' So, men are already organized around making woman happy...men feel defeated when they're not able to make women happy..."
men  women  emotionalintelligence  hysteria  testosterone  sacrifice 
6 weeks ago
Freedomain Radio -- #2830: Fifty Shades of EGGS (MP3)
"For women to remember that eggs don't make them special, is really tough. Because it's a huge amount of power for women who used to be trained how to use that power, and now that power is just mutant and rampant... Women used to be taught you basically have a whole bunch of bombs, and the bombs can go off in a controlled manner, or they can go off and take out half the village. But they're going to go off either way. Now, the controlled manner is, you get a man to commit. You get the eggs, you get the babies. There's your controlled egg explosion. The uncontrolled manner is, you fuck a lot, bad shit happens, you run out of time, your eggs die...and there's nothing but a smoking crater of regret for the second half of your life...And so women in their late twenties begin to figure this stuff out. And they say, 'Shit. I was supposed to use my prettiness and my hotness and my attractiveness to get commitment from a man. But instead I used it for recreational vanity, sex fests that have left me heart-broken and full of antibiotics'...And there's this looming sense of disaster, and it happens to men in their twenties, too. The way if happens for men is, men say, 'Well, I sure self-indulged a lot, I've got really good at Call of Duty III, and I now how to make a latte. But I don't really have any money with which to build a family. Oh, shit!'... So, women are like, 'Oh, I fucked up! When I should have been building a relationship to have kids...and now I'm really screwed because I've got to scramble to find some guy to commit to me when I'm running low on looks and when I have this agenda.' And the guy knows it's too obviously about the eggs. See, in your early twenties, you can make it subtly about the eggs. But in your late twenties, it's like, 'Hey! We gonna get married? How much money do you make? How long have you had your current position? What's your education like?' It's just like, 'Egg, egg, egg, egg, egg!' and no-one can pretend there's anything to do with romance and love in it. And that's not good. You need the illusion of romance to generate the fantasy of love to generate the prison of commitment... There's this slow unease that creeps up on you, and like all these slow unease things, you can put it off for a long time, but the longer you put it off, the worse it gets, and at some point, you're really just kinda screwed."
men  women  hypergamy  dating  relationships 
7 weeks ago
Freedomain Radio -- #2826: [Continuation of the “Vulnerability is Strength” Convo] (MP3)
"This is the fundamental MGTOW issue for me...find a woman who is an anarchist. How likely is a committed anarchist to invoke the power of the State in a marriage?"
men  women  relationships  marriage  anarchism  voluntaryism  honour  integrity  philosophy  StefanMolyneux 
7 weeks ago
Freedomain Radio -- #2819: The Legend of the NAWALT* (MP3)
'*Not All Women Are Like That.' -- '...being scared to be honest with women and efficiency in finding a quality relationship partner.' -- "...relentless honesty is what happens...you're hiding who you are from women and then saying 'Well, I'm having trouble finding a woman to really connect with'...you are white-knighting women – which is odd for a MGTOW guy to be doing...because you're treating women as fragile and treating men as robust...you're changing your behaviour out of deference for women's 'weakness'...you are adjusting your behaviour to protect women from your honesty. Or. more accurately, from their reaction to your honesty...There's nothing more efficient than honesty. And there's nothing more powerful than vulnerability. There is nothing more powerful than vulnerability. Because vulnerability reveals everyone in your life who will abuse power. Immediately. And almost irrevocably. There's nothing weaker than hiding your vulnerability. Because it's a refusal to stare at those who will abuse power and see them for who they are, which means they still have power over you, and still have control over you. Nothing is stronger than vulnerability. Nothing is more clarifying than vulnerability. Nothing is clearer than vulnerability. And if you hide who you are, you are just making a tombstone for your every day actions. Because you don't exist in hiding, and you're letting the past rob you of marriage and children. 'I had to lie to my mom; I couldn't be who I was with my mom, so that's all I'm ever going to do.' Well, that's letting the bitch win. No, no, no. She had her life, she had her kids; you have your life, you have your kids. Exercise the power of vulnerability. Vulnerability breaks the past for we victims because we couldn't be vulnerable when we were children, because we had no choice, we had no voluntaryism, we had no freedom. But we can be vulnerable as adults – that is a fundamental recognition that the world has changed, that we no longer life in the past. The world has changed. When you are vulnerable you are signalling to your system that the past is over and done. That you're no longer a victim, that you're no longer trapped in a destructive and abusive environment. Vulnerability means it's over, it's done – war is over, we're home...But if you continue to use the same defences that you had in the past, all you're telling your whole body is that the past is not over. Be vulnerable. Be honest. Be open. Show your heart...Vulnerability and openness will get you exactly what you want in your life. And hiding will only get you the feeling of being prey, from here to the end of your life."
men  women  relationships  RTR  honesty  vulnerability  agencyvspatiency  victimhood  defencemechanisms  StefanMolyneux  * 
7 weeks ago
The Rational Male -- The Burden of Performance
'...even with a ‘fuck it, I’ll just be me’ mindset you’re still being evaluated on how well ‘you are just you’. -- The simple fact is that you must actually be your performance – it must be internalized. In truth, you already are that performance whether you dictate and direct that, or you think you can forget it and hope your natural, undirected performance will be appreciated by women (and others), but regardless, women will filter for hypergamous optimization based on how well you align with what they believe they are entitled to in a man in the context of their own perception of their SMV. -- For Men, there is no true rest from performance. To believe so is to believe in women’s mythical capacity for a higher form of empathy which would perdispose them to overriding their innate hypergamous filtering based on performance. -- Women will never have the same requisites of performance for themselves for which they expect men to maintain of themselves. Hypergamy demands a constant, subliminal reconfirmation of a man’s worthiness of her commitment to him, so there is never a parallel of experience. -- Women will claim men “require” they meet some physical standard (i.e. performance) and while generally true, this is still a performance standard men have of women, not one they hold for themselves. There simply is no reciprocal dynamic or prequalification of performance for women, and in fact for a man to even voice the idea that he might qualify a woman for his intimacy he’s characterized as judgmental and misogynistic. -- Social conventions like this are established to ensure women’s hypergamous sexual strategy is the socially dominant one. Expecting a woman to perform for a man is an insult to her ‘prize status’ as an individual. -- From a humanistic perspective there’s a want for a rational solution to this performance requirement, but as I’ve outlined in prior posts, appeals to women’s reason are no insulation against the subliminal influences of hypergamy. -- I read many a ‘dating coach’ who’s approach is complete honesty and full disclosure in the hopes that a like-minded, rational woman will naturally appreciate a man’s forthrightness, but this presupposes a preexisting equal playing field where subliminal influences are overridden by mutual rationalism. -- The real hope is that women will drop their innate hypergamous performance requisites in appreciation of this vulnerable, inadequate honesty. -- What they sweep under the rug is that you cannot appeal to a woman’s reason or sentiment to genuinely forgive a deficit in a man’s performance. Love, reason, both demand a preexisting mutual appreciation in a common context, but neither love nor reason alleviate the necessity of performance for a man. -- Women simply are not motivated to compromise hypergamy on their own accord. They will not be reasoned into accommodating a situation of mutual needs by overt means. -- It is a Man’s capacity to perform and demonstrate (never explicate) higher value that motivates women to accommodate mutual needs in a relationship – whether that’s a same night lay or a 50 year marriage.'
men  women  hypergamy  sacrifice 
7 weeks ago
The Rational Male -- [Interview with Christian McQueen and Dagonet]
"Men love idealistically. Women love opportunistically. Hypergamy makes women opportunistic. Women love men for what they are, and then – maybe – for who they are. A women is not going to love you unless you have something to offer her, or are performing in some way. And women know that men have to perform – and keep performing. Men love idealistically to escape the pressure of having perform: 'She's going to love me whether I win or lose'. That's the equalist mindset that incorrectly assumes men and women love in the same way." ~ Rollo Tamasi, The Rational Male (Paraphrased)
men  women  hypergamy  sacrifice  romance 
7 weeks ago
YouTube -- Freedomain Radio: Feminism: Unequal Opportunity Nagging
"...women don't want equality of opportunity – in the feminist paradigm – women don't want equality of opportunity, they want equality of [outcome]." -- "What, fundamentally, is feminism other than women whining and complaining to men and manipulating men into giving them resources? It's such a throwback to all of the cliches of femininity...Women whine and complain and nag, and men give them resources. Women play the victim, and men throw resources at them. Women want freedom, but the moment freedom becomes alarming or challenging, they run to men for protection – because the reality is that feminism is female and the State is male. So, if you want to understand feminism, the more modern Marxist feminism, feminism is the wife and the State is the husband... Feminism is the nagging wife, and the State is beleaguered husband...'I want this, I want that. Things aren't equal; I need pay equity; I need preferential treatment; I want abortions; I want this...' And, of course, because it's appeasement, women are never satisfied and never happy: 'I need more; I need this; I need that; I want never to be fired; I want more welfare...'" -- "A woman who complains about being victimized – against all evidence – a woman who complains about being victimized, – and runs to men to protect her from the consequences of her own behaviour – is like a caricature of a woman. This like woman as retarded child." -- "For a women to use her femininity as a tool to manipulate resources out of exhausted and beleaguered men, is the ultimate retrograde caricature of bad femininity." -- "Women who run to men to protect them from the consequences of the freedom they demanded in the first place are ridiculous human beings...Philosophically they're ridiculous, morally they're ridiculous...'I demand freedom.' (With freedom comes responsibility.) 'I don't want that!'" -- "'I want to be free when it suits me. When things go badly, I want to run to the government – run to the men – run to the patriarchy – so that men can be forced to pay for the consequences of my mistakes, of my bad decisions.'"
men  women  feminism  statism  socialism  victimhood  agencyvspatiency  sacrifice  StefanMolyneux 
7 weeks ago
YouTube -- Freedomain Radio: The Irrational Boner: Estrogen Based Parasite Avoidance
00:29:20: "...there's this myth that women are the romantic ones; I find that to be complete and total bullshit. Like all exquisite bullshit, it's the exact opposite of the truth. In my experience and in the experience of every single man I know, it is men who are the hopeless romantics, and women who are the like the Machiavellian calculating robots of resource allocation ... Do you know why women like romance? Because it means men have no judgement ... When men say that men are idiots, that's kinda true because when men are attracted to women, they turn into idiots."
men  women  hypergamy  sacrifice  romance  StefanMolyneux 
8 weeks ago
girlwriteswhat comments
'...the false face of feminism as a movement for justice is more insidious by far than even communism, since gendered perceptions operate through different psychological schemas than classism or tribalism. It is very difficult for people to view women (or those claiming to represent women) as perpetrators or liars or malicious or malfeasant. The burden of proof required to convince someone that "feminism" has bad intentions or is essentially full of shit is much more difficult to meet than the burden of proof necessary to convince someone that "communism" or "nazism" or some other movement or ideology has malicious intentions or is full of shit. We just don't see women in that way. We like women and are not only programmed to take their concerns seriously and at face value, but we are programmed to expect men to address those concerns to women's satisfaction. And given the greater psychological individuation of men than women, men are much less likely to see feminism's anti-male rhetoric as an attack on them personally - feminists might be saying "men are bad", but that doesn't mean they're saying "you, specifically, are bad". The man in power who submits to feminism is able to claim status as the one good man, while only all the other men are bad. -- It amazes me how feminists have managed to convince men that "traditional masculinity" is harmful and oppressive to women, when the entire body of male-penned classical literature defines the ideal man as one who serves and protects women, even at the cost of his own life. It is that very chivalry that seems innate to men that has allowed individual men to be hoodwinked into thinking that all other men, not them, mind you, just all the others, are oppressive, rapey bastards who glory in the oppression of women. -- Given the psychological schemas involved, I would have to say that NO society predicated on the oppression and exploitation of (that society's) women for men's benefit has ever existed, because the psychological mechanisms involved would preclude such a possibility. Yet it is these very schemas that allow men to be convinced that such societies not only have existed, and not only still exist, but that they have been the norm throughout history. -- ...As for feminism exacerbating AND erasing the underlying reality of society's impulse to protect women, it has gone even farther than that. It has exploited and manipulated that very impulse on the part of society to convince that society that it actually hates women. It quite literally has manipulated the impulse on the part of men to sacrifice for women in order to convince men that they are all actually misogynists. -- It uses the underlying reality to convince everyone that not only does the underlying reality not exist, but that the underlying reality is the opposite of reality. And because they have so effectively convinced society that society is misogynistic, the original underlying reality of society (that it prioritizes the safety and wellbeing of women) makes society even more prone to prioritize the safety and wellbeing of women. -- Feminism says, "society hates women!" and it is the depth of society's love for women that makes society want to prove them wrong by capitulating to their every demand.'
men  women  feminism  victimhood  agencyvspatiency  apexuality  predation  sacrifice  * 
8 weeks ago
girlwriteswhat comments
'...Recent research has found that female sexual arousal is at least partly dependent on feeling desired. It is reactive. -- While the most common rape fantasy among women ("I'm being forced and I love it") has been posited as based on a rejection of responsibility and a means to remain a "good girl" even when having sex with a stranger, I think its just as likely to be a narcissistic need to feel desired. Imagine, this man desires me so much that he will set aside all the rules of a civilized society and risk being put in prison just to have me. He will even cast his own human decency aside and become a rapist, because he wants me that much. That's an extremely powerful thing, I think.'
men  women  sexuality 
8 weeks ago
Honey Badger Brigade -- How many falls does it take to level up from biased media to journalist? by Hannah Wallen
'...various articles have attempted to shift the discussion from criticism of the bias, the conflict of interest, and the manipulation back onto gamers by labeling rejection of their push to infuse their ideology into an apolitical, recreational activity “misogyny.” The stated reasoning, as it is recently described in this Mirror article, is that because the particular ideological push being rejected is feminism, gamers must hate women. -- This tactic is also known as a DARVO attack: Deny, Accuse, Reverse Victim and Offender. You can read more about that specific behavior here. In this case, we have obstinately biased media screaming from the pulpit of their outlets, long-winded versions of, “We didn’t lie to you! You’re just hateful, inferior people!” -- This particular attack is rooted in layers of presumed entitlement. -- The base is the belief that women are exempt from criticism, and therefore any claim made on behalf of women is also exempt. This is a flawed approach to women’s issues, based on the false assumption that women are all in agreement, and always right. It’s an attitude that is inherently sexist, because it depends on an inequality; the assignment of so much greater relevance and legitimacy to women’s interests that women are entitled to acquiescence of other interests when there is a conflict. -- The second layer is the treatment of “feminism” and “women” as interchangeable terms, making women the territory of feminism and inferring upon feminism that same presumed exemption from criticism. There has been plenty of evidence to the contrary, including #womenagainstfeminism on twitter, on tumblr, and on facebook, and as part of the #gamergate protest there’s #notyourshield, the response of female and minority gamers to being told that social justice whining represents their interests. It seems that many, many women are averse to feminism’s territorial claims. Apparently we’re not all so much in agreement as is believed. -- Feminists don’t get it, however, and treat women’s refusal to bow to their presumed authority over all things female as a form of apostasy, which leads to the third and fourth layers, too intertwined to separate. -- These are self-assigned moral superiority, and the belief that said superiority infers a right to impose one’s ideology on others. Essentially this is the attitude of aggressive evangelism; the belief that one need not recognize other people’s independence because one believes that one is right. Not simply content with the ability to exchange ideas with others in an intellectual setting, the individual feels entitled to impose his or her ideological standards on the greater community “for their own good.” To the individual presuming this entitlement, opposition to his or her attempt at influencing your beliefs is not merely criticism or disagreement, but blasphemy, justifying behavior he or she would otherwise recognize as abusive, such as misleading or bullying others.'
feminism  totalitarianism  marxism  ideology  goodthink 
8 weeks ago
Honey Badger Brigade -- The origin of feminism and the importance of female MRAs
'...feminism feeds off hatred and feeds into hatred. -- In “The Science of Hatred” by Jen Robinson, she notes: Professor of Psychology Ervin Staub has been studying hatred and violence for almost 30 years. In a recent article entitled The Origins and Evolution of Hate, he extends Penguin’s definition, pointing out that hate is more likely to occur when we view another person as having either equal or greater social or economic value rather than less. Humans may feel things like pity or disdain for people they view as inferior to them, but true hatred typically comes about when the other is seen as equal or superior. Often, the hated person or group is seen as having more than they deserve, and that these fortunes have been acquired at the expense of the hater. -- This is why feminists make up so many fake studies, they ignore data, they alter the meaning of terms and definitions, they ignore what women say about having been raped, they alter legal code to exclude male victims, they alter legal code to extend the definitions of terms: it’s all to create propaganda and rhetoric. To constantly drum the idea of the patriarchy because it no longer actually exists. As you Honey Badgers have so often said, men are not privileged, men do not have power over women and haven’t for some time. However, if feminists can’t constantly play the powerless victim and portray men as the dark overlords of evil, they become irrelevant because the non-feminist women would lose the primary mechanism of their hate.'
feminism  marxism  dehumanization  victimhood  agencyvspatiency 
8 weeks ago
The Rational Male -- Yes Means Fear
'...And thus we understand the latent purpose of this law – instilling fear in men. Nominally the law is about making men so fearful that they concede all aspects of any intersexual discourse to a feminine imperative. This is Sadie Hawkins’ world. One in which only women are allowed to make any intersexual approach to a man for fear that his doing so will be construed as rape, or an intent to rape, even before he initiates anything. -- "The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality." ~ Heartiste -- The more a feminine-primary social order embraces, endorses and openly promotes feminine hypergamy as the normative, correct, social paradigm, the more it will be necessary to legally force men to comply with it. -- The Feminine Imperative is so fixated upon the insecurities inherent to women’s individual capacity to optimize their hypergamy, so entitled are women to an Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks sexual strategy, it will enact legal mandates to ensure that optimization.' -- He/She who controls the price controls the victory.
men  women  feminism  power  hypergamy  sexcrime 
8 weeks ago
YouTube -- ShieldWife: Fuck Fagin Feminists!
'Feminists exploit children for their own ends.' [Potty-Mouthed Princesses Drop F-Bombs for Feminism: http://youtu.be/XqHYzYn3WZw] -- Threat Narrative
feminism  victimhood  predation 
8 weeks ago
Freedomain Radio -- #2814 [Sugar and Spice...] (MP3)
01:48:50: "...Hey women, just go talk to other women about being peaceful parents. They won't listen to men because we're just annoying puppies. But – women, go talk to each other. And you know what, the fact that women get really angry at me when I say go talk to other women about peaceful parenting is much more of an indictment of women than even the most fervent, imaginary female hatred coming out of me – could possibly be. People think I hate women. No, no, no! Think I hate women? Women know women and they don't even want to talk to them about any kind of virtue. Go talk to other women about not hitting their kids. 'Oh, no. No, no, no. You see, I'm a woman; I know what other women are like. I don't want anything to do with that, thank you very much.' Well, that's pretty damning about women! Even I don't go that far! ..."
men  women  hypocrisy 
8 weeks ago
Freedomain Radio -- #2811 [Socialized Vaginas] (MP3)
00:49:00: "You know, men don't like the welfare state as a whole, because it emasculates men. Because it means women aren't dependent on men for helping raise children. And it's not because we love women to be dependent on us, it's just that's a biological reality. Now, if women don't have to be dependent on men, it means they don't have to choose reliable men to have children with. Which means assholes win, pretty-boys win, jocks win, and good, decent stable providers who would otherwise win...the stable, steady men lose...What women don't understand about the welfare state is that men bring resources and that's our value. And that's biological; that's just the way it is. And women bring fertility, and excellent childcare and breast-feeding, and that's their value from a biological standpoint. What women don't understand about men's hostility to the welfare state is that taking resources from a man is like taking vaginas from a woman. It robs us of our sexual value. The redistribution of male dollars is exactly that same as the redistribution of female blowjobs – and fertility and eggs and breast-feeding. So if we said to women, 'Well, I'm sorry but we've got to socialize your vaginas; you've got to go have sex with all these gross men,' they'd be appalled! It's a violation! Well, when the government takes money from men who are working and gives it to women who are having sex with men who aren't working, it's exactly the same thing, biologically. It's like, how would women feel if lazy, overweight women could have the fat sucked out of their asses and injected into women who did aerobics? ... Or whatever, whatever, transfered sexual appeal from more attractive women to less attractive women would be appalling for women! That's exactly the same as the redistribution of income from men to women, or from hard-working men to lazy men. Because when our money is taken away, the foundational value of our sexual appeal is taken away. Socializing men's money is exactly the same as socializing women's sexual appeal."
men  women  feminism  socialism  welfare  statism  sexuality  StefanMolyneux 
8 weeks ago
YouTube -- ShieldWife: I don't need a man, but...
'Why is it that feminists say they need so little and yet demand so much?'
feminism  predation  entitlement  statism  slavery 
8 weeks ago
YouTube -- Freedomain Radio: Emma Watson’s UN Speech: What She Didn’t Say #HeForShe
"...she's basically saying that women cannot free themselves; they've nothing whatsoever to do with the cycle of oppression and require men to release them from bondage...Men must get involved because only men are bad. Women cannot free themselves without men saving them because women are only victims never perpetrators. Man, bad; woman, good...Demanding or requiring or inviting men to save women strips them of any moral responsibility or moral agency in the cycle of violence that so consumes the world...Welcome to the underground world of female violence. The great unspoken horror that drives so many of the world's evils. Women are responsible for half of all domestic violence incidents in Western countries. 80% of British mothers hit their babies before their babies are even one-years-old...The idea that endlessly bashing toddlers has nothing whatsoever to do with the perpetuation of the cycle of violence is absolutely jaw-dropping. I, for one would be thrilled to hear a feminist say something like the following: 'Certainly there is anti-female prejudice in the world and we have been speaking about it for decades, if not centuries – but ladies, my sisters, I invite you to turn away from men and look inwards towards yourselves and see what we can do independent of men to bring about a better world. Most mothers hit their children. This cannot be blamed on children; it is a moral failing of women. No man stands behind us and commands us to hit our children. Men have their issues and faults and evils, to be sure, but in this instance, in this circumstance, we need to look directly in the mirror to find the source of so many of the world's aliments, evils and catastrophes. It is time for us to stop only blaming men which merely disempowers us and insults men, and accept the responsibility of becoming peaceful parents...' -- Ladies, my sisters, let me lay it out for you as plainly as I can: Before we are men, we are boys. When we are boys we are under the command and control of women almost exclusively. We are parented by women, disciplined by women, educated by women – we are raised by women. And those women scream at us and hit us. A lot. -- Mothers. Stop hitting your children. -- The hidden violence of the world is the violence of women – and the men they choose – against children. Stop hitting children and save the world."
men  women  feminism  victimhood  agencyvepatiency  violence  psychohistory  childhood  abuse  manifesto  StefanMolyneux 
8 weeks ago
« earlier      
"capitalism" #bandwidth #socialization * 1984 abuse activism addiction advertising advice america art attachment attention augmentationistsvsimmersionists avatars backlash banking behaviours bitcoin blogging brain branding business businessmodels celebrity centralbanking centralnervoussystem childhood children china climate code cognitivesurplus collaboration collapse collectiveintelligence communication communities conformity consumerism content corporatism creativity criticism crowdsourcing culture data datamining debt delusion design documentaries dollar economics emotionalintelligence empire entertainment evolution existentialism experience extensionsofman facebook fame feedback feminism finance forcedmemes freedom funny games gaming geoism globalgovernment google government greatestdepression groupthink hackersvsvectoralists hacking health hipsterrunoff history ideas identity ideology immateriallabour immunesystem incrementalism inflation information innovation interface internet irrationality journalism land law leaky learning legalese life lifecasting literaryculturevsoralculture mapping marketing markets media men mercantilism mobile money morality music narcissism narrativeactivism narrativeenvironments narrativeobjects networks news numbers objects oligarchicalcollectivism oligarchy parasitism parenting pathocracy people performance philosophy planning play politics privacy productnarratives propaganda psychohistory psychology psychotherapy puppetry quotes reality realityprogramming reflexivity relationships religion rent rentseeking research retribalization roleplay satire science search security self selfservers sexuality shame simulation slavery socialgraph socialism socialmedia socialnetworking sociology software sousveillance space statism status stefanmolyneux storytelling strategy surveillance tagging technology television temes terrorism! theadvertisedlife thegamingofeverydaylife theonion thinking tools transmedia trauma tv twitter uk victimhood violence virtuality virtualworlds visualization voluntaryism war wikileaks women wordpress work

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: