Progress.org -- Real Estate USA 2015 by Fred Foldvary
'Since the US 18-year business cycle went into depression in 2008, and the projected next depression is forecast for 2026, it is worthwhile to check on the status of the US economy as we approach the midpoint. In the last cycle phase, 1990 to 2008, there was a midpoint recession in 2001, but this time around, no half-time recession is imminent. The recovery has been sluggish, commodity prices are down, and interest rates have been kept low, so that the elements of recession are not yet in place. Real estate prices have recovered, but the speculative boom still looms in the future. -- ... One reason why the ever increasing cost of taxes and regulations have not crushed the economy has been that land rent has absorbed some of the costs. Just as land rent captures much of the gains from economic expansion, so too does land rent fall as an economy contracts. As greater productivity increases land rent, lower productivity, such as from costly regulations, decreases land rent. Thus land values have risen more slowly due to these higher costs. -- While economists have recognized that higher minimum wages in states and cities are reducing the growth of employment, economists have not generally analyzed the effect of higher wages on land rent. Owners of enterprises such as restaurants and shops will, over the long run, bid less for the rental of real estate, faced with higher labor costs, while residential landlords raise their rentals as their low-income tenants can now afford to pay more. -- Market dynamics in the USA are so strong that the private sector, especially real estate construction, is growing despite the higher costs imposed by government. Without the imposed costs, growth would be so high, and employment so strong, it would make us dizzy. -- Thus now the US economy is entering the expansionary phase, as unemployment is falling to the pre-recession level and real estate prices and construction enter the next speculative boom. The US fiscal system will once again misdirect economic growth towards excessive real estate construction and price rises. Governmental public works, civic services, and subsidies become capitalized into ever higher land rent as they are paid for mostly by taxes on labor and capital. Land rent is the greatest redistribution and subsidy in the US economy. The subsidy to real estate is the generation of higher land rent from public goods plus the financial subsidy of cheap credit. -- The real estate cycle will once again lead the business cycle to a peak. Land speculation will once again escalate real estate prices, while towards the end of the boom, the Federal Reserve will have raised interest rates step by step until the high cost of borrowing plus high prices for purchasing will again make real estate unaffordable for households and enterprise. Then comes the next financial crash as real estate prices collapse and loans default. -- None of the financial regulations confront the basic problem: massive subsidies to land values. The only remedy that will prevent the next depression is a prosperity tax shift, the replacement of all taxes with levies on land values.'
economics  geoism  land  rent  landcycle  businesscycle  predictions  FredFoldvary 
3 hours ago
Thought Catalog -- You Should Choose The Lifestyle You Want Over The Person You Want by Heidi Priebe|
'You should be able to be with somebody you love and also live a life that entices, invigorates and inspires you. You should be able to pursue what you want out of this world in every fearless way you want to without running the risk of losing the person you value most. You should be able to have, at the bare minimum, a relationship that allows for growth and exploration on the part of both parties. Here’s the stark truth about the person who is right for you: They want the same lifestyle that you do. How do I know this? Because that is, by definition, what makes them right for you. To be with someone whose eyes light up when yours do, whose heart races when your blood also pounds, who is enticed and inspired by the same forces that drive you forward, is a gift many of us never truly get to experience. We tell ourselves that love is enough. That it conquers everything. But we forget that love shouldn’t be the thing that conquers our lives – we should be. And we should do it deliberately, triumphantly, by the side of somebody who shares all of our joys and successes. So how do we meet such a person? That’s simple – we do more of what we love. We give ourselves up to uncertainty, to searching, to pursuing what we want out of life without the certainty of having someone beside us while we do it. We throw ourselves wholeheartedly into the things that we love and we consequently attract the people who love what we love. Who value what we prioritize. Who appreciate all that we are. We throw ourselves into the heart of possibility instead of staying comfortably settled inside of certainty. Because we owe it to ourselves to do so. We owe it to ourselves to live the greatest life that we’re capable of living, even if that means that we have to be alone for a very long time. At the end of the day, love is wonderful but it isn’t enough to make up for an entire lifetime of compromising your core values. You don’t want to spend forever gazing into somebody’s eyes expecting to find all of the answers you need inside of them. Wait for the person who is gazing outward in the same direction as you are. It’s going to make all of the difference in the world.'
relationships  individuation  purpose  love  philosophy  Kierkegaard  * 
8 hours ago
jdkeith comments on "What rights did man have before societies and governments?"
'Whatever other people respected. How about that? States form AFTER there is a surplus. You can't maintain a state on bare subsistence because kings, their retinue, and politicians aren't producers. -- You can't build a surplus without dispute resolution and cooperation within society. You can't cooperate without norms and a general conception of what is right and proper – rights. Rights ALWAYS predate the state.'
philosophy  rights  commonlaw  statism  parasitism 
The Art of Manliness -- Status and the Brain: The Neurology of Status
'The most important neurotransmitter connected to status is serotonin. Serotonin helps regulate appetite and sex drive, as well as one’s mood. Individuals with low serotonin levels are often cranky, aggressive, and depressed, which is why they are sometimes prescribed antidepressants designed to boost this neurotransmitter. -- Serotonin levels are influenced by genetics and lifestyle factors like stress, sleep, and diet. But one of the biggest factors impacting the amount of serotonin in the brain is whether you think others perceive you as having high status. Serotonin feels good, and whenever we experience boosts in our status, serotonin floods our brain, and we become more confident, relaxed, cooperative, and pro-social. That groovy, connected feeling encourages us to seek more status. -- Researchers have found in both primates and humans that serotonin levels rise as status rises, and decreases as status decreases. For example, dominant male vervet monkeys have twice as much serotonin in their blood as non-dominant males. When the dominant male is overthrown, his serotonin drops and his replacement’s serotonin levels surge dramatically. In humans, researchers have found that individuals in leadership positions have higher serotonin levels than their subordinates. For example, in one study researchers found that fraternity officers had 25% more serotonin than the other members in the fraternity. -- Drops in serotonin are also found in humans when they experience status defeat. Simply getting negative feedback from people you care about can cause your levels to drop. This is why getting snubbed or criticized by those you care about can make you feel so dang miserable. (Another factor is that rejection triggers the parts of the brain responsible for pain; and I’m talking actual physical pain — the kind of pain taking a Tylenol will help alleviate. Our whole body reacts surprisingly strongly to status defeats.) -- The serotonin boost that accompanies high status only activates when you perceive that others are displaying submissive behavior towards you. Researchers know this because they found they could deplete the serotonin levels of a dominant vervet monkey by putting him behind a one-way mirror. The alpha monkey could see his peers, but his peers couldn’t see him. Mr. Alpha Monkey made dominant gestures, but because his fellow monkeys couldn’t see him, they didn’t respond with signals of submission. Without this ego-stoking feedback, Mr. Alpha Monkey’s serotonin levels dropped, and he started to get really anxious. When the mirror was removed, his levels began to rise again. -- A similar mechanism works in humans. We need to see others display submissive behavior towards us to get the serotonin shot that comes from status. For people, submissive behavior comes in various forms. Bowing to someone or calling them “sir” is a form of submissive behavior, but so is simply giving a compliment, or even liking someone’s Facebook status. (We don’t think of giving this kind of positive feedback as submission, but when we compliment someone, we acknowledge that they have or did something of value that may make them superior to us, even in a slight, subtle, and temporary sense.) Just like monkeys, if we don’t get any signals that others perceive us as having high status, we’re not going to get a serotonin boost. Just because you think you’re an alpha male, doesn’t mean you’ll feel like one. -- So gaining status can give us more serotonin, which encourages us to seek more status, but can it also work the other way around? That is, does having high serotonin levels to begin with lead to higher status? -- Researchers explored this question by artificially increasing serotonin levels in vervet monkeys. The monkeys that received the spike became much calmer and more sociable, but they didn’t immediately become the dominant male. Instead, the injected monkey began engaging in pro-social behaviors, like grooming and gift giving, which eventually led to dominance in a few weeks. So instead of having an immediate, direct effect on status, serotonin seems to have a more indirect effect by encouraging behavior that can eventually lead to elevated status. -- Think about happy-go-lucky people, who likely have higher amounts of natural serotonin in their brains; their calm, cooperative dispositions often ingratiate them to others, and can lead to higher status. Depressed folks, on the other hand, who have lower levels of serotonin, frequently can’t work up the motivation to socialize, and act out in angry and aggressive ways; this works to isolate them from others, and lower their status in the social hierarchy. (Depressed individuals, however, who use this solitude to master some skill or work out a solution to a cultural problem, can emerge from their retreat to attain higher social status in a different way. See: Abraham Lincoln.)'
psychology  status  serotonin  groups  hierarchy 
2 days ago
Psychology Today -- Why We Love to Hate Politicians by Loretta G Breuning
'#2. Challenging the power structure feels good to the mammal brain: Mammals challenge the hierarchy of their herd or pack or troop whenever it's safe because that promotes their survival. Losing a challenge threatens survival, of course, so the mammal brain is always scanning for safe opportunities to challenge. Insulting a politician to your friends or your screen is safe. Insulting someone with power over you in real life often is much less safe. It's easy to see why venting oppositional feelings at politicians is so tempting. It's easy to rail at the politician's urge for power without noticing your own. You may think power seeking is caused by “our society,” but monkeys have been doing it for 50 million years. New reports of animal empathy use contrived circumstances to obscure the animal status-seeking that humans have observed for generations.'
psychology  serotonin  status  groups  hierarchy 
3 days ago
Personality Junkie -- Understanding INTPs’ Indifference to Stories
'...INTPs are well described as philosophers. As such, their primary interest is to understand the deepest essence of things by way of concepts. In their view, this requires seeing past or stripping away all details that strike them as arbitrary, superfluous, or purely stylistic. -- The problem with stories for INTPs is their most important content—the fundamental truths or ideas they contain—is buried in a sandbox of sensory details. Hence, getting to a story’s N goodies, especially through reading, is typically viewed as more work than it’s worth. This is why INTPs often bypass fiction entirely in favor of non-fiction. -- In Einstein’s indifference toward the “the merely personal,” he effectively revealed his lack of Fi. After all, Fi is known to cherish and defend the unique stories, values, and interests of particular individuals or cultures. If I am correct about INTPs being the least story-oriented of all types, then it is no coincidence that Fi is their most unconscious (i.e., 8th) function. -- One story INTPs may find endlessly fascinating is that of their own life. While they enjoy self-analysis (Ti) for its own sake, it can also serve as a sort of gateway to understanding the human condition and to their feeling more connected to humanity at large (Fe). In this sense, Ti combined with Fe can resemble Fi. Indeed, both INTPs and INFPs may exhibit marked interests in existentialism. INTPs often explore existential matters by way of theology or philosophy, while INFPs are more inclined to do so through art, film, or literature. Both types may also explore the existential through the lens of psychology, as well as through biographies or memoirs of likeminded thinkers, artists, or innovators.'
psychology  personality  INTP 
3 days ago
Thought Catalog -- 16 Little Fall Things That Remind Us Of Each Myers-Briggs Personality Type by Heidi Priebe
'#INTJ: Going back to school: It’s no secret that the INTJ’s favorite part of the fall season isn’t the crisp air or the pumpkin pie – it’s the opportunity to return to a structured form of education. Fall kicks off the school season and while most students accept this with a mixture of disdain and apprehension, the INTJ could not be more pleased. The return to school means they are right back where they belong.'
psychology  personality  INFJ 
3 days ago
Thought Catalog -- The Four Different Types Of Extroverts According To Jungian Psychology by Heidi Priebe
'#Extroverted Sensors: Extroverted sensors are energized and inspired by the physical world that surrounds them. They are keenly in tune with every sight, sound, smell, taste and touch that enters their awareness – they gain energy by engaging in each new sensory experience. These extroverts may be particularly interested in athletics and other physically intense experiences. They take in people the way they take in everything else – by noticing how people look, smell, sound and hold themselves. Their preferred method of socializing is one in which they are sharing experiences with other people – they’d rather bond over doing something fun together than over a long conversation. What extroverted sensors love about social gatherings is the intense stimulation of being introduced to new people whom they haven’t ‘taken in’ before. These extroverts particularly enjoy the sensory stimulation that clubs, raves and other such entertainment venues provide – they can almost physically feel the energy that is present in such environments. -- #Extroverted Feelers: Extroverted feelers are the most stereotypically extroverted extroverts in that they gain energy primarily through interacting with people. They enjoy listening to, learning about and sharing experiences with others in just about any fashion – be it a long, in-depth conversation or a simple exchange of small talk. Others’ joy and pain is their joy and pain. Though they certainly require alone time every once in a while (all extroverts do), extroverted feelers require the least amount of alone time out of all extroverted types. People are their main joy and inspiration in life and it doesn’t matter how or in what capacity they’re interacting with others – as long as there’s a plethora of people present whose energy they can feed off. What extroverted feelers love about social gatherings is the chance to interact with various people, learn about the lives of those people and form new interpersonal connections. They also enjoy the validation they receive from others in social situations and they feed off the positive social energy that abounds. At a social gathering, you will usually find them chatting with many different people and making sure everyone feels comfortable and happy. -- #Extroverted Intuitives: Extroverted intuitives are the least stereotypically extroverted extroverts. They gain energy primarily through exploring abstract ideas about the world and speculating over various possibilities for the future. They are extroverts primarily in that their thoughts are oriented externally, toward the world of experiences they could have. These extroverts feed off the mental energy of others in order to form new ideas and come to intellectual conclusions. They particularly enjoy engaging in friendly debates and bouncing ideas off others. If others are uninterested in engaging in such conversations, the extroverted intuitive is likely to go engage their plans and ideas alone. Extroverted intuitives often enjoy speculating about how a social gathering might go more than they enjoy the actual social gathering itself. They are maximally energized by the feeling that ‘Anything could happen.’ At a social gathering, you are likely to find extroverted intuitives excitedly discussing an idea in the corner of a room with someone who intrigues them. They may also spur friendly debates or intellectual conversations with a group. -- #Extroverted Thinkers: Extroverted thinkers are the most structured and decisive extroverts. They aim to impose logical order on their external environment in as efficient a manner as possible. These extroverts are goal-oriented and aggressive – they see a clear path between where they are and where they want to be and they are perfectly comfortable navigating their environments in any means possible in order to get there. They gain energy through working with others to achieve their goals and taking hold of those hard-earned achievements. They are not the warmest extroverts, but they do genuinely enjoy the company of others and they are primarily motivated by external achievements. What extroverted thinkers enjoy about social gatherings are the networking opportunities they present, as well as the opportunity to gauge their own achievements and social status against others’ (not necessarily in a petty way, but as a means of benchmarking their own progress). These types will often be found trying to ‘charm’ or entice others who can help them professionally, as they almost always have business on their mind.'
psychology  personality 
3 days ago
Thought Catalog -- The Four Different Types Of Introverts According To Jungian Psychology by Heidi Priebe
'#Introverted Sensors: To sensing introverts, reality exists as a series of physical observations and experiences that they can sort through and classify while they are alone. These introverts are highly meticulous and detail-oriented, and enjoy keeping their homes, selves and environments in proper order. They are quick to notice patterns of behavior over time and they use those patterns to predict (and plan for) future occurrences. These introverts place a high value on tradition and are extremely respectful of social and societal conventions. They are rule-followers and tradition-upholders. To them, life is an ongoing process of putting – and keeping – things in order. While alone, the introverted sensor is reflecting on past experiences, maintaining order in his or her personal environment and making tangible plans for the future. -- #Introverted Feelers: To feeling introverts, reality exists as a series of subjective experiences that they must explore and internalize to determine the true meaning of. Introverted feelers are highly creative individuals, who often use alone time to create poetry, music or art. They come to understand the world by deciding how they feel about the experiences they’ve had and developing a personal moral code to help them make future decisions. They often care deeply about social justice, and may feel the pain of wronged individuals on a personal level. They are the tortured artists of the world, who feel and experience everything on an incredibly deep, personal level. When alone, the introverted feeler is reflecting on the experiences they’ve had, uncovering a deeper meaning behind those experiences and determining the corresponding moral principle. Often, they channel their feelings through some form of artistic expression. They also use alone time to indulge their wild imaginations and develop (constantly shifting) future ideals to aspire to. -- #Introverted Thinkers: To thinking introverts, life exists as a series of objective truths that must be sorted through and fit into a greater system of cohesive, indisputable facts. Introverted thinkers are highly logical individuals, who strive to acquire as wide a breadth of knowledge as possible, in order to determine true information from false information. Unlike introverted feelers or introverted intuitives, they are not as concerned with the deeper, subjective meaning of their findings as they are with simply assuring that their findings are a correct and accurate reflection of the world around them. Introverted thinkers are the true scientists and researchers of the world. When alone, the introverted thinker is researching topics of interest, comparing any new information they acquire to their pre-existing database of knowledge and determining where – if anywhere – the new information fits. They are creating an internal framework of how the world works on an objective, rational level. -- #Introverted Intuitives: To intuitive introverts, life exists as a giant, mystical puzzle to be solved. They enjoy gathering a large database of knowledge about the topics that interest them and discerning which knowledge ‘clicks’ with their pre-existing hunches or perceptions about the world. While alone, they are usually meditating on the ‘big picture’ issues of the world and attempting to understand – and find abstract ways to solve – complex problems. They enjoy speculating about the future in a direct, pointed fashion – by predicting exactly how things are likely to unfold and forming long-term plans accordingly. When alone, the introverted intuitive is usually researching topics of interest and analyzing what they’re learning to discern whether or not it fits with their pre-existing worldview. They also spend a great deal of time deciding upon and laying down long-term plans for their future.
psychology  personality  introversion 
3 days ago
Thought Catalog -- The Top Relationship Dealbreaker For Each Myers-Briggs Personality Type by Heidi Priebe
'#INFJ: Feeling unable to fully trust their partner. INFJs are long-term oriented individuals who invest their emotions carefully. They aren’t looking for a partner who might bail or run out on them at a moment’s notice – they need someone they can trust to stick around for the long haul. When entering a new relationship, INFJs are consistently evaluating whether or not their partner is someone they can safely invest their love in long-term – and if they get the sense that they aren’t, they won’t waste any more time on the relationship. -- #INTP: A partner who cannot think critically. INTPs are the ultimate critical thinkers – this type won’t accept any thought, fact or opinion until they’ve examined it thoroughly, from every available angle. Though they may not expect their partners to be as intellectually thorough as they are, they need to be paired with someone who wants to learn, advance and grow alongside them. After all, if the INTP can’t discuss the latest theory they’re interested in, they’re going to have very little left to discuss. -- #ENTP: Boredom. ENTPs are curious, explorative and eager to push boundaries. They approach relationships the way they approach everything else – with curiosity and an unquenchable enthusiasm to learn more. There is nothing more exciting to an ENTP than a person they can’t quite figure out – and there’s nothing more boring to them than someone they can. This type enjoys complicated, multi-dimensional partners who challenge them intellectually. Someone who is consistent to the point of rigidity gives the ENTP nothing to explore and learn from – which means the ENTP will likely tire of them quickly.'
psychology  relationships  INTP  personality  INFJ 
3 days ago
Ribbonfarm -- How to be a Precious Snowflake
'...The clod patronizes — in the sense of materially supporting rather than smugly clodsplaining — the precious snowflake. Partly in search of redemption, and partly out of the desire to protect in others what one has oneself lost. The snowflake on the other hand, seeks to avoid some bruising contact with reality in order to create more freely. The clod seeks to offer some of the necessary protection towards that end. -- The purpose of the clod-snowflake relationship is perhaps the most surprising aspect: creation as a means of weakening the inner child of the snowflake and strengthening the inner child of the clod. If the relationship succeeds completely, clod and snowflake trade places. But that is rare. There is always some redistribution of clod and snowflake nature though. The clod becomes somewhat more precious; the snowflake becomes somewhat more debased. -- ...the snowflake in the relationship is the one whose ability to create is temporarily worth protecting — sacred — for both parties. The clod-snowflake relationship is about the clod willingly ceding some of his or her greater freedom (the fruits of “success”) to the snowflake, who both agree is able to put it to a “higher” use. -- The clod-snowflake relationship is ultimately about a temporarily shared notion of pricelessness prevailing over deep differences. -- We are all simultaneously clods and snowflakes. It’s just a matter of which aspect of our personality is at the forefront in a given relationship situation. In a given situation, the person playing worldly protector is the clod of course. -- But there is also some commonality across relationship situations that tells you, in an absolute sense, how you are a clod or a snowflake. -- To be a successful precious snowflake, you have to understand how you are a clod. And vice versa. -- In general, you are a clod in that area of life where you are something of a professional. The area of life where you remain in control of your emotions and the situation no matter what the world throws at you. Usually, this ability is worth money or some other reward. -- You are a snowflake in the area of life that can evoke the most uncontrolled emotions in you, or cause you to freeze up.'
psychology  relationships  individuation  anima  animus 
3 days ago
YouTube -- Life Before Birth - In the Womb
'This documentary film explores the development of the growing fetus from conception to delivery. Open a window into the hidden world of the foetus and explore each trimester in amazing detail. It’s meant to be a joyous event, but in reality, it's a gripping battle for survival. Using cutting edge technology, we go inside the womb and follow the incredible nine month journey from conception to birth, showing how the struggle for life turns into the miracle of birth. Enhanced by poet Roger McGough’s reading of a series of poems written for the occasion.'
life  biology  documentaries 
3 days ago
YouTube -- TEDtalks: What Really Matters at the End of Life
"...most of the time we spend thinking out loud together about his life. Really about our lives. And in this way Frank grieves; in this way he keeps up with his losses – as they roll in – so that he's ready to take in the next moment. Loss is one thing, regret is quite another."
psychology  life  death  loss  regret 
3 days ago
YouTube -- [Alain de Botton]: Schopenhauer
"There is only one inborn error, and that is the notion that we exist in order to be happy..."
philosophy  quotes  happiness 
3 days ago
NCZOnline -- My favorite interview question
'I rarely ask the question in the exact same way, but it usually takes this form: Suppose you could design your dream job that you'll be starting on Monday. It's at your ideal company with your ideal job title and salary. All you have to do is tell them what you want to do at your job and you can have it. What does your job entail? -- The question looks fairly simple at first glance, but there are some subtleties that help you dig in on important details. ... -- I've never once had an argument with someone when I suggested it seemed like we didn't have a good match. In most cases, the candidates have thanked me for the exercise because it helped them really narrow in on what they're passionate about and what type of job they should be looking for. A couple times I've encouraged the candidate to apply to a different job at the company that seems more suited for what they're looking for. In all cases, candidates have told me they enjoyed answering the question.'
career  management 
3 days ago
Brookings Institution -- Credit scores and committed relationships
'This paper presents novel evidence on the role of credit scores in the dynamics of committed relationships. We document substantial positive assortative matching with respect to credit scores, even when controlling for other socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. As a result, individual-level differences in access to credit are largely preserved at the household level. Moreover, we find that the couples' average level of and the match quality in credit scores, measured at the time of relationship formation, are highly predictive of subsequent separations. This result arises, in part, because initial credit scores and match quality predict subsequent credit usage and financial distress, which in turn are correlated with relationship dissolution. Credit scores and match quality appear predictive of subsequent separations even beyond these credit channels, suggesting that credit scores reveal an individual's relationship skill and level of commitment. We present ancillary evidence supporting the interpretation of this skill as trustworthiness.'
economics  credit  trust  relationships  rkselectiontheory 
3 days ago
The New York Times -- Sherry Turkle’s ‘Reclaiming Conversation’
'...the most moving and representative section of the book concerns the demise of family conversation. According to Turkle’s young interviewees, the vicious circle works like this: “Parents give their children phones. Children can’t get their parents’ attention away from their phones, so children take refuge in their own devices. Then, parents use their children’s absorption with phones as permission to have their own phones out as much as they wish.” For Turkle, the onus lies squarely on the parents: “The most realistic way to disrupt this circle is to have parents step up to their responsibilities as mentors.” She acknowledges that this can be difficult; that parents feel afraid of falling behind their children technologically; that conversation with young children takes patience and practice; that it’s easier to demonstrate parental love by snapping lots of pictures and posting them to Facebook. But, unlike in “Alone Together,” where Turkle was content to diagnose, the tone of “Reclaiming Conversation” is therapeutic and hortatory. She calls on parents to understand what’s at stake in family conversations — “the development of trust and self-esteem,” “the capacity for empathy, friendship and intimacy” — and to recognize their own vulnerability to the enchantments of tech. “Accept your vulnerability,” she says. “Remove the ­temptation.”'
psychology  attachment  parenting  SherryTurkle 
3 days ago
The New York Times -- Stop Googling. Let’s Talk. by Sherry Turkle
'...Studies of conversation both in the laboratory and in natural settings show that when two people are talking, the mere presence of a phone on a table between them or in the periphery of their vision changes both what they talk about and the degree of connection they feel. People keep the conversation on topics where they won’t mind being interrupted. They don’t feel as invested in each other. Even a silent phone disconnects us. -- Across generations, technology is implicated in this assault on empathy. We’ve gotten used to being connected all the time, but we have found ways around conversation — at least from conversation that is open-ended and spontaneous, in which we play with ideas and allow ourselves to be fully present and vulnerable. But it is in this type of conversation — where we learn to make eye contact, to become aware of another person’s posture and tone, to comfort one another and respectfully challenge one another — that empathy and intimacy flourish. In these conversations, we learn who we are. -- Of course, we can find empathic conversations today, but the trend line is clear. It’s not only that we turn away from talking face to face to chat online. It’s that we don’t allow these conversations to happen in the first place because we keep our phones in the landscape. -- ... We turn time alone into a problem that needs to be solved with technology. Timothy D. Wilson, a psychologist at the University of Virginia, led a team that explored our capacity for solitude. People were asked to sit in a chair and think, without a device or a book. They were told that they would have from six to 15 minutes alone and that the only rules were that they had to stay seated and not fall asleep. In one experiment, many student subjects opted to give themselves mild electric shocks rather than sit alone with their thoughts. -- A college junior told me that she shied away from conversation because it demanded that one live by the rigors of what she calls the “seven minute rule.” It takes at least seven minutes to see how a conversation is going to unfold. You can’t go to your phone before those seven minutes are up. If the conversation goes quiet, you have to let it be. For conversation, like life, has silences — what some young people I interviewed called “the boring bits.” It is often in the moments when we stumble, hesitate and fall silent that we most reveal ourselves to one another. -- The young woman who is so clear about the seven minutes that it takes to see where a conversation is going admits that she often doesn’t have the patience to wait for anything near that kind of time before going to her phone. In this she is characteristic of what the psychologists Howard Gardner and Katie Davis called the “app generation,” which grew up with phones in hand and apps at the ready. It tends toward impatience, expecting the world to respond like an app, quickly and efficiently. The app way of thinking starts with the idea that actions in the world will work like algorithms: Certain actions will lead to predictable results. -- This attitude can show up in friendship as a lack of empathy. Friendships become things to manage; you have a lot of them, and you come to them with tools. So here is a first step: To reclaim conversation for yourself, your friendships and society, push back against viewing the world as one giant app. It works the other way, too: Conversation is the antidote to the algorithmic way of looking at life because it teaches you about fluidity, contingency and personality.'
psychology  empathy  attention  ambientimmediacy  soma  SherryTurkle 
3 days ago
typhonblue comments
'How many people here agree with me that gynocentrism is damaging to women, and not in a vague "patriarchy hurts men too" way? Have you asked? In a real and verifiable way backed by science into human psychology and possibly to the tune of a dollar amount. -- By centring women, society also removes their personhood – removes recognition of the consequences of their actions turning them into measuring sticks for men's actions. -- Enjoying consequences to your actions is a billion dollar industry(games) therefore we can even put a price tag on what society takes from women. -- Might even be equal to the forced transfer of wealth from men to women via government. -- Think about having no consequences to your actions. Ever. And it's the negative consequences to your moral choices that make the positive consequences meaningful. That's why games have the negative choice tree even though fewer people take them. -- Essentially it's a form of inverted isolation – no one is actually recognizing you exist as a person; to be honest I'm surprised more women aren't completely apeshit mad. -- For women it's sort of like circumcision. Because they've never experienced having that "part" they don't know what it's like to have it and think it's irrelevant. -- How would you experience growth as a person if all the negative consequences for your failures were erased?'
gynocentricism  women  agencyvspatiency  thegamingofeverydaylife 
5 days ago
JudgyBitch -- The United Nations takes a bold stance against global misogyny
'The UN is taking a brave stand against misogyny by suggesting the world censor the internet to protect some rich, whiny, white women, who make thousands upon thousands of dollars as professional victims, from people saying mean stuff to them on Twitter. Bitches are allowed to cheat on their boyfriends, fuck journalists to get better reviews of their inane games, and if you question the ethics of whoring for good coverage, you’re a goddamn misogynist who hates women! -- Luckily, the women in Afghanistan are safe, because they don’t have internet*. -- Well, that takes a load off of my mind. Don’t know about you, but gosh, it sure does feel good to know no one is tweeting mean shit to women in Kabul! Shooting them for going to school? Come on, what’s more dangerous? Bullets, or tweets from Milo? He’s really mean! That woman-hater! -- This latest example of sippy-cup wielding damsels demanding protection from criticism is all part of a larger trend that I find very, very interesting. In a very literal way, rich, white feminists are demanding the return of the patriarchy, only this time, they want the benefits spelled out more clearly. The central feature of all these ridiculous, infantalizing demands is that an authority figure intervene in women’s day-to-day lives to protect and insulate them from the slings and arrows that come with living as an adult in a world full of other adults, some of whom are assholes (a mirror will come in handy, feminists, if you want a clue as to what an asshole looks like). -- #HeForShe – men, stand up and declare your intention to protect women and girls from violence. Men and boys? Fuck them, they can protect themselves. Men are responsible for the safety of women and girls, and must take actions to protect them, even at the expense of their own well-being. -- #YesMeansYes – men, you are required under penalty of expulsion, to accept responsibility for women’s sexual choices. Under no circumstances are you to assume that women are autonomous, thinking, independent adults capable of making choices and accepting the consequences of those choices. It is your legal responsibility to probe a woman’s mind to ensure that she actually knows her own, scattered little mind. And understand that if you fail to meet the needs she has in addition to physical pleasure (text her back, motherfucker), you can retroactively be declared guilty of rape. -- #SafeSpace – women are so mentally fragile, so delicate, so easily frightened, they must not be exposed to any ideas that might ‘trigger’ their unreliable minds into frenzied hysteria. All persons in positions of responsibility and authority (mostly men) must protect women from bad feels.' --- ...Feminists are leading us into a terrifying world where appeals to authority to prevent women from experiencing disagreement or offence are having the desired affect: the UN wants to control how the modern world uses the internet to protect some rich white ladies from having their ideas challenged, sometimes in language that sends them to the fainting couch! Naturally, many of these women don’t mind dishing it out, but they must never, ever be called ‘cunts’, lest their delicate sense of propriety be offended! The vast majority of women are not grateful to feminists for defining women as essentially children. The vast majority of women are not pleased that feminists consider women too stupid to make basic decisions about their own lives. If men are responsible for my well-being, my safety, my sexual choices, the career I choose to purse, my perpetual comfort, should they vote for me, too? Approve my applications for credit? Determine what hours I am allowed outside the home? Supervise my interaction with other men who might rape me? -- Think it through, you morons. This will end nowhere good, for either women or men. -- When it comes to reversing the destructive legacy of feminism, women and men play a complementary role. IMO, our role as women is to police other women, and make it clear we do not share the #HiveMind of feminists. We must criticize feminism in terms both harsh and mild. We must refuse their attempts to define us as children. We must support men as they educate other men about the realities of feminism. And then we need to stand back. I’m guessing a lot of men will object heartily to what I am going to say next, but truth is truth: when it comes time to do the real work of change, it’s men who get it done. When men work together collectively, wars are waged, barns are raised, machines are assembled, and civilizations are built. Throw some men on an island and some women on another island, and that’s exactly what happens. Men create a society, women decorate it. And of course, do the work of producing the next generation. -- Feminists have ruined the happiness of an entire generation of women. Those women are likely lost. They will end their days as angry, miserable, bitter human beings who drank the Koolaid and discovered it was poison. And somehow, I don’t think coloring books, crayons, cookies and videos of puppies will fill the void. -- Welcome to adulthood, ladies. Choices have consequences. And you’ve made bad ones. Our job is to save the next generation.'
forcedmemes  feminism  victimhood  thoughtpolice  miniluv  women  men  sacrifice 
9 days ago
Freedomain Radio -- #2867: Sexual Economics - Call In Show December 17 2014 (MP3)
"If the woman has a shitty relationship with her dad it means that she will never take responsibility for own actions – most likely. And do you know why that is? Because if she has a shitty relationship with her dad then her mom chose a bad man to have children with. Now, is the mom going to be more likely to say in that situation: 'I am so sorry. I really screwed up. I chose a guy for all the wrong reasons and you have suffered as a result of that. I'm incredibly sorry. I'm going to go to therapy so I can figure out how to get better people into your life. You now have to grow up without your biological father because I made ridiculously bad mistakes and ignored all the warning signs for a bad father.' Likely? That's not what's going to happen. What's going to happen is the mother is going to say: 'Well, I had no way of knowing. I'm not responsible. That man is just a bad guy. I am not responsible for choosing him as the father of my children. There was no way for me to know.' ... So the mother will take no responsibility for choosing an asshole to be the father of her children. And so because the mother abandons all of her responsibilities and all of her choices in the world, then the daughter grows up blaming men and exonerating women. In other words: women can do no wrong and all the fault with society lies with the man, all the fault of marriage lies with the man. And this is just such a common trope these days because women are making so many unbelievably bad choices – supported by the state... So and look at the woman's relationship with her own father. It's going to be really hard, if not downright impossible – without massive amounts of therapy – it's going to be really hard for a woman to love you more than she loves her own father. ... So you ask a woman: 'What's your dad like? How's your relationship with your dad?' –'Yeah, y'know, I don't really see him; I don't have much to do with him – blah, blah, blah.' Well, that's going to be you."
men  women  relationships  parenting  agencyvspatiency  StefanMolyneux 
9 days ago
The Rational Male -- Solipsism II
Comment: Jeremy: 'What you’re repeating there is actually the first steps of a hostage crisis. That is first-wave-feminism boilerplate response. It is the first redirection in a misdirection perpetuated by women in order to sink any notion that men should have some authority on matters. It’s been repeated for so long, it’s a cliche… -- It’s typical crab-basket behavior. Women seek power over their lives and somehow instinctively believe that the only way to achieve power is to take someone elses power away. So they attack male authority by placing children above the man. This then becomes a stick with which to beat male authority into submission, as the woman is allowed to speak for the needs of the children. This is literally textbook subversion, and plays out on so many levels of human culture it tends to make one consider how boring humanity must look to any alien life that happens to stumble across our unremarkable corner of the universe. -- When the children’s needs become the “throne” of the household, and the wife is allowed to speak for the children’s needs, then the authority of the household becomes a rather grotesque combination of immediate child needs and female manipulation. Worse still, the children are now effectively captives of the wife, because at any time she can accuse the husband of anything the law is forced to throw him in handcuffs for, and take away the kids. -- What you’re repeating is the first steps in that hostage situation. Equalists will try to convince you of the logic that children come first, that children are the future, that all of that which makes them better is more important than anything else. This is bullshit. -- Do you think cavemen sat around in caves all day playing and socially interacting with their babies? Do you think they had some kind of fresh-gazelle-delivery service that allowed him to interact with the children directly? Do you think the mothers were not under exactly the same survival condition, needing to forage for carrots, potatoes, berries, etc, while the men hunted and built structures? Do you think the “children” came first in any other era of humanity? If so, you are very sadly mistaken. -- Children are more than capable of getting everything they need to know about how to live simply by watching their parents live a happy life together. This is how humans did things for eons, changing that order and putting the “children first” is frankly perverse and the beginning of the destruction of the family. Children are more than information sponges, they are blank minds that want desperately to be adult. Children want to understand everything that everyone around them understands, which is why a parent telling a child that you’re “disappointed” in them is more effective than a paddling. If you focus on children, you are frankly just spoiling them with attention that they will never receive in the real world. If instead you focus on yourself and your spouse, you will raise children that see you putting yourself as the MPO [Mental Point of Origin] (as Rollo calls it), and your marriage/partnership as an important part of what you do each day. -- Don’t put the children first. That’s essentially like negotiating with a terrorist, they’ll only make more demands on you until the cops storm the plane and lots of people get shot. -- Your MPO should never waver from yourself.' -- The Couple Bubble: https://www.psychotherapy.net/interview/stan-tatkin
men  women  relationships  parenting  childhood 
10 days ago
JudgyBitch -- Sexbots increase the market value of some women. Bring ‘em on!
'Let’s oversimplify, and consider what women want from men, and what men want from women. Both want the same things, but they want them in different orders of priority: Men: #Sex #Companionship #Children #Resources; Women: #Resources #Children #Companionship #Sex -- When Milo writes that ‘women have always had the upper hand’ when it comes to sex, this is what he means. Sex is first on the priority list for men, and last for women. Demand is high, supply is tight, the suppliers set the price. The price for sex used to be very high, indeed: regular sexual access to a woman meant you legally married her, supported her and the resulting children, and remained committed for the rest of your natural life (which ended rather sooner than hers, thanks to the stresses of being the sole provider for a family). -- Obviously, a great many men were not happy with this situation, not the least because the supply side could be tightened after marriage, but a man’s obligation to support his family was static, and extremely difficult to avoid or change. That whole dying years earlier thing kind of sucked too. I find it incredulous that feminists were able to spin the power and control women had because they controlled the supply side of sex oppressive. Despite being able to set the price for the supply of sex so high, women were somehow victims! Betty Friedan, the most famous of all the bored housewives, spearheaded women sense of being mistreated and downtrodden, and women jumped on board the bandwagon in droves. -- And unwittingly gave up their power to set the price for sex high. The birth control pill and the sexual revolution ushered in an era where the supply of sex suddenly exploded and men were under no obligation of any kind to meet the demand that sex be exchanged for men’s resources. Cue the single mother, who found a way to oblige men to support her in exchange for sex, by claiming the support was for the child. Very clever, really. This sleight of hand goes a long way towards explaining why women resist all requirements that they prove resources acquired from men, for the purposes of supporting children the man may or may not have biologically fathered, are actually being used to support that child. -- Women’s mass entry into the workforce shattered men’s ability to earn a family wage, so suddenly men had to move access to a woman’s resources higher up the priority scale. This has resulted in what the Economist calls assortative mating – women have not changed their priorities in the least – access to a man’s resources still remains the highest priority for women, but those women can, by and large, no longer trade just sex for access. They have to trade resources of their own. -- And this has made women absolutely miserable. Resources have moved up men’s priority scale, but women’s scale remains unchanged: resources, children, companionship, sex. It’s impossible to be both an effective mother and a woman who provides a significant portion of the family’s resources. Some women, like Sheryl Sandberg, have shifted children to the bottom of the priority list, but for most women, that simply isn’t possible. It violates their deepest sense of purpose, and they are utterly bereft. -- ... I simply have to quote this Forbes survey again, in which 84% of women admitted that staying at home with their children full time was a financial luxury they aspired to, and of that group, one third admitted they resented their husbands for not being able to provide that luxury for them. The resentment part is what I want to focus on: resentment is absolute poison to a marriage. What this Forbes survey demonstrates is that women are unhappy, seething bitches, bitter they made the Feminist Approved Choice™, and it turns out, that choice sucks donkey balls. -- Now enter the sexbots. Here is your choice as a man: You want to have regular sex with a woman whose companionship you enjoy, but you are unlikely to be able to provide for a family on your wage alone, so you have to marry a partner who can contribute resources to the family. Once the two of you have children, she will likely be a guilty, exhausted, angry, resentful, bitter, nagging shrew who blames you for making her life so difficult. Your sex life will die, and you will left with this deranged, miserable woman, who, in all likelihood, will file for divorce and take half your stuff and your children. -- Or you can go back to your list of demands and reconsider: sex, resources, companionship, children. Sexbots can provide drama-free sex whenever you want. The sexbot will claim no more resources that those to purchase her (and perhaps a bit of maintenance? Sexbot cleaning products?), meaning you can drop resources back down to the bottom of the list, since you will have more than enough to support just yourself. The sexbot cannot provide you with companionship (at least not yet – AI might take care of that), and cannot provide you with children. Milo suggests that ‘marriage will benefit from a reduced focus on sex. With desire taken out of the marital equation, it’s conceivable that the number of “partnership marriages” between people who get on well and respect each other enough to share the load of raising children will grow. Without the power imbalance built in to traditional heterosexual marriage — i.e., women holding all the cards — marriage could become stronger than ever’. -- That’s possible. A lot of men definitely want children, they just don’t want the bitchy wife that comes with them, so this is a rational choice. But there is another group of women who see the opportunities in unmet demand, women who have always been able to keep the price of access to them sexually very high: women who know that men value companionship only slightly less than they value sex. Sexbots will be no threat to these women, indeed, sexbots will increase the demand for women who value companionship with men. -- Just like economics, this is an oversimplification and of course there are outliers everywhere. Some men don’t want children, some women don’t want children either, some women are not the slightest bit bothered by handing the children over to the hired help to be raised, some men would like nothing more than to be a stay at home parent, some men only value women for their money…. but those are outliers. In general, men want sex and companionship from women, and trade resources and children to get those things. In general, women want resources and children from men, and trade companionship and sex to get those things. And there is nothing wrong with that. It has worked to create happy, productive, healthy families for centuries. -- Dramatically altering the supply and demand curves between men and women has resulted in what Milo calls The Sexodus, whereby men avoid women altogether, and the miseries of slut culture, where women give away sex at an extremely low price, and then get angry and resentful when they are not living the happy life they want. Sexbots will allow men to continue to eschew screaming, misandrist harpies, and women won’t have even partial access to men’s resources, since the value of sex will be reduced effectively to zero. -- That restores the emphasis on companionship, and loving, mutually beneficial relationships between two people who genuinely like and love each other, and want to raise a family together, over the long run. It’s a complementary system that balances perfectly. Changes in demand for one aspect are met with changes in supply. The system is designed to maintain what game theorists call ‘the Nash equilibrium’. I think a good solid marriage is always searching for equilibrium, too. That means you really can’t mess with supply and demand too much.' -- Comment: Janet Bloomfield: 'I must not have worded myself very well, because understanding that desire for companionship is precisely what gives women the opportunity to set the price for sex high. I think there is case to be made that society undersells men desire for companionship. Smart women don't. They know exactly how valuable that is to men.'
men  women  relationships  marriage  power  sexuality 
17 days ago
typhonblue comments
'What is really shameful is they supposedly speak for "rape victims" yet they pick and choose which rape victims are prettiest for their fucking rape pageant. -- They even do this to poor and minority women who are victims of rape by focusing on wealthy pretty mostly white Co-eds as victims of rape(the population LEAST likely to be raped in the 18-24 demographic). For people who supposedly advocate for women, they certainly pimp those female rape victims that appeal most to so-called "male gaze" like they're sex traffickers calculating the worth of their human livestock and throwing out anyone who doesn't make the cut.'
feminism  grifting 
17 days ago
Zhwazi comments on What's with all the capitalist scum here?
'...Property is justice (fairness applied to responsibility) as justice applies to the product of labor. You are responsible for the consequences of your actions, others will hold you responsible when you harm them with your actions, and when those actions are labor that create a durable change or improvement in the world, that change or improvement and its value is something you are responsible for. Those who value justice as a means to establish cooperation with others inevitably come to some concept of property regardless of what they call it, I call it property. -- Your improvements to matter and energy are your property, but the matter and energy itself is not your property, only your possession because it is being used by you to hold the value of your property (your improvements). Things like space or territory can't be property because the space itself is never the product of your action. -- When I talk about property, this is what I'm talking about. It isn't a claim, it isn't control, and it isn't physical things that are controlled. It's a standard for recognizing where one individual's will interferes with another's as it applies to the qualitative improvements in the world they've made (or traded for). It's one aspect of a wider concept of justice where no individual's will overpowers another except in response to the overpowering of another's will.'
philosophy  anarchism  property 
18 days ago
Reason.com -- The Rise of the Culture of Victimhood Explained
'...Horwitz makes a strong case that unsupervised and unstructured play among children teaches them private, noncoercive ways to resolve conflicts and generate cooperation, lessons that are very important to how they conduct themselves when they become adults. Supervised play, by contrast, trains children to expect adults to step in to adjudicate disputes and apply coercion. Horwitz fears this is flipping the social default setting from "figure out how to solve this conflict on your own" to "invoke force and/or third parties whenever conflict arises." He suggests that the recent upsurge in conflicts around sexual consent on campus may arise in part because so many young adults never acquired the social skills developed through unstructured play, such as "ensuring that all involved continue to consent to the rules and to the game being played." -- Like Campbell and Manning, Horwitz notes that Americans are turning increasingly to third-party coercion to resolve what would in earlier days have been considered minor conflicts. He worries that without "the skills necessary to solve conflicts cooperatively, it is not hard to imagine that people will quickly turn either to external authorities like the state to resolve them, or would demand an exhaustive list of explicit rules" as to what constitutes permissible conduct. His concern mirrors that of Alexis de Tocqueville who in Democracy in America (1835) prophesied that democracy would generate an "immense and tutelary power" whose authority is "absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood." Ultimately, Horwitz fears that the result of ceding ever more power to state authorities to resolve conflicts "will be the destruction of liberalism and democracy." -- A victimhood culture combines an honor culture's quickness to take offense with an overdependence on the coercive institutions that serve as a dignity culture's last resort. If Campbell, Manning, and Horwitz are right about the direction American society is taking, that's really terrible news. A victimhood culture will spawn social conflict, which in turn will produce an ever larger and more coercive government tasked with trying to suppress it.'
play  negotiation  civility  victimhood  sociology 
20 days ago
YouTube -- Emmy van Deurzen: Self reflection as part of the training of existential therapists
'Emmy van Deurzen speaks about the importance of self reflection in the training of existential therapists and counsellors. Self awareness allows you to pace yourself and stay safe in your experience whilst closely connecting to your clients.' -- "...quiet enjoyment of the years given you that you're alive."
psychology  psychotherapy  RTR  EmmyvanDeurzen 
21 days ago
YouTube -- Emmy van Deurzen: Facing Guilt
'How do you face up to guilt over things you have done in the past and now regret? Emmy van Deurzen speaks about restitution and the resolution to face up rather than hide and live in shame.'
psychology  guilt  responsibility  freedom  EmmyvanDeurzen 
21 days ago
YouTube -- Emmy van Deurzen: Existential Living and Learning
'Emmy van Deurzen speaks about an existential way of life which consists of engaging fully with the world and being prepared to learn every day from our mistakes.'
psychology  philosophy  existentialism  life  EmmyvanDeurzen 
21 days ago
The Atlantic -- Living Like Thoreau in a Cabin in Alaska by Diana Saverin
'So: How to live? Just filling a day, I learned in my little cabin, is a tricky but essential business. I could much sooner tell you the way I’d like to spend a life than the way I’d like to spend an hour. Lives are fun to play with: I’ll be a writer! An astronaut! A world traveler! It’s harder to make yourself into a noun in the span of a day. Days are about verbs. In the cabin, there were too many options, and none of them very exciting. Read, write, walk, run, split wood, bake bread, pick berries, call my mom, hunt the mosquitos that had snuck into the cabin? Most of what I did in that cabin was mundane. There aren’t many stories worth telling. There aren’t many moments I remember.'
life  boredom  solitude 
22 days ago
Freedomain Radio -- #2831: Sex, Polyamory and Reproductive Strategies (MP3)
"If you have empathy, you don't need rules." ... "Rules are a way of shielding yourself from the vulnerability of being hurt.When we get hurt we often react with rules as a shaming tactic, and that avoids the vulnerability of showing that you're hurt."
psychology  empathy  control  vulnerability  RTR  StefanMolyneux 
22 days ago
Intolerance of Sexy Peers: Intrasexual Competition Among Women by T. Vaillancourt (PDF)
'Intrasexual competition among males of different species, including humans, is well documented. Among females, far less is known. Recent non experimental studies suggest that women are intolerant of attractive females and use indirect aggression to derogate potential rivals. In Study 1, an experimental design was used to test the evolutionary-based hypothesis that women would be intolerant of sexy women and would censure those who seem to make sex too readily available. Results provide strong empirical support for intrasexual competition among women. Using independent raters, blind to condition, we found that almost all women were rated as reacting negatively ("bitchy") to an attractive female confederate when she was dressed in a sexually provocative manner. In contrast, when she was dressed conservatively, the same confederate was barely noticed by the participants. In Study 2, an experimental design was used to assess whether the sexy female confederate from Study 1 was viewed as a sexual rival by women. Results indicated that as hypothesized, women did not want to introduce her to their boyfriend, allow him to spend time alone with her, or be friends with her. Findings from both studies are discussed in terms of evolutionary theory. Aggr. Behav. 37:569–577, 2011. -- Indirect aggression is used by males and females [Card et al., 2008] and usually directed at same-sex peers [Gallup and Wilson, 2009]. It includes behaviors such as spreading rumors that question the perceived rival’s fidelity or level of promiscuity, disparaging the competitor’s appearance, excluding the rival from the peer group, giving her the silent treatment, or using derisive body and facial gestures to make the rival feel badly about herself and thus less willing to compete. Studies have shown that even though indirect aggression is covert, it is nevertheless effective at inflicting harm on targets, particularly female targets, who are able to pick upon the subtle nuances which comprise this form of negative behavior [Vaillancourt, 2005]. Moreover, recent evidence suggests that women are more likely than men to engage in this type of behavior when they face a social threat [e.g., Benenson et al., 2011] -- Research on human mate preferences clearly demonstrates that males show a strong preference for young, attractive females [Buss, 1989; Buss and Schmitt, 1993; Grammer and Thornhill, 1994; Singh, 1993, 1994; Singh and Young, 1995]. In reaction to this predilection, females derogate rivals who imbue these qualities. Indeed, studies have shown that females are particularly intolerant of attractive peers, using indirect aggression against them at a greater rate than their less attractive peers [e.g., Leenaars et al., 2008]. Moreover, at times when females are maximally fertile (time of ovulation), they are the most derogating of competitors; rating female faces as less attractive [Fisher, 2004]. In addition to being intolerant of physically attractive peers, we hypothesize that women are particularly intolerant of sexy attractive peers. According to Baumeister and Twenge [2002], a double standard of sexual morality exists in which women "stiffle each other’s sexuality because sex is a limited resource that women use to negotiate with men, and scarcity gives women an advantage" (p. 166). In their review of relevant literature, Baumeister and Twenge found support for their theory that females, and not males, suppress the sexuality of other females. Females accomplish this by "punishing" other females who seem to make sex too readily available "through informal sanctions such as ostracism and derogatory gossip" (p. 172). In other words, females used indirect aggression to suppress the sexuality of other females.' -- S/he who controls the price controls the victory
women  relationalaggression  sexuality  pricefixing 
24 days ago
YouTube -- Freedomain Radio: Gene Wars: r/K Selection Theory - Part 3
'For many decades, two main reproductive strategies have been recognized by biologists – this is referred to as r/K Selection Theory. When you look at humanity through the lens of reproduction strategies – things quickly begin snapping into place and a battle for genetic survival is revealed.' -- "r-selected organisms need to create the illusion of infinite resources." -- Abortion: 'r-Organisms: Babies are just "blobs of cells" / K-organisms: Babies are worshiped' -- Radical Feminism: 'r-Organisms: Promotes hostility towards men, breeds r-gene set from constant danger; Promotes masculinity among women since fathers are bad; Opposes "slut-shaming" r-behaviour; Denies female responsibility / K-organisms: Promotes affection for men; Accepts differentiation among the sexes; Knows it's essential to ostracize r-behaviour; Promotes female responsibility'
psychology  psychohistrory  rkselectiontheory  ideology  sociology  feminism  agencyvspatiency 
24 days ago
JudgyBitch -- Revealing private sexual information about people is fine, as long as they’re mostly men
Comment: Janet Bloomfield: 'What women contribute to humanity is, well, humanity itself. Note I didn't say they do that alone! The most important thing a woman can contribute to humanity is to be a loving, effective mother to children and supportive, loyal partner to the father of those children. That creates stable, productive societies that can harness the genius of its members. The vast majority of that genius is male. Sorry, feminists. Men outnumber women by a factor of 6 or 8 at the highest levels of intelligence. Our job as humans is to find, guard, protect, nourish, and set free that genius.'
men  women  parenting 
24 days ago
JudgyBitch -- Revealing private sexual information about people is fine, as long as they’re mostly men
'In the Vanity Fair article talking about Lawrence’s reaction to what she refers to as ‘a sex crime’, Lawrence appears nude, with one hand artfully covering a nipple. I mean, come on. You can’t complain about a culture that hyper-sexualizes actors and actresses and reduces their talents and accomplishments to a series of nude photos, and then turn around and in an article about actresses being reduced to nude photos appear nude! Seriously WTF? How does Lawrence not see that she is directly contributing to the culture that creates a desire for nude celebrity photos? Lawrence complains, in the article, that she didn’t know how the release of the photos would affect her career, and then poses nude, making it pretty clear she doesn’t think nudity is an adverse strategy to pursue in terms of her career at all. So what’s the real issue? Lawrence is clearly not opposed to appearing naked for all the world to see, as part of her job. What pisses her off is that she did not have control over the release of the fappening photos.' -- S/he who controls the price controls the victory
women  sexuality  pricefixing 
24 days ago
typhonblue comments on Anybody notice how the Mary Sue's logo portrays exactly the type of unrealistic proportions that usually causes chubby SJWs to spill spaghetti?
'They don't have a problem with using attractive female sexuality as a reward; they have a problem when anyone ELSE uses attractive females as a reward. This is a turf war, nothing else.' -- S/he who controls the price controls the victory
women  sexuality  pricefixing 
24 days ago
The Onion -- Neighborhood Starting To Get Too Safe For Family To Afford
'“When we first moved in seven years ago, we didn’t even feel like we could leave the house after dark, which was great for a family on a limited budget,” said Healy, who noted that, given how little she lies awake these days worrying about a potential home invasion or assault, she can tell her family will soon be priced out of their apartment. “The way things are going, we won’t even feel unsafe walking the few blocks to the grocery store in a year or two—I just don’t think we have the kind of money for that. We’d love to stay here, but with our finances the way they are, the minute we stop needing the second bolt on the back door we’ll have no choice but to go out looking for a neighborhood that’s more terrifying.” At press time, the Healys breathed sighs of relief after hearing about a shooting that occurred just five blocks away.
TheOnion  land  rent  rentseeking  satire 
4 weeks ago
Progress.org -- The Tyranny of Billionaire Monopolists by Fred Foldvary
'Winston Churchill, in a speech in 1909, said, “Land monopoly is not the only monopoly, but it is by far the greatest of monopolies—it is a perpetual monopoly, and it is the mother of all other forms of monopoly.” Churchill used the term “monopoly” in the classical sense, meaning the inability of entrants to expand the supply, in this case, of land. -- Welfare statists who claim that free markets induce monopoly do not confront the contradiction of their support for government as an absolute monopoly, never mind their neglect of the land monopoly that was imposed by and is protected by government. If monopoly is bad, critics of markets would favor school choice, the ability of parents to choose schooling for their children on an equal financial basis for government and private schools. But they typically oppose school choice. They oppose a free choice in government services generally. --- As for allodial free-marketeers, they have some good arguments for why an allodial free market too would not be dominated by monopolies. Many industries achieve economies of scale - lowest average cost - at a small scale, so small firms can compete well with large firms. Even when an industry is dominated by large firms, too high a price set by a monopolist invites entry into the industry. But allodials too ignore the land monopoly, not taking into account that land rent captures much of the gains from economic expansion and efficiencies. -- When the land rent is distributed equally among the people, and when there is no legal restriction or imposed cost on peaceful and honest enterprise, nor on the consumption of goods, then a basic income from rent, plus the easy ability to become self-employed, prevents firm owners from exploiting workers, and prevents landlords from becoming housing tyrants. -- The case for landlord and company tyranny by billionaires collapses when closely examined. But the critics cannot do such analysis, as they keep confusing capitalism as a free market with capitalism as today’s mixed economies. And when they do use the term “free,” they don’t delve into the natural-law ethic that gives freedom and liberty their meaning. The welfare-statist critique of markets is a failure to think things through.'
economics  land  rent  geoism  landlordism  "capitalism"  statism  FredFoldvary 
4 weeks ago
YouTube -- [Alain de Botton]: History of Ideas - Religion
'Religion was an ingenious solution to many of mankind's earliest fears and needs. Religion is now implausible to many, but the needs remain. That is the challenge of our times.'
history  religion  philosophy 
4 weeks ago
Evolution Counseling -- Handling Success
'...the real problem from the existential point of view is that the vast majority of people equate success almost entirely with external variables, not with their own inner growth. This makes them, once success comes around, completely dependent upon the external variables that signify it. Instead of being able to sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride they often feel more pressure and anxiety than they did before, they’re less happy not more happy. They suddenly have something to lose and this something is either partially or totally outside of their control. As Erich Fromm once succinctly put it, “If I am what I have, and I lose what I have, what then am I?” -- The key in handling success then is, paradoxically, to stop placing so much importance on the external signs that you’ve achieved it and instead refocus on developing your inner potentialities, on continually increasing your knowledge and skill in the area you’ve chosen to pursue. Mastery and the sense of efficacy that comes with it are their own rewards, rewards that usually make the external signifiers of success follow but aren’t dependent upon these signifiers for an integrated sense of Self.'
psychology  control  loss 
4 weeks ago
The Rational Male -- Solipsism I
'“Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat. Women often have to flee from the only homes they have ever known. Women are often the refugees from conflict and sometimes, more frequently in today’s warfare, victims. Women are often left with the responsibility, alone, of raising the children.” ~ Hillary Clinton -- From a solipsistically oblivious female perspective what Hillary is expounding on here is entirely true. From a perspective that prioritizes feminine Hypergamy above all else, these three sentences make perfect, pragmatic sense. The idea that men losing their lives in warfare would make them victims at all (much less the primary victims) isn’t even an afterthought; all that matters is the long term security and continued provisioning of women and their imperatives. -- ... Women’s solipsistic nature however is an integral part of their evolved psychological firmware. Solipsism is the evolved, selected-for result of self-preservation necessities that ensured the survival of our species. As men we get frustrated by this intrinsic nature; a nature that puts women’s imperatives as their primary mental point of origin. -- When I wrote Empathy I got taken to task about women’s capacity to feel empathy to a greater degree than do men. It’s not that women cannot feel empathically (a shared experience), my argument was that the idea that women feel a ‘greater’ empathy than men was a social convention with the latent purpose of masking women’s innate solipsism. -- That wasn’t a very popular idea. The notion that women are the mothers and nurturers was predictably spelled out, but with regards to empathizing and caring for men the primary concern of women was worry over their own and their children’s well being before that of their men should they become incapacitated. Again, this is a cruel truth, but also a pragmatic and survival based one. -- Women’s mental point of origin begins with their own self-importance, and the overriding importance of their own and their offspring’s survival. I’ve had women readers lambast me that they couldn’t possibly be so influenced by solipsism because they put their children’s wellbeing before their own. However it is just this solipsism that predisposes women to seeing their children as extensions of themselves and their own identities. And the good news is that this dynamic is one reason the human species has been so successful.' -- Comment: ianironwood: 'Just as women have the “women and children first!” mentality, men have a sacrificial instinct that is just as strong. It’s like we’re subconsciously looking for a reason to make that glorious effort. -- Men, in aggregate, naturally respond to crisis by running toward danger, not away from it. If we do not have a woman to sacrifice for, or a family, or if we’re personally not inclined that way, we find a cause or a vocation or Mitty-out about the idea of personal sacrifice on behalf of a greater good. It’s in our nature. And when we have nothing left to sacrifice, or nothing worthy enough to sacrifice ourselves for, we take our own lives. -- It is both the strength that men use to bind us together for greater purpose and the weakness that women use against our interests in furtherance of our own. Like female solipsism it is an instinct that serves the species but can be devastating to the individual. Awareness of our own self-destructive propensities is the only real defense against potential abuse of this instinct: don’t fall for every little “Fair Maiden” trick that’s lobbed at you as a shit test. It also requires awareness of female solipsism and hypergamy. It’s rare that all three of those things get naturally injected into a boy’s masculine subconscious before its too late, leading to broken hearts and regretted enlistment papers.' -- Comment: Forge the Sky: 'Fundamentally, solipsism means that there’s poor differentiation between self/other or a self which is distinct from the feelings of the moment. What she feels is what’s real. -- When she holds the frame, that’s an issue. Feelings are capricious and can be quite nonsensical or cruel. However, it also means that when YOU hold the frame, that suddenly becomes all of reality for her. She participates in your emotional and didactic reality, and her actions become ABOUT better satisfying or completing it. She doesn’t really ‘get’ the difference even; in both cases she’s just reacting to the universe of feels around her. -- That’s why women can submit so entirely, and be so happy doing so. It’s why they read so much off of your emotional state. She ceases to be her ‘own person’ in a way that’s just foreign to men; when I’ve held frame in relationships, I remember being surprised at the primal delight a woman gets from the sense of having pleased you or done something for you. But in her mind, she just made the world a better, more complete place. So that’s the flip side of female solipsism.'
men  women  solipsism  gynocentrism  sacrifice 
4 weeks ago
The Blackdragon Blog -- Men's Great Flaw: Looking For The Unicorn Woman
Comments: Kryptokate: '@JRM Because it is natural to stop desiring something you already have. Drives exist for a reason: to get you to do something. To get you to acquire something or avoid something. The feeling of desire is there to motivate you to acquire the desired person/object. Once you’ve acquired it, it would be an enormous waste of energy and completely inefficient for your system to allocate energy towards producing a drive that is now unnecessary. We all have extremely efficient bodies, and typically we only produce enough of a drive to get us sufficiently motivated to do what is needed to achieve a goal. -- What this means is that if you want someone to *maintain* sexual desire for you, the only way to do this is to never allow that person to feel that they sexually own you. Getting someone’s initial sexual attraction and desire is one thing. But once you have that, if you want to *maintain* their desire, you cannot allow that person to believe they own your sexuality. They can have access to you sexuality but they cannot own you sexually. Romantic desire and sexual attraction are essentially possessive drives — your lover wants you to be THEIRS. But the desire to possess will only last so long as one feels they don’t have the thing they want to be theirs. There is no reason for the body to waste energy keeping someone in a state of desire when they already own the object of their desire. -- So to maintain someone’s interest, they must never believe they’ve achieved their goal or you being THEIRS, because once that goal is achieved, after a temporary burst of happiness at achieving the goal, all emotions and drives that were once aimed towards the goal are unnecessary and thus disappear. People’s body’s don’t signal to them that they’re hungry after they’ve just eaten, and likewise a woman’s body is not going to signal to her that it should bother with getting sexually aroused for a person she’s already had sex with 1,000 times and who she knows is not willing or able to leave her or have sex with someone else. -- People don’t maintain active desire for goals they’ve already achieved, they move on to the next goal. I don’t know why anyone would expect sexual desire to operate any differently. Once a person is secure that they sexually own you, their attention and emotional resources will look elsewhere because there is no longer any reason to produce desire for you. This is why women virtually always lose interest a few months after the wedding. The wedding was her goal. She had many intense emotions and desires about getting married in order to achieve that goal. But once it’s achieved, there’s no longer any need for those emotions. And at that point she’ll move on to another goal, which may be a baby or some travel/adventure goal, or potentially the goal of proving to herself that she’s still got it by making the dude she works with fall for her. -- This is why monogamy always leads to loss of desire. How “alpha” someone is (which is really nothing more than a measure of one’s relative SMP and how many options one has), is only relevant to the extent that it makes someone more attractive than the other available options. But even if a guy is the best option a woman has, she will still get sexually bored with him if she thinks she sexually owns him. “Bored” is just a word for lacking any motivating feelings that typically drive someone to acquire something — i.e. feelings of wanting, longing, distraction, desire. But a woman monogamously married already owns her husband’s dick so there is zero reason for her body to produce those feelings anymore, other than maybe once a month to get pregnant or at the bare minimum level to prevent him from leaving. Or if he’s actually way below the man she’s capable of getting, her body will begin to produce a new feeling, which is disgust — a feeling that exists to get someone to avoid something (in this case, pregnancy by an inferior man). -- But people will also leave for the opposite reason…not because they’re lacking desire, but because they’re experiencing too many unpleasant emotions. Bad feelings exist for the same reason as good feelings– to get you to act. If a guy is a pain in the ass to be around or mean or doesn’t provide enough value to make it worth her while, she will feel bad emotions that exist to motivate her to avoid him. If she feels too many of those emotions, she will leave at the first opportunity. If he never makes her feel comfortable, she will feel too anxious too often and leave. -- Almost everyone understands their emotions backwards, with reverse causation. They believe that an emotion is the RESULT of something that happens; a reaction to circumstances. They believe that love arises as a sort of reward in response to the “right” person. This is why they expect the emotion to be permanent. But emotions are not a response, they’re a prompt. And they’re never permanent, because they’re only there to temporarily motivate you to take action to achieve a goal, and once that goal is achieved, they dissipate.' -- 'We are creatures of desire and most people will become quite depressed and miserable when they no longer have the need to desire anything. Which is why a man who tries to give a woman *everything* she desires will only end up making both of them miserable.' -- '...essentially, women love drama. There is almost nothing a man could be to a woman that would be worse than being boring.'
psychology  men  women  relationships  sexuality  dopamine  serotonin  securityvsnovelty 
4 weeks ago
The Blackdragon Blog -- Men's Great Flaw: Looking For The Unicorn Woman
'... The problem is that Ms. Unicorn Woman doesn’t exist in My Country or New Country. She doesn’t exist at all. As I’ve been talking about forever, she’s biologically hard-wired to get sexually bored with you after a few years of living with you in a monogamous state. This is how she’s designed, and it doesn’t matter if she was born in Chicago, Kiev, or Bangkok. -- Moreover, unless she lives in the Muslim Middle East, she lives in a society where she’s not only allowed to break up or divorce you whenever she wants, and for any reason she wants, but is actually pressured to do so from strong, modern-day Societal Programming regarding the Strong Independent Woman™. -- Therefore, at some point, assuming the monogamous relationship lasts long enough, she’s going to either A) get bored with you and start restricting sex, or B) leave you / divorce you, or C) leave you / divorce you when she catches you cheating on her (which we both know you eventually will), or D) cheat on you. The odds are overwhelming that one of those four things are going to happen, no matter how sweet, submissive, feminine, or religious she is, or how great her upbringing was, or if her parents are still married, etc. -- http://www.blackdragonblog.com/2014/01/19/serial-monogamy-revisited/#comment-151943
men  women  relationships 
4 weeks ago
The Art of Manliness -- Men's Complaints About Women 50 Years Ago
'...whether or not women are in fact worse than they used to be, we do know men have never been completely happy with them relative to the times in which they lived. They have always found women wanting — either too dependent and shallow or too independent and domineering. -- This fact may elicit one of two responses. On the one hand, it may seem depressing, and justify the idea that the sexes are fundamentally incompatible and that men should deal with women as little as possible. -- On the other hand, it’s kind of liberating and comforting to know that one is not living in some uniquely terrible time, with burdens unfaced by past generations of men. That men and women sometimes butt heads then comes to be seen not as some insurmountable problem of the modern age, but as something inherent to the human condition and perfectly navigable. After all, flaws aside, plenty of folks in every age have made a happy, successful go of relationships. Plenty of relationships have failed over the centuries too, of course. -- So perhaps the triumphs and difficulties of modern relationships have more to do with the timeless qualities of individuals, rather than “men today” or “women today.” Men have always been happy when they’ve chosen women who try to maximize their virtues and minimize their flaws, and unhappy when they pair with those who embrace the reverse equation. And each type has existed in every era. The same dynamic holds true for the happiness of women and the men they choose as companions. -- Indeed, the failings and ideals we alternately criticize and champion in the opposite sex might be better characterized as human failings and merits rather than gender-specific ones. Men and women work for the same virtues and succumb to the very same flaws, but often express and manifest them in different ways. -- ... The skeptic will likely say that maybe the late 19th century really was the golden age of men and women, making such mutual kindness and respect warranted. But that then begs the question: did men and women formerly appreciate each other more because each sex was better and nobler, or were they better and nobler because men and women appreciated each other more? -- In other words, might it not be possible that in only concentrating on each other’s faults and failings, men and women alike sink to these abysmally low expectations? And that if we criticized each other only in the spirit of friendship, and set common goals for greater virtue and excellence, we all might rise to greater beauty and strength?'
men  women  relationships 
4 weeks ago
Dame Magazine -- Are Black Mothers Beating Their Sons Into Misogyny?
'There is a scene in the film where Dr. Dre’s mom slaps the daylights out of him for mouthing off—and in fact, the film represents this abusive act in a positive light. His mother loves him and wants the best for him. For Dre, the slap leads him to leave home and pursue his dreams rather than lie in his room listening to music. Here we see yet another example, now commonplace within popular culture, where a Black mother is celebrated for whooping her child into success. He becomes a billionaire, and a game changer because of his mom. In another scene, she is seen as loving and caring as he struggles with the death of his brother. -- This part of the narrative gives me pause because of what I know about the research linking spanking children to aggressive behavior in adulthood. And it begs the question: How often did Dre’s mom hit him throughout his childhood, and did her treatment of him inform his views and violent behavior toward women? -- The first place children learn relationship skills and social behaviors is at home. And their first teachers are their parents or other caregivers. So if a child is growing up in a home where they witness violent relationships, or if they are being hit by a parent, then we should not be surprised that some go on to perpetuate these patterns as adults. If a mother hits her son, she is effectively teaching him that violence is an acceptable, even normal part of intimate relationships, at that anger, frustration, and power can be expressed by hitting. -- We must consider that, for some men at least, there might be a link between the spankings they received as children and their hostility and abuse toward—or avoidance of—Black women as grown men.'
psychology  psychohistory  childhood  violence  abuse 
4 weeks ago
r/MensRights -- Revenge porn: The real reason women share nude images online
Comment: SirSkeptic: 'Also they don't mention that women have been doing this to men since indiscreet gossip began. -- While women in ancient times may not have posted pictures of their exes. They were very indiscreet about what happened in graphic and usually inaccurate and condemning detail. -- A man may say "Yeah, we bonked" but will usually not elaborate either positively or negatively. -- A woman, on the other hand, will typically share every tiny detail with her friends through her own biased lens. It can be much more devastating than a simple picture.'
men  women  relationalaggression 
4 weeks ago
The Onion -- Family Trying To Tune Out Hints Of Misogyny As Grandfather Lovingly Recalls Courting Grandmother
'“Back when I was a young man, me and the boys would go down to the pizza parlor every Friday night to try and rustle up some gals, and that’s where I first saw your grandmother,” said Joseph Thurman, 81, whose children and grandchildren reportedly smiled and nodded as they attempted to focus on his professions of love for their grandmother rather than his repeated mentions of her “fine set of legs” that he deemed to be the best he ever saw. “The way she looked that first night, I knew I had to make her mine. She turned me down when I asked her to go out with me, but I wouldn’t take no for an answer. I kept calling her every day until she finally gave in, but even then I had to keep my hands off her on the first date because she came from a good family.” At press time, Thurman was describing how he insisted on walking their grandmother home after their date because she had to pass through the black part of town.'
TheOnion  feminism  satire 
4 weeks ago
The Art of Manliness -- How to Be an Honorable Man
'#Honor creates meaning. There’s a reason people tend to like old movies and books better than the modern variety. It’s not because of nostalgia. And it’s not because writers aren’t as talented as they once were. It’s that there’s nothing much to write about anymore. The drama of old literature captures our attention because the characters lived and moved in a culture of honor. There was structure to navigate and push against. There were many layers to life, and people tried to move up and avoid shame, and earn honor. These days authors have to invent their own drama in the form of self-created experiments in order to generate some fodder for a book (eg., living all the commandments of the Bible for a year, going a year without throwing anything away, living a year as a woman disguised as a man…). Because the rest of life is flat and bor–ring. -- The longer I live, the more I appreciate the benefits of structure, of rules, of friction. Today we are amoebas floating in an Age of Anomie. Life seems empty and insubstantial. Evil goes unpunished. Good goes unrewarded. Merit goes unhonored. There’s no clear way to earn honor or avoid shame. Instead of a few earning the just fruits of their valiant labors, everyone is given a tiny portion of the egalitarian pie of praise, a crumb that offers no nourishment, does nothing to satiate our hunger for glory. Nobody cares what you do. There’s no in or out. We each construct our own realities, but without the comparison with, the competition with, the esteem of others — it all feels sometimes like a great charade where we’ve all convinced ourselves that the world’s never been better, while shoving down the empty pit in our stomachs. -- ...I want to leave you with a quote that sums up the current state of honor: “We say we want a renewal of character in our day but we don’t really know what we ask for. To have a renewal of character is to have a renewal of a creedal order that constrains, limits, binds, obligates, and compels. This price is too high for us to pay. We want character but without unyielding conviction; we want strong morality but without the emotional burden of guilt or shame; we want virtue but without particular moral justifications that invariably offend; we want good without having to name evil; we want decency without the authority to insist upon it; we want moral community without any limitations to personal freedom. In short, we want what we cannot possibly have on the terms that we want it.” ~ The Death of Character, James Davison Hunter'
honour  boredom  thegamingofeverydaylife 
4 weeks ago
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics: How Conservatism and Liberalism Evolved Within Humans
Comment: Richard Chandler: 'That makes a certain amount of sense. If r-types don't care about survival of the children, having them die in the womb isn't an issue, although it's a poor evolutionary strategy, one they make up for by commandeering the children of the rest of us in the schools.'
psychology  psychohistory  rkselectiontheory  ideology  sociology 
4 weeks ago
Eric S. Raymond -- Dancing With The Gods
There's my experience. Now some theory for you skeptical types out there. -- If my language is too "religious" for you, feel free to transpose it all into the key of psychology. Speak of archetypes and semi-independent complexes. Feel free to hypothesize that I've merely learned how to enter some non-ordinary mental states that change my body language, disable a few mental censors, and have me putting out signals that other people interpret in terms of certain material in their own unconscious minds. -- Fine. You've explained it. Correctly, even. But you can't *do* it! -- And as long as you stick with the sterile denotative language of psychology, and the logical mode of the waking mind, you won't be able to - because you can't reach and program the unconscious mind that way. It takes music, symbolism, sex, hypnosis, wine and strange drugs, firelight and chanting, ritual and magic. Super-stimuli that reach past the conscious mind and neocortex, in and back to the primate and mammal and reptile brains curled up inside. -- Rituals are programs written in the symbolic language of the unconscious mind. Religions are program libraries that share critical subroutines. And the Gods represent subystems in the wetware being programmed. All humans have potential access to pretty much the same major gods because our wetware design is 99% shared. -- Only...that cold and mechanistic a way of thinking about the Gods simply will not work when you want to evoke one. For full understanding, the Apollonian/scientific mode is essential; for direct experience, the Dionysian/ecstatic mode is the only way to go. -- One great virtue of this dual explanation is that it removes the need for what William James, in his remarkable "The Varieties of Religious Experience", called the "objective correlative". By identifying the Gods with shared features of our psychological and inter-subjective experience, but being willing to dance with them on their own terms in the ritual circle, we can explain religious experience in respectful and non-reductive ways without making any anti-rational commitments about history or cosmology. Scientific method cannot ultimately be reconciled with religious faith, but it can get along with experiential mysticism just fine. -- Religions are, mostly, the rotting corpses of dead mystical schools. They're founded by people who have primary mystical experiences or theophanies and (for whatever reason) do not interpret the content of those experiences into the terms of the religious traditions available around them. These primary mystics recruit disciples and attempt to teach them how to replicate their theophany. -- Usually these founders (having neither training for nor interest in science or analytic rigor) mistake the incidentals of the experience for its cause, and teach induction methods which are only accidentally effective. As time goes by the induction methods accrete layers of ritual and dogma that crowd out the theophanic aspect, and are adapted for other purposes. -- Most late-stage religions distrust mystics and lock them up in monasteries or hermitages; they rightly fear the renewing but disruptive effect of theophany. Eventually, for most of the religion's followers, even the theoretical possibility of unmediated experience of the God(s) is lost, or thought of as the preserve of specialists and madmen. -- And this decay impoverishes our spiritual lives. It cheats most of us of our birthright to the sacred lightning...'
religion  rituals  trance 
5 weeks ago
The Art of Manliness -- Public Speaking Guide: Tips from Churchill
'“The climax of oratory is reached by a rapid succession of waves of sound and vivid pictures. The audience is delighted by the changing scenes presented to their imagination. Their ear is tickled by the rhythm of the language. The enthusiasm rises. A series of facts is brought forward all pointing in a common direction. The end appears in view before it is reached. The crowd anticipates the conclusion and the last words fall amid a thunder of assent.” –WC -- Churchill called the ideal oratorical flow outlined in the quote above the “accumulation of argument.” -- It begins by placing the most important point first. -- Then the audience is swept along as you present different pieces of evidence, one after the other, smoothly segueing between them. -- Sometimes the compiling of evidence merely consists of saying the same thing multiple times, in slightly different ways. “If you have an important point to make,” Churchill advised, “don’t try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time — a tremendous whack.” -- Finally, you reach the resounding, electrifying climax that leaves the audience with but one inescapable conclusion.'
5 weeks ago
NYTimes.com -- My Own Life: Oliver Sacks on Learning He Has Terminal Cancer
'I have been increasingly conscious, for the last 10 years or so, of deaths among my contemporaries. My generation is on the way out, and each death I have felt as an abruption, a tearing away of part of myself. There will be no one like us when we are gone, but then there is no one like anyone else, ever. When people die, they cannot be replaced. They leave holes that cannot be filled, for it is the fate — the genetic and neural fate — of every human being to be a unique individual, to find his own path, to live his own life, to die his own death. -- I cannot pretend I am without fear. But my predominant feeling is one of gratitude. I have loved and been loved; I have been given much and I have given something in return; I have read and traveled and thought and written. I have had an intercourse with the world, the special intercourse of writers and readers. -- Above all, I have been a sentient being, a thinking animal, on this beautiful planet, and that in itself has been an enormous privilege and adventure.'
5 weeks ago
Nautilus -- Nicholas Epley, Author of Mindwise: Can We Ever Really Know Another Person?
'How can we understand people better? I think the first insight from all of this work is to recognize that the first thing you need to have to understand somebody else better is a little humility about yourself, a recognition that you might not understand where somebody else is coming from, what their point of view is, what their intention actually is. So once you have some awareness that you might not know, that you might be mistaken yourself, then you can think about what would you do to be better. -- ... In one condition, you read what the other side had to say about their position, so it was just the text. In another condition, you were able to hear what the other person had to say: you heard their audio, you heard their voice, their literal voice. In the third condition, you watched what the person had to say. You watched them explain their position and you could hear them as well as see them. -- What we found was that you tended to dehumanize the other person more when you just read what they had to say. That is, you strip out a person’s voice with all the paralinguistic cues that actually reflect what’s going on in your actual mind as you’re having certain thoughts or feelings—you strip all of that out; you create a more ambiguous medium of interaction and you tend to evaluate the other person in line with the views that you already have. You think they’re idiots. But as soon as you actually give them a voice—you can hear what they have to say—then we found that people didn’t dehumanize the other side at all. That is, they rated them as just as thoughtful, as intelligent, as a person on their own side who shared the same belief that they did. And we didn’t find any meaningful increase or difference in evaluations when we added the video. Most of the effect that we found, in this case, of humanizing somebody on the other side making you recognize that they have a mind that’s capable of thinking or feeling, came through their mouth, came through their voice, when you could hear what they had to say.'
psychology  empathy  voice  civility  mentalization 
5 weeks ago
'It's Now Or Never,' Texted [Michelle Carter] Charged In Boyfriend's Suicide by Sebastian Murdock
Man up! 'When Roy expressed hesitancy at going through with his plan, Carter sent him text messages expressing her frustration. "You always say you're gonna do it, but you never do," she texted. "I just want to make sure tonight is the real thing." -- Defense attorney Joseph Cataldo said in court on Monday that his client was "brainwashed" by Roy, who "ultimately persuaded a young, impressionable girl"...' -- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Women_are_wonderful
men  women  power  predation  agencyvspatiency 
5 weeks ago
The Rational Male -- Jails & Churches
Comment: Lucien: '...Men turn into supplicating weaklings because they have nothing to do but chase pussy in the first place. Our hedonism is what has turned this into a fem-centric society. Everyone worships something, and if you have nothing but your desires, then you will worship the object of those desires — and the greatest of those objects is pussy. Fem-centric hardly describes it — this is a society in which men worship vagina, prostrate before it, reorganize their lives around it. And putting it in your face all day, every day is a way of ensuring that you stay in that zone. That when boys should be focusing on school, or men should be focusing on making their way in the world, their eyes are instead following the bounce of dat ass. -- They know. There is the example of that Christian blogger who wrote a fairly humble post about why she would no longer wear leggings, and she got flamed so hard she literally had to take down her blog and ended up on f*cking network news. That’s how fierce, how vicious women became when this woman had the temerity to even indirectly cast doubt on the wisdom of their wearing ass-tight clothing.' -- '....they do it because they want power. The power comes from signaling value, not from spending it down by actually sleeping with boys. -- And though promiscuity has its defects from a male perspective, the (accurate) story you tell is even worse — heightened female power, with males not even getting sex out of the deal. -- Think to yourself just how viciously, how shrilly, the right to dress like a whore is defended in this society. It is probably the dark heart of the feminine imperative. Because it ensures that men can never get away from the product, that they never be allowed to stop thinking about it. It ensures that we never be allowed to forget that they have something that we want...' -- Comment: ManlyMan: '...They wanna dress the way they want, but they wanna control WHO looks. Hypergamy to the end.' -- Comment: fleezer: '...everything she does from the minute she wakes up revolves around finding the best guy to fuck her. she’ll get the nerds suspended on the first day of school for looking at her ass because she didn’t get dressed that day for nerds – it’s her equivalent of the salesman at the luxury import dealer telling the stinky bum who wanders onto the property, “you can’t afford to shop here. leave now or I’m calling the police.”' -- Rollo Tomassi: 'Every man wants a slut, he just wants her to be HIS slut.' -- S/he who controls the price controls the victory.
men  women  sexuality  power  hypergamy 
5 weeks ago
YouTube -- Honey Badger Radio 18: "I'm no cissy!"
Karen/GirlWritesWhat: "...When you talk about male and females doms, it falls along the same gender lines as domestic violence and sexual violence where female dominance is a larger predictor of female abuse of men than male dominance is a predictor of male abuse of women..." Anna Cherry: "I've met many submissive women and a few dom women as well, and it's very clear that submissive women actually hold all of the power; they might as well be dominant." Karen: "They top from the bottom. They top from the bottom." Anna Cherry: "Very much so, not to mention that they say to the man: 'Be cruel and sociopathic to me otherwise you're not a real man.' ... So they force you into this position of cruelty by virtue of 'prove yourself,' but they are also requiring you to risk your life – jail time – in order to give them a beating, which doesn't translate into the female situation." Karen: "Not at all! Female doms operate with absolute impunity..." Anna Cherry: "I actually stay away from dom-ing in any kind of shoots or porn where I'm invited to do ball kicking or anything like that. I definitely don't appreciate any of that in the sense that I'm not sure of the mental state of men who – basically, it seems to me that there's such a desire to be involved with a woman and involved in a sexual context that they will [endure] any amount of pain and displeasure in order to be a part of that – and I just can't stand to be part of that system."
men  women  sexuality  power  masochism  BDSM 
5 weeks ago
Evolution Counseling -- Coping With Aging
'When we’re young aging holds a fully different meaning for us because our possibilities seem limitless, most of us are filled with hope about the future, our behaviors act as building blocks for bigger and better things. We look towards distant horizons, we think we have all the time in the world. -- Something Rollo May wrote that has stuck with me over the years, something that perfectly captures the qualitative psychological change we’re talking about, was that one of his patients found himself confronted with the painful reality that life is not a never-ending upward spiral. -- When we’re young we do think life is a never-ending upward spiral. But time goes by and sooner or later we realize it’s not, we realize that we probably have more years behind us than we do in front of us. Aging ceases to be a welcome friend helping us along towards our bright futures and instead becomes a menacing adversary, constantly taunting us, threatening us with the obliteration of our beings.'
psychology  philosophy  existentialism  death  loss 
5 weeks ago
girlwriteswhat comments on This is how Mary P. Koss, one of the most prominent feminist researchers in the field of sexual violence in the United States, feels about male rape victims.
'...One study (I could find it for you if I have to) found that, of adults with a documented history of sexual abuse as children, only 16% of men disclosed that abuse on a survey designed to capture it. (This is compared to 64% of women with documented histories) -- This effect would almost certainly be amplified if the perpetrator is female. Another study found that when people witness violence perpetrated by a woman, their recollections of the violence become less severe if they're asked to recall it days or weeks later, as opposed to minutes or hours later. Over time, their memories of the incident begin to conform to cultural (perhaps partly biological) perceptions of women and common narratives about violence. -- Conversely, we've seen several cases in the last year where staff at women's centers on campus have helped convince a female student to report a consensual incident as a rape based on an "evolution of her perceptions of the incident" or some shit. -- I would expect it's comparatively easy to convince a woman (or for that woman to convince herself) to recontextualize a regretted incident of consensual sex into an incident of sexual assault. I can only speculate, due to a host of reasons, that any recontextualization by men when it comes to heterosexual incidents would operate in the opposite direction – that sexual assaults will most often be reinterpreted as consensual. #1) the cultural narrative around women is that they are passive objects who have things happen to them #2) the cultural narrative around men is that they are active agents who make things happen #3) objects are easily perceived as victims #4) agents are not perceived as victims #5) the cultural narrative around rape is that it is a male perpetrated crime, and women are most often the victims #6) there is a regret asymmetry around casual sex, with twice as many women as men describing one-night stands as negative experiences #7) the immediate psychological sequelae for sexual assault or even negative consensual sexual experiences are much more apparent in women than in men. Women are much more likely to feel bad right away, and to associate the bad feelings with the incident, while men are more likely to experience more distant negative sequelae (not necessarily feeling traumatized right away, but showing changes in behavior such as abusing alcohol or losing focus or depression, that they don't necessarily associate with the incident, but which they nonetheless tend to experience in its aftermath). #8) due to the male agent/female object dichotomy, a man's feelings of guilt over having been victimized are much more likely to be perceived by himself and others as genuine culpability, while for women it is more likely to be interpreted by herself and others as unjustified self-blaming behavior. -- If you look at Koss's narrative about men's experiences "that they have had unwanted sex with female partners while ambivalent about their own desires", it dovetails perfectly with all of the above. Even the language she uses gives away the game: Active language: the men "have had unwanted sex", not the men "have been subjected to unwanted sex". "Ambivalent about their own desires" implies that part of them wanted the sex, therefore it wasn't entirely against their will – they were active participants. And a lot of her objection to including men made to penetrate in the rape numbers has to do with the less immediate trauma response on the part of the majority of male victims.'
men  women  violence  trauma  agencyvspatiency 
5 weeks ago
Aeon Video -- Massimo Pigliucci on death and Stoicism
'For the Stoic, death is an open door, and the freedom to walk through it enables us to live a virtuous life.' -- To every man his little cross...
philosophy  existentialism  stoicism  death  absurd 
5 weeks ago
Broader Perspective -- CryptoSustainability: Reinventing Economics
'There are some exciting examples of fungible, distributed autonomous space. Distributed autonomous mobile space includes the concept of a mobile AirBnB, embodied by the Blackbird Bus, which uses city streets as a commons for on-demand locational parking of a 68-passenger school bus that has been converted into a luxury mobile office/living space for a startup company, and offers co-housing nights via AirBnB. For example, there are Houslets, modular, portable, reconfigurable, and open-source living structures which can be fixed or mobile or anything in between. Another example is using space and economic designability to competitive advantage, such as autonomous political/judicial zones within countries, like the Zones for Economic Development and Employment (ZEDEs) in Honduras. Existing space-on-demand offerings like Liquid Space (hourly, daily, weekly, monthly booking of office space) could be further extended and enhanced by delivering mobile office pods to locations.'
architecture  archigram  phyles 
5 weeks ago
github -- danluu/debugging-stories
'Debugging stories are fun! This is a collection of links to various debugging stories.'
6 weeks ago
Scientific American -- Among Trillions of Microbes in the Gut, a Few Are Special
'Kenya Honda, a microbiologist at Keio University in Tokyo, was among the first to uncover the critical role of clostridial microbes in maintaining a balanced immune system. To study how native microbes affect animals, scientists decades ago developed the germ-free mouse: an animal without any microbiota whatsoever. These rodents, delivered by cesarean section and raised in sterile plastic bubbles, can exist only in labs. Of the many oddities they present—including shrunken heart and lungs and abnormalities in the large intestine—Honda was particularly intrigued by their lack of cells that prevented immune overreaction, called regulatory T cells, or Tregs. Without these cells, the mice were unusually prone to inflammatory disease. --- Honda wanted to know which of the many intestinal species might induce these suppressor cells. Soon after Sokol identified the anti-inflammatory effects of F. prausnitzii, Honda began whittling away at the gut microbiota of mice by treating them with narrow-spectrum antibiotics. The animals' Tregs declined after a course of vancomycin. With their ability to restrain their immune reaction hobbled, the mice became highly susceptible to colitis, the rodent version of inflammatory bowel disease and allergic diarrhea. Honda found he could restore the Tregs and immune equilibrium of the mice just by reinstating 46 native clostridial strains. -- Honda repeated the exercise with human-adapted microbes obtained from a healthy lab member. He extracted just 17 clostridial species this time that, in mice, could induce a full repertoire of Tregs and prevent inflammation. These human-adapted microbes specialized in nudging the immune system away from inflammatory disease. They came from branches of the clostridial group labeled clusters IV, XIVa and XVIII. F. prausnitzii belongs to cluster IV. -- Vedanta Biosciences recently formed to try to turn Honda's 17-strain “clostridial cocktail” into a treatment for inflammatory disease. If the company's efforts are successful, it could signal the arrival of the next generation of probiotics—human-adapted microbes to treat immune-mediated disease—and all derived from one member of Honda's lab. As always, it is unclear if what works in lab mice will translate to humans. Sokol has his doubts. He recently identified a type of regulatory T cell that is unique to humans and that is deficient in people with inflammatory bowel disease. He questions if Honda's cocktail, which has been developed in mice, will activate these cells in people. -- ...Earlier this year Cathryn Nagler, an immunologist at the University of Chicago, knocked out the clostridial bacteria with antibiotics and then fed the animals peanut protein. Without those microbes and their corresponding Tregs present, the protein leaked through the gut barrier into circulation, prompting the rodent version of a food allergy. She could prevent the sensitization just by introducing those clostridial bacteria. -- One key difference between mice with and without the clostridial clusters was how many mucus-secreting cells they possessed. Animals that harbored the clostridial clusters had more. That may have far-reaching consequences. Mucus, scientists are finding, contains compounds that repel certain microbes, maintaining a tiny distance between them and us. But it also carries food for other bacteria—complex, fermentable sugars that resemble those found in breast milk. Lora Hooper, a microbiologist at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, calls this dual function the “carrot” and the “stick.” Mucus serves both as an antimicrobial repellent and a growth medium for friendly bacteria.'
biology  bacteria  health 
6 weeks ago
Childhood Emotional Neglect -- Were You Born Under the Gaslight?
'#4. The Emotionally Neglectful Family (CEN): In this family, your physical needs may be met just fine. But your emotional needs are ignored. No one notices what the children are feeling. The language of emotion is not used in the home. “Don’t cry,” “Suck it up,” “Don’t be so sensitive,” are frequently uttered by the CEN parent. The most basic, primary part of what makes you you (your emotional self) is treated as a burden or non-existent. -- The Message: Your feelings and needs are bad and a burden to others. Keep them hidden. Don’t rely on others, and don’t need anything. You don’t matter. -- The Gaslight Effect: You have been trained to deny the most deeply personal, biological part of who you are, your emotions, and you have dutifully pushed them out of sight and out of mind. Now, you live your life with a deeply ingrained feeling that you are missing something that other people have. You feel empty or numb at times. You don’t trust yourself or your judgments because you lack your emotions to guide you. Your connections to others are one-way or lack emotional depth. Even if you are surrounded by people, deep down you feel alone. None of it makes any sense to you.'
psychology  emotion  neglect  schizoid 
6 weeks ago
Oliver Burkeman -- Why patience really is a virtue
'...patience was a matter of “conforming yourself to the need to wait for things”; it was a way of accepting one’s lack of control over the world. But now we don’t need to wait for most things, patience has become a form of control over the world and, as she puts it, “over the tempo of contemporary life that otherwise controls us”. In this new environment, there’s nothing remotely passive about standing in front of a painting for three hours. On the contrary, it’s a subversive act. On the other side of impatience – if you can learn to wait out that jitteriness – lies power.'
psychology  ambientimmediacy  control 
6 weeks ago
Aeon -- Algorithms can be a digital star chamber by Frank Pasquale
'Cyberspace is no longer an escape from the ‘real world’. It is now a force governing it via algorithms: recipe-like sets of instructions to solve problems. From Google search to OkCupid matchmaking, software orders and weights hundreds of variables into clean, simple interfaces, taking us from query to solution. Complex mathematics govern such answers, but it is hidden from plain view, thanks either to secrecy imposed by law, or to complexity outsiders cannot unravel. -- Limits on data collection will frustrate big-data mavens. The CEO of ZestFinance has proudly stated that ‘all data is credit data’ – that is, predictive analytics can take virtually any scrap of information about a person, analyse whether it corresponds to a characteristic of known-to-be-creditworthy people, and extrapolate accordingly. -- ...Law enforcers of the future could find it difficult to learn all the variables that go into credit and employment decisions. Protected by trade secrecy, many algorithms remain impenetrable to outside observers. When they try to unveil them, litigants can face a Catch-22. Legitimately concerned to stop ‘fishing expeditions’, courts are likely to grant discovery requests only if a plaintiff has accumulated some quantity of evidence of discrimination. But if the key entity making a decision was a faceless ‘black boxed’ algorithm, what’s the basis for an initial suspicion of discrimination?'
algorithms  malgorithms  blackboxes  echochamber  daemon 
6 weeks ago
McLuhan Galaxy -- The Metaphor Morphs: From Global Village to Global Theatre
'[1.6] The Internet, more than television (indeed, the two are increasingly converging), is a public space for doing one’s thing, with participants generating their own content—putting on their own show, as it were. The Internet “turns the globe into a repertory theater to be programmed” by its participants (McLuhan, 1970, pp. 9–10). The Internet realizes McLuhan’s vision of a space that serves as a stage that is theoretically open to an infinite number of players, each doing their thing for others to witness, and thus contributing programming to the nonstop theater. McLuhan is even clearer in his prediction of a networked participatory culture in his 1972 book, written with Barrington Nevitt, Take Today: The Executive as Dropout. They write of [1.7] the institution of a new kind of global theater, in which all men become actors and there are few spectators. The population of the world is both the cast and content of this new theater. The repertory of the theater consists of a perpetual happening,which can include the retrieval or replay of any previous happenings that men choose to experience. (p. 145)'
internet  anonequiveillance  selfservers  performance  theadvertisedlife  McLuhan 
6 weeks ago
YouTube -- The Onion Explains: The Totalitarian State Of North Korea
'How is the secretive totalitarian government of the Hermit Kingdom operated? The Onion explains North Korea.'
TheOnion  statism  satire 
6 weeks ago
ThoughtCatalog -- 25 Struggles Only INFJs Will Understand by Heidi Priebe
'INFJs – Introverted, Intuitive, Feeling Judgers – are the deep, compassionate intellectuals of the MBTI world. Making up just 1% of the population, this type is sourly misunderstood by most other types. They are the philosophical nurturers, the accidental counsellors and the extroverted introverts. In may ways, they are a series of internal contradictions. And sometimes it’s a struggle.'
psychology  personality  INFJ 
6 weeks ago
YouTube -- Nature's Lessons in Healing Trauma: An Introduction to Somatic Experiencing
'In this video, you will learn about the physiological basis of trauma and how Somatic Experiencing® (SE™), developed by Peter A. Levine, PhD, helps distressed individuals recover a sense of well being, stability and vitality.'
psychology  body  trauma 
7 weeks ago
The Journal of Libertarian Studies -- The Enterprise of Community: Market Competition, Land, and Environment by Spencer Heath MacCallum (PDF)
'We tend to think of land as something physical: We describe it as clear, rocky, fertile, or barren. But those who deal in land say that three things give it value: location, location, location. It makes sense from an economic standpoint, therefore, to look at land not as anything physical, but as a special kind of location having to do only incidentally with geophysical coordinates. It is intangible, always changing, never fixed in supply. I am talking about location with respect to all of the things in the environs of a site, near or far, present or anticipated, that have any relevance for its intended use. This excludes features of the site itself, such as the presence or absence of valuable minerals, soil, water, or built improvements. We are interested in what surrounds the site, not what is on it. Admittedly, having said that, the physical attributes of a site do affect the probable use of the surrounding land, and to that extent its environment. But except for that, the physical features just named can be bought, sold, altered, or removed from a site without affecting its location in the sense described. -- From this perspective, what landowners actually sell—that which commands value—is location with respect to a specific environment at the moment of consideration or anticipated for the future. A site merely defined by geophysical coordinates without reference to its surroundings has no ascertainable value; it comes into demand only as its environs have relevance for an activity that is to take place there. A prospective home site for a young family gains in desirability if there is a school nearby, or a mine site if there is a railroad accessible to transport its ores, or a retail site if there are residences nearby, not to mention parking spaces, utility grids, and many other things. When we buy or sell land, therefore, we are trading in what might be called positioning rights – rights to position ourselves and our activities strategically relative to other people and activities we consider significant.'
economics  land  landlordism 
7 weeks ago
Albion Awake -- Albion Awake Interviews – Spencer MacCallum
'2) What is heathian anarchism? Heath was never an anarchist, which is a negative term signifying nothing but the absence of rulership. He was interested in how society works, how it self-organizes. He defined society not as simply a population, but as th e portion of a population reciprocally engaged in voluntary exchange. The boundaries of society are thus permeable and, as society evolves, expanding to include a greater and greater fraction of the population, the excluded fraction consisting of political and other violent and criminal elements. These are beyond the pale, literally outlaw, outside the customary law of society, customary law tending to approximate the natural laws that govern social phenomena like everything else in nature and which ought never be confused with legislated rules. -- 3) Could you explain the basic idea as presented in Spencer Heath’s book Citadel, Market and Altar? The title symbolizes three aspects of society. First, there must be a protected place. Given a safe place, there can develop voluntary exchange. The market meets the current needs of society, maintaining it at a given level. In addition, it creates opportunity and means for non-necessitous pursuits, which is the field of inspiration, symbolized by the altar. Here society advances to higher levels through the development of pure sciences, philosophy, and the arts. Citadel, Market and Altar explains, as no one has undertaken to do before, the functional role of private property in land as the fundamental social institution. It makes possible the protected place upon which the market depends. As its potential to provide not only protection but all manner of public community services contractually in the market comes to be understood, it will become one of the most profitable of market enterprises, freeing mankind to creative pursuits in infinite scope and variety. -- 4) What are the main differences in your mind between the Heathian vision and the Henry George model of society? George’s great, intuitive insight was to see ground rent as the natural fund for public services. But in applying this insight, he mistakenly looked to political means. He would remove all taxes on land use, which is good, and place it entirely on ground rent — the “Single Tax.” Heath saw that protecting land users from taxation would make land use of every kind so profitable that the value of land would rise dramatically. Realizing this, the land-owning interest would become not the opponent but the main proponent of the Single-Tax. Property owners would lead the movement to untax all land uses and out of the increased revenues would begin to oversee and gradually take over voluntarily the funding and provision of all community services. By thus bringing public services out of politics and into the market, government as we know it would be outgrown. See my paper, “The Enterprise of Community” (Journal of Libertarian Studies 17:4, Fall 2003), revised by the author 2008. -- 5) How is this different from the various schools of anarcho-capitalism? Anarcho-capitalists fail to see the provision of public community services as a potential field for entrepreneurial enterprise.'
economics  land  landlordism 
7 weeks ago
Spencer Heath -- The Legacy of Spencer Heath
'Heath departs from the traditionally moral view of ownership as a matter of individual rights granted from a "higher authority." His analysis proceeds from his observations of ownership functioning as a social institution. The unspoken social convention, or covenant, establishing the institution of property he found to be the essential factor that makes all the rest of the spectrum of social relations possible, thereby directly enhancing durability (longer life). The duration of one's life and the time available for living it fully is served on the one hand, he explains, by “quiet possession” (property in the individual or private sense), and on the other by the specialization of services and exchange (property in the social sense). He shows how this social convention enables men and women to moderate the temporal imperative each faces and with which each must deal in his own way. -- Property in the individual sense is said to be owned. Ownership, therefore, is the status that derives from the social condition of quiet possession. McCallum points out that the root of the word own is the same as for the word owe.[5] Thus, to own property enables one to owe another. This is suggestive that property has long been regarded as having a reciprocal social function. -- Heath might readily have characterized the institution of property in some manner like the following: Ownership and its socially dynamic corollary of exchange liberate the imagination, open the path to immortality and inspire the prospect of infinite creation. Property is truly the social capital in nature which underwrites man's inclinations to perfect his life, to nurture his offspring, to cultivate his community and to preserve the prospects of succeeding generations of his species. -- Heath thus analyzes the convention of property as having a dual nature, an individual and a social aspect, both of which he finds embedded in consensual (volitional) phenomena. The individual aspect, quiet possession, is precedent. It calls for a covenant among men, at least among those in the neighborhood, that thou shalt not do (trespass, etc.). This covenant of quiet possession confers more than an immediate benefit in terms of personal security. It is the true social covenant for it establishes the tolerance that enables exchange by means of which man may serve himself by serving others. Without quiet possession, not only is there no secure production or consumption; there is nothing secure to exchange. -- While he discovered the social aspect of property in the process of exchange, Heath found exchange to be quite evidently derivative of quiet possession because it occurs only when a transaction is mutual, and mutuality cannot be established if the status of the parties with respect to the contemplated exchange is ambiguous. Exchange proceeds only upon agreement --which is contract--to do that which prompts other participants to do their part freely in return, i.e., to reciprocate. -- Exchange is man's principal agency of self-improvement because improvement requires doing and, obviously, not just anything will do. Some "doings" cause conflict, which detracts from life. Others, lacking technological prowess, not only fail to gratify but are wasteful of time and materials. Thus, it is the individual drive for self improvement that underlies the consensus for reciprocity characterizing civil society everywhere. That man civilizes himself is a consequence of his drive for self improvement. Such civilizing tendencies are recognized by economists in what they call “the division or specialization of labor" and by sociologists in what they see as a virtually universal quest for "education." -- Heath defined property in its social sense in strictly operational terms, namely, as “that which can become the subject-matter of contract." This was no mere abstract definition to suit his theoretical constructions. He would rely on what is meant by “contract” to explain the origin and operation of proprietary administration, which he showed to be the only truly rational form of administration for whatever social purpose. -- Possibly a result of his training in law, Heath was satisfied that Anglo-Saxon common-law notions of contract were reliable, reinforcing his view of property as a social institution. According to this conception, property is a natural phenomenon that is discovered by man who, upon such discovery, may characterize it as "natural law." "Property," so understood, is no more a creation of man-made law, or statute, than are language, art, music, arithmetic, common law, family, money, etc.'
economics  property  contract  commonlaw  civility  anarchism 
7 weeks ago
Vanity Fair -- Tinder and Hookup-Culture Promotion
'...Bring all of this up to young men, however, and they scoff. Women are just as responsible for “the shit show that dating has become,” according to one. “Romance is completely dead, and it’s the girls’ fault,” says Alex, 25, a New Yorker who works in the film industry. “They act like all they want is to have sex with you and then they yell at you for not wanting to have a relationship. How are you gonna feel romantic about a girl like that? Oh, and by the way? I met you on Tinder.”'
7 weeks ago
« earlier      
"capitalism" #bandwidth #socialization * 1984 abuse activism addiction advertising advice agencyvspatiency america archetypes art attachment attention augmentationistsvsimmersionists authenticity avatars backlash banking behaviours biology bitcoin blogging brain branding business businessmodels centralbanking centralnervoussystem childhood children china climate code cognitivesurplus collaboration collapse collectiveintelligence communication communities consumerism content corporatism creativity criticism crowdsourcing culture data datamining debt delusion design documentaries dollar economics empire entertainment evolution existentialism experience extensionsofman facebook fame feedback feminism finance forcedmemes freedom funny games gaming geoism globalgovernment google government greatestdepression groups hackersvsvectoralists hacking health hipsterrunoff history ideas identity ideology immateriallabour immunesystem incrementalism inflation information innovation interface internet irrationality journalism land law leaky learning legalese life literaryculturevsoralculture mapping marketing markets media men mercantilism mobile money morality music narcissism narrativeactivism narrativeenvironments narrativeobjects networks news numbers objects oligarchicalcollectivism oligarchy parasitism parenting pathocracy performance philosophy planning play politics power predation privacy productnarratives propaganda psychohistory psychology psychotherapy puppetry quotes reality realityprogramming reflexivity relationships religion rent rentseeking research retribalization roleplay sacrifice 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: