The Feminization of Males page 52

[Urban Forager]

uhm, uhm, uhm????


i hope you are joking here. or maybe you are just too young to know any better, youth is riddled with functional errors.

recognition of whites has been done by whites.

that hardly makes it an objective exercise.

i am not denying that some white people made some pretty cool shit IN OUR CURRENT ENVIRONMENT, however Monsanto is also a white ongoing concern.

There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreampt of in your philosophy, Horatio.

most of the worlds intelligence has not destroyed it. Additionally most of the worlds intelligence has been carefully hidden from the "white" man due to the clear knowledge that the Caucasian race in general ( Aryan and Indo Aryan alike) are just beserking genocidal destroyers looking for something to smash mindlessly.

Hopefully as time progresses "whites" will mature out of that infantilism. Individually many of them do very well, but as a group, sigh.

so of course they have to pat themselves on the back, who else will????

Thank you Quelsen. Wilton just keeps digging himself in deeper.

[Urban Forager]

p.s. Have you read this before? What do you think of it?

I thought this was a very good explanation of privilege, though I think he should have factored in class as well.

[Scott F]

Wilton, do you honestly think that the endless pursuit of status (which in our society typically also means material wealth) makes any kind of sense? Look at all the waste and environmental degradation and corruption that comes with it.

I know my response here is (mostly) aside from the thread but....waste and environmental degradation are typical of all societies....which is why Jared Diamond said "agriculture was the worst mistake in human history."
The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race

The pursuit of any post-paleolithic society is the pursuit of material wealth. None of which is ecologically sustainable and why societies are known to grow in complexity and then collapse as their primary energy source can no longer keep pace with population growth. While I agree with you that the pursuit of social wealth makes no sense ecologically, it is what it is. Humans are going to do what humans do. (Kind of leading back into the thread here: ) I can't prove this but I believe it's typically a male thing, for which I'm sensing in some of your arguments. Men, typically, seem to believe they can engineer better social systems which look good on paper but don't work in practice. The don't because they require a type of universal progressive altruism. Marxism is one such system (for which another poster was asking about). The USSR was not a classless society, neither is China. Labor unions are another. Unions are a kind of sub-culture third-world country run by a dictatorship. Union bosses usually stay in power for long periods of time and command salaries in the hundreds of thousands: - The Daily . Keynesian economic theory is another that politicians exploit to maintain control...even at the risk of crashing the economy. Peter Schiff on The Real Crash, Austrian economics and Ron Paul | Washington Times Communities.

In whatever form it takes people pursue power and control over resources. Native tribes controlled territories and kept other tribes out. No universal altruism there. At the core but now more politically sophisticated, politicians do the same thing....for themselves and their political party. I don't think he meant to but in his book, Throw Them All Out, Peter Schweizer does a good job of illustrating this pursuit of power status and material wealth within Washington....even though it's at the expense of wrecking the financial health of the country...quite contrary to altruism. We have two political parties (political tribes if you will) battling it out every election for financial resources. Why don't they simply come together in a spirit of cooperation to try and fix social problems? How many people feel a sense of relief because their guy won the election and their political tribe has maintained its status?

[Uncephalized]

I know my response here is (mostly) aside from the thread but....waste and environmental degradation are typical of all societies....which is why Jared Diamond said "agriculture was the worst mistake in human history."
The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race

The pursuit of any post-paleolithic society is the pursuit of material wealth. None of which is ecologically sustainable and why societies are known to grow in complexity and then collapse as their primary energy source can no longer keep pace with population growth. While I agree with you that the pursuit of social wealth makes no sense ecologically, it is what it is. Humans are going to do what humans do. (Kind of leading back into the thread here: ) I can't prove this but I believe it's typically a male thing, for which I'm sensing in some of your arguments. Men, typically, seem to believe they can engineer better social systems which look good on paper but don't work in practice. The don't because they require a type of universal progressive altruism. Marxism is one such system (for which another poster was asking about). The USSR was not a classless society, neither is China. Labor unions are another. Unions are a kind of sub-culture third-world country run by a dictatorship. Union bosses usually stay in power for long periods of time and command salaries in the hundreds of thousands: - The Daily . Keynesian economic theory is another that politicians exploit to maintain control...even at the risk of crashing the economy. Peter Schiff on The Real Crash, Austrian economics and Ron Paul | Washington Times Communities.

In whatever form it takes people pursue power and control over resources. Native tribes controlled territories and kept other tribes out. No universal altruism there. At the core but now more politically sophisticated, politicians do the same thing....for themselves and their political party. I don't think he meant to but in his book, Throw Them All Out, Peter Schweizer does a good job of illustrating this pursuit of power status and material wealth within Washington....even though it's at the expense of wrecking the financial health of the country...quite contrary to altruism. We have two political parties (political tribes if you will) battling it out every election for financial resources. Why don't they simply come together in a spirit of cooperation to try and fix social problems? How many people feel a sense of relief because their guy won the election and their political tribe has maintained its status?

Oh, absolutely. Of course this does suggest that if there were a way to (a) stabilize the population even in the face of resource abundance and (b) limit the extraction of natural resources to their respective natural production levels, then people would be free to pursue material wealth and status within those hard limits without causing an overrun and subsequent crash. Of course the tricks to managing (a) and (b) are not something we've got sorted out, and maybe there are no such tricks.

Actually, now that I think of it, accomplishing (b) would automatically solve (a), though possibly mainly through famine which is obviously less-than-desirable, humanistically speaking.

I recommend Diamond's Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, by the way, if you haven't read it. He meanders a lot into personal ruminations on his memories of Montana, but there's a lot of interesting information in it about the Greenland Norse and other failed societies, along with an attempt at a systematic understanding of the main drivers of societal staying power vs failure.

[Urban Forager]

It occurs to me that we may have been a little hard on Wilton. He clearly has learned his lessons well. High School history teachers should be proud of him, he's inculcated the approved texts into his belief system. He's seen through all the distracting (PC) additions that history textbooks have included for the past 30 or so yrs to the underlying message that it's really white males that have accomplished all the stuff worth writing about. I give Wilton an A+. The education system is still working!

[canio6]

It occurs to me that we may have been a little hard on Wilton. He clearly has learned his lessons well. High School history teachers should be proud of him, he's inculcated the approved texts into his belief system. He's seen through all the distracting (PC) additions that history textbooks have included for the past 30 or so yrs to the underlying message that it's really white males that have accomplished all the stuff worth writing about. I give Wilton an A+. The education system is still working!

Well, considering the vast majority of teachers, especially in the early, formative years, are women, you all only have yourselves to blame. Gheesh, women failing again.

[Scott F]

I have Diamonds Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed and read most of it but yeah he meanders a lot which is why I never finished it. I think Joseph Tainter is more on point with his energy spiral and complexity argument: Collapse of Complex Societies by Dr. Joseph Tainter (1 of 7) - YouTube

This is a summary of the above lecture. At the heart of our social problem is that ours is based upon fossil fuels which are not sustainable and as of right now there is nothing, not anything, that can replace those fuel sources declines or have the net energy return they've supplied. In the face of all that we have a government (and governed) who is increasingly adding to social complexity. Obamacare is only the latest of such attempts at solving problems with increased complexity.



If you haven't seen this I highly recommend: The Crash Course | Peak Prosperity Chris Martenson was VP of a fortune 300 company (Pfizer I think). He downsized his life from the corporate rat race. He spent 6 months putting together The Crash Course and, as he puts it, gave it away for free. It ties together the 3 "E's" economic, energy, and environment.

Tainter's 7 part lecture, The Crash Course, and Mary Logan's Withering Complexity Dr. Mary Logan - Whither Complexity? are, in one way or another, all saying the same thing. There are young people reading this message board who can expect to see that global famine in their life time. Between 2008 and 2030 the global oil industry needs to put online the equivalent of 6 new Saudi Arabias, 4 of which are simply to replace declining fields. We'll replace a lot of it...but it'll have to come from unconventional plays like shale and tar sands. That's very expensive to drill and produce (both in engineering complexity and in economics) which will push down the net energy return from the effort and drive up the relative cost of living.....back on thread topic

[jojohaligo]

A longish read, but very well worth it. And off topic, but not really.
There is hope for us yet... maybe...

State of the Species.

[Scott F]

Well, considering the vast majority of teachers, especially in the early, formative years, are women, you all only have yourselves to blame. Gheesh, women failing again.

Here's one of the criticism of the education system I've seen coming from scientists like Ann Moir: If the vast majority of teachers are women and they believe gender behavior is socialized are boys being hampered by that socialization paradigm? If it's in a boy's nature to be active and roam how many of them are being accused of having ADHD when they may simply be acting genetically normal, simply because they fidget and don't stay in their chair?

[canio6]

Here's one of the criticism of the education system I've seen coming from scientists like Ann Moir: If the vast majority of teachers are women and they believe gender behavior is socialized are boys being hampered by that socialization paradigm? If it's in a boy's nature to be active and roam how many of them are being accused of having ADHD when they may simply be acting genetically normal, simply because they fidget and don't stay in their chair?

I've read the same and think there is some merit to the idea, especially given that something like 85%+ of elementary teachers (at least in the US) are women. Add in the large number of single mothers raising boys and you have yet more female influence. I'm not saying this is bad necessarily but I can see it having an influence on the development of the male mind these days.

Edit: As for ADD, I think this could be part of it, but I also consider it part of the culture of irresponsiblity/self-esteem movement. "I must be a good parent because I exist; as such my kid must have a problem, since he is not perfect, therefore, medication!"