The Feminization of Males page 54

[magicmerl]

True, but regardless of the complexity of the society, or whether we look at it linearly, or as a rhizome, or as some other model the outcome according to what both Chris Martenson and Charles Mann are saying is - collapse, or reaching a "second inflection point" after which our numbers sharply decrease - unless we make a change.

Actually, the world population is already stabilising. It will just take two more generations in the third world.

Hans Rosling has a number of really good presentations about this topic.

What I appreciated from the Mann article are the examples where some human groups have made an about face (slavery, women's rights) and it is at least hopeful because of that - or else it acts as a massively false panacea.

Except that I think that the slavery one is actually about energy. Pre-industrial revolution, civilisation was built on the backs of slaves. Slaves were the energy source. With the widespread use of coal and steam power, the cost of a unit of energy was dramatically lowered. With oil it was lowered still further. The economics of slave ownership changed. The industrial revolution was also the main driver in womens liberation (since women can operate machinery as proficiently as men).

[RitaRose]

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 kind of agree, though I don't think it's because women are teachers. I think teachers (male and female) are drawn to that environment, but I agree that a greater number of women are comfortable in that kind of environment.

People that are very strong-willed, strong-minded and don't do well in overly-regulated systems will most likely not choose to be an elementary school teacher. I knew when I volunteered at my youngest son's kindergarten that I never could. Someone got the genius idea to paint lightbulbs, and one kid was running with one in his hand, so I grabbed him by his shirt collar - second nature for me, but public schools don't allow that. You're supposed to convince him to voluntarily do things your way, or maybe have a discussion and come to a consensus about proper behavior and safety and all that... with 6-year-olds.

The desire for a passive male isn't really a female thing, it's more a product of the viewpoint of people that can function in a system like that. I have 2 sons, and they have been taught to defend themselves (and others) regardless of what the school district said. When they were in school, the policy was that defending yourself, even just enough to make the other person stop, was not allowed and was punishable. Bullshit.

So it's not really a female thing, it's a function of the type of personailty that can thrive for 30 years in a public school type of environment, which is overly passive and regulated to the extreme.

[Scott F]

Except that I think that the slavery one is actually about energy. Pre-industrial revolution, civilisation was built on the backs of slaves. Slaves were the energy source. With the widespread use of coal and steam power, the cost of a unit of energy was dramatically lowered. With oil it was lowered still further. The economics of slave ownership changed. The industrial revolution was also the main driver in womens liberation (since women can operate machinery as proficiently as men).

I've wondered the same thing. Martenson, and others, use the analogy of the energy slaves working for each of us making us richer than the past kings.

[Scott F]

I kind of agree, though I don't think it's because women are teachers. I think teachers (male and female) are drawn to that environment, but I agree that a greater number of women are comfortable in that kind of environment.

People that are very strong-willed, strong-minded and don't do well in overly-regulated systems will most likely not choose to be an elementary school teacher. I knew when I volunteered at my youngest son's kindergarten that I never could. Someone got the genius idea to paint lightbulbs, and one kid was running with one in his hand, so I grabbed him by his shirt collar - second nature for me, but public schools don't allow that. You're supposed to convince him to voluntarily do things your way, or maybe have a discussion and come to a consensus about proper behavior and safety and all that... with 6-year-olds.

Yeah, that looks good on paper but won't work in practice.

[/QUOTE]The desire for a passive male isn't really a female thing, it's more a product of the viewpoint of people that can function in a system like that. I have 2 sons, and they have been taught to defend themselves (and others) regardless of what the school district said. When they were in school, the policy was that defending yourself, even just enough to make the other person stop, was not allowed and was punishable. Bullshit.[/QUOTE]

The social origin of our term "Gentleman" originates from this same desire Gentleman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So it's not really a female thing, it's a function of the type of personailty that can thrive for 30 years in a public school type of environment, which is overly passive and regulated to the extreme.[/QUOTE]

I couldn't do it. I'm too independent and have little patience for bureaucratic BS that lacks logical reasoning. But I think I'm somewhat on the Asperger's spectrum (seems to be family genetics) and one of the common traits is an intolerance such rules like the one you described.

When I was heavy into the martial arts (close quarter hand to hand combat stuff) I read a book called "What Cops Know." It was a personality profile book relative to different types of criminals and how they behave. The subject on male pedophiles was informative. These men genuinely like interacting with kids. So what they will do is chose a career/job that gives them social contact with kids. The ones who become teachers are often seen by students and parents as a great teacher. When the pedophile is discovered the parents are shock because they had thought highly of the man. Parents will often defend the guy. Google: "pediphile favorite teacher parents shocked" to see what I mean. It isn't just teachers. Think of any occupation that gives similar contact.

I've seen a lot of men go into coaching because of their love of sports. They had to teach some other class that they really weren't interested in so if you were in that class making grade was fairly easy. Most of these guys didn't stick to their coaching career, however, and ended up taking jobs (or running businesses) unrelated to their teaching/coaching degrees.

[Scott F]

True, but regardless of the complexity of the society, or whether we look at it linearly, or as a rhizome, or as some other model the outcome according to what both Chris Martenson and Charles Mann are saying is - collapse, or reaching a "second inflection point" after which our numbers sharply decrease - unless we make a change.

What I appreciated from the Mann article are the examples where some human groups have made an about face (slavery, women's rights) and it is at least hopeful because of that - or else it acts as a massively false panacea.

The MIT people who wrote the book Limits to Growth in the 70's did a 30 year update and another book called Beyond the Limits. Mary Logan's lecture is good up-to-date summary of those books: Dr. Mary Logan - Whither Complexity? She discusses the inflection point in a graph that she presents at approximately 20 minutes into the video.

[jojohaligo]

Actually, the world population is already stabilising. It will just take two more generations in the third world.

Hans Rosling has a number of really good presentations about this topic.


Except that I think that the slavery one is actually about energy. Pre-industrial revolution, civilisation was built on the backs of slaves. Slaves were the energy source. With the widespread use of coal and steam power, the cost of a unit of energy was dramatically lowered. With oil it was lowered still further. The economics of slave ownership changed. The industrial revolution was also the main driver in womens liberation (since women can operate machinery as proficiently as men).

Yes, interesting.

The MIT people who wrote the book Limits to Growth in the 70's did a 30 year update and another book called Beyond the Limits. Mary Logan's lecture is good up-to-date summary of those books: Dr. Mary Logan - Whither Complexity? She discusses the inflection point in a graph that she presents at approximately 20 minutes into the video.

More to study... thank you both!

[Nicator]

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????

Curious that nobody here, despite being forward-thinking humanitarians that detest racism, has challenged these distasteful statements. Okay, I'm being ornery...it's not curious at all.

Well, at least you don't bother with the standard leftist tack of colorblindness, egalitarianism, or the old 'race is a social construct' tripe. That's a plus, by my reckoning.

[magicmerl]

Curious that nobody here, despite being forward-thinking humanitarians that detest racism, has challenged these distasteful statements. Okay, I'm being ornery...it's not curious at all.

Not, it's not curious. Because there's an element of truth behind his obvious exaggeration.

Well, at least you don't bother with the standard leftist tack of colorblindness, egalitarianism, or the old 'race is a social construct' tripe. That's a plus, by my reckoning.

Yes, it's other people who are deluded. YOU can see clearly on the issue.

[Nicator]

Not, it's not curious. Because there's an element of truth behind his obvious exaggeration.


Yes, it's other people who are deluded. YOU can see clearly on the issue.

His invective was condescending, absurd, and lacking a single objective truth. There was also an element of truth behind the statement that Wilton made that was so offensive to him, but that truth doesn't suit you so you dismiss it.

Or do you suppose the evil white man has manipulated world I.Q. test data to put himself behind northeast asians and ashkenazi jews, but still comfortably above africans and indians?

Your self-loathing and self-delusion go hand in hand.

[magicmerl]

His invective was condescending, absurd, and lacking a single objective truth. There was also an element of truth behind the statement that Wilton made that was so offensive to him, but that truth doesn't suit you so you dismiss it.

I think that the 'element of truth' behind Wilton's arguement can be summarised as 'men and women are different'. And I agree with that. I don't dismiss it. But I disagree with that being used to assert positions that I think are incorrect.

And I think that the single 'objective' truth behind quelsen's post can be summed up as Colonialism.

Or do you suppose the evil white man has manipulated world I.Q. test data to put himself behind northeast asians and ashkenazi jews, but still comfortably above africans and indians?

Your self-loathing and self-delusion go hand in hand.

I think that it's either naive or ignorant to think that IQ tests don't have a cultural bias to them. Is that self-loathing?

Did you think that Nate Silver was self-deluded as well?