While I usually attempt to avoid certain forms of entertainment, specifically those that tend to be massive time-sinks with little productive to gain, I was sick for a few days this week and ended up watching the full 10 episodes of the HBO series “Westworld“. The show itself is set within a theme park where wealthy members of society can vacation and live out their western fantasy in a world populated by “Hosts“. The hosts themselves are artificial human beings of sorts, that the guest can kill, rape, murder, maim, live out their innocent farmer’s daughter fantasy and whatever else they desire.
In essence, it allows them to be the black hat, the white hat and everything in between. This got me thinking about what the effect on the sexual market place would be if such technology was widely available within our society. What if “sex-bots” were as ubiquitous as smart phones or laptop computers? What if you could pick up an iPartner at the Apple Store, along with your new iPhone?
The first major barrier is naturally the technology required to adequately mimic human behavior to a point where such bots would be the equivalent or better than human. A second factor would be the social programming related to sex and reproduction that affect all of us as super-ego instructions. Continue reading
Usually when someone seeks to change something with their life, regardless of whether it is a minor or major issue, the same methods tend to be applied. Extreme methodology applied for a burst-style period of time. For instance, people who seek to drop excess weight gained over a period of years, seek to drop this weight in a span of weeks or months. People who have been neglecting one part of their life for years, seek to rectify it in a flurry of excessive effort, without a focus on efficacy.
Likewise, people love to hunt for simple, smart solutions, to complex and convoluted challenges, without regard for the destination they seek. For instance, changing your life from one where you consume too much, and too poor quality food, tends to be one where people make radical changes rapidly, disregarding the longer term perspective.
The combination of these two tendencies, trends towards short sighted strategies, and simplistic solutions. When one approaches a problem that must be tackled long term, with complex and multi-variable solutions, from the short-term perspective and a simple solution, the inevitable failure leads to a person being worse off than they were initially. Continue reading
I did something I promised myself I would stop doing on Twitter the other day, I made a snarky remark about climate change. I wasn’t going to right about the ensuing debate, or the topic itself, as it does not fit the nature of this blog, however, then it struck me; climate change and the red pill have many things in common. They are both issues that have strong components within both facts and policy, both are emotionally loaded and they tend to involve policy solutions that have unforeseen and negative consequences.
The reason why I tend to avoid issues like climate change is for the simple reason that they are highly emotional issues. In addition, many of the climate change adherents are pushing policy, and predictably engage in typical name-calling rather than discussions regarding underlying principles.
This is very similar to discussing social issues, where statements of a red pill nature frequently can have you branded a misogynist faster than a 35 year old single girl empties a box of wine. Continue reading
As the Gendernomics book is getting close to being ready for publishing, I thought I’d offer a sample chapter to the blog audience to get some feedback. The following is the chapter entitled “The Company of Man” and is the introductory chapter to the micro-economics section of the book.
The Company of Man
The company of a Man is founded on the day of his birth. It has value to his parents. Throughout his life, the actions and choices made by the man can either add, subtract or sustain the value of his equity. The equity starts with a value of zero when he is born, and as he passes through life, his choices and performance affect the equity. This is the reason why the male sexual market curve peaks long after the female sexual market value curve. A woman is born with her equity at maximum value reduced for risk; male equity is built one-step at a time. Continue reading
I’m sure we’ve all seen the statistics that women control most of the purchasing decisions within a family . This is a major reason why so much of marketing and advertising is aimed at women. From the statistics I cited in last week’s essay it is also clear that women are the major beneficiaries of income sharing within the family, on top of being the majority recipients of social benefits. This all breaks down to the fact that women control much of the money within a family, not only their own income, but the income of their husband, or many other men within the society via taxation. This follows from the fact that any social redistribution of income program is largely a process to redistribute money from men to women.
Thus, a woman will not only control her own income, as is frequently the case with men. Any man who has ever lived with a modern western woman knows the distinction between “our money“, which is the income earned by the man, and “my money” meaning the income earned by the woman. Thus, at best the man controls his own income, subtracting the income he contributes to joint expenses. The woman on the other hand controls her own income and part of the man’s income, and in some modern western states also gets specific allowances from the state. If the woman decides that she is not happy and wants to kick the guy out, then the state will rapidly step in to be her daddy.
Therefore, a woman within a family at minimum controls income equal to that of her own, plus part of that of her husband. A single woman at minimum controls her own income, and a single woman with children controls her own income, plus the income received via the state. Thus, it follows that any marketer worth his or her salt will seek to appeal to women. Continue reading
The social contract is a concept that symbolizes the agreement between the individual and the collective. It protects the rights of the individual and the outlines the duties each individual must accept in order to gain the benefits of the collective. In a sense, this is a case of risk management on a very high level, wherein each individual who opts in gains a way to normalize risk through the law of large numbers. The concept of the social contract comes from Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and is Rousseau’s idea on how to best form a community in lieu of the problems he identified in his discourse on inequality. One of the fundamental principles within the theory is that force does not create right, and humans are only obliged to submit to legitimate powers. Therefore, a human has no duty to submit to coercion.
Furthermore, it makes no sense for a human to voluntarily submit to slavery, therefore to accept a rule in which they accept a lesser amount of rights or higher amount of duties than others makes little sense. Thus, as individuals gather intro steadily larger tribes, unless their rights and duties are equal and identical, one group or multiple groups will be enslaving the other(s).
In exchange for each member of his tribe or group pledging to protect his rights, he also pledges to protect theirs, thus he gains protection and he gains duties. This forms the basis for most of the Western democracies that we have today. Many countries have such principles outlined within their constitutions, drawing limits for both individual rights and behaviors, along with the rights and behaviors of the collective.
However, as with most deals that are struck, this has tended to somewhat breach against the original terms over time, wherein the collective Leviathan of the state slowly take away the rights of their population, while seeking more rights for itself. This is merely a function of incentive theory, that leads the individuals chosen to represent the people to act in their own best short-term interest, at the expense of the population. Continue reading
When I was writing the recent article about the lamentations of “Fun Single girl“, one of the things that struck me was how many of her complaints, men being raised poorly, men not embodying the narrative of what a man should be and men not knowing what they want, so accurately appear to capture the negative phenomena. Some of the more frequent complaints I see in the manosphere both in articles and comment sections is that women are no longer raised to be feminine, to embody the image of what a female is and that women do not know what they want. This made me think of the mechanism of psychological projection, wherein a human being defends themselves against unconscious impulses or qualities by denying their existence in themselves and attributing them to others. Perhaps the woman in lamentations is in fact attributing the truth about herself to the men she desires but fails to capture in her net.
This lead to thinking about the psychological defense mechanisms that Sigmund Freud identified, and that Anna Freud defined in “The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense“. These are not merely unconscious protective measures to stop you from connecting with your instincts, but also serve to protect you from the consequences of confronting your flaws and weaknesses. Thus, by identifying when defense mechanisms appear in your psyche, you can better connect with your instincts, confront your flaws, and eradicate your weaknesses. There is quite an arsenal of different defense mechanisms, but for the purpose of brevity, I’ll cover the nine most common ones. Continue reading