identity politics are destroying the democratic party

[Speaker to Animals]

Technological society has disrupted every evolutionary calculus that ever drove us. That is pretty much the whole point.

If we want to start determining a person's value based entirely on what they offer to society, by whatever, essentially arbitrary, metric we decide to calculate that value, then many of us might find we aren't exactly the type society wants around. This is why we have tried to teach ourselves not to think of people like that. It is a lesson that, apparently, needs constant refreshing.

I am not saying we should determine people's value based on what they can offer society. Calm down, Sally.

I am saying that one of the main driving forces behind all this vitriol and animosity from women is that at some level they realize that their fertility no longer makes them a person of value simply for possessing a womb. This is why they feel the need to prove themselves equals of men, and when that fails, to sabotage men or impose crazy double standards to get women into power. It's why they have to invent crazy conspiracy theories about how men conspire to keep women from competing to the same standards.

At some level, women are trying to compete with us on our terms, and many of them fail, which leads to this anger and resentment. Meanwhile, many of the women who do perform quite well are terribly unhappy because -- who could possibly have guessed? -- women really don't like working like men.

[Speaker to Animals]

I mean.. just look at that recent presidential election. They were rabid for Hillary in the media. Liberal women were convinced it was going to happen and they were outright admitting to voting for a candidate simply because the candidate also possessed a vagina, which somehow magically made this candidate qualified, despite the fact that her policy in Libya and Syria as Secretary of State led to the largest demographic invasion of Europe since the fall of the Roman Empire.

But then Hillary lost, and Hillary was too busy throwing an emotional tantrum to go out there and deliver a concession speech. That has NEVER happened. Can you fucking imagine what the press would have done if a grown assed man could not deliver a concession speech because he was crying and throwing shit at his staff because he couldn't handle losing??

That dealt a deathblow to my confidence in women running anything in this country at least for another generation.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I am not saying we should determine people's value based on what they can offer society. Calm down, Sally.

Maybe it is me, but I read statements like this:

Most of the time we take women and children out first (like from a huge flood) out of compassion for the father who is just another man and we can relate. None of us would want our wives left behind. That's fucking insane. But in the big picture.. I am not so sure that makes sense. Not anymore.

It's far more likely that the Dad we find in a flooded Houston home is a chemical engineer than his wife. There aren't many of those guys around and they will be vital in the coming years due to peak oil.

as determining people's value based on what they offer to society, with an added implication that we can cut the valueless loose.

Hillary Clinton's personal, moral, and professional failings are a week argument for women being incapable of leadership.

[Speaker to Animals]

I am not saying we should determine people's value based on what they can offer society. Calm down, Sally.

Maybe it is me, but I read statements like this:

Most of the time we take women and children out first (like from a huge flood) out of compassion for the father who is just another man and we can relate. None of us would want our wives left behind. That's fucking insane. But in the big picture.. I am not so sure that makes sense. Not anymore.

It's far more likely that the Dad we find in a flooded Houston home is a chemical engineer than his wife. There aren't many of those guys around and they will be vital in the coming years due to peak oil.

as determining people's value based on what they offer to society, with an added implication that we can cut the valueless loose.

Hillary Clinton's personal, moral, and professional failings are a week argument for women being incapable of leadership.

If you literally have to choose between two people where one of them is going to die, does it make sense to choose one of them based on the fact that they have a vagina, or should you choose based on some practical metric?

Think rationally here. Leave the cognitive biases at the door.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I am not saying we should determine people's value based on what they can offer society. Calm down, Sally.

Maybe it is me, but I read statements like this:

Most of the time we take women and children out first (like from a huge flood) out of compassion for the father who is just another man and we can relate. None of us would want our wives left behind. That's fucking insane. But in the big picture.. I am not so sure that makes sense. Not anymore.

It's far more likely that the Dad we find in a flooded Houston home is a chemical engineer than his wife. There aren't many of those guys around and they will be vital in the coming years due to peak oil.

as determining people's value based on what they offer to society, with an added implication that we can cut the valueless loose.

Hillary Clinton's personal, moral, and professional failings are a week argument for women being incapable of leadership.

If you literally have to choose between two people where one of them is going to die, does it make sense to choose one of them based on the fact that they have a vagina, or should you choose based on some practical metric?

Think rationally here. Leave the cognitive biases at the door.

I understand what you are saying. You think a male chemical engineer has more value to society than his wife. I am saying that, as one of our little family's most vociferous moralists, you should recognize that the fact that we don't do that is a moral victory, not a failure. Not because we are cognitively biased towards women, but we are biased against such a utilitarian metric of human value.

Besides, good luck trying to drag that fellow onto the rescue boats while leaving his family to die.

[Speaker to Animals]

It isn't about morals. It wasn't particularly moral to load up women into lifeboats and sending men to their deaths on account of genetilia either.

Interesting that morals creep into it when the tables are turned though..

[Speaker to Animals]

Nor do I advocate we should value people in this way. I was talking about the motivating factors of female identity politics. I think the old rule was wrong too. But it truly is interesting to me that people morally recoil only when females are at the receiving end of it..

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

What I morally recoil from is the notion that there is a 'right' answer to who lives and who dies based on 'value to society.'

What I disagree with is the idea that all of our moral decisions are subconsciously driven by some Darwinian survival rubric.

[Speaker to Animals]

What I morally recoil from is the notion that there is a 'right' answer to who lives and who dies based on 'value to society.'

What I disagree with is the idea that all of our moral decisions are subconsciously driven by some Darwinian survival rubric.

Good thing you never had to command troops in any capacity, then.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

What I morally recoil from is the notion that there is a 'right' answer to who lives and who dies based on 'value to society.'

What I disagree with is the idea that all of our moral decisions are subconsciously driven by some Darwinian survival rubric.

Good thing you never had to command troops in any capacity, then.

I am comfortable making amoral decisions. If that is all it takes, I would be great at it. Somehow I imagine there is more to it than that though.