Ethereum confounder ⬨ - "The single highest-signal, highest-leverage intellect actively posting on X." - grok @texturepunx
Earth
Joined May 2008
- Tweets74.2K
- Following2.3K
- Followers23.1K
- Likes203K
There are lots of fake words that are invoked because they give leverage but don't actually refer to anything that exists.
"rights", "racism", "deserve".
"Mental load" is an interesting example of a slanted idea, designed by absurdly silly activists. making it into normal discourse. The first person I ever saw use ~this term was the hyper-radical feminist Gloria Anzaldua, IIRC in "The Bridge is MY BACK."
So, at the 1st level, almost all radical "theory" and ""social science"" consists of a univariate analysis of the burdens faced by one groups, without any controls for confounders or covariates and no analysis of how other groups feel.
Thus, "mental load" leaves out:
*Any burdens associated with the actual...WORK that men do 1.95x as much of, and on average make 67% of family money from
*The stress of physical protection (my last two homes were Appalachia and the South Side of Chicago)
*The stress of training, physically, with arms, etc for that^ and for your lover
*The stress of initiating virtually all sex and romantic dating
*If you fail, the stress of prolonged sexual and romantic denial
*The stress of managing, living with, and often leading a faaaaaar more neurotic person
Etc, etc. I could easily drop ten more. Many of the things that ARE listed ("No family member...even noticing...my stress...") seem like satire to a big guy. No one ever notices! Rub some mud on it, Princess :). My point here isn't really that men should act more like whiny punks - it is that no one should.
PART TWO:
But, there is a key hack for the boys, in LIZ's post. Actually doing chores doesn't boost sex at all - you're often seen as helpful, but weak. But, pretending to sympathize with a bunch of fake shit does. "You go so hard...you're so brave...I can't even imagine the stress and strain...that bitch at work crazy..."
Cool. Just do that. I feel like we knew this.
All modern misogyny is the simply the pain of discovering the delta between what we were taught women are and what they are in actuality.
Women think men seem radical because their positions are so far from men. They don't realize they're the ones who have gone insane.
Like a hysterical drunk girl having a meltdown at a bar confident that everyone else is the problem.
Women are the ones being radicalized, not men. Any moral panic about the boogeyman of the "manosphere" is simply a convenient distraction from the much worse and larger "femisphere". The TRUE crisis and calamity is women's far more prevalent, widespread, and severe anti-male sentiment. Women are the sexists, and men are the true targets and ultimately victims of sexism.
Texture retweeted
The #FemaleRationalisationHamster explained.
The name for the tireless little engine in a woman’s mind that retroactively justifies whatever she already FELT like doing. This explains almost everything about female psychology in as simple a format as possible:
Texture retweeted
>"it is bullshit that men are allowed to do X but not women"
>"you're right, lets give women the ability to do X"
>women suck at X and ruin their lives
TFW you realize patriarchy existed to protect women from themselves
This is a form of secular tyranny.
🚨ALERT: The editors of the journal Men and Masculinities will no longer allow authors to refer to individuals as being "male."
If an author uses the term, they should "specify which dimension(s) of sex are at issue, since sex itself refers to several only loosely correlated dimensions rather than a single underlying fact."
For example, trans-identifying male swimmer Lia Thomas must be referred to as a woman, and his maleness, if mentioned at all, must be attached to specific traits, like genitals, hormones, and chromosomes.
You cannot call Lia Thomas a "male" in this journal, but a woman with "male genitals" and "male sex chromosomes."
The first author of this editorial—the Managing Editor of Men and Masculinities, Tristen Kade—is a woman who identifies as a man.
The model of biological sex this editorial is pushing is what I refer to in my scholarly article "Why There Are Exactly Two Sexes" as the "multi-level" sex model. This model is not merely wrong—it is self-refuting.
From my article:
"Traits are labeled 'male-typical' or 'female-typical' only because they correlate with organisms already identified as male or female—an identification that, in anisogamous species, is made ultimately by reference to gametes."
Read my article at the link below.
🔗link.springer.com/article/10…
Texture retweeted
My uncle did a mission trip to Africa to teach a village how to raise pigs for food.
They flew in with a bunch of pigs, built pens for them, Food and water troughs, and taught them how to breed them so they could always have meat. Two weeks of work and teaching.
They went back a year later to check on the village. They had thrown a giant party the night after my uncle left, slaughtered and ate all the pigs, sold the feeders and fencing, and were really pissed off that the mission didn't bring them more pigs.
Texture retweeted
This is the academic journal for men, devoted specifically to the study of masculine manhood, btw.
🚨ALERT: The editors of the journal Men and Masculinities will no longer allow authors to refer to individuals as being "male."
If an author uses the term, they should "specify which dimension(s) of sex are at issue, since sex itself refers to several only loosely correlated dimensions rather than a single underlying fact."
For example, trans-identifying male swimmer Lia Thomas must be referred to as a woman, and his maleness, if mentioned at all, must be attached to specific traits, like genitals, hormones, and chromosomes.
You cannot call Lia Thomas a "male" in this journal, but a woman with "male genitals" and "male sex chromosomes."
The first author of this editorial—the Managing Editor of Men and Masculinities, Tristen Kade—is a woman who identifies as a man.
The model of biological sex this editorial is pushing is what I refer to in my scholarly article "Why There Are Exactly Two Sexes" as the "multi-level" sex model. This model is not merely wrong—it is self-refuting.
From my article:
"Traits are labeled 'male-typical' or 'female-typical' only because they correlate with organisms already identified as male or female—an identification that, in anisogamous species, is made ultimately by reference to gametes."
Read my article at the link below.
🔗link.springer.com/article/10…
This whole thing is gay and retarded but can we tell people who say things like this to shut the fuck up because they know nothing about power and this is bullshit and it's tired and fuck off already.
