Is womenz independence really a thing now? Or are we just an "allele" of olden times?

"Allele" = root of word "parallel", generally signifying equal to, but with minor modification.

In genetics an "allele" = gene variant, i.e. replica of a gene at a specific location on the chromosome (genetic locus) but with minor modification.

In olden times, women were seen as child bearers, looking after household matters and tending to the sexual necessities of her man.

Men = breadwinners, workers, assertive component of the relationship that would step up and take charge of "shit got real" etc.

....

Point being, in spite of feminism, female empowerment rights parades etc,. the question we need to ask is - how different is the situation today, like - really?

Women stil by far and away focus on sexuality in terms of the simple practicality of attaining a male partner (i.e. they become hot, men are attracted to them).

Which would clearly indicate that men still highly prioritize sexual gratification in terms of partner selection.

Could argue that's in our biology - never going to change......... or is it?

I've seen these contemporary terms: metrosexual, effeminate men, and perhaps my personal favorite..... "simp" (the specific etymology for which I could not locate, but generally infer as being an amalgam of "sissy" and "pimp").

Which would seem to indicate a fairly dramatic change in conventional male role as being "masculine" and impositional, not to be trifled with etc. (newstalks Ciara Kelly actually did quite an interesting segment on this, but it was forever ago and I can't locate the clip).

It would leave you scratching your head thinking, "where does one end and the other begin....?"

....

A kettle of fish, let me tell you.

There was something else I wanted to convey - something to do with "slut shaming".

Happens far more frequently between women, than between men and women (i.e. women slut shaming each other).

Yeah, so - "woman in a mans world", gals gotta do what she's gotta do.

Normally if a gal is pretty enough (and I'm quoting a behavioral psychologist), she arranges a series of "suitors".

i.e. dudes she can readily wrap around her finger.

And then obviously selects what she feels is the prime-candidate, based on her needs and desires at that point in space and time.

.....

So yeah, relative to womenz independence obviously the modern day idea of that is that women now have equal opportunity (well, maybe not in Afghanistan currently but, regions not controlled by primitive minded drug cartels, per se);

Equal education opportunity, largely equal employment opportunity - maternity leave is still a contentious subject with some business owners but you get the general idea.

So - I suppose what I'm asking is, in reality - how far removed are we from the historical "woman must optimize her man-finding ability" partner selection paradigm?

Is it conceivable that one day we have a reverse "metrosexual" situation? Where women can work and provide for themselves entirely and in complete security, then spend the rest of their time drinking beer, watching soccer and having as much casual sex as possible (like many of their successful male counterparts....) - - ?

Could we transcend our naturally occurring biology such that one day that fantasy may come to fruition (?)

Leg End Reject

Jesus man, go out and get a leg over or something.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117782431#Comment_117782431

A "leg over", hmmm?

I think that's right up there in terms of historical Irish speak with, "I was shifting that lass in the corner of the disco-bar....".

Similar to "simp", there's no available etymological rational behind the expression, "shift".

....

"Leg over" is pretty self explanatory.

Women tend to be more a peoples person hence why we see less of them in trades and things such as engineering and I.T and more in professions such as accounting, Business, teaching, childcare, retail and healthcare.

Men are more materialistic and want to challenge themselves.

Its just gender.

growleaves

'"simp" (the specific etymology for which I could not locate, but generally infer as being an amalgam of "sissy" and "pimp").'

I always assumed it was shorthand for simpleton.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117782900#Comment_117782900

Perhaps originally.

But its contemporary application is very specific:

• a woman of a man.
• A man who is subservient to women
• A nancy boy
• An inverse pimp, i.e. pimps historically control women/prostitutes, but a simp is like a prostitutes lapdog.

As I understand, not unlike many contemporary esoteric expressions, popularized via african-american gangster rap culture.

E-40 is a particular proponent of the term "simp";

https://youtu.be/_7vQSPBtwyc

Mrs OBumble

Are we talking about "women" in the modern sense of the word, or the more traditional womb-humans?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117782879#Comment_117782879

Subscribe to Elon Musks newsletter, he probably explains it a little better:

https://youtu.be/0JQXoSmC1rs?t=60

In terms of what I was saying about contemporary society being an "allele" of historical incarnations (versions),

i.e. the same, with minor modifications and adjustments here and there;

Specifically what I was referencing in this thread was, there has been leeway given in terms of education and employment prospects, but at a fundamental basis of biology, men/women - not much has changed.

Under the surface, under the masquerade and all sorts of crap the masses present with on the surface layer, the fundamental impetus remains merely an "allele", an analogy of our pre-disposed state.

i.e. largely un-evolved.

....

Time stamped in that clip is the physics approach of making sense of a highly counter-intuitive concept.

Such as quantum mechanics, wave-particles duality, the reality of the universe around us being completely at odds with our immediate sensory perception.

Issac Newton, perhaps the greatest physicist of all time was forthright about his opinion of humans;

"I can calculate the motion of celestial bodies.... but I cannot understand the madness of people".

Bearing in mind of course that classical Newtonian mechanics is particle based, and particle based motion does not reflect the true reality of nature.

The true reality of nature is reflected in contemporary quantum mechanics

(quantum referring to "quanta" - packets of energy in which light travels, denominated as the minimum wave quantity necessary to form said packet or "quanta"; thus quantum-mechanics refers merely to the wave-based behavior of the universe and everything in it - which is counter intuitive because looking around us this isn't readily apparent......... all is not as it seems).

The point being, to make sense of something which is "not as it seems" - i.e. something highly counter intuitive, as Elon describes the infallible (but still highly challenging) means to do this, is the "first principles" approach.

As he also describes, classically humans have evolved in terms of analogy; we essentially copy the preceding generation, making some minor modifications here and there.

This is the form our "evolution" has taken.

And it shows - feminism, womenz rights, identity, cultural and societal evolution.

What feminism theoretically contends is not "evolutionary".... no.

It's "revolutionary".

This will never be attained via reason-by-analogy.

To truly understand a concept as counter intuitive as "the madness of humans", this requires "reason by first principles" - boiling the situation down to its most fundamental truths, and rationalizing the functional model upwards from there.

This way, we're redefining the entire gene code, the entire germ line.

Not simply copying the former with small augmentation as per an "allele".

....

I think that's the way forward, make all this ugliness a thing of the past.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117783112#Comment_117783112

The point I was making was that really, it could be either;

There's not much difference between the two.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117782869#Comment_117782869

Interesting point.

What you're saying is (whether you're aware this is what you're saying or not), women are more approachable, amenable etc., and dudes are more product/achievement focused and more difficult to interact with on a personable level.

"It's just gender" - I assume you mean to say, it's just the predisposed biological nature of the gender in question.

THAT, is maybe the primary point of consideration.

Of course put this in perspective of these new male cultural trends - effeminacy, nancy dudes, "simps" etc., arguably a shift toward increasing approachability - it's like a redefinition of the entire historical male identity.

You could question whether this is a function of conventional "masculinity" having been brow beaten by modern feminism into submission.

Or (looking at historical gender differences in violence statistics puts this in good perspective), a move toward becoming more civilized as a species?

growleaves

'Or (looking at historical gender differences in violence statistics puts this in good perspective), a move toward becoming more civilized as a species?'

Being over-civilized is a bad thing. I remember reading an anthropologist who said that ancient Greek and later European half-civilized, half-free cultures were the historical exception. Most cultures were either barbaric or else very tightly controlled collectivist (the kind of conformism that is now called 'responsible' or 'unselfish' in its modern form).

If you're a man have some balls, don't be an over-friendly fool taking your thoughts from the cultural mush of the media and office life.

85603

Today I learned about the word 'allele'.

And I hate it.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117784336#Comment_117784336

Remember that flick "Pitch Black".

It had a follow up.... and then another called "Riddick".

The protagonist made the observation during a moment of self reflection after essentially getting extorted, ".... perhaps I made the worst mistake of all.... I became civilized....".

Of course this is just macho crap, but surprisingly common, as per your post also.

"I don't take shit from nobody bruh".

Essentially it's a desperate cry declaring, "how do I think functionally in the modern world full of contradictions, masquerades and hypocrisy" - i.e. we're drowning in the counter-intuitive.

And we come up with these trivial rationalizations such as

-> If you're a man have some balls, don't be an over-friendly fool taking your thoughts from the cultural mush of the media and office life.

..... that may serve a purpose in some small collective, be functionless in another, and a distinct drawback in another.

As to "being overly civilized", I guess the definition is simply not well understood so it's always prone to these ambiguous claims.

I mean take a walk along O'Connell St or Talbot/Parnell area in Dublin.

Their philosophy is "be street wise, work the hustle" etc.

Take a stroll around some shops on Grafton St., the male subculture there is they're essentially aspiring to be simps, as they prioritize relatability, the male demographic want to be as relatable and approachable as the chicks.

Stroll into a department store - there's dudes selling make up.

Yes.

Really - dudes selling make up.

Some Blackrock college ex-rugby meathead is selling makeup in Brown Thomas, lol.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117786011#Comment_117786011

I googled it and all I’m seeing is how it relates to genomes. Has some American professor from the social sciences hijacked it for wokery?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117786100#Comment_117786100

The protagonist made the observation during a moment of self reflection after essentially getting extorted, ".... perhaps I made the worst mistake of all.... I became civilized....".

Becoming civilized made him lose the instincts that made him dangerous enough to seize the throne in the first place. A reality where to keep what you kill. And yet, you're taking a fantasy/sci-fi world reality... and trying to apply conditions of gender to them as if it's anything to do with "being macho" (except from the perspective of the Action Hero of Hollywood, which traditionally was aimed at male audiences). It was about being deadly. And a religion based around death and living in the next life.

You keep introducing examples and concepts from other sources, and then, misusing them in attempts to push your points.. but they just make your position look weaker.

^^ Not really. That whole "I'm a billy bad ass" thing is rife in society at large.

Being civilized is considered "weak" by many.

Being feral, I don't know.... at one with mother earth?

Supposedly considered stronger.

It's the reason youth culture rebel against the machine of civilization; paying attention at school is not suave and in some subcultures is actively condemned.

Traveler culture = prime example, as contentious as using that example is.

.....

I get the point; you don't want to be a doormat cause everyone will basically go to town on you if you are.

But advancement will not be had by way of going backwards - it will be pushing the concept of "civilized" to a point that incorporates adequate management of more inflammatory issues with greater efficacy (as is currently NOT the case).

Not really a fan of posting links but I must mention the research endeavors of neuroscientist Heather Berlin which focus on "impulse control", cognitive development specifically as a means to understand our base human impulses, and make them work for us, vs against us.

https://www.podbean.com/media/share/pb-a5huv-1036b3a?utm_campaign=w_share_ep&utm_medium=dlink&utm_source=w_share

• 1:14 to 6:59  - Self-regulation and impulsivity

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117787412#Comment_117787412

"Wokery".

These gangster-rap/hip-hop slang terms having actually entered legitimate terminology is concerning on so many levels.

Just final thought:

In terms of being "civilized".

I brushed shoulders naturally with many who consider themselves the "cutting edge" in that capacity.

Real nice guys, sweet dudes etc.

A lot of them assholes are pretty perverted and lead double lives.

Point I'm making is, as does Heather Berlin, base cognitive function relative to emotion is the underlying principle of advancing civilization.

Ah OP, not sure welcome back is the right word. At least you've become somewhat more nuanced.

Still hating on those pesky Alpha males and those genetically retarded females in their thrall?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117787916#Comment_117787916

"Nuanced" hmmm?

lol

That's beautiful champ.

Have you been brushing up on your vocabulary?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117788030#Comment_117788030

Nuanced is a perfectly cromulent word given the context. 🤪

Now answer my question.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117788041#Comment_117788041

"Cromulent" hmmm?

lol

That's beautiful champ.

Have you been......

.....

🤪 🤪 🤪

Though I looked it up and at least it hasn't been adopted from african-american gangster-rap culture.

So you're still pretty low down on the ladder of boards.ie rhetoric, but that puts you at least one to two rungs above those other paste eaters.

Timberrrrrrrr

WOMENZ? Really?

God I hate boards when the schools are off 🙄

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117788077#Comment_117788077

You need to brush up on your conversational skills seeing as that high forehead of yours isn't getting any attention from anyone outside your league... 3.5 billion give or take, now or when they become adults.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117788086#Comment_117788086

He's a pseudo intellectual trying to get his brain around why he's not considered attractive to females HE finds attractive. Result... hilarious. I don't think he's gone full INCEL just yet, so there's still some hope for him. GUE would be my suggestion for him.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117787779#Comment_117787779

Being <insert state or opinion> is consider weak by many. Just because "many" (as vague a term as any) consider something to be true, doesn't mean that it is, or even is, in the majority of cases. Being civilised is a matter of perspective and is usually extremely biased based on where the person making that judgment comes from. I learned that when I traveled outside of western nations... nation who often had their own different perceptions of what civilisation entailed, and the effects on people.

The machine of civilisation (very dramatic) has nothing to youth culture. Youth culture tends to rebel against the conformity that comes with society, since society tends to seek to place people within roles and categories, which takes all the fun out of individuality. It's worth considering how quickly young people conform when they have to pay their own bills and seek to find success within the system they so dislike... ultimately contributing to the boundaries that the next generation faces.

You're also jumping all over the place, and not doing a good job of it. Perhaps stick to a particular issue and deal with it properly before moving on to others?

"I get the point; you don't want to be a doormat cause everyone will basically go to town on you if you are."

You get the point because you made the point but assigned it to me. That's a remarkably dishonest manner of posting...

RulesOfNature

I know people who write shite like this and they're all unemployed.

It's happened more than once that, I've bumped into dudes from those eastern european block of countries and they've said to me, "I love being in Ireland; know why? Cause I've never actually had sex with a woman from my own country.... except for prostitute".

Just to get confirmation of the principle I suspect was at work underneath this situation, I once put it to this big Polish dude I somehow got to bumping chops with in a nightclub;

I was like, "bruh, as I understand it, the culture of toxic masculinity in your country is so appalling and aversive to your female counter-parts, that most dudes end up losing their virginity to prostitutes; am I right..... ??".

And he was like,

Normally if a gal is pretty enough (and I'm quoting a behavioral psychologist), she arranges a series of "suitors".

i.e. dudes she can readily wrap around her finger.

dude. Let it go. The receptionist didn’t like you because you creeped her out.

In other words, effeminization of men, on some level, is there something to be said for it?

Well - there clearly is.

Ted Kaczynski (una-bomber), oddly enough his manifesto was in relation to regression of civilization he felt technology was causing (of course the opposite is true - technology is the exclusive component driving civilization forward);

But he felt men and women had a pre-disposed rift which he contended could only be addressed by men becoming more woman like.

He actually became a cross-dresser as he felt relating to women was otherwise a biologically impossible task.

....

One point supporting this is as previous, statistics on violence.

I know some bitches that talk shit and instigate, but the reality is violence is 90%+ male initiated.

Ten of Swords

Op, I hope you got whatever catharsis and fulfillment you needed from this latest stream of consciousness nonsense thread because it's the last one

Start another nonsense thread like this and you're on a LONG holiday.