Thursday, May 28, 2015

hbd cats shame Bro.Feed the devil and swing for the fences..,

westhunt |  Humans exhibit a diversity of strategy “choices” that are solutions to the allocation problem between mating and parenting. Males can devote most of their effort to mating effort, usually involving competition with other males. Male commitment to parenting effort is not common in mammals but there are familiar examples like beavers, coyotes, gibbons, and some humans. In the jargon the polar strategies of male mammals are called “cad” and “dad” strategies.

Females have a more restricted set of strategy choices because of their engineered commitment to parenting. At one extreme a human female can seek a dadly male who provides resources like food and protection to their joint offspring. At the other extreme, a human female can pay little or no attention to her mate choice, instead letting the guys work things out. In the jargon these female alternatives are called “coy” and “fast”.

You can find a more detailed account of this game between the human sexes works in a chapter of our book (that the editor discarded as “too academic”) on our website here. Briefly we are likely to find dad males/coy females in ecological situations where male labor and resources are critical for successful reproduction. Think of labor-intensive agriculture, European peasants and Asian farmers, as examples. In the United States in the past, “working class” meant stable mated pairs who together provisioned and cared for children. An archetype of working class in American television was Archie Bunker.

Social organization with cad males and fast females is found prominently among tropical gardeners where women provide most of the food for themselves and their children as well as for the men, who are often just parasites on the women. The euphemism in economics for these societies is “female farming systems”. These share many characteristics with our industrial “underclass” in which women have no ecological force pushing them into long term stable pair bonds.

Notice that in each of the above descriptions there are two hands clapping: in cad/fast social systems neither a coy female nor a dad male does very well while in dad/coy systems neither a fast females nor a cad male does very well. The two polar social types are deeply rooted in contemporary politics. The zany feminism of the 1980s (“a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”) precisely advocated the cad/fast setup. Our religious right with its chatter about “the natural family” and “stable marriages” and the like pushes hard for a dad/coy world.

Back to our social engineers who know biology. They share a goal of a society in which dad males mate with coy females because children enjoy the care and security of a stable home and streets safe from gunfire. The new policy is simple: welfare payments are to be given only to males.
This policy would mimic, they think, the ecology of most dad/coy societies. How would this work out? In a new post we can imagine how the new policy can be modified when the engineers are given a sense of human decency and responsibility for human well being.


John Kurman said...

In the rasp, there are three types of males. The big nest building male (the so-called 'strong male'). The satellite male, that advertises for the nest building male. And the sneaker male that disguises itself as a female. The fact that the latter two males propagate their genes suggests parasitism is a worthwhile pursuit. But Nature generally makes sure that the male is as heavily invested as the female, so we don't quite know what the cost is to these other males. Perhaps increased risk of predation. Regardless, the Almighty must love parasites, He created so many niches for them. The deepest known range of hyperparasitism is seven levels. (Cads upon cads upon...).

CNu said...

One wonders at the incidence of ecological overshoot in these manifold instances of natural multi-level parasitism? If they're not trending toward a Margulis-ian symbiontic improvement, one suspects they're in for a summary blind-alley.

That said, what tickles me is how an HBD villain-extraordinaire has vaulted to the front of the policy prescription pack with a novel policy proposal. In his wake, he leaves both camps of political partisans standing around endlessly and uselessly jawjacking in hopes of keeping that next parasitic paycheck coming. I have been thinking a lot about public policy, welfare, support of the indigent, and the growth of the underclass in industrial societies, mostly to prepare for this meeting. Public discussion and journalism routinely identify people as “right wing” or “left wing”. My reaction is that most public commentary—on both the right and the left—is hardly worth our attention.

Some trends that I find particularly distressing are outlined by Charles Murray and Robert Putnam in a youtube video which we discussed in a previous post. Both Murray and Putnam describe growing numbers of the underclass in this country with their failure of community and family organization. Single mothers are normative. Both speakers focus on white people: Murray explicitly restricts his recent book to ‘White America’ while Putnam’s new book is ethnographic in style about his own home town, again mostly white. Is there a way out of the trends they describe through social engineering?

Neither Murray nor Putnam have much in the way of policy suggestions. Murray identifies increasing isolation between the prosperous and the
impoverished and the failure of the prosperous to advocate their own moral and social values to the to the poor. Putnam advocates a Soviet
style system of public education in which teachers assume the duties and roles of parents, starting with early childhood educationBetween Harpending and the HBDChick, before too terribly long I'm going to be convinced that the HBD camp is comprised of folks too intelligent to get caught on the wrong side of the Kahneman equation.

Constructive_Feedback said...

Had to do a "Page Refresh" to make sure that I am on the "Subrealism" blog and not a victim of a "Man In The Middle Attack"

These were strike outs per the chalk and dust that were kicked up by the catcher's mitt.

1) THE VIDEO: A LICENSE TO HAVE KIDS. He could ONLY be talking about a government regulation of SEX because "Having A Kid" is a result of exchanging the body fluids of procreation. The more common way of achieving what he is speaking of is the CULTURE and RITES OF PASSAGE after the kid exits the womb and is brought into a certain end state of purpose and conscious awareness

2) Females have a more restricted set of strategy choices because of their engineered commitment to parenting.

READ CAREFULLY the sentence above and then tell me where you, DeGrass Tyson and Hawkings should have a problem.



Or is an ENGINEER a manifestation of THEIR PARTY INTELLIGENT that infers the EXPERIENCES that this sentient being will need to cope with as a means of advancing its own GENETIC PHENOTYPE.

Now "I'ma Give You The Mic Back So You Can Reconcile These Points, Brother CNu".
Your friend Dale can assist if he chooses.

CNu said...

Harpending's proposal is to channel welfare benefits exclusively to males with minimal game who can be depended upon to invest significant biological resources into offspring that they value highly. It's an interesting proposal.

The bro-man in the video was a bit of fantasy overreach on my part. I believe that the state should require licensure as a precondition to legal parenting. Would save a lot of innocent children from incompetence, impoverishment, and an underinvested hell on earth.

Not going to indulge your bizarre intelligent design struggle motions.

Constructive_Feedback said...

So you agree with giving money to the "Father"?

When it comes to 3rd world interventions regarding "Micro-loans", "Birth Control" and "Education for Women" - they run a contrariwise theory, saying that THE WOMAN in control of her body and children, freed from the clutches of "Patriarchy" - is the most effective way forward for women and children.

And you say?..............................

CNu said...

I say it's an intersting thought worthy of further consideration. The Roman Catholic chirch is a highly successful 2000 year old collective security club organized to serve the reproductive interests of males with no game. (non-cads)

Constructive_Feedback said...

Wow Bro.
You assume that you know my heart and my intentions with the "People Of Color" who reside outside of the United States.

You are unable to factor in the information that I am married to an immigrant and that she exposes me to a large mix of other people and culture. That when we travel internationally we stay at these people's houses rather than hotels.

It seems that you are OFFENDED that I am bringing reporting from "Africa Live" to do an end run around "The Grio", "Alternet", "Fox News" and "Think Progress"

CNu said...

Honestly Feed, it never occurred to me that you have skin in the game, I'll still be an unapologetically harsh, tribal, and imperialist asshole, but I'll understand that your sympathies are on the level.

Musical chairs on the deck of the Titanic is a vicious, zero-sum beast...,

CNu said...

lol, you so clevah in an IQ-80 typa-sorta way BD!!! Time for Mayor Rawlings-Blake to start liquidating non-performing, suburban colonial occupation overseers and reconstituting the overseer force with unemployed, vigorous young male residents of the neighborhoods in question. This is something that should have happened a loooooong time ago. Same goes for de Blasio in NYC. Dump all those Staten Island potatoheads and replace them with grimy cats from Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan and the Bronx.

CNu said...


lol, thank you for demonstrating that our sigma-gap matters a lot. The present article I posted and under which you imagine yourself making a point was offered in conjunction with another. Permit me to assist you through/past/across the gap and your consequent struggle motions

Click back to Taibbi's rollingstone article. Pay attention. Get it? I'll not be holding my breath....,

BigDonOne said...

To control these urban savages the cops must get respect -- they do that by seriously kicking ass. No other way.

And it was obvious yhr ass-kicking approach was quite effective because now that the cops have backed off, the 'hood is more violent and less safe than ever...that condition is now MSM news. Taibbi's article was anecdotal exaggerated sour grapes from StreetScumLooozerz that got caught....the sort of folks now committing twice as many shootings and murders with un-policed impunity. Shootings of children are up a reported 500%.....

CNu said...

To control these urban savages the cops must get respect -- they do that by seriously kicking ass. No other way.

lol, that "kicking ass" strategy hasn't worked even one time to promote foreign or domestic tranquility over the course of the past century over which it's been attempted - going all the way back to prohibition. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is the definition of _______________?

BigDonOne said...

Perhaps Subrealism would prefer Shariah Law...?? That works, few repeat offenders. You won't find that story in Rolling Stone.

Photo below shows a jewelry store streetfront in Dubai, they don't even have video surveillance. How long do you think that merchant would last in Baltimore, or Kansas City? A half-life (average time before first smash-and-grab) of maybe one hour....

BD can already hear the screaming howls of demonstrating protesters, "Black HANDS matter..."