Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,725|4959|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

right and fancy costumes, too, so let's talk some more about how girls 'naturally' love playing dress-up and make-up because it's their 'instinct' to make a  home in an oddly specific way like a 1950s housewife. plz, tell me some more.

OmG bower birds, the MALE creates the fancy nest and looks all NICE for the female. you can't argue with the science! it's evolUTIONARY baby!


you just need to go outside and observe nature, idiot, really it's obvious.
Didn't you just tell me not to invoke lobsters?
#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+388|2305
er, your entire cod-science thesis hinges on badly applied 'evolutionary' principles.

so why would you insult a people for being 'backwards' and 'closed in a bubble'? shouldn't they be our, er, historical antecedents?

as usual, your simplistic generalisations make little sense, are easily contradicted, and confirm only your weird little dilbert prejudices.
uziq
Member
+388|2305

Dilbert_X wrote:

uziq wrote:

right and fancy costumes, too, so let's talk some more about how girls 'naturally' love playing dress-up and make-up because it's their 'instinct' to make a  home in an oddly specific way like a 1950s housewife. plz, tell me some more.

OmG bower birds, the MALE creates the fancy nest and looks all NICE for the female. you can't argue with the science! it's evolUTIONARY baby!


you just need to go outside and observe nature, idiot, really it's obvious.
Didn't you just tell me not to invoke lobsters?
do i need to start adding /sarcasm tags? your whole evolutionary codswallop is victorian.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,725|4959|eXtreme to the maX
Yes, humans are descended from birds, it explains a lot, the desire to build a nest, shitting on car windscreens etc.

Maybe we have some angler fish genes in us still, perhaps its why people enjoy sitting in darkened cinemas holding their phone in front of them.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/96/d0/80/96d080cf03417bc28f7b2a52f3e685be.jpg
#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+388|2305
ok so.

boys and girls behave the way they do because of 'instinct', it's natural, it comes from our evolutionary origins, you see.

except when they don't in other cultures, who might in fact have completely polar opposite behaviour.

but then, pah, those cultures are backwards, you see. they haven't developed at all!

???
uziq
Member
+388|2305

Dilbert_X wrote:

Maybe we have some angler fish genes in us still, perhaps its why people enjoy sitting in darkened cinemas holding their phone in front of them.
you're mocking your own habitual type of thinking, here, not mine. i recommended a child psychologist and paediatricians' work, winnicott. good, reasoned, sound analysis and thought-provoking speculation. a classic study, in fact.

you appeal to vague things like 'look around you, watch people, it's Nature'. i never argue for anything so inane. you do this all the time when trying to explain hugely complex processes. dilbert knows best! he can explain entire civilizations, cultures, human behaviour!

Last edited by uziq (2021-01-21 13:56:52)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,725|4959|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

ok so.

boys and girls behave the way they do because of 'instinct', it's natural, it comes from our evolutionary origins, you see.

except when they don't in other cultures, who might in fact have completely polar opposite behaviour.

but then, pah, those cultures are backwards, you see. they haven't developed at all!

???
If those cultures are oddball offshoots and dead ends which have been stagnant for millennia since the main trunk carried on then they're irrelevant, like the angler fish.
#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+388|2305
ah, yes, right. so not only are they 'backwards', they're an 'oddball offshoot'. THAT's why their own 'instinctual' behaviour is different from ours. a separate evolutionary tree!

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,725|4959|eXtreme to the maX
Offshoot you moron, thats why they're still in africa daubing themselves with mud.

Even their fellow Africans think they're backward and isolated.

The Wodaabe speak the Fula language and don't use a written language.[4] In the Fula language, woɗa means "taboo", and Woɗaaɓe means "people of the taboo". This is sometimes translated as "those who respect taboos", a reference to the Wodaabe isolation from broader Fulbe culture, and their contention that they retain "older" traditions than their Fulbe neighbors.[5] In contrast, other Fulbe as well as other ethnic groups sometimes refer to the Wodaabe as "Mbororo", a sometimes pejorative name,[6] translated into English as "Cattle Fulani", and meaning "those who dwell in cattle camps'.
So great job putting forward a weird backward tribe as an example of typical human behaviour.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2021-01-21 14:12:02)

#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+388|2305
i never said 'typical' human behaviour? i said your appeals to 'instinct' were outmoded, pseudo-scientific bullshit.

do keep up.

presumably the fact that other human groups on the planet who have different gender roles and exhibit different behaviour as children, teenagers, young adults, with different rites of passage and so on, problematize your claims that weird 1950s gender stereotypes are 'instinct'.

poor thing, your head must overheat.
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+757|5537|United States of America

SuperJail Warden wrote:

The women thread is probably good for this observation: what is wrong with boys?

I can watch the kid's computer screen to see what they are doing. The boys mostly watch anime stuff while girls watch make up tutorials, 'how to talk to boys' and stuff. One girl spent the holiday season watching a youtube teen sit on the floor and wrap gifts while talking about girl stuff. Same youtuber is now remodeling her room.

I know anime and video games were the vectors through which a lot of young males got introduced to the alt-right. Why? Why were male youth hobbies easy to infiltrate by extremist while girl hobbies and interest stayed normal?
Not sure about anything related to anime besides how sometimes Nazi chic seems to be a common style, since I don't watch it. But the video games part makes sense, right? Depending on the games and mindset of the player, it could be escapism for some insecure dude with shit-tier prospects in real life? You meet people and become friends with the sort of other edgelords saying the n word on Xbox Live, and your perceptions of what is appropriate are shaped by those around you. It's easy to make fun of the caricatured outgroups you don't regularly interact with like Feminists™ or SJWs. It's an ouroboros of radicalization as criticism gets written off as normies who can't take jokes.

I don't think women have the same forums to radicalize because the tradwife ilk aren't spending their time proselytizing those views to the aether on makeup tutorials. They don't have a space where a susceptible audience is ripe for the picking.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,725|4959|eXtreme to the maX
In most video games you can play either side and it doesn't matter, shall I be US Army or MEC today? which one has better weapons and is more likely to win?, thats a dangerous idea to spill over into the real world.
#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+388|2305
women actually do have forums and weird little cultish things of their own.

sites like Mumsnet have gone some way to creating the karen stereotype, or at least a certain 'concerned parent' middle-class 4x4 school-run type.

In most video games you can play either side and it doesn't matter, shall I be US Army or MEC today? which one has better weapons and is more likely to win?, thats a dangerous idea to spill over into the real world.
lmao ffs you are beyond parody. next you'll be arguing that people preferring black in chess for their opening strats is undermining the white race.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,725|4959|eXtreme to the maX
I am familiar with Mumsnet, thank you.

Why are chess pieces black or white? Makesuthink
#FreeBritney
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+757|5537|United States of America
For sure, pregnancy and parenthood stuff is a whole 'nother minefield of weirdness. Hopefully Mac's pupils aren't dealing with that.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+445|2572

Dilbert_X wrote:

In most video games you can play either side and it doesn't matter, shall I be US Army or MEC today? which one has better weapons and is more likely to win?, thats a dangerous idea to spill over into the real world.
Someday I plan to buy a black AK pattern rifle in honor of the MEC's AK-101. What a gun.
uziq
Member
+388|2305

Dilbert_X wrote:

uziq wrote:

ok so.

boys and girls behave the way they do because of 'instinct', it's natural, it comes from our evolutionary origins, you see.

except when they don't in other cultures, who might in fact have completely polar opposite behaviour.

but then, pah, those cultures are backwards, you see. they haven't developed at all!

???
If those cultures are oddball offshoots and dead ends which have been stagnant for millennia since the main trunk carried on then they're irrelevant, like the angler fish.
also, just to return to this flagrant nonsense: even considering the 'main trunk' thesis, it's wrong.

men in the west all of 300 or 400 years ago wore make-up, high heels. they were dressed as girls when they were young, in dresses and smocks. this was a custom for male babies right up until the edwardian age and early 20th century. find any baby photo of a middle-class boy and he'll be in a dress or pinafore.

in elizabethan england or the france of louis XIV, men were heavily into cosmetics.

so if it's 'instinct' for girls to wear make-up and for boys to be outdoorsy tough types, what the hell?

instinct presumably operates at a lower, more fundamental level than 'culture'. did we lose our instinct? regain an instinct? raaaaah my head!

pseudo-science is your forte, really, in so many ways.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,725|4959|eXtreme to the maX
The 0.1% inbred elite classes of western europe for a for a blink of an eye are indicative of typical human behaviour and instinct.
Do you have a citation for this?

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2021-01-21 16:10:35)

#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+388|2305
https://cdn.babyology.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Franklin-Roosevelt-1884.jpg
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,725|4959|eXtreme to the maX
So you're taking outlier data and extrapolating to create the universe.

I found a four-leaf clover today, the natural state of clover must be to have four leaves, all these three leaf clovers are aberrations and can safely be ignored.
#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+388|2305
dilbert, boys were dressed as girls until the early-mid 20th century. it wasn't something for nobles bored at court.

it was a custom known as 'breeching'.

don't fucking talk to me about 'outlier data'. YOU DON'T READ.

https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/03/ … hing-boys/
uziq
Member
+388|2305
Not to get confused, the patriarch system was the norm in the Victorian era and gender roles were extremely polarized. However, young children were left out of the equation. According to most accounts, pictures, and photos, up until the age of seven, gender was apparently not something that parents paid much attention to. The clothes worn by boys and girls were nearly identical, indistinguishable from one another.
ah, yes, 'instincts' governing all behaviour, you see ... very scientific.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,725|4959|eXtreme to the maX
So you think how children were dressed by their parents affects their adult behaviour and means we're all really pansexual?

This progressive thinking certainly is weird.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2021-01-21 16:39:19)

#FreeBritney
uziq
Member
+388|2305
we were discussing children.

but you're getting to the point, yes. the way adults behave in their gender roles when grown-up are largely constructed by their society. they 'assume' gender roles as they grow into maturity and assume more and more responsibilities and social importance.

children, however, do not have anything like such polarized gender roles.

you were talking about children. girls like make-up and 'pretending' to run a home. boys like going outside and 'pretending' to be soldiers, apparently because of 'instinct'.

it's total bollocks. they do that because of the social environments in which they are raised. it's society preparing them for their socially ordained roles, not some essential, ahistorical, evolutionary 'instinct'. women do not have 'instincts' to wear make-up and dresses. it's ridiculous. maternity itself takes many social forms, beyond the elemental mother-child dyad. victorian mothers, for instance, deputed child-rearing to nannies. 'b-b-b-but it's instinct!'

'instinct' should imply a universal trait across our entire species. we all have the same hardware underneath the racial phenotype-level stuff. there is no 'african instinct' or 'french instinct'. the fact that diverse peoples from all over the world and throughout time have wildly different conceptions of gender and typical gender behaviour, should tell you all you need to know about your idea that '1950s housewife' is 'instinct'.

insofar as there are differences between boys and girls - and there patently are - there is an emotional-behavioural level that's probably to do with hormones, puberty, the cycle of biological maturity, etc. girls at some point do become broody and boys at some point do want to compete for the choiciest mate. but that doesn't explain why children play or behave the ways they do. children's play is extremely fluid and gender neutral. society shapes it in its own image.

Last edited by uziq (2021-01-21 16:58:27)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,881|5624|USA

Isn't cowboys and indians practically extinct at this point? I would think it was kept on life support by TVs and movies before going the way of the dodo.

Whatever evolutionary masculine and feminine tendencies there are should be kept separate from rapidly shifting cultural norms and imposed/encouraged behaviors.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2021 Jeff Minard