[RD] Abortion, once again

[PPQ_Purple]

Reminds me of this meme I sent my gf the other day

Indeed. And it is just natural.

I mean, think about it. Imagine you are a woman waiting for your partner and his friends to clean out a cave by fighting a 6m tall cave bear with claws the size of your face and paws the size of your torso that can bite a man in half without effort. He swipes at one guy than another and they fall motionless to the ground.

Who are you going to be more attracted to? The "sociopath" that keeps pushing him away from you with his spear or the "well adjusted" emotional guy that falls to the ground weeping over his dead brethren.

Well who ever you picked the weeping guy is going to get eaten by the cave bear where as the other guy is going to be left to give you babies, with or without your enthusiastic consent. He has a spear after all and he just killed a bloody cave bear. So you don't have much of a choice.

 

[Senethro]

It's not sociopathy but self control. As in, the emotions are there and they are just as strong but they are not as in control as with many women. So while we do feel all the same things they do we can also just tell our emotions to shut up and let us get on with our life doing what needs to be done. And we do it on a subconscious instinctual level so that at the end of the day it looks like we don't feel a thing when in reality we just know how to clench our teeth and get on with things. Especially if the end result is in our benefit.

This is something that is just biologically built into us as we men are intended by biology to be expendable seed carriers that take on all the dirty and dangerous jobs in society such as hunting mammoths or war. And in dangerous high intensity situations being controlled by emotions too much is what gets you and those around you killed.

The same pressures also create a natural culture where men are discouraged from showing emotions lest they appear weak and unreliable to those around them which in turn reinforces the behavior in a closed loop.

Now, admittedly all that is now mostly obsolete in the western world. But it's not like we can go back and undo tens of millennia of evolution by half a century of peace. Even if the bygenerational Franco-German deathmatch is a couple decades late.

lol, actual sighting in the wild

 

[PPQ_Purple]

lol, actual sighting in the wild

Thankfully we have as a society escaped that. Well, mostly. And only in parts of the world that are very rich.

Frankly I wish it weren't so but I also am not one of those that thinks you should not try and understand reality just because you do not like the conclusions this leads to.

 

[Senethro]

Thankfully we have as a society escaped that. Well, mostly. And only in parts of the world that are very rich.

Frankly I wish it weren't so but I also am not one of those that thinks you should not try and understand reality just because you do not like the conclusions this leads to.

Stay in your lane, software engineer. These subjects are clearly beyond you yet.

 

[Gorbles]

Daddy issues?

Men care about their kids as much as their moms.

Lot of societal crap about how men aren't as loving/attentive but I think that's primarily cultural.

If you're speaking about yourself then please don't have kids.

The plural of anecdote is not data.

Also remember how often you tell people to not argue with made-up versions of people? You are - once again - doing exactly that.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Moderator Action: You guys are going asray from from the topic.

 

[Sommerswerd]

If men don't want any of the pregnancy-related risks to fall on them (financial, emotional, legal), there are a few things they can do:
1. Don't get into the situation in the first place. Nobody ever got a woman pregnant by abstention.
2. Birth control. There are multiple methods available. Pick one and use it responsibly.
3. There's a medical procedure that men can avail themselves of without too much fuss from the doctor or condescending lines like "I'm not going to do this operation because you might change your mind later."

Often underlying pro-life advocacy, is the desire to control womens' sexual activity.

So while I get what you're saying, I'll also note that the admonition, "if you don't want a pregnancy then don't have sex/use birth control/get hysterectomy" is commonly used by pro-life folks against/towards women... particularly the "don't have sex" part.

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

Often underlying pro-life advocacy, is the desire to control womens' sexual activity.

So while I get what you're saying, I'll also note that the admonition, "if you don't want a pregnancy then don't have sex/use birth control/get hysterectomy" is commonly used by pro-life folks against/towards women... particularly the "don't have sex" part.

I get that people don't like being lectured to; I'm just confused as to why advocating self control is nonetheless trying to control.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I get that people don't like being lectured to; I'm just confused as to why advocating self control is nonetheless trying to control.

It certanly doesn't have to be. We do find though that many of those advocating "self control" do it in the context of sin and damnation. At that point it slides easily into control.

 

[Cutlass]

I get that people don't like being lectured to; I'm just confused as to why advocating self control is nonetheless trying to control.

Because it isn't nearly that simple. Including, but not limited to, the fact that sex is not always voluntary.

 

[JollyRoger]

I get that people don't like being lectured to; I'm just confused as to why advocating self control is nonetheless trying to control.

So shall we jail people who have a high BMI because of a lack of self control?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Often underlying pro-life advocacy, is the desire to control womens' sexual activity.

So while I get what you're saying, I'll also note that the admonition, "if you don't want a pregnancy then don't have sex/use birth control/get hysterectomy" is commonly used by pro-life folks against/towards women... particularly the "don't have sex" part.

Nobody on this forum who has known me for more than a few months on this forum (give or take a bit) could possibly be confused about my stance on things like pro-life vs anti-choice.

Keep in mind to whom my reply was directed. I'm reasonably sure this person is male. If I'm mistaken and they want to correct me on that, they're welcome to reply to me directly, either in the thread or via PM.

It certanly doesn't have to be. We do find though that many of those advocating "self control" do it in the context of sin and damnation. At that point it slides easily into control.

When I advocate abstention, it's not in the context of "sin and damnation". It's in the context of common sense.

 

[Narz]

So shall we jail people who have a high BMI because of a lack of self control?

Can stop subsidizing junk food and instead subsidize fruit and veg. Disallow food advertisment.

 

[Farm Boy]

Men care about their kids as much as their moms.

Lot of societal crap about how men aren't as loving/attentive but I think that's primarily cultural.

If you're speaking about yourself then please don't have kids.

That's been covered with tests of emotional responses(heart rate, stress), not social responses, which are trained to be deadened in men, to the sound of children crying.

Men are consistently more emotional, women consistently more neurotic. So it makes sense that they'd actually just judge disgust straight onto emotion that isn't useful to them.

Anyone who confuses the first year of parenting with the lifetime that comes after and doesn't think men are at least half the equation in the next generation is the sort of person you want veeeery far from kids.

 

[Narz]

That's been covered with tests of emotional responses(heart rate, stress), not social responses, which are trained to be deadened in men, to the sound of children crying.

Which tests? The sound of children crying definitely triggers a major reaction in me. Could be due to my own neglect I try to hyperreact to my own kids & loathe for them to think I find them a burden (I do of course).

Men are consistently more emotional, women consistently more neurotic. So it makes sense that they'd actually just judge disgust straight onto emotion that isn't useful to them.

Can you unpack this?

Anyone who confuses the first year of parenting with the lifetime that comes after and doesn't think men are at least half the equation in the next generation is the sort of person you want veeeery far from kids.

Agreed, lack of respect for and hence low quantity of father figures in kids lives today is a major part of why society is so screwed right now. They is so much throwaway disrespect towards males these days (see this thread for instance) and then people wonder why people gravitate towards Trump, he's the shadow side of the repressed masculine.

 

[Farm Boy]

I'm getting more mixed jumbles of crap now that I'm revisiting it, but the long and short was that men react quite strongly in the absolute sense to children in distress, it's one of the strongest emotional responses they have.

I'm also probably not going to start looking stuff up again, but if I remember right men tend to score higher as creatures of volatile emotion, whereas women trend towards more neurotic behaviors. If one has to compare them in a meaningful sense. There's obviously going to be a lot of overlap in broad-ass trend lines. So, rational neuroticism would view a big blubbering galoot that's big enough to be dangerous but not competent enough to be useful, how?

I mean, if we're going to use this lens. It's not always a useful lens. But things get weird when the discussion starts weird, like with men not being assumed to be necessary and present parents.

 

[Senethro]

Its definitely a good idea to investigate this stuff by measuring things, and not just making poorly supported explanations that your favorite things are also evolutionary adaptations.

 

[lymond]

Moderator Action: Back to topic please. -lymond

 

[Farm Boy]

Its definitely a good idea to investigate this stuff by measuring things, and not just making poorly supported explanations that your favorite things are also evolutionary adaptations.

Right. So go look. Or don't!

 

[EgonSpengler]

Three female GOP state senators who filibustered S.C. abortion ban lost their primaries

They were defeated by three male Republican candidates.

www.nbcnews.com

I know I've mentioned before that the women of the state senate of South Carolina were 100% against the further tightening of that state's abortion laws, after the Dobbs decision of 2022. Even the Republican women, whose party controls that state's government, were against further restrictions (they didn't want to loosen the laws, which were already conservative, they just wanted to leave them as they were). But because there were so few women elected to that chamber, their voices were overruled by the men who feel okay telling women what sort of medical care they're entitled to.

Well, the good people of South Carolina - the Republicans, anyway - have told those women (all women, really) and me, to kindly stfu. Okay, then. Godspeed to the women of S. Carolina. I still like your accents and your barbecue.

To be clear, this was the Republican Primary and not the final election to the state Senate. But, as I learned on a recent podcast, a full 30 states in our little republic are fully-controlled by one of the two major parties, and thus the primaries are the real, meaningful elections in those states. I don't know for sure that S. Carolina is one of those "locked-in" states where one party controls the State House and both chambers of the legislature, and being a member of the minority party grants you less power than the quarterback of the state's university football team, but I'm going to guess that it might be. (And I think some of those 30 states even have a "supermajority" in their legislatures - 2/3rds. I think that number was 9, but don't quote me.)