wedrifid comments on Rationality and Relationships September 2011 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (101)
Feels like you have forbidden knowledge. Not coincidentally, I want to know what it is.
What is it roughly? That innate differences across the sexes play a strong role in causing statistically different mating behaviors to develop? That these differences end up somewhat resembling "females want high-value sex and a devoted father while males want sex and sexually faithful partners"? That females are often attracted to high value behavior (e.g. PUA stuff)? That many people have some, possibly very vague, estimate of how sexually valuable they are, and act upon this belief? Is there any way you can quench my curiosity? It seems obvious that if you answer in general terms you won't offend anyone, as meta thought doesn't really push the emotional buttons.
PS: It has been suggested that general statements can cause worse beliefs in a group, since they're very simplified. But there should be some way of pointing to an area of the map without degrading that region of the map.
It goes something like "Do this... No, that is the opposite of what works, do this... No, you're manipulative and it's unethical to say that... No, saying that it is manipulative is crazy political indoctrination... People here are Pigs... No we're not... Yes you are, manipulative pigs... that's not what your mom said last night." (And somehwere in there is HughRistik writing a massive treatise. If you want to get all the best of such conversations just read through this)