Something to keep in mind, only "general duties" muppets are this glowie when playing at being undercover.
Specialist unit members are more intelligent, less dogmatic, and you won't spot them even after they message uniformed to pick you up.
Something has gone very right when a hard-line Conservative publication like the National Interest is using Chomsky's "manufacturing consent" frame to criticise the Mainstream Media.
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/interventionism%E2%80%99s-moral-narrative-has-crumbled-208482
I immediately looked around for cover.
There's a slight depression in the ground two metres away, if that girl turns out to be in the same grid square as me!
"I treated a one-year-old boy with a bloody diaper, and his right arm and right leg had been blown off. There was no leg below the diaper. He was bleeding into his chest. I treated him on the ground."
- Dr. Seema Jilani, an American MD, describing the work she did in Gaza for Israel's victims.
Back in the dawn of time, I had a housemate who made a professional income in online sports betting. Complete autist and soccer nut.
He was so good he was banned everywhere (except BetFair for some reason).
He changed mobile numbers, bank accounts names, addresses and finally continents. Every time he opened an account, they'd detect him in a few days, politely call and compliment him on being a sharp operator, and ban him again, most times keeping the money in his account.
If the House doesn't win, they change the rules until they do. #fiatLife
I've had a few clients get paid to take oyster and scallop shells by the tonne, from seafood processors.
The costs are electricity for hammer milling, and bureaucracy. The bureaucracy is insanely expensive.
If you have the space to store it, find out who takes away the shells from seafood plants in your state, and see if you can pay them for a truck load delivered.
Long press that reaction button, it'll pop up a menu where you can paste in any Unicode emoji you like. I didn't find it for a week or more :-p
Pick an random human, and there's a 90% chance its also a tool that is not intelligent on its own.
"Villain Has A Point", there's a TvTropes page on it.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VillainHasAPoint
"Does anyone have trend data handy?"
Lol. I gotta go. I have a busy day. I'll check back in later. ππ nostr:npub1m4ny6hjqzepn4rxknuq94c2gpqzr29ufkkw7ttcxyak7v43n6vvsajc2jl You're up! π€£π
(Yawn) I gotta sleep here. GN plebs, let's do these convos more often!
Reduces the fitness costs of both hypergamy and promiscuity.
Hmmm.
Could go either way, prima facie. Does anyone have trend data handy?
Very possible.
But the effect is in an unexpected direction - more monopolising of mating opportunities by high-status males, at least in the form of high remarriage rates.
1.4 reproducing women for every reproducing man, averaging over hundreds of generations in Europe and West Africa. But only 1.1 in East Asia, and middling numbers in West Asia and East Africa. I'll chase up the paper if anyone wants it.
No, I have no idea why the regional differences. Culture, and marriage customs, but in what ways...?
100%, but, before sulfanilimide and penicillin, as many as half of men didn't make the cut, every generation. Childbearing-age women just died in childbirth all the time, to the point that men outnumbered women 2:1 in many age brackets (if there hadn't been a major war for a while). Hard to comprehend these days, but that's the environment our cultures evolved in...
Undead Odalisques article linked in that thread is 110% true - http://jsanilac.com/dispelling-beauty-lies
But there's not a single women I know who'd not get mad reading it...
Societies have crashed and burned frequently in the past, jus' saying. On every inhabited continent, too.
Sometimes abrupt (but usually drawn-out), traumatic decomplexifications of society, with consequent falls in energy use and population.
The popular explanations these days revolve around limits and ecological instability, but older theories of cultural and political instability are also valid in many cases.
Ricardo wrote about this way back in the 1700s.
Men and women, but especially women, don't settle down and have children until they have the same financial security their parents had. (I would broaden this slightly to include other forms of social status).
When living standards are rising, people have always married earlier and with more certainty.
And when living standards are falling, they don't get married, and do more war and crime instead.
Fits contemporary data neatly, but is very unfashionable viewpoint today. If you want grant money you need to claim a priori that its women's empowerment and mens' unwillingness to do her dishes that have led to declining birth rates.
Nothing to do with the State and its handmaids vampiring up more productivity every year for the last fifty. Unthinkable.