General

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Qlubsoda — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 01:38:27 GMT

It's probably far more a nurture thing that nature, but it seems to me that the big difference between men and woman is that men tend to communicate more with the purpose of exchanging information and finding solutions. Women on the other hand, tend to communicate more in order to validate themselves emotionally. It's the difference between men asking, earnestly "am I right?", and women asking, implicitly "please make me feel good about what I already want to believe"

obviously, if the latter is what you're working with, you're going to tend to want to reinforce only what you know intuitively, and since all of us, having been brain washed to accept the state without much critical thought, our ability to reprogram our minds depends heavily on our ability to use "out-of-the-box" thinking. It follows that the less willing we are to honestly discuss ideas and think freely, the more likely we are to never have our minds changed.

Again, I need to point out that I'm not implying out a physiological impairment in women. Rather, I tend to think of women as victimized by a culture that pushes them toward meekness, histrionics and unbalanced priorities. I've met women as open-minded as practical as any man that I know, they just happen to be rarer. What I do notice though is that each of these enlightened women, unsurprisingly, have female role-models with roughly the same values.

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Vitor — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 01:22:57 GMT

I'm libertarian and fully enjoy sex.

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Stephen — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 01:14:24 GMT

Juan:
I guess that a white male christian like, say, bush, or rumsfeld (christian?) is an example of oppressed people while blacks who are in jail because they are not white, are members of the 'ruling class'.

Wow Juan, you've transformed miscontruing into a fine art.

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Stephen — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 01:11:45 GMT

I guess the ones most complained about are evolutionary theory, anti-homophobia, sex education, cultural relativism, handing out condoms, and so on.

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Juan — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 00:38:33 GMT

I guess that a white male christian like, say, bush, or rumsfeld (christian?) is an example of oppressed people while blacks who are in jail because they are not white, are members of the 'ruling class'.

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Wanderer — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 23:11:41 GMT

Stephen:

Wanderer:

Stephen:

christians tend to be net losers when it comes to redistribution.

Really? Is that why public money goes to "faith-based charities", the building of the 10 commandments, and emblazoning "In God We Trust" and "Under God" everywhere?

I was thinking more along the lines of compulsory public education teaching anti-Chistian values to Christians. Also, you should notice the word net.

Non-religious people in the United States tend to be better educated and more affluent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_the_United_States#Demographics

Thus, they pay a disproportionate level of taxes. What anti-Christian values are taught in public schools? I'm not saying public schooling is a good thing, but what are you talking about?

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Stephen — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:43:13 GMT

liberty student:

Wanderer:
Really? Is that why public money goes to "faith-based charities", the building of the 10 commandments, and emblazoning "In God We Trust" and "Under God" everywhere?

Whatsamatter, haven't you seen all of the black lesbian atheists living it up at the expense of poor whitey?

I'm also starting to think that domestically born blacks and native indians are net losers as a result of anti-discriminative legislation, just because they aren't very politically correct minorities any more. Right now, arab muslims, south asians, and first generation Africans are what is fashionable.

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Saan2 — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:38:40 GMT

Three steps left, two steps right consolidate and start again. Divide and conquer.

I'm not talking about republicans and democrats here, I'm talking about the State.

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Stephen — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:33:28 GMT

Wanderer:

Stephen:

christians tend to be net losers when it comes to redistribution.

Really? Is that why public money goes to "faith-based charities", the building of the 10 commandments, and emblazoning "In God We Trust" and "Under God" everywhere?

I was thinking more along the lines of compulsory public education teaching anti-Chistian values to Christians. Also, you should notice the word net.

Re: Libertarianism and sex

liberty student — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:35:41 GMT

Wanderer:
Really? Is that why public money goes to "faith-based charities", the building of the 10 commandments, and emblazoning "In God We Trust" and "Under God" everywhere?

Whatsamatter, haven't you seen all of the black lesbian atheists living it up at the expense of poor whitey?

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Saan2 — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:28:58 GMT

alimentarius:
Why are there so few libertarian women?

Because they don't want to give up their state privileges. It is the same with any person. The State coddles them in the west and acts as husband and father when they get bored with their boyfriends/husbands.

The State will give them more resources than any one man, except donald trump.

That is my guess anyway. Read Menckens "In Defense of Women" It has a good answer, as to why?

Re: Libertarianism and sex

John Ess — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:27:15 GMT

Woman can be Christians, goof.

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Wanderer — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:17:33 GMT

Stephen:

christians tend to be net losers when it comes to redistribution.

Really? Is that why public money goes to "faith-based charities", the building of the 10 commandments, and emblazoning "In God We Trust" and "Under God" everywhere?

Re: Libertarianism and sex

Stephen — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:37:10 GMT

liberty student:

Stephen:
I'm making a guess based on the simple theory that libertarian ideas tend appeal to people who have more to gain by there implementation, hence people most politically oppressed.

I avoid making guesses based on poor theories. YMMV.

The social sciences are not like the natural sciences. In the natural sciences, when you make a mistake, you bear the cost of the mistake. For example, if you jump off a tall building hoping that gravity will carry you up instead of down, nobody else will smash into the ground. You would do that all on your own. In the social sciences, you may bear the cost, but the possibility also exists that other people will bear the cost and you might actually benefit. For example, if you're a communist dictator and believe that instituting socialism will bring about a garden of Eden on earth, and you're wrong, you still get a cushy job and material comfort out of it.

Material incentives affect receptiveness to social ideas.

Re: Libertarianism and sex

John Ess — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:32:52 GMT

I can't blame them. I don't have much to do with the libertarian party or them in general. Sine it's mostly a political thing in some ways (eventhough a dreadful failure), it tends to bore me to tears hearing people talk about the constitution, the cult of the founding fathers, or even worse Cato Institute articles or Milton Friedman. Though, I do like Mary Ruwart and was surprised she almost was nominated instead of the two chumps they chose instead. (her book Healing Our World in an Age of Aggression is very good).

Maybe they're scared of all the guys with guns in their holsters at all the meet ups and events.