gdp's Comments

Secular News Daily : Religion, belief, and women's rights: Mental acrobatics at the Jimmy Carter Center

Fri, 8 Apr 2011 19:47:11 +0000

Gaius, this was a panel convened to speak about abuse of women. So that's what it focused on. One of the keynote speakers was the head of the U.N. council on human rights, so I think it's fair to say she's aware of human rights violations against other groups. But this was about women.

Secular News Daily : Did Jesus exist?

Fri, 5 Nov 2010 20:14:36 +0000

The thing I find interesting about the Jesus myth is not so much the discussion over whether he existed as a real person or not. It's that the whole story of his life is a cobbled succession of borrowed stories from earlier mythologies. It would be one thing to see something like a reasonable biography interspersed with a few exaggerations or claims of miracles. The myths of George Washington chopping down the cherry tree and having wooden teeth both come to mind as good examples. We know Washington existed because of good record keeping, and we know he was the president. But we have to weed through the stories about him and try to decide what's true and what's not in terms of his personal life. Not so with Jesus. EVERYTHING in the gospels gives every appearance of being made up, including -- as the author mentioned -- the very circumstances of his being born and basic biographical information. It's baffling to me that any serious scholar could suggest that we take anything in the Gospel seriously. As for Paul, I think it's important to mention that some mythicists interpret Paul very differently than they interpret the Gospels. They believe that Paul saw Jesus as a heavenly deity, like the Greek and Roman gods he was most certainly familiar with. Births and deaths and resurrections had happened in the pantheon for centuries, and it doesn't seem outlandish to me that Paul could have viewed Jesus the same way. It's odd that for all the specificity of the Gospel as to earthly deeds and miracles, Paul doesn't corroborate any of it. And he wrote his earliest epistles before the Gospel was written. That seems very odd to me. It looks like trumped up charges to me, chief. No evidence, no case.

Secular News Daily : Review: The God Virus

Tue, 28 Sep 2010 22:51:55 +0000

I suppose I should have made myself a little more clear about that, Librehombre. I don't consider myself a humanist, so I'm admittedly doing humanists a disservice by not mentioning that they've been covering the subject of living without God for years. But I think Darrel's book is especially valuable because it isn't specifically humanist. It's just non-religious. And a lot of people -- myself included -- spent a lot of time wanting information without advice. That is, don't tell me how I *should* live. Give me information to help me make my own decision. And for some, I think the idea of humanism sounds too much like secular religion. So I think this fills a niche.

Hooking Up Smart : Will We Import Japan's Peculiar Sexuality?

Mon, 12 Apr 2010 21:44:44 +0000

Wow. I knew about a lot of those, but when you compile it all into a list, it definitely seems more... bizarre. I honestly don't know enough to be able to make more than an educated guess, but I think one of the things that probably has a lot to do with it is the really high incidence of virginity among relatively old men and women. (That is, it's pretty unusual to be a 25 or 30 year old virgin.) Probably most American readers can't relate as well to this, but virginity really does have an effect on the brain, if for no other reason than we invent lots of fantasies about sex that may or may not have anything to do with reality at all. There's also got to be something to the "culture of repression" that's contributing to this as well. Japanese men and women both lead "double lives" in the sense that they must be completely prim, proper, and reserved at work, but almost anything goes at the club, on the bus, or on the street. It's my understanding that nobody flinches when half the males on a completely full bus are reading explicit magazines openly. That just wouldn't happen in America. On a totally different topic, you might be interested to read Athol Kay's guest post on my blog. It's my latest post, so it should post here. My recent post Guest Post: Athol Kay

Hooking Up Smart : How Obamacare Could Change What Turns Women On

Mon, 29 Mar 2010 19:21:42 +0000

I wonder how many babies have been born to women who had sex for reasons other than the vag tingle. When you look at the history of marriage, you have to wonder why evolutionary psychologists are so hip to jump on the female mate selection bandwagon when studies like these come out. It seems very likely to me that a significant part of the female cognitive algorithm is devoted to cost/benefit analysis of men. While this can certainly translate into physiological responses, it's just tricky, tricky territory to start asserting causal relationships. Cognitive decisions and unconscious desires are tough to link linearly. Women are definitely turned on by situations. Romance novels don't have pictures. The thought of a strong protector might trigger sexual response, especially when a strong protector is very valuable, but it just seems like there are too many variables. To much noise in the data. My recent post A Bit of Soul Searching

Hooking Up Smart : How Obamacare Could Change What Turns Women On

Mon, 29 Mar 2010 19:15:28 +0000

I'm very leery of a lot of these ideas. Not that I think they're wrong, but I'm not ready to jump on the bandwagon, mainly because I can't work out the evolutionary reasoning. It's fine to say that the long term costs to the woman are sometimes higher when she chooses a masculine mate, but sexual fitness is about the offspring, not the health and happiness of the mother. While it's true that a mother does need to be healthy to care for her offspring, I don't know that I'm convinced that this benefit alone constitutes a strong enough evolutionary pressure to account for a shift in mate preference based on socioeconomic strength in the culture. To put it more simply, what these tests measure is not female's subjective opinions about the long term fitness of a potential mate, but whether or not his face makes the vag tingle. This hypothesis suggests that female bodies are able to forecast socioeconomic trends and make subconscious adjustments to account for the long term health of the relationship. While this isn't impossible, it seems like a bit of a stretch based on the sketchy data I've seen so far. I think it's far more likely that something like birth control will be the culprit.

Hooking Up Smart : How Obamacare Could Change What Turns Women On

Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:21:04 +0000

I smell a rat. Did the researchers by chance control for birth control? If not, then the whole thing might be bunk. We would expect that women in the wealthiest, healthiest countries are all on the pill, right? And the pill is known to shift women's preferences towards less masculine and more androgynous.

Hooking Up Smart : Only Four Words Stand Between You and the Girl of Your Dreams

Sun, 28 Mar 2010 23:48:25 +0000

I think you're right. We tend to create a false dichotomy. Smart guys all have advanced degrees, and spend all their time in labs mixing potions together or building computers out of paper clips. That's only a small subset of "smart guys." Some guys are viciously smart AND socially savvy. They've applied their intelligence to social dominance. These are the guys who ALWAYS have beautiful, intelligent wives/girlfriends.

Hooking Up Smart : Only Four Words Stand Between You and the Girl of Your Dreams

Sun, 28 Mar 2010 23:42:46 +0000

Ah, very good observation, Susan. Let me put it another way. Your hobby doesn't make me want to have sex with you. But once we've had sex and I'm thinking about committing to you long term, your hobby might well make you more desirable. It's that whole value thing again. An interesting hobby might well add value to you as a long term mate, especially if it's a shared interest, or something a guy thinks he might like if he tried it. (And on a more cynical note, girls with hobbies have something to do on Saturday while college football is on. That's no small thing.)

Hooking Up Smart : Only Four Words Stand Between You and the Girl of Your Dreams

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 20:05:45 +0000

The short answer is no. It doesn't work in reverse, unless your hobby is dressing up in schoolgirl outfits and doing stripteases for your boyfriend. That isn't to say that men don't want girls with hobbies. Most guys do. But a girl's hobbies aren't boner inducing. When a girl is doing a hobby, she's not doing her lover. So no... hobbies don't turn guys on. Oh, but FYI, if you're talking to a guy and he starts getting bored or distracted when you talk about your hobbies, there's a 78.3% chance that he's trying to get in your pants and wishes you would let him show off his hobbies some more so you'll jump his bones. My recent post The Story of Easter, Part 3

Hooking Up Smart : Only Four Words Stand Between You and the Girl of Your Dreams

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 20:01:36 +0000

I have a love-hate relationship with neg theory. The hate part is because negs are the easiest path to the dark side. They work. They're like that magic blue lightning that shoots out of the emperor's fingers. For bitter men who enjoy pumping and dumping, negs are one of the easiest fastest ways to get into a girl's pants. But here's the thing. Negs don't have to be mean or hurtful to work, and Mystery, et al, are right about approaching "10s." Most really hot women won't give a guy the time of day unless he proves to them that he won't take their shit. Women are designed to get tingly in the presence of high value males. One of the marks of high value is that a guy can get a better woman than you. The biological programming says, "If a guy of higher value than you wants you, take him!" Like it or not, when a guy tells a girl something is wrong with her, it's sending the message "I'm higher value than you." It's the easiest way for a guy to send the message, too. So unfortunately, it's part of the 75% of Game that's accessible to most men with only 25% of the work. Blame natural selection, but it's just the reality. My recent post The Story of Easter, Part 3

Hooking Up Smart : Only Four Words Stand Between You and the Girl of Your Dreams

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:31:12 +0000

I think there are two things American men really need: 1) We need to take "Game" from the PUA community and turn it into "Guy Training." 2) We need a whole new chapter on the difference between cocky and arrogant. As you say, cocky is a way of bantering. I like Mystery's approach to it even though I'm not always fond of the way he executes it. His theory is that you tease (or neg) and then move on without giving her the chance to get all defensive. Psychologically, I think what's going on is that the neg or teasing is a continuity break. Girls get approached and crushed on all the time, and they have a set mental routine. Women are designed to say no a lot, and that's what their brains are doing... unconsciously thinking of reasons why this guy won't do. "He's too short. He's got a beer gut. He has a receding hairline. He has... What? I sound like a chipmunk when I laugh? Did he just insult me? Do I sound like a chipmunk? Oh, wait... what's this new thing he's doing? Oh, neat... he knows how to juggle." Snark aside, breaking continuity keeps a woman off balance, and that's attractive in its own way. So functionally, a neg creates uncertainty, which is good, and it also creates a break in the continuity, which is a break from the norm... which is also good. The trick is to do all of this with a genuine and warm demeanor, not a superior one. My recent post The Story of Easter, Part 3

Hooking Up Smart : Only Four Words Stand Between You and the Girl of Your Dreams

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 01:52:26 +0000

Very true, Athol. That's especially true in terms of displaying social value. Women never, ever, ever approach a guy sitting by himself at a bar. Women do occasionally approach guys who are doing something interesting. Women constantly approach the singer in the band. The more interesting the thing you do, the more attractive you are.

Hooking Up Smart : Only Four Words Stand Between You and the Girl of Your Dreams

Sat, 27 Mar 2010 00:56:40 +0000

Very good advice. It's interesting that you just picked up on all the guys on the Food Network. It seems like a lot of the men I know are good cooks these days, and it's not just to save money. Great food is a very fast path to a woman's heart on two levels. First, a man who insists on very good food is displaying social value. If you were told you had to go on a date with one of two men, and all you knew about either was what they had for dinner last night, would you choose the guy who had a Big Mac combo, or the guy who had sushi? (Assuming you don't hate sushi, I guess...) Second, as you said, if you're good at cooking, women will get all tingly when they watch you do a julienne cut on a yukon gold. Actually, there's a third reason cooking is great for attracting quality women. If you are a great cook, you're eating better quality food, and will be healthier than if you eat fast food all the time. That's attractive. I think you really need to add one piece of advice to this list, though. Part of being attractive is being a prize to be won. When a man displays interest in a woman, he's changing the power dynamic and giving her the opportunity to reject him. Attractive men are good at displaying interest without asking for approval. They're just giving information and moving on. This also displays high social value because it conveys an attitude: "Yeah, you're attractive, and I might be interested in you, but it takes more than a pretty face for me to get all crushy." It feels counter-intuitive, but one of the best ways to get a girl attracted to you is to indicate a little interest and then move on to something else. Most unattractive guys (chumps, in PUA) lock on once they've decided to approach a girl. They're in until they get a phone number or get rejected. This displays a lack of social value AND desperation. Better to display interest early, move on to something else for a while, and then come back -- or better yet, wait until she comes to you. This can be done in a group without physically walking away. Just say something flirty, then spend the next ten minutes talking to one of the other girls or guys in the group. We are funny creatures, we humans.

Hooking Up Smart : The Greening of Relationships: Recycling an Old Love

Fri, 26 Mar 2010 22:37:33 +0000

I think another huge factor in this transient culture is a sense of entitlement in both men and women. Men are driven to get the best job, the nicest house, the biggest boat, and it's a natural and healthy drive. It's how we get to have sex with the most desirable women. It's also a very big factor in whether or not the best women want to keep us on a more permanent basis. And in America, we men believe that we're entitled to get our way when it comes to career. Don't even suggest that we put business school on hold so that we can go to England for a year while our wife studies literature. Don't even think it! For women, we've talked a lot about entitlement. A lot of women believe they deserve to have whatever career they want AND a committed, happy relationship with a guy who looks like an underwear model, makes six figures a year, is assertive, confident, and charming AND knows when to give her flowers and never forgets any of the seventy-five important milestone dates in the relationship. In reality, if a woman puts her career first, she often becomes a cougar. She starts really looking to settle down when the biological clock starts screaming for babies in her thirties, but unfortunately, her "relationship capital" has already started the nose-dive, and all the great men in their thirties are still perfectly capable of dating 25 year old women with perky tits. She's either got to settle for a 45 or 50 year old man on his second marriage or a man her own age who is only a 6. It seems like this is another example where women need to choose. Do I want a stable long term relationship? Well, I need to get the deal sealed while I'm still in my 20s, and that will probably mean making my career choices AFTER my husband makes his. Is my career more important than a relationship? Then I need to realize that I will probably not get the pick of the litter when I marry later. I may have to "settle." Like it or not, men's drive to pursue their own careers is not selfishness. It's what women have been breeding into us for hundreds of thousands of years. Sure, you can find men who will put their career second to their wives, but then, haven't we spent the last few months lamenting the fact that women don't want beta males?

Hooking Up Smart : The Nice Guy Dilemma

Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:55:53 +0000

I got invited to go to Las Vegas last weekend by a girl who typically dates jerks. (She'd just broken up with her last jerk... again.) I had nothing better to do for the weekend, and it was going to be a big group of people, so I said, "Sure. That sounds fun. Call me tomorrow and we'll work out the details." That was last Monday. I didn't hear from her again until Wednesday, when she asked me if I was still going. I told her no, I wasn't going because she didn't call me and I made other plans. She tried to get me to change my plans and go. I said, "Sorry sweetie. I'd have been happy to go, but you have to hold up your end of things when you ask me for something." (You should know she wanted me to go "as a friend" so she wouldn't be by herself with a bunch of couples.) Long story short: She went by herself, had a fine time, and so forth, but now she's kissing my ass and trying to get me to hang out with her with no mention of "as a friend." I wasn't an asshole, but I did stand up for myself when she gave me a shit test. She knows now that I'm not the guy who's going to be there no matter what. I'm the guy who'll be around if she treats me well. That's having a spine, and it's attractive, even though nothing I did was even remotely "asshole."