Ideally everyone handled individually,

But sometimes the battle is not over individuals.

Sometimes false GROUP statements get weaponized.

False weaponized GROUP statements must be countered with true GROUP statements.

Not by talking about individuals.

E.g.

“People with dicks who identify as women should be allowed in women’s sports, and let into women’s locker rooms, because women and men as groups have identical physical potential, and all that matters is how they identify”

= False weaponized claim about the GROUPS, and must be countered with a true claim about the GROUPS,

not by talking about individuals.

They attack with false group claims, you must counter with true group claims.

Basic self-defense.

The thing I’d point out here is to notice that

— Humans are not extremely sexually dimorphic, instead just partially, e.g. versus some animals which are far more sexually dimorphic

What does this mean for mate choice?

Same things it means for all things that are not heavily sexually dimorphic

= this signals that BOTH sexes better take on some of the duty, or else everything falls apart.

Signals that relying on just one side to do this role is far from optimal.

I.e. males have to exercise some discretion in mate choice too, not putting this duty fully on the women, or everything falls apart.

…And this is exactly what the right encourages — caring about genes, fitness, beauty

….And exactly what the left discourages — against an endless list of “phobias” and “body shaming” and “straight men must date trans women with dicks”

Humans are not 100% sexually dimorphic.

This signals that men must exercise some discretion in who they choose to be with too.

Men must force themselves to be choosy too.

post-election web3

The easiest and quickest way to test someone's intelligence is to post the 4chan meme about the easiest and quickest way to test someone's intelligence