The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Why Do Liberals Ideologically Cocoon Themselves More Than Do Conservatives?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I got this idea of masculine vs. feminine preferences in discussion from theologian Alastair Roberts, who explained this dichotomy in his eloquent indoor voice in “Two Modes of Intellectual Discourse: Taking Everything Personally vs. Debate as Sport.”

More crudely than Roberts would put it, men like to bust each other’s balls, while women don’t.

 
Hide 103 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Altai says:

    Why Do Liberals Ideologically Cocoon Themselves More Than Conservatives?

    Because the MSM is biased towards cultural liberalism. If the MSM was biased towards socially conservative viewpoints we’d be asking ‘Why do Conservatives Ideologically Cocoon Themselves More Than Liberals?’ It’s not hard.

    It’s one of the reasons for the freakout among urban educated types. They don’t ever see counter perspectives and so can’t fathom how anyone could disagree with the narrative. If you’re not an SJW or are an immigration skeptic or a nationalist or even just feel that it’s all gone a bit too far, you can’t help but be presented with a counter narrative. Siloing just isn’t as possible.

    • Agree: vhrm, ben tillman, sayless
    • Replies: @AndrewR
  2. Any mention of what “Conservative” news sources are?

    Any examples?

  3. Women are oriented toward raising children. You do not want argument from children – you want children to follow the rules. Women are oriented toward enforcing the home rules, unity and harmony at home, everyone in agreement at home. Home is supposed to be a cocoon.
    Men are oriented toward dealing with each other out in the world which necessitates negotiation and the debates that goes with it, to avoid war. Men are programmed to debate and therefore expose themselves to contending views.
    Add to this that Liberalism is rooted in blind dogmas easily proved wrong by fact and reason, and it’s no wonder that the increasingly feminine liberals of today are hiding in their bubble, afraid to face the real world.

    • Replies: @gent
  4. One of the reasons I no longer discuss politics with liberals is that, eventually, you have to say things that can’t be taken any other way than personally. You have to tell them that they’ve been brainwashed into believing a lot of things that aren’t true. Is there a polite way to say that?

    Obviously, they’re going to tell me I’m a racist and a Nazi, but I don’t take that personally because I understand that they’re only saying that because they’ve been brainwashed.

  5. Dr. X says:

    Are conservatives less likely to ideologically cocoon online because they tend to be more masculine and thus enjoy political argument as sport, whereas contemporary liberals are more feminine and thus take political disagreement personally?

    Absolutely true. I thought it would be a good idea to become a professor so I could argue with people about ideas and get paid for it. Boy, was I wrong. We used to have a lot of vigorous and fun arguments among the guys in graduate school, but it sure isn’t like that anymore.

    Colleges are full of women who take “offense” to everything they don’t like. They don’t want to argue, they don’t want to defend their position, and they don’t want to respect someone else’s viewpoint. They want to enforce conformity and groupthink. They want the title and the honors and the pay and the great hours that come with being a professor, but they do not want to tolerate competing viewpoints. They won’t confront you directly, but they’ll snipe at you from behind the scenes and gin up bogus “harassment” accusations and the like.

    It’s worth noting that in all of Plato’s dialogues, Socrates converses with men, not women.

  6. Anonymous[278] • Disclaimer says:

    Would another explanation be that the contemporary “liberal” world view is more at odds with reality, and its “globalist” worldview cousin more malicious and deceitful, and that opposition to either is subject to severe penalties.

    Therefore, exposure to information outside the cocoon risks having to face reality (and thereby being shown to be wrong or a fool), or being revealed to be playing a deceitful, malicious strategy against the native populations of the United States and Europe, or associating with illicit thoughts subject to punishment (guilt by association). Who wouldn’t shy away?

  7. songbird says:

    It would conform with social observations that I have made, but I’m not sure it is possible to make a proper study of this on youtube. The algorithm probably tries to subject people to leftist videos and hide the rightist ones from them.

  8. cthulhu says:

    …men like to bust each other’s balls, while women don’t.

    Charles Murray pointed this out recently on his Twitter account; he said that, in the aftermath of the Middlebury College kerfuffle, his female friends offered sympathy, while his male poker buddies hassled him gleefully and unmercifully about it.

    Still waiting for Murray’s publisher to back out on his new book. The preorder page is still up on Amazon too.

    • LOL: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Kibernetika
  9. I avoid discussion of politics with my left wing friends.

    It worries me that I might someday be at a dinner table with let wingers who I dislike. My plan is to let them speak first and then respond by calling them racists.

    Put them on the defensive.

    For example:

    LW: The schools are underfunded.
    APE: You’re a racist; and wrong, too.

  10. Mr. Blank says:

    If you’re a woman in a relationship with a man, one surefire way to tell he’s serious about you is if he starts busting your balls (figuratively speaking). Not a lot — he shouldn’t talk to you the way he talks to his buddies. But if he’s gently trash-talking from time to time — he’s really into you.

    It’s a sign he respects you.

    • Replies: @anon
  11. Wokeism is also a pseudo-religion, so like all religions they don’t want outsiders to pick at the logical inconsistencies. Of course, women have always been more religious than men so these two aspects are intertwined.

    • Agree: Wilkey
  12. Anonymous[735] • Disclaimer says:

    Aaaaand White Nationalists were right again. If you are lighter in color than a pair of khakis, never willingly speak to a black person. Do not have one in your home, do not allow your child to speak to one. If confronted by one out in public, be advised to “stand mute” as anything you say can and will be used against you. If your school or job forces you to interact with a black person, treat them as a diplomat, knowing they do actually have diplomatic immunity and you don’t. Then, ever so gently find a new department, job, class or school. Do not ever so much as smile at one, as they will surely take it for a display of weakness (which it is.)

    Make sure you are bilingual in another European language so that if one takes offence and begins throwing a tantrum for a perceived slight out in the wild, tell them no hablo.

  13. Mr. Blank says:

    I think it’s less that conservatives are more masculine and more that they are more accustomed to hearing things they disagree with and thus less shy about speaking up.

    While it’s definitely possible for right-wingers to completely wall themselves off from leftist or at least left-leaning thought, it requires some active effort. You actually have to work at it. Left-wingers can cocoon themselves off from right-wing thought fairly easily, if they’re of the mind to do so.

    • Replies: @Lurker
  14. anon[215] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Blank

    Chuckle. Have a little fragment of the red pill. The words you are looking for are “teasing”, and “is attracted to you”. Not “busting imaginary balls” and “respects”.

    Regarding the OP: Liberals cocoon themselves because they find reality upsetting. They wish to live in a Disney world combining parts of Lake Wobegon with Harry Potter. Yes, I know this means liberals are femmy, that should not be news to anyone.

  15. Muggles says:

    More crudely than Roberts would put it, men like to bust each other’s balls, while women don’t.

    True.

    Most women would prefer ‘death by a thousand cuts’ preferably done behind your back with others. Mean Girl gossip is considered unmanly and something of a gay behavior if men do it.

    Of course women rely on Argument by Feelings which can’t be won unless you totally agree with the woman at issue. Oddly but nearly universally, the women who use this tactic (not all do) never ask about the man’s feelings or seem to care one iota about them.

    If they are unhappy about something, it is because you hurt their feelings when disagreeing. So men learn to be very careful around women they like or love. Women on the other hand, love unloading on the men around them, ratchets raising their voices, making accusations based upon their imaginary slights, etc. “Hurting your feelings” when possible.

    I learned long ago in high school debate that no matter how poorly they debated or knew about their topic, you had to be extremely careful in rolling over them. Easily moved to tears (of course they were somewhat brave girls but still teens.) Gently, gently was the only tactic.

    The old Mars vs. Venus thing.

    Most men relish some kind of ‘combat’ especially if they think they might prevail or at least hold their own. But you can’t debate or argue feelings. It is equivalent to staying inside the bunker.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
  16. I love starting a good debate on WaPo or the others but they keep banning me for it.

    • LOL: Bardon Kaldian
  17. “More crudely than Roberts would put it, men like to bust each other’s balls, while women don’t.”

    Uh, women don’t have balls, Steve. Except for the “T” (e.g. LGBT), assuming that they are of course, women.

    Or did you mean that women don’t like to bust men’s balls while debating. Except of course, for “ball busting” lesbians.

    Speaking of which, why exactly do men like to bust each other’s balls? What’s up with that anyway? Sounds a bit creepy along the lines of Jeffrey Epstein or something.

  18. Why Do Liberals Ideologically Cocoon Themselves More Than Do Conservatives?

    They are both about the same in that respect, but neither side can see that due to low visibility in cocoons.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Disagree: Chrisnonymous
    • Replies: @res
  19. vhrm says:
    @Harry Baldwin

    One of the reasons I no longer discuss politics with liberals is that, eventually, you have to say things that can’t be taken any other way than personally. You have to tell them that they’ve been brainwashed into believing a lot of things that aren’t true. Is there a polite way to say that?

    Obviously, they’re going to tell me I’m a racist and a Nazi, but I don’t take that personally because I understand that they’re only saying that because they’ve been brainwashed.

    Accusing someone of being brainwashed is not an argument about politics, it’s a personal attack against them. Same with saying people are idiots or that they or their arguments are stupid or retarded or that they’re racists or communists.

    First of all you can discuss whatever arguments they or you are putting forth and identify where you agree or disagree. If they got their info only from CNN you may be able to fill in relevant other facts about the issue that you know but that the MSM hasn’t reported or generally buried.

    If it becomes relevant, e.g. if they ask why they haven’t seen these facts mentioned, then you can mention the tendency of the MSM to highlight some issues and bury other ones.

    The chances that you’ll change anyone’s mind are slim but maybe you find out something interesting you didn’t consider and maybe they do too.

  20. Mark G. says:
    @Dr. X

    Colleges are full of women who take “offense” to everything they don’t like. They don’t want to argue, they don’t want to defend their position, and they don’t want to respect someone else’s viewpoint. They want to enforce conformity and groupthink.

    George Orwell in 1984:

    “It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy.”

    John Derbyshire’s comment on this in his book We Are Doomed:

    “I saw the same thing myself when living in Communist China in the years just after Mao. If you wanted to hear a total-credulity, utterly unreflective parroting of the Party line, a woman was always your best bet.”

  21. Speaking of leftish cocooning, the Daily Mail has picked up on the intensive DIE focus at Harvard-Westlake school: LINK

    Highlights:

    There is even a new term for what is going on in this and many other schools in liberal Hollywood: woke weaning. That is to say that children are being groomed in wokeness.

    This is, after all, ‘the new world we live in, where if you can’t speak the language of ‘woke’ you won’t get into the college you want or get the job you want,’ explained the mother, who did not want to be named.

    ‘There is a growing group of parents who are desperately unhappy with how things are going. But we talk in secret.

    ‘I’d rather be called a murderer in Hollywood than a racist. OJ Simpson got off but if I was branded a racist I’d lose everything.’

  22. More crudely than Roberts would put it, men like to bust each other’s balls, while women don’t.

    Unfortunately, there is also the ideological purity motive, which is just like back in the CPUSA heighdays and is more akin to cult psychology than gender psychology.

    For example, I recently recommended to someone that they get an Urbit comet to check out this interesting new tech. After a day, they emailed me back saying they couldn’t use Urbit because they needed to investigate its founder more first. Now, Moldbug is not even assiciated with the project anymore and there is nothing explicitly right or left about Tlon. This is just fear of being tainted by association with CrimeThink. Pathetic. Pathetic but scary.

    • Thanks: Nikolai Vladivostok
    • Replies: @Anon
  23. We have to read enemy news sources because most of them are. For example, I read Australia’s ABC because it’s the best news source in the old country despite its comical level of poz.
    Also, as Woke is ascendant we need to stay abreast of what our rulers are thinking, kind of like how Soviet dissidents poured over Pravda to glean information from between the lines.
    Finally, we are curious and they are not.
    This study reinforces earlier research mentioned on Epigone that conservatives can explain liberal positions much better than the other way around.

    • Agree: ic1000
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  24. Good point.
    The algo tries to shift you gradually to acceptable viewpoints.
    Try it for yourself: if you watch Black Pigeon Speaks or Paul Joseph Watson, the next suggested videos will be tamer conservatives like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro or something on Fox.
    From there they’ll start throwing in videos from Forbes, and so on.
    Those who start off watching CNN clips will not be led in the opposite direction.

    • Agree: photondancer
  25. @Abolish_public_education

    “APE: You’re a racist; and wrong, too.”

    Don’t use a semicolon in dialog unless you’re writing for Bette Davis.

  26. @vhrm

    You live in lollipop land.

  27. Wilkey says:

    Religious extremists always cocoon themselves. That’s just how they are.

    For conservatives being conservative is usually secondary to whatever else it is we are in life. There are far more leftists who define themselves as, basically, professional, full-time leftists. Their politics is what they eat, drink, and breath.

    • Replies: @S. Anonyia
  28. @Muggles

    Have a question: speaking of combat in the extreme, has anyone else noticed that there are very, very few women who are serial killers? They’re all guys. Steve has written periodically about serial killers, and various aspects about them. One aspect that tends to go overlooked, is that there are few, if any, women who are serial killers. It’s just not a thing with them. One could say this is either a way to impose their wills on other people, or that they’re in a really bad mood, or whatever the reasons may be known only to them. Obviously, most tend to be psychopaths, but aren’t there also psychopathic women? And yet, women don’t go out and blow up buildings or shoot 20-50 people in a public gathering because they were really ticked off about losing their job, losing a loved one, etc. Serial killers, for whatever the reason, all tend to be men.

  29. It’s more complicated. When men want to overpower the opponent- this called a debate. When they want to seek the truth- which can run contrary to their beliefs- this is called a discussion.

    An informed discussion is a very rare thing (dispassion, erudition, non-attachment, patience to listen to others,… )- so, it rare. It is for true, not fake intellectuals.

    The highest debate in the 20th C was between Einstein and Bohr on the nature of QM. At the end, they both stayed on their earlier positions, but with an expanded knowledge and wisdom. They tried to prove their point, not to cow the opponent into submission.

    Women are mostly social creatures seeking approval of their social circle. An American rabbi, perhaps 2-3 years ago, commented: You know, liberals are like women. That’s why they are so fascinated by Muslims- they see raw masculinity in them, and it attracts them. Of course, this is shallow. But most life is shallow.

    I am certain you would find in liberals lower levels of testosterone/serum estrogen, psychological functioning (brain scan) more appropriate to woman, lack of sound reasoning etc.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  30. AndrewR says:
    @Altai

    Well yes, when I read the headline I thought “because right wing people don’t have any choice.”

    But Sailer brings up a good point. Women are unquestionably more childish when it comes to being able to have a friendly debate. They take everything personally. Their brains stop developing at puberty.

    Whether women are inherently more “liberal” is a separate question. My own take is that they’re basically groupthink enforcers. In the Third Reich I imagine they were the most eager enforcers of the ideology of the day. Was the Third Reich left wing?

    Whatever the answer to these questions, the dominant ideology today is globohomo and the dominant sex is females, so do the math

  31. There are two separate issues being conflated here

    1) Do you expose yourself to viewpoints that conflict with your own?
    2) Do you actively engage opposing people in debate and discussion?

    The first one is passive, say reading a well-done but wokish novel or the Sunday NYT, or listening to Rush if you’re a lib. The second is much more active, confrontational, personal and potentially exasperating.

    I feel it’s long become useless to talk to liberals, and I happily recall eras like the 80s when people did not discuss politics and divisive social issues very often– politics was just something a bunch of old men were taking care of in Washington.

    I also find it funny that some people get that I’m conservative without me saying much of anything, but some people (mostly women) somehow assume I’m liberal. People will see what they want to see.

  32. AndrewR says:
    @vhrm

    He’s not wrong.

    Long story short, I realized a couple years ago that my brother-in-law, who had been known for very un-PC rhetoric like, talking about “TNB,” had full faith and confidence in the mainstream media. So at that point, suggesting that the corporate media is biased is tantamount to accusing him of being brainwashed. You can be as indirect as you want, but if they’re brainwashed they will take it personally when you question the legitimacy of the authorities they worship.

  33. Zpaladin says:

    I would conservatively estimate they of the people who are paid to communicate (journalists, authors, tv show runners, script writers, professors, k-12 teachers, ad writers, and other content producers, 80 percent are liberal. The main exceptions would be religious leaders. Virtually all of them, even if conservative, would have been exposed to liberalism at Journalism School, Seminary, Education school, Film School, etc.
    It is easy to imagine a liberal who grew up liberal (maybe in Berkeley) and never encountered a conservative idea. It is difficult to think of a conservative doing the same. You’d have to avoid every product of Hollywood, be homeschooled, avoid college.

  34. More crudely than Roberts would put it, men like to bust each other’s balls, while women don’t.

    It could also be that men are more curious than women are, and thus more likely to stumble across the other side’s argument. Women’s curiosity is more like cats’, quite intense within the narrow channels of their interests (in both senses of that word), but dissipating beyond those. Yes, we all know exceptions*– and they are very special people.

    As for “busting each other’s 🤹”, there is a case for expressing one’s hardcore beliefs politely. Our great-great grandfathers would be most surprised by today’s “alt-right” (and alt-Left) presumption that good manners equals surrender. To them, it meant civilization.

    The Rockford Institute’s blogs demand that everyone comment in the third person. As did Lawrence Auster’s, before he and Steve traded commenting régimes.

    Besides, as Cinderella could tell you, women have been busting each other’s balls, and other social dos, from time immemorial.

    * Speaking of balls… “I wanted to understand the paradox; I wanted to know why ‘one ball equals two’.” –Kelsey Houston-Edwards on Banach-Tarski
    AMS interview (PDF)

  35. Now, a longish post not too on the issue, a bit out of my character (I’m a private person who doesn’t care about others’ life histories).

    A week or so ago was my 2nd encounter with Covid (the first one 12 months ago) and while not disastrous, it really exhausted me very much (the 1st time- 2 days of higher temperatue; the 2nd time- 11 or 12 days. Also, various medications and stuff (sumamed, D3 4000 IU, Zinc, pulse oximeter etc.). I am still very tired & I guess I’ll be OK within 1-2 months.

    First, I was so tired I couldn’t read or listen to anything but music on my laptop (especially Irish & Country music that have a healing effect on me). Then, when I got a bit stronger, I would listen to YouTube- nothing mental, just 25-30 videos of reddit (a manosphere stuff), lasting 20 to 25 minutes, about divorce in the US- weird, I’m not married, have never been & don’t intend to in a foreseeable future. It was relaxing and a peek into a human nature.

    And it’s old stuff masters like Flaubert or Tolstoy knew everything about.

    Usually, it was a divorce/breakup of a relationship people aged 25 to 45/50, because of female infidelity. Mostly big cities, work in corporations, childless or 1-2 kids.

    With “higher type” of women, women started to cheat (various reasons), but their conscience couldn’t bear it and she confessed. Usually a divorce, but these people somehow managed to start their new lives without too much humiliation, drama, evil…

    Just, most stories were clearly different: a husband treats his wife as queen; sometimes he’s a doormat, but, more frequently, a normal decent man who idolizes his wife because he is blinded by infatuation; she despises him, humiliates him like garbage and between sheaths, nothing. He’s a good provider, sometimes father- and she hates him & despises him. Then he learns she’s been cheating at work (some colleagues etc) for months, years,… He’s broken inside, but somehow manages to grow a spine & service her divorce papers.

    Now she is grovelling, hysterically crawling, promising she’ll be his sex slave & do whatever he says. But- it’s too late. A year passes-he’s a new man, regenerated. She is condemned by their social circles & has aged 10 years in a year (sometimes starts drinking etc.).

    Statistically, I would say there are more good men out there, but without restraints of a religion, male authority, condemnation of patriarchy,… women are lost. They don’t appreciate what they have. And it is not just sexualization, but even more- boredom, unrealistic expectations from life,..

    Liberals are, to some extent, similar to this, lower type of women. They seek validation of others; they are spineless, but they ruin others’ lives if they can; they are not truly individualistic; not rational; their emotions are shallow; … At the end, they lack moral character & fortitude.

    • Thanks: Mark G.
  36. anonymous[110] • Disclaimer says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    And yet, women don’t go out and blow up buildings or shoot 20-50 people in a public gathering because they were really ticked off about losing their job, losing a loved one, etc.

    Men generally have more at stake in a job (and more to lose from losing one) than women do.

  37. anonymous[110] • Disclaimer says:
    @AndrewR

    They take everything personally. Their brains stop developing at puberty.

    Are there any scientific studies showing this?

  38. @Abolish_public_education

    “I avoid discussion of politics with my left wing friends.”

    I avoid having left wing friends.

    • Agree: AndrewR
  39. gent says:
    @rebel yell

    Women with children are oriented towards raising children. Women without children are oriented toward signalling high mate status.

    • Replies: @Anon
  40. @Dr. X

    Colleges are full of women who take “offense” to everything they don’t like. They don’t want to argue, they don’t want to defend their position, and they don’t want to respect someone else’s viewpoint. They want to enforce conformity and groupthink.

    This is true but it isn’t as if the men are any better. If anything the men can be worse because they will pretend to value debate while doing what they can cut down the dissenters behind the scenes.

    The men that go on to become professors identify with the women that push egalitarian conformity. They tend to be bitter effeminates types that view alpha Whites as the ultimate enemy.

    This all resulted from conservatives allowing the left to dominate the conversation on race which then led to the left-wing conformity in most departments. If you grant the left the belief that race and gender don’t exist then they can make up anything.

    I’m sure I mentioned it before but I had Anthro grads go after me outside of the classroom because I asked a few questions about race. I really just wanted to know their opinion and was polite but this sent them into a panic mode.

    It’s worth noting that in all of Plato’s dialogues, Socrates converses with men, not women.

    Well it should also be noted that women found him repulsive.

  41. @vhrm

    I think you’re missing his point, which is that there’s no polite way to say “you’re brainwashed”. For instance, this…

    If they got their info only from CNN you may be able to fill in relevant other facts about the issue that you know but that the MSM hasn’t reported or generally buried.

    If it becomes relevant, e.g. if they ask why they haven’t seen these facts mentioned, then you can mention the tendency of the MSM to highlight some issues and bury other ones.

    …is an attempt to do so, and if you put it into practice, it will fail, especially if they’re already taking it personally (which they likely are). On a person willing to change their mind, or a moderate, or whatever, it might work, but that’s not who he was talking about.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
  42. Muggles says:
    @Mark G.

    “I saw the same thing myself when living in Communist China in the years just after Mao. If you wanted to hear a total-credulity, utterly unreflective parroting of the Party line, a woman was always your best bet.”

    Yes, two of the infamous Gang of Four were women. One of those was Mao’s “wife” much younger than he. Very vicious and damaged China immensely.

    Mao grew quickly to resent her and comrades since once he used them to disrupt and tarnish, exile or even kill his internal opponents, he had no use for them. Also they were widely hated even more than feared. Their Cultural Revolution (a/k/a The Great Reset !) killed, starved millions.

    This group was eventually purged and with one exception (who I think was killed) the others “committed suicide” in prison.

    German Communist Rosa Luxembourg was more radical and combative than her other 1920s German Marxist comrades. She was killed in street battles with rightists.

    There is the old naturalist adage, for what it’s worth, that “the female is deadlier than the male.”

    • Replies: @Shango
    , @Wade Hampton
  43. @Harry Baldwin

    I’d go further. Is there a polite way, for instance, to tell a black person that black people are more predisposed to crime than white people? To tell a childless career woman that society would be better with more young mothers and fewer childless career women?

    In the first instance, few self-respecting black men can agree: any racial solidarity at all will surely preclude it. In the second, you’re directly telling someone that they made the wrong choice with their life. It would take a very self-assured person not to be a little hurt by it, and how many people are so self-assured these days?

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  44. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    A female serial killer would likely have to physically dominate their victims at some point in the process, so maybe that is a reason for so few.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  45. Muggles says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    Aileen Warmos was a female serial killer who was finally executed in Florida for multiple murders of men who picked her up while she was hitchhiking there. In the 80s I think.

    She was a drug using prostitute (possibly lesbian, as many prostitutes are) and clearly a psychopath.

    One of the rare ones, since I think she killed with a knife. (I haven’t bothered to search details for this.)

    The most common female serial killer types are poisoners or nurses who kill their usually helpless older patients. The poisoners kill their husbands for money usually. Nurses because they — as some other serial killers, like to watch people die. “Black Widows” aren’t a myth.

    There are undoubtedly others I can’t quickly recall. Sometimes the women team up with males and do a duet serial killing act. These seem to be more violent, probably because of the male involvement.

    Female psychopaths often get “their men” to do the actual deeds.

    However the overall point seems correct. Men lead the serial killer pack.

  46. @AndrewR

    Women are unquestionably more childish when it comes to being able to have a friendly debate. They take everything personally.

    This is true but ideologically driven men aren’t any better. It’s at best around 1% of men that can discuss politics and not be offended or intimidated by the other person.

    Whether women are inherently more “liberal” is a separate question. My own take is that they’re basically groupthink enforcers.

    Women are more likely to conform to authority and that is really the issue. This is especially true if the authority is perceived as trying to promote stability.

    In the Third Reich I imagine they were the most eager enforcers of the ideology of the day. Was the Third Reich left wing?

    They worshipped Hitler. Just look at some of the videos on youtube of the crowds. The women go insane for him.

    Whatever the answer to these questions, the dominant ideology today is globohomo and the dominant sex is females, so do the math

    The top 20% of women know that society is at least lying about some things. I am certain of this. As with many liberal men they don’t see a way out of the race conflict other than by supporting lies. The establishment or globohomo as you call it isn’t as solid as it appears. A third way movement could absolutely destroy it. There are plenty of women that can see we are in a mess but think the Nazis will return if we are honest about race. They just have to be led around this into a new way of thinking.

  47. @AndrewR

    “Was the Third Reich left wing?” If we consider that Nazis, like Soviets, operated tyrannies, yes, they were left wing.

  48. @cthulhu

    Charles Murray pointed this out recently on his Twitter account; he said that, in the aftermath of the Middlebury College kerfuffle, his female friends offered sympathy, while his male poker buddies hassled him gleefully and unmercifully about it.

    Middlebury and some other schools are still good at one thing — teaching foreign languages. But honestly, there are often better much more practical courses taught by the US military.

    Sure, if you study at both places you may get a nice embassy gig.

  49. @Known Fact

    I feel it’s long become useless to talk to liberals, and I happily recall eras like the 80s when people did not discuss politics and divisive social issues very often– politics was just something a bunch of old men were taking care of in Washington.

    I also find it funny that some people get that I’m conservative without me saying much of anything, but some people (mostly women) somehow assume I’m liberal. People will see what they want to see.

    I identify as independent and I never talk to liberals. Even before Trump they started turning on independents. Basically if you aren’t part of liberal conformity then you are suspect. With Trump this became further amplified. So if you aren’t bashing Trump with them then you must be on his side for everything.

    One thing I learned is that it doesn’t matter at all as to how much you support a liberal issue. You could adopt a dozen Black kids but if you put on a Maga hat then you are all of a sudden an evil racist meanie White.

  50. @Dr. X

    In the Symposium, Socrates recounts an important conversation he had with a woman, Diotima.

    • Replies: @James J O'Meara
  51. Anonymous[272] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    A debate is just a discussion with formal rules, so that for example, the guy with the loudest voice isn’t allowed to drown out other speakers.

    And there is no practical difference between seeking the truth and trying to invalidate your opponent’s arguments.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  52. @Ron Mexico

    There have been a few female serial killers. When I was young the Guinness book of world records had a record for some countess who murdered dozens.

    There have been cases of female nurses who kill many patients.

    Just about any weird thing has happened given a long enough time span.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  53. Elli says:

    A warning to men out there who aren’t good at reading people: beware the woman who encourages you to go on and expose the full extent of your conservative or unconventional beliefs, because she just might turn around and flay you for being so evil. In today’s climate, she could ruin you.

  54. Anon[230] • Disclaimer says:

    I think there’s a tendency for men and women to divide up what they teach children. Women teach mythos. Men teach skills and character. Women pass along a society’s belief system. Men are more inclined to be skeptical of mythos, and ‘female men’–the priests, are the primary males who back the women up.

    However, as a the Spanish Inquisition proved, the ‘female men’ can be very powerful indeed. The establishment of science meant breaking their power.

    • Replies: @James J O'Meara
  55. Anon[332] • Disclaimer says:
    @gent

    Women without children are oriented toward signalling high mate status.

    What translates to high mate status in a woman? Do the types of signals differ depending on whether a woman is post-menopausal?

  56. Anon[292] • Disclaimer says:

    I got this idea of masculine vs. feminine preferences in discussion from theologian Alastair Roberts, who explained this dichotomy in his eloquent indoor voice in “Two Modes of Intellectual Discourse: Taking Everything Personally vs. Debate as Sport.”

    Thomas Kochman described in his 1980 ethonography Black and White: Style in Conflict how in black culture vigorous debate is key, while whites tend to want to minimize conflict. Could this be because blacks are more testosterone saturated. Is there a left-right testosterone gap to match the white-black gap?

    From Mother Jones:

    Testosterone. “There is genetic variance in how much testosterone someone has at birth, and there are certain things that can enhance or diminish that,” explains Brown University political scientist Rose McDermott, a prominent researcher on the science of ideology who authored a recent book chapter on hormones and politics. “One of those things that enhance that is muscle mass—if you build muscle mass, you enhance” your testosterone levels.

    What might this have to do with politics? While direct research linking testosterone to ideology is lacking, researchers have recently published data tying muscle mass to political preferences. One study shows that rich men with large biceps are more opposed to wealth redistribution than rich men with small biceps. Another study finds that weightlifting ability correlates with support for, er, a more muscular foreign policy. Plus, get this: Men with wider faces (an indicator of testosterone levels) have been found to be more willing to outwardly express prejudicial beliefs than their thin-faced counterparts.

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/06/how-hormones-influence-our-political-opinions/

  57. The real question is, are men becoming more feminine, and does that explain our political situation?

    Alastair Roberts’s framing is interesting, too, suggesting that civilisation itself, or any kind of progress, is of necessity patriarchal, with a feminised society being only capable of statis, degradation, or collapse.

    shakes head Chicks, right?

  58. @Known Fact

    [Debate] is much more active, confrontational, personal and potentially exasperating.

    Ah, but was it ever thus? And is it, today, exasperating, when you’re debating someone other than a liberal?

    I feel it’s long become useless to talk to liberals, and I happily recall eras like the 80s when people did not discuss politics and divisive social issues very often– politics was just something a bunch of old men were taking care of in Washington.

    Those were the days. (Old folks chime in: were liberals always like this?) I’ve been wondering lately whether the world really is getting crazier, or whether I’ve just been paying more attention to politics. But perhaps the world is getting crazier, because everyoneis paying more attention to politics.

    • Replies: @Yawrate
  59. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer

    There have been a few female serial killers. When I was young the Guinness book of world records had a record for some countess who murdered dozens.

    Countess Elizabeth Báthory (1560-1614). No-one knows how many girls she may have murdered but some sources claim 650. She may have been the most prolific serial killer of all time.

  60. Shango says:
    @Muggles

    Why not call her a marxist?

  61. @John Pepple

    Indeed. Actually, more than “an important conversation,” he transmits what he considers a great spiritual doctrine.

    It’s also of note that he relates the conversation, rather than Plato have her at the symposium. Greek women were sequestered, and uneducated anyway, so the only women who might be present at such a banquet would be prostitutes/geishas/courtesans. I believe the presence of “flute girls” is noted.

    As usual, the Men of Unz can’t decide if they want to keep the women under wraps at home, with the corresponding homoerotic culture (as in Diotima’s discourse on the Two Loves) or emancipated females shooting their mouths off a la North Western Europe.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  62. @Anon

    “However, as a the Spanish Inquisition proved, the ‘female men’ can be very powerful indeed. The establishment of science meant breaking their power.”

    Really? Isn’t science the realm of “female men” aka nerds? Isn’t that why the BLM lawn signs say “Science is Real”?

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  63. Charlotte says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    There have been a few female serial killers, but they often poison their victims, and frequently the deaths are initially attributed to natural causes. Also, I think the victims usually have family or quasi-familial relationships with the killer. Perhaps it’s actually a different phenomenon than the better known male variety.

  64. @Barack Obama's secret Unz account

    Thank you, this is the point I was making. I don’t think the liberals I know are looking for the truth. They are attracted to liberalism as a belief system that gives them a sense of moral superiority and a sense of belonging to a community of like-minded people. Within that community there is a strong drive toward consensus, toward hewing to the party line.

    If they were looking for truth, they would eventually be put off by the realization that their chosen sources of information frequently lie to them. I used to read the NY Times and listen to NPR. While doing so, I often thought, “This doesn’t sound right” or “This can’t be all there is to this story.” I might then look into the topic and see that context and facts had been purposely omitted. I was aware that, while these news sources did convey information, they were doing so in a propagandistic manner. This bothered me. It does not seem to bother my liberal acquaintances.

    I am equally annoyed by fake news on the right. Listening to Rush Limbaugh occasionally, I might agree with some of what he said, but would often have the same “This doesn’t sound right” or “This can’t be all there is to this story” reaction as I would listening to the MSM. I hate being lied to. To the extent that is possible, I want to know the truth.

    ‘There are two different types of people in the world, those who want to know, and those who want to believe.” –Friedrich Nietzsche

  65. Twinkie says:

    “Two Modes of Intellectual Discourse: Taking Everything Personally vs. Debate as Sport.”

    Ah, I now understand the acrimony and ad hominem that commenter Rosie sends my way when I present data and numbers (and my interpretations).

    Me: “Women with fewer sexual partners bond better with their husbands.”

    Rosie: “Are you calling me a whore, you dirty Yellow Peril?”

    Me: “Healthy diet and exercise with good self-discipline are necessary to lose weight.”

    Rosie: “I can’t lose weight and keep it off, because doctors are heartless bastards like you and won’t give me Amphetamin, you dirty Yellow Peril!”

  66. @Muggles

    From Kipling’s “The Female of the Species” (is deadlier than the male):

    She is wedded to convictions – in default of grosser ties;
    Her contentions are her children, Heaven help him, who denies!
    He will meet no cool discussion, but the instant, white-hot wild
    Wakened female of the species warring as for spouse and child.

    https://www.poetry.com/poem/33429/the-female-of-the-species

    I wonder if our modern SJWs got their “woke” expression from this stanza? In any case, the left’s hysterical politics and unwillingness to entertain plain fact is all part of the feminization of American society.

  67. @Steve Sailer

    It’s true that conservatives might be more traditionally masculine than liberals in that they like contact sports and hunting more, joining the military, etc. But they also have much higher levels of masculine anxiety than liberal men as well. Every time I see a guy ranting about “alpha males” and “beta males” and “cuc”, “cuckold”, “Kitchen bitch”, etc, the guy turns out to be a conservative Republican. Liberal men don’t talk like that. They just don’t. They tend to be a lot more relaxed and self-confident, especially on issues of sexuality, than conservative men, who constantly wonder how “alpha” they are, and what that means for their breeding chances. The essence of conservatism is breeding, and conservative males experience a lot of anxiety over whether they will be successful at breeding and passing on their conservative genes and have a lot of little conservatives or not. Hence, all the endless articles by conservative writers about affordable family formation, on enforbing monogamy so that all man get a chance at breeding, etc.

    Oddly, liberal men tend to be less shy around women than conservative males, more promiscuous, more outgoing, etc, anf these are all stereotypically masculine traits. If you think of the ladies men Presidents, from Kennedy to Clinton, were all liberal.

    Another way in which conservative men are less masculine than liberal men: long-term orientation. Conservative males are more long-term orientated, and long-term orientation is a stereotypically feminine characteristic(women are more long-term orientated than men), This personality trait, of being angsty and anxious about the future, and wanting to preserve what you have instead of striving for new things at the risk of losing what you have, is stereotypically feminine: men enjoy change, challenge and risks more than women do, in all areas of life. Hence, conservatives blow out of proportion things like statistics about criminality, or out-of-wedlock birth, etc, and make it out to be some utter catastrophe, when in reality it is trivial and insignificant, simply because they are much more sensitive to change and distressed by change than liberals are – which is what makes them want to conserve things. Women, likewise, are more distressed by change than men are, and often pick stability over uncertainty. Men, conversely, find instability and change exciting. In this sense, liberal males with their openess to new experiences and change are more stereotypically masculine in this sense than conservative males.

    Conversely, liberal men are definitely less masculine than conservative men wnen it comes to the traits of physicality, territoriality, and low empathy. Empathy is a stereotypically feminine trait, and liberal men have more of it than conservative men. Empathy, the ability to put yourself in another person’s shoes and “feel their pain”(quoting Clinton) is something that conservatives have less than liberals, and conservative males tend to have so little of it that they induce anger in liberals and make libeals see them as callous(“deplorables”). Because liberals have more of the stereotypically feminine trait of empathy, they are more sensitive to inequality, and make the fight against injusrices central to their ideology. Liberals always feel sympathy for the underdog, be they poor working-class white workers in the 1950’s and 60’s, or destituted immigrants now. Income tax, end of segregation, etc, all liberals finding unfair treatment and social inequality deplorable.

    So I think liberal and conservative men are both more masculine and feminine than each other in different ways.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @John Johnson
  68. res says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    They are both about the same in that respect

    You are starting to sound like Corvinus. That is not a good thing.

    P.S. Any response to the survey results (which Steve posted) which indicate that you are wrong and/or lying?

  69. Why Do Liberals Ideologically Cocoon Themselves More Than Do Conservatives?

    Easy. The Left is attacking the Right. People on the right have to pay attention so we can defend ourselves.

  70. @Harry Baldwin

    One of the reasons I no longer discuss politics with liberals is that, eventually, you have to say things that can’t be taken any other way than personally. You have to tell them that they’ve been brainwashed into believing a lot of things that aren’t true. Is there a polite way to say that?

    Yes, of course. It’s the division of labor. We involved in groups and developed a psychological propensity to accept that what the authorities say is true. It was efficient and good for the group. There is nothing personal about that. The problem is that the authorities now are enemies of our group.

  71. @vhrm

    Accusing someone of being brainwashed is not an argument about politics, it’s a personal attack against them.

    Absolutely not. The propensity to be brainwashed is a universal human trait.

  72. @Wilkey

    Better explanation. Liberals must “spread the good news” and “live by their faith” of wokism or else they consider themselves moral failures and risk excommunication from their people.

    When liberal men attack conservatives, it doesn’t seem particularly feminine. They are vicious and relentless, especially when they think they are smarter than their target or have greater social status. It’s bullying behavior. Liberal women just seem to cry and whine and play the victim a lot.

    Also playing a role is that liberals have a greater ability to cocoon themselves because more media outlets are liberal. Conservatives don’t have many choices.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
  73. @Mark G.

    “I saw the same thing myself when living in Communist China in the years just after Mao. If you wanted to hear a total-credulity, utterly unreflective parroting of the Party line, a woman was always your best bet.”

  74. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    You’re right in general, and this is evidence for some underlying sexual motivation for serial killing. I don’t mean the killers get off on killing, just there is some connection to sexuality. In the few cases of female serial killers, I think you will find sexual abnormality like lesbianism o r chastity.

  75. @AndrewR

    Ypu mention the Third Reich like you don’t know, but I bet you know… women were great supporters of Hitler. Mussolini too. Apparently, Mussolini was a great sex symbol in Italy. It’s difficult for us to see it because he didn’t have a six-pack and Elvis-hair, but apparebtly his big head, scowling features, and power made Italian women wet. Transferred into political support among women. This is thw big difference between men and women. I would welcome a blowjob from AOC but never vote for her. Women seem to have a problem separating sexual and political desire.

  76. @Mark G.

    All due respect to Mrs. Derb, but it might be a Chinese thing too. The Chinese women I know are extremely partisan about whatever they are involved in. If they grew up in ghr the old country, even more so.

  77. … men like to bust each other’s balls, while women don’t.

    I dunno … I’ve seen plenty of women who like to bust men’s balls.

  78. @Anonymous

    And there is no practical difference between seeking the truth and trying to invalidate your opponent’s arguments.

    It is a world of difference. Not only have I seen it personally, but experienced it. I simply changed my mind confronted with data & arguments, although I’ve had a firm position on the topic. The truth, corroborated, was stronger than my cherished opinions- and I dumped them.

  79. Anon[402] • Disclaimer says:
    @Chrisnonymous

    I live in a mostly liberal area and I see this desire for purity in their actions.

    Heard a woman say she wouldn’t shop at Home Depot because one of the founders (no longer managing the company) was a Trump supporter.

    Another said they wouldn’t buy from LL Bean. LL Bean gets good environmental marks. But ONE of the Bean family (think there are many and don’t even think this one was involved in management) gave to Trump.

    Went to a local lecture on Art History (this was years ago) and the instructer goes off script at the lecture by saying there was a good exhibit at a museum named/connected with a well known Republican political family in the area, and the woman was shaking her head at the idea of going to the museum due to the connection.

  80. @Nikolai Vladivostok

    Soviet dissidents poured over Pravda…

    Should be “pored over Pravda”, unless you are implying that Pravda had a glossy color girly section stuck in the middle, say, something like: This month’s tight asses of the lumpen proletariat.

    Sorry, I’m not trying to be a homo…

    [MORE]

    …nym Commie here.

  81. I have a pal who maintains that women should never have been given the vote. I credit him more nowadays than I used to, although I’m not fully persuaded. Still, I note that I have more than one female acquaintance who will make a political point and then, just as I begin to respond, will state: “That’s enough. I don’t want to discuss it.” Is this a widespread observation?

  82. anon[771] • Disclaimer says:

    Hey, this is discrimination against emotional right wingers. You’re erasing them for being a little feminine! How will you explain yourself?

  83. AndrewR says:
    @Barack Obama's secret Unz account

    I think I’m pretty pro-white but I’m willing to accept unflattering factual analyses of white people without getting offended. There is a difference between racial solidarity and racial narcissism.

    A psychologically healthy black man would say “at the end of the day I’m Team Black because I’m black, but yeah obviously we do commit more crime and there’s probably a genetic aspect”

    An ethnonarcissist would say “aww hell naw honky, how dare you say that about us?” then he would proceed to prove you right by assaulting you

    Then again I’ve pretty much reached the ultimate black pill stage where I am so critical of white people (from a pro-white perspective) that I no longer even care about saving us. My own sister and her kids are all aboard the anti-white train. There is a significant chance my own kids would be too, if I had them, regardless of how much I tried to teach them racial pride.

  84. AndrewR says:
    @James J O'Meara

    I think it’s impossible to be fully red-pilled and still respect women as anything more than semen recepticles, wombs, housekeepers and childcare providers. Does this justify engaging in homosexual sex? Some would say no, but certainly there is something deeply effeminate about getting strong romantic feelings for a woman since they can’t reciprocate in the way a man truly needs.

  85. AndrewR says:
    @James J O'Meara

    The IFLS crew still thinks it’s 2004 when young earth creationists still were more than a circus sideshow exhibit.

    Critical theory has infected every branch of “science” now so “science” just means whatever Jewish Democrats say it means

  86. Wilkey says:
    @S. Anonyia

    When liberal men attack conservatives, it doesn’t seem particularly feminine. They are vicious and relentless, especially when they think they are smarter than their target or have greater social status.

    Maybe. But there are plenty of women who enjoy viciously attacking other women. I’m not too sure there’s a masculine/feminine angle to their nastiness.

    To extend my own comment a bit, I think for most conservatives our conservatism is just an extension of some other part of our personality. Many devout Christians are conservative. That is what is most important how they see themselves. They are only conservative as an extension of their faith. The conservatism is secondary. As more than a few faiths have proven, if you change their faith you can change their politics. See what’s happening to Mormonism right now.

    But with liberalism, many don’t have a traditional faith. Their politics is their faith. Many of them, like monks and nuns, are even effectively celibate (or at least childless). They are completely indifferent or actively opposed to having children. They are more interested in spreading their “faith,” sometimes at great personal cost.

    There is a lot more to the Woke Left-as-religion analogy than most people recognize. It is one of the reasons the Woke Left is so effective. The other reasons, of course, are more financial – that fact that mass immigration makes a shitload of money for the rich, and the fact that focusing on racial grievances distracts from the huge and rapidly growing wealth disparities in the West. The total wealth of billionaires climbed last year – a year of immense financial disruption for so many – climbed from $8 trillion to $13 trillion. That’s a 62% increase in a single year. Woke Leftists, whatever they think they’re fighting for, have essentially become missionaries and mercenaries for the oligarchs. Of course so have all the “conservatives” fighting for tax cuts for the rich, but that’s an issue for another time.

    • Agree: Alden
  87. Dnought says:
    @AndrewR

    My own take is that they’re basically groupthink enforcers

    .
    The usual reference on these matters…Orwell.
    “It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy.”

  88. Alden says:
    @Rockford Tyson

    Some, not all the MEN OF UNZ are obsessed with breeding and White fertility rates. My husband and his 2 brothers produced 11 White children between the 3 brothers. And 17 grandchildren; so far.

    I’ve never heard any of them say a word about fertility. They just do it.

    But the MEN OF UNZ on and on, every day, commenting about every article no matter what the subject that White women, White women alone are responsible for White reproduction.

    Anyone who cruises around the web and finds this site would assume the MEN OF UNZ don’t know how to do the deed that makes a White baby, firmly believe that it takes only an egg to make a baby, and truly are ignorant of the fact that it takes a man and a woman to make a baby.

    If the MEN OF UNZ wanted White children, they would have them. But they didn’t. As for masculinity it’s the epitome of wimp nerd beta Woody Allenism to display your childless womanless sexless impotent whining about fertility on the WWW.

  89. anon[144] • Disclaimer says:
    @Alden

    •Troll

  90. @Rockford Tyson

    Oddly, liberal men tend to be less shy around women than conservative males, more promiscuous, more outgoing, etc, anf these are all stereotypically masculine traits.

    I didn’t see this at all in college. What I did see consistently were liberal men trying to virtue signal under the belief that liberal women would find that attractive. The opposite happened as liberal women simply aren’t attracted to their men. A girl I was sleeping with in fact told me about how her liberal boyfriend fit into this category.

    Because liberals have more of the stereotypically feminine trait of empathy, they are more sensitive to inequality, and make the fight against injustices central to their ideology.

    I wish that were the case.

    Liberal men do have higher levels of empathy and the problem is that it overrides their ability to think rationally. It’s perfectly fine to be empathetic but liberalism encourages cultural and ethnic suicide by promoting mindless globalism over rational self-interest. Liberalism decrees that race doth not exist which means some poor third worlder has not only equal right to your resources but is in fact more equal because within the liberal ideology Whites are deemed morally inferior.

    Liberals always feel sympathy for the underdog, be they poor working-class white workers in the 1950’s and 60’s, or destituted immigrants now. Income tax, end of segregation, etc, all liberals finding unfair treatment and social inequality deplorable.

    Liberalism is a modern cult built around race denial and is certainly not a labor movement. They don’t care about working-class White workers and never have. In their minds working class Whites are crass brutes that hold back non-Whites through daily discrimination. In fact this is why they have welcomed third world immigration. They believe Hispanics will be better for the country than poor Whites. This has not worked in California to their expectations and the response? Blame Whites.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  91. @Alden

    Good lord Alden calm down.

    Here is what Andrew said earlier:
    But Sailer brings up a good point. Women are unquestionably more childish when it comes to being able to have a friendly debate. They take everything personally.

    You really aren’t breaking stereotypes.

    Women have a harder time with criticism and open debate.

    The colleges are packed with White female professors that flip out when you present evidence that contradicts the narrative.

  92. Lurker says:
    @Mr. Blank

    Left-wingers can cocoon themselves off from right-wing thought fairly easily

    Mostly they manage that without even knowing it’s happening.

    • Replies: @anon
  93. Yawrate says:
    @Barack Obama's secret Unz account

    Liberals were and are fairly open minded and will discuss issues without resorting to diatribes. But many liberals have become leftists or more politely, progressives. And leftists brook no dissent.

    As as soon I detect leftism I resort to platitudes and near agreement. You can’t win an argument with a zealot.

    My fall back line is “now I understand.”

  94. @Bardon Kaldian

    Liberals are, to some extent, similar to this, lower type of women. They seek validation of others; they are spineless, but they ruin others’ lives if they can; they are not truly individualistic; not rational; their emotions are shallow; … At the end, they lack moral character & fortitude.

    How do many women validate themselves?

    By invalidating others.

    This is also true of many liberals.

    That’s why women have cliques, go to the bathroom together, and will talk endlessly about others with each other to confirm their status.

    And they can be very very cruel.

    There’s a great Seinfeld bit, the atomic wedgie episode, where George recalls getting one from the gym teacher in high school, and Jerry informs Elaine about how a wedgie works and when a wedgie becomes an “atomic wedgie” — “very rare.”

    Elaine responds by saying “boys are sick.”

    Jerry asks “what do girls do?”

    Elaine: “We just tease someone until they develop an eating disorder.”

    From 1:35 to 2:05.

  95. anon[430] • Disclaimer says:
    @Lurker

    Mostly they manage that without even knowing it’s happening.

    It’s their normal. “Morning edition” on NPR, some NY Times over lunch with CNN in the background, “All Things Considered” in the afternoon, some NBC news with Shepard Smith or CNBC Rachel Maddow in the evening. Read the subscription to Atlantic or The Nation or Mother Jones from time to time. “Hate Has No Home Here” signs in the front yard.

    Never encounter an idea that isn’t part of the Narrative, therefore never have an independent thought.

    The Narrative forms a seamless bubble. I have neighbors that have been living inside it all their lives. Nice people, but largely clueless. Except all their kids are married to wypipo…

  96. @Alden

    Go off yourself, you trollop. I will never allow women to define to me what a man is. I couldn’t care less what your definition of masculinity is. If I am a beta nerd, you are an omega wench.And your reply exemplifies perfectly why modern white women are trash. That husband of yours fits perfectly into gthe definition of a beta nerd, to marry trash like you that has so little respect for men.

  97. anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Johnson

    A girl I was sleeping with in fact told me about how her liberal boyfriend fit into this category.

    Into what category? That she wasn’t attracted to him? Did she explain why?

  98. EdKPyros says:

    The “news sources” tweet only covers whites—curious if they separate out blacks.

    I recall reading—it might even have been a Sailer column—that blacks’ self-reported political leanings are completely unreliable due to so many not understanding the definitions of “liberal” and “conservative”.

    Does anyone remember that or know what column or paper that was from?

    Thanks!

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  99. Philip Neal says: • Website

    The 2012 post about argument as sport reminds me of something I have often thought about Brexit, from the referendum result to actual departure four years later: that it was a meta-conflict between two conceptions of politics.

    The leavers – Tory traditionalists and working class Labour – saw politics as a ritual war conducted with rhetoric like that of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson: tubthumping, funny and not meant to be fair. EU politics is not that kind of game and they never found any continental allies who were willing to play it, which is why they wanted to leave.

    The remainers had an emotional attachment to Europe, woven from student travelling, holiday homes and business trips on expenses, as a place where they felt more opulent and important than at home. They also imagined that EU membership had covertly transformed Britain into a managed democracy like Germany, where they were in power whoever was in power.

    Hence the sequence of events which led to the zombie parliament divided into leavers who would settle for nothing less than hard Brexit and remainers who would not appoint a new government or call a new election because it would mean countenancing an opposition.

    • Replies: @photondancer
  100. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EdKPyros

    I recall reading—it might even have been a Sailer column—that blacks’ self-reported political leanings are completely unreliable due to so many not understanding the definitions of “liberal” and “conservative”.

    I suspect that most voters (of all races) would have trouble giving a meaningful explanation of the terms “liberal” and “conservative”.

    The reason being that those terms do not have any actual meaning.

    In practice a conservative is just a liberal who doesn’t like paying his taxes.

    Almost all of the terms that are commonly used to describe political leanings – liberal, conservative, left, right, socialist, capitalist, fascist – once had actual meanings but now they don’t really mean anything at all.

  101. @Philip Neal

    Interesting analysis. A British, conservative friend of mine was anti-Brexit which initially took me by surprise. His job involves extensive travelling and his home life is split between 3 continents (pre-Covid obviously). His arguments against Brexit were economic but there may well have been some self image factors too.

  102. @Yawrate

    now I understand

    Who could possibly be so dense or weird as to hear that and think it sincere?

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks?