User Controls
Why are perverts such fucking retards?
-
2016-06-30 at 12:09 AM UTCTo be fair, i don't usually go to porn sites for intellectual discourse. It's even worse on the dankweb with random Russian and Spanish phrases thrown in.
-
2016-06-30 at 2:24 AM UTC[greentext]>no newzealand[/greentext]
The anglopshere sure is exclusionary -
2016-06-30 at 3:07 AM UTCIT WAS THE IMAGE LIMIT FUCK YOU!.
-
2016-06-30 at 6:38 AM UTC
-
2016-06-30 at 7:35 AM UTCTo answer the OP: Yes.
http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/04/intercourse-and-intelligence.php
Shit, 35% of graduate students at MIT are virgins? Guess there's some truth to the stereotype, at least in certain sectors, maybe at tail ends of bell curves (extremes). Guess there may be some truth to the stereotype. Although I do recall reading that the stereotype of intelligence and poor athleticism was a myth, which isn't surprising if you think about it from the view point of genes (mutations, health, correlation, brain being a part of the body, interconnection etc.). Doesn't mean they necessarily tend to be "fit", at least depending on the major and IQ range, the lifestyle may simply not foster it, and there are differences in interests, introversion.
Just ask Lanny about the computer science field.
And to finish it off with an pseudo-elitist quote: "An intellectual is a person who has discovered something more interesting than sex." - Aldous Huxley -
2016-06-30 at 7:47 AM UTC
Interesting charts. I think conventional wisdom would predict the line for women would be flatter than for men, "women get by on looks" and such, you wouldn't think intelligence would have a strong impact one way or the other.
Also I'm really surprised wellesley comp sci majors get laid more often than phil majors, almost to the point of doubting the reliability of the study. -
2016-06-30 at 5 PM UTCYou would almost be driven to driven to doubting the reliability of a study over a 10 percentile divergence that doesn't align with an aspect of your worldview, formed largely by your highly limited and naturally skewed life experience and limited knowledge (Ponder the expansive data which would be required, the magnitude and complexity of a properly conducted study to determine the causal factors!)!?
I just don't know about you anymore, Lanny. Ever sense you began regularly indulging in psychedelics it seems I've repeatedly had moments where I've questioned whether you're on a course that will you away from the path of pure reason. In addition there has been the subsequent, yet tragic and understandable (I know it well to be painfully reminded that I remain all too human.), corrupting effects of the recent emotional impact stemming from the events in your familial life.I think conventional wisdom would predict the line for women would be flatter than for men, "women get by on looks" and such, you wouldn't think intelligence would have a strong impact one way or the other.
No! The penile surplus, evolutionary history/theory, differential traits, promiscuity, sex drive (a region of the brain related to this is around 2x in volume or mass, IIRC, along with a myriad of other data. No, women are not "just as horny as men, societal/cultural factors aside.") anxiety, risk aversion, subconscious drivers effecting sexual behavior ->Selectiveness (keepers of the gate) - One pregnancy at a time followed by enormous resource devotion, even among hunter gatherers without birth control the gap between pregnancies being an average of 3 years IIRC. Men can continue to spread their seed far and wide. Remember your gene centrality of evolution. Dawkin's seminal The Selfish Gene. Just because they can attain sex (far, far) more easily doesn't mean they will. There's even fascinating data on the effects of the gender gap in educational attainment, the relative values placed on it when selecting a partner, and the effect it has on the dating/marriage market, with women being far far more reluctant to "marry down" facing a more limited pool and greater difficulties (hypergamy in action).
That you could miss something as fundamental as this...it just, it breaks me to see further evidence of what you've becoming.
BTW, I started back on my bulk Parnate supply after a temporary hitch in Nardil, this time combined with propranolol and pyrazolam to make up for deficits. Thought acceleration as usual, greater amount and speed, verbosity, fuller utilization of mental faculties. Then there's the whole "cyclic psychopathy" thing where artificially (I find this word bothersome.) reduced levels of depression, triggered by a cause in line with evo psych theory, also lead to a decline that evo psych theory predicts, an research supports, promote - pro-social behavior (anti-social personality disorder being arguably synonymous with psychopathy, possibly even a better predictor or harmful behavior).
We've been down this line enough times. You know you're just my favorite little outlet for sadism, at times. -
2016-06-30 at 5:17 PM UTCWow, pure sadism at its best. Haha. Good post, though.
-
2016-06-30 at 5:22 PM UTCThe comments on anal fisting videos like prolapse party are pretty funny "Oh god why the FUCK did I click this" "How can you not be on drugs and actually enjoy this" "DISGUSTING WTF"
-
2016-06-30 at 5:23 PM UTCI like turtles.
-
2016-06-30 at 10:27 PM UTC
I like turtles.
Thats a [FONT="]non[/FONT][FONT="] [/FONT][FONT="]sequitur if I ever heard one.
But on that note…[/FONT]
I can sing in 3 different languages
http://vocaroo.com/i/s1b34zaokcJD -
2016-06-30 at 11:10 PM UTCBill Krozby will be institutionalized/locked up within the next two weeks. Let's all enjoy his last fewvposts before he goes on a shooting spree, only wounds 3 people because he's drunk and shit and sees demons everywhere and becomes "The Austin Pizza Shooter" or some kinda shit.
Game over, fuckboi. -
2016-07-01 at 1:20 AM UTC
You would almost be driven to driven to doubting the reliability of a study over a 10 percentile divergence that doesn't align with an aspect of your worldview, formed largely by your highly limited and naturally skewed life experience and limited knowledge (Ponder the expansive data which would be required, the magnitude and complexity of a properly conducted study to determine the causal factors!)!?
Yes, it seems quite reasonable in fact. If a claim is contrary to your expectations, experiences, prior evidence then skepticism is wholly justified. I never said prior belief constitutes stronger evidence than a well conducted study, but I didn't look at a well conducted study, I looked at the chart posted out of context and if I were to accept the finding I'd want to learn about the actual methodology and findings as opposed to some vaguely sciency looking charts form a third hand source. Also if you read your own link you'd realize the chart in question was a campus survey for a college magazine, the link to which is now broken. We're not talking about the height of scientific rigor here.I just don't know about you anymore, Lanny. Ever sense you began regularly indulging in psychedelics it seems I've repeatedly had moments where I've questioned whether you're on a course that will you away from the path of pure reason. In addition there has been the subsequent, yet tragic and understandable (I know it well to be painfully reminded that I remain all too human.), corrupting effects of the recent emotional impact stemming from the events in your familial life.
"path of pure reason", kekNo! The penile surplus, evolutionary history/theory, differential traits, promiscuity, sex drive (a region of the brain related to this is around 2x in volume or mass, IIRC, along with a myriad of other data. No, women are not "just as horny as men, societal/cultural factors aside.") anxiety, risk aversion, subconscious drivers effecting sexual behavior ->Selectiveness (keepers of the gate)
You just listed a bunch of nouns, I guess it kinda sounds smart in like a movie villain sort of way but it's not a real argument for anything.Men can continue to spread their seed far and wide. Remember your gene centrality of evolution. Dawkin's seminal The Selfish Gene. Just because they can attain sex (far, far) more easily doesn't mean they will.
Again, this does nothing to explain why women at extrema points are more likely to have never had sex. The same evolutionary pressure to reproduce exists for the intelligent and unintelligent as for typical humans. The argument that low sex drive co-occurs with intelligence due to the opportunity cost of sex then it's an uphill battle to explain the reason for genetic intelligence in the first place and it still fails entirely to explain why the the graph for women is an arc rather than a descending line (that is we should expect women with low intelligence but presumably easy access to sex to have more sex since they don't have intellectual activities supposedly competing for their attention and ever evolutionary reason to have a high sex drive). -
2016-07-01 at 1:25 AM UTCOk, guys. What are we arguing?
-
2016-07-01 at 1:33 AM UTCI want to go to college again and just be the cool old dude who fucks young chicks.
I love it when you call me big cherry poppa. -
2016-07-01 at 2:16 AM UTC
Thats a [FONT="]non[/FONT][FONT="] [/FONT][FONT="]sequitur if I ever heard one.
But on that note…[/FONT]
I can sing in 3 different languages
http://vocaroo.com/i/s1b34zaokcJD
lol http://vocaroo.com/i/s1Wqq2V6NQL0 -
2016-07-01 at 3:03 PM UTC^was dootiful
