A software company just went bust.  Happens a lot.  That a woman happened to be running this company is not significant.  Lots of men have lost lots of other people’s money too.  What is significant is that she starts off her explanation of how she pissed away all her investor’s money by talking about her sex life.
She begins:
Something wasn’t right, and I couldn’t put my finger on exactly what it was. On the surface, it seemed like I had the best life. A popular blog with millions of readers. The perfect relationship with Brian, the most adoring fiance in the universe.
“Adoring Fiance†is girl code for “The man I am about to cheat on and then dump.†If a woman says her fiancee adores her, she is cruising for a dicking.  If she is not cruising for a dicking, she tells us she adores her fiancee, not that he adores her.
Then, one day, a few weeks ago, an event happened (I’ll save the details of that for some other time.) Suddenly a torrent of emotions poured in. I was overwhelmed. I stayed home from work one day–my best friend Erica sent me some poetry, and I just cried. I wept. It felt like my soul was pouring out of me, one tear at a time.
I reeled from the onslaught of emotions for days, and soon thereafter, I broke off my relationship with Brian.
And, by the way, forgot about running the company she was supposed to be running, with the result that the paychecks bounced and the investors lost all their money, but that, not being very important to her does not get much mention, even though the people she is addressing, the investors, are likely to be more interested in that part.
Here is what I guess happened, interpolating between “My adoring fianceeâ€Â “onslaught of emotionsâ€, and “payrollâ€.
“My adoring fianceeâ€
She fucked some bad boy, Mr Very Wrong. After Mr Very Wrong was done, he kicked her out of his room and soon thereafter called the next girl on his booty call list.
“onslaught of emotionsâ€
She dumped her fiancee and forgot about her business so as to be fully available in case the next booty call came. Â And the next booty call did not come.
“payrollâ€.
Payroll.
Good Lord– that was unbelievable. Whoever gave this moron money never deserved to have it to begin with.
Her blog had millions of readers….’and I just cried’
She’s a marketer, “millions of readers” is a giant lie.
I love that she doesn’t mind that she lost allof the investors money, bc it was a “growth experience” for her, and she’s more self confident now. WTF?!?!?
I get that failure happens, and I’m not asking that she commit sepuku over this…but to say in her very first post on the topic that she’s not upset that she lost the money is…boggling.
A man in her shoes would be lot less self confident now, with good reason for being less confident – it would be obvious to him he had just done something very stupid and morally wrong.
That she is more self confident now indicates that after her company went bust, she got the second booty call.
Hah. This explains so much.
Indeed it does.
Wow.
Proverbs 30:20
“This is the way of an adulteress: she eats and wipes her mouth and says, “I have done no wrong.â€
Well duh!
The wifey swallows. She recites that just to please me.
ZING!
Well, now she can do a lot more staying home and crying. Seems like it worked out for her.
Thought to be fair, I bet there are a bunch of men who would stay home, play video games, and masturbate. Not the guys who would ever get control of a software company, though.
If a male ran his company into the ground by staying at home, playing video games, and masturbating, he would not tell us it was growth experience and improved his self confidence.
Further, when posting an apology to his investors, he would not tell us about how he was getting really high scores in the video games.
Which is the result of not keeping women on leashes.
Behold the broken muse machine:
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-destruction-of-muse-machine.html
Hey now… let’s not hate on studs like me!
I Googled studies about the proportion of women on the Board of Directors, and stock market performance. This was the first academic result on Google.
http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dobbin/cv/workingpapers/Board_Diversity_and_Performance_07_01_10.pdf
Investors in the Stock Market must be sexists. Down with the efficient market hypothesis. Up with the patriarchal market hypothesis.
From this, I propose a new type of index fund, the anti-diversity fund. We invest in the S&P 500, in proportion to the percentage of White Men on the board, and in executive positions.
Could you imagine the ruckus that would ensue if such a fund were created? Especially if it outperformed the market?
And in particular if this innovative Family of Funds was created and heavily invested in by Mohamed El-Erian. Remember, they used to say only Nixon could have gone to China.
This supports Scott Alexander’s hypothesis that leftism happens when groups accumulate enough wealth and security under common-sense policies that they think they can afford to piss it away in signalling games.
http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/03/04/a-thrivesurvive-theory-of-the-political-spectrum/
I have been sympathetic to the wealth –> leftism relationship.
But I am re-reading The Gulag Archipelago by Solzhenitsyn.
(That folks like BHO and Bergoglio apparently harbored Marxist sympathies *after* that was published in 1973 speaks to a serious defect of both of their characters.)
The thing is, the Soviet Union was desperately poor, starving throughout the 1918 to 1956. And yet they were murderously lefter-than-thou throughout this time, as Gulag Archipelago makes clear. (It is utterly false when modern ‘progressives’ say that the USSR was totalitarian, not leftist. Historical accounts show it was utterly holier-than-thou leftist.)
My sense is that the better relationship is,
irreligion/antireligion –> leftism
That was the problem in the USSR then I think it is the problem here and now, expressed differently. The decline of the west now is demographic and religion was and is the only known antidote.
I think a better way to describe the wealth-progressivism relationship is this:
If 40% of births were outside of marriage 500 years ago, there would have been mass starvation. Plenty of women, with no way to earn a living, and the markets for charity, prostitution, et cetera are limited. Now, we can afford the welfare state, and single mothers can get along on their own, since even the lowest wages can buy you food and shelter. Technology and surplus wealth.
It’s not an actual cause – it just gives you the freedom to pursue stupid ideas.
I don’t think the issue is specifically religious, it’s moral. The system of “ethics” we praise in the West is explicitly an attempt to live without morality (which we refer to as “traditional morality”) and to treat society as a collection of atomistic individuals who participate in a purely judicial society (the so-called “social contract”).
That our moral tradition is Christian is, of course, important to us as Westerners, but is unimportant from the perspective of Leftism, which is just as happy overturning a Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or Confucian society (hence its claim to universalism: it can ruin anything). The common feature is replacing morality with judicial constructs like “rights.”
Marxism, having the same roots as the rest of liberalism, inherited this moral nihilism and exported it all over the world in a particularly virulent form.
>That folks like BHO and Bergoglio apparently harbored Marxist sympathies *after* that was published in 1973 speaks to a serious defect of both of their characters.
You really think either of them read the Archipelago? Why? Was it assigned in class or something?
>The decline of the west now is demographic and religion was and is the only known antidote.
Yes. Problem is, you can’t fake the funk-not with MTV and the internet everywhere. How you gonna keep ’em on the farm after they’ve met Karl Hungus?
Wow I didn’t even understand the Karl Hungus reference and that movie is one of my favorites.
The problem goes back to the original assumption that prosperity creates leftism. When times are good no one needs God and people do not do what they do not need to do. A large calamity and people would find God again. The moment women can’t work will be the moment they expect men to do it for them. When they can they’ll discard them like trash and take up the 23rd century version of feminism.
Prosperity causes leftism. People are adaptive to their environment. People will do what they can do and what they can get away with.
What then caused the Russian left singularity? Or the left singularity into which the Song dynasty collapsed?
And many would curse God for the calamity. And some would go into prostitution, drugs and alcohol because of their newfound poverty.
Crises produces extremes in both directions.
Yeshurun waxed fat (it is well worth reading Moshe’s original prophecy from which the quote comes.)
Prosperity does not cause Leftism per se. It causes corruption and idolatry. In the last few centuries, the idols are equality, science, humanity, etc. Idols are projections of human desire and of course require human sacrifice. You can build great empires on them, Egypt being the first example. In the end, though, the outcome is the same:
I am against you, Pharaoh king of Egypt,
you great monster lying among your streams.
You say, “The Nile belongs to me;
I made it for myself.â€
But I will put hooks in your jaws
and make the fish of your streams stick to your scales.
I will pull you out from among your streams,
with all the fish sticking to your scales.
I will leave you in the desert,
you and all the fish of your streams.
You will fall on the open field
and not be gathered or picked up.
I will give you as food
to the beasts of the earth and the birds of the sky.
All the fish, of course, are all the hangers-on of the system built on lies and idolatry.
The Russian Revolution was precede by a century of growing wealth and elite nihilism, and then a war which created massive social upheaval. When you look at the great works of Russian literature from the 60 years preceding the revolution, they all either reveal an irreligious worldview or one reacting to a crisis of faith.
Leftism is the attempt to replace an elite based on moral superiority. I don’t think it’s directly connected to wealth.
The study cited by hitlerwasananimallover was selectively quoted. Its conclusions are very different: “Our findings are consistent with the proposition that bias is affecting stock price. Female directors have negative effects on stock value and no effects on profits.”
Stock value is generally used as the index of company performance. Profits isn’t, because companies manipulate them, in order to reduce their tax bill. Accounting tricks, business decisions, et cetera.
[…] By jim […]
I’ve been meaning to ask, what are your opinions on mild Polygyny?
It is eugenic, and in accordance with female nature, but it means that some men go without, so are not attached to society. Afghanistan has a big homosexuality problem because of polygyny.
If you have a large problem population that cannot or will not work, then the obvious solution is to put the problem men in prison or the ghetto, and marry off the problem women as junior wives, but you don’t want to have a large problem population. You want the smallest possible problem population.
Otherwise, that problem population becomes too big to handle…
When reading about women I always think of Ether Villar’s book “The Manipulated Man.” One point she brings up is that most women don’t know how stupid they look to men. They think they’re being smart
No man cares about this woman’s personal growth. In fact, no women cares about it either. What people want to hear when you mess up is that you messed up and that you’re sorry and are working on a way to amend the situation.
Women without children are narcissists. Any man who acted that way would be challenged on his behavior a thousand times mostly by women right after they slept with him a few times.
In the movie “Equilibrium” the world is kept in peace by a drug which eliminates emotion in humans. The filmmakers decided to depict the world as tyrannical and militant. The people in the film rebel against the drug fueled government in order to restore balance. I disagree with the idea that a world free of emotion would be tyrannical. In fact the opposite is true. A tyranny is defined not by strict rules but by a near infinite amount of rules which can be enforced subjectively at the whim of the enforcer.
Emotions are present in all social mammals. Love is the brain’s interpretation of a chemical reaction. It’s used to bond people together to better facilitate the survival of the group. Unlike what religion and women will tell you, love is not some mystical force. If you alter the chemicals in a person’s brain artificially you can create someone who loves everyone. If you change the chemicals again you can create a person incapable of love. One of the benefits of experimenting with psychological drugs is the realization that emotions are almost solely determined by the brain’s chemistry and interpretation.
What I disagree with is that if humanity turned from emotion it would be tyranny. I believe it wouldn’t be needed as the society would function much better than it does now. The society I imagine would be similar to the Vulcans in Star Trek.
Emotions are required for brain function. Without them, there would be no way of determining which information needs to be remembered, focused on, et cetera. How can you do most tasks without intuition?
People who lack emotion, have all sorts of brain problems as a result of this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexithymia
The idea of Spock is nonsense. He’s doesn’t lack emotion – he’s just calm. He certainly finds some subjects interesting, and others unimportant.
Vulcans are a race of stoics who have powerful emotions but learned to suppress them through meditation. It was the suppression of their emotions which allowed them to surpass humans in their development.
I disagree with your definition of intuition. I don’t believe it has anything to do with emotions. It’s a function of the mind to connect two unlike points together. Intuition is required for innovation. An apple falling on a man’s head and him discovering gravity is an intuitive leap. While he may have felt happy afterwards it was not emotion which drove him to this.
I don’t believe emotions are useless, at least not in their current state. But the belief that emotions are anything more than a chemical function of the brain is wrong. Emotion must be superseded by logic, the squared circle. Otherwise there is madness and nonsense. There is feminism.
Let’s remember that Vulcans are a fiction invented for a 1960s TV show. I’m not sure you can draw too many valid conclusions about life and emotion based on that.
You may also be going a little bit too far in saying that emotions are nothing more than a chemical function in the brain. While you are right that we have discovered that chemicals can have an effect on the emotions experienced by a person, there is no proof that emotions are ONLY caused by chemicals. Eastern spiritual traditions describe different “levels” of reality/energy (physical, emotional, thought, spirit), mediated by chakras that explain things differently. I have experienced these chakras and so they are real to me, though I understand that someone who has not is understandably going to be skeptical. And I can’t prove they exist to you because it is just my own subjective, unverifiable experience. My point is just that there is no proof that emotions are purely chemical – just that emotions can be affected by chemicals. It’s like saying that because there’s no scientific proof that God exists, that proves that He doesn’t exist. You can say the former but can’t say the latter.
I’m familiar with the chakras though I haven’t experienced them. I try to study a lot of the religious beliefs in the hopes that one of them will be true. There may be something more to chakras than most religious beliefs though as there is some evidence that things like acupuncture works. The problem is that there is so much nonsense being peddled by religion it’s too time consuming to find anything worthwhile.
If you take a pragmatic approach to emotions you can see that they’re found in other species and that they directly related to our survival. Women are emotional because they need to be in order to communicate with infants. Men have a greater ability to suppress emotion because they need to. It’s difficult for a man to hunt a bear with tears in his eyes.
I see no reason for there to be a spiritual explanation for emotions when a logical one is present. Our behavior is a derivative of our need to survive and replicate. If you use that as a principle than human behavior is not difficult to understand.
Why would people avoid tyranny if tyranny did not make people sad. Why would you clean things if dirt did not disgust you. Why would you eat if you did not fell hunger or pleasure from. Why would you do anything to avoid death if death did not frighten you.
There is no such thing as rational thought without emotion, our emotions tell us what we want and our rational mind figures out how to get them. Without emotions we would not want anything and our rational minds would not have anything to do and we would not care about that, probably just sit there until they starved. This is extreme depression allot depressed people say they did not feel sad just that they did not feel much, did not feel motivated to do anything.
The drugs in equilibrium did not really suppress all emotions just certain ones. The drug takers seemed to still be quite motivated by conformism and status seeking for example.
[…] Why women need to kept on leashes A software company just went bust.  Happens a lot.  That a woman happened to be running this company is not significant.  Lots of men have lost lots of other people’s money too.  What is significant is that she starts off her explanation of how she pissed away all her investor’s money by talking about her sex […] Ever faster movement left Weasel zippers reports some tweets: Now, not only can free speech get you fired, supporting, people’s right to free speech behind closed doors with the blinds drawn, while piously deploring what they say, can get you fired. Observe that Josh Olin did not take the horribly extreme ultra ultra far right neo nazi position that people […] ESR moves ever leftwards Esr has to move ever leftwards, or else suffer persecution, and to prove himself sufficiently left, has to enthusiastically support the ever greater persecution of his fellow leftists. Thus each leftist has to move further left, and has to support the persecution of his fellow leftists even more than he did last year. This is […] Shooting Gennady Kernes The Ukraine, like most of the former communist lands, experienced a five finger conversion to capitalism. State assets mysteriously wound up in the hands of some individuals. Gennady Kernes was prominent among those individuals. In the Ukraine the new plutocrats have proven less competent at utilizing assets than stealing them. Ukraine lacks law, tradition, and […] Technological decline If we cannot build high buildings any more, progressives say we are now so sophisticated that we are now superior to status competition based on giant penis substitutes, and status competition based on having a higher corner office than the other business executives. If high art is an aids infested trannie projectile vomiting over the […] […]
Why would people avoid tyranny if tyranny did not make people sad. Why would you clean things if dirt did not disgust you. Why would you eat if you did not fell hunger or pleasure from. Why would you do anything to avoid death if death did not frighten you.
Sadness is an emotion so I’ll let that go. The other things you list aren’t emotions. Disgust is created by a fear of death. We are disgusted by shit because it contains harmful bacteria. Likewise for dirty things. Hunger is an impulse in the brain but is handled with a different portion of the brain than the social mechanism. A person can develop a fear of un-harmful things and we call it a phobia, an irrational fear. Somewhere in the past the person paired danger with that object or circumstance. Again death and fear are handled by another portion of the brain and shouldn’t be considered emotions. Emotions are relegated to social mammals. Crocodiles feel no emotions and yet know fear and hunger. Without emotions we would still fear, feed, and fuck.
How do you know crocodiles feel no emotions? How much study has ever actually been done on their tears, for instance?
I don’t know. I doubt they do. They would sense fear but nothing complex like humans. I don’t know about crocodile tears. I was thinking about crocodiles in the sense of being ancient creatures, unchanged for millions of years, and being little more than an instinctive brain. They would be the lizard brain, the amygdala, concerned with feeding, fighting, and fucking.
Love, or something.
Salt water crocodiles care for their children for several months. So, presumably they feel love for their children, and anger if you get too close their children.
I don’t believe the crocodile’s brain is complex enough to feel love. Providing for offspring is something all life does even single celled organisms provides something. I think of that type of provision as a survival instinct, genetic survival.
After looking it up it seems that most zoologists agree with me, crocodiles are instinctive creatures with little variation in their behavior. I could be wrong, they could feel love, but it seems unlikely.
Jim: crocodiles care for their children
Dr. Faust: I don’t believe the crocodile’s brain is complex enough to feel love… a survival instinct… it seems that most zoologists agree with me, crocodiles are instinctive creatures
yup, definitely a Ph.D.
Disgust is not created by the fear of death, animals have evolved the emotion of disgust because it helps animals avoid disease but you do not need to be conscious of the fact that disgusting things can carry disease to be disgusted by them, people who have no knowledge of bacteria are disgusted by shit.
How do you distinguish between instincts, feelings, and emotions. What is an instinct but doing what feels right, and what is an emotion but a group of feelings.
If we use your definition of an emotion those feelings that pertain to social interactions (first time I have heard this definition) then it is clear what a world without emotions would look like it would be a world filled with aspergery psychopaths. It would be a world without leftism but also no honor or manners. Everybody would do what they could get away with and any authorities would only care about enriching themselves. The only value children would have to there parents would be how much they can sell them for, (Earnest leftism is misdirected parental instincts) you can see how this situation would not last long and quickly collapse with all of these emotionless people going extinct.
Jim,
The Song Dynasty didn’t collapse into a leftist singularity. It was invaded, once by Jurchens, then by mongols. The leftist episode in the Song was early with Wang Anshi, and that was 200 years before the Song ended. No singularity.
It’s hard to get feedback loops working in such a big country without modern transportation.
Zhang Xianzhong was a warlord that arose when the Mongol Yuan Dynasty collapsed. You could make the argument that the Mongol collapse was a leftist singularity (they got too fond of printing money), but the mainstream explanation is that the Black Death and crop failure caused it to fall, and out of the turmoil you got all those bloodthirsty warlords.
Sorry, Zhang was from the Ming collapse, not the Yuan.
Jim,
I’m curious if you’ve ever considered the variation in male/female behavior. Specifically, IQ tests show general parity in men and women but with greater variation in the male curve. Likewise, personality tests show the same general variation with men spread out and women all clustered together. I’ve read that nature experiment’s with the males of the human species and was curious about your thoughts on the subject.
You mean Women below Men at the top? That’s the general consensus anyway.
Females I’ve ever worked with, at the top, were monsters at their job. Some uber. Most asian. But men were obviously the glue and gravity of 90% of things that mattered.
Some men I know (yet a small minority) love asian chicks. Me too. I cannot, for the life of me, put my finger on it.
I suspect that at least some of these men, some of the time, are attracted to submissive, attractive females.
However, that is not for me.
BTW, I’m done trolling. I has them – the data!
Yey. Asian chicks.
Though estonian chicks are good also. But highly intelligent well educated asian checks who only superficially accept the cathedral feminist bullshit are easier to find.
Indeed.
Asians are hot as fucking hell to me.
(I’m a wrestling standout beast, you be the judge…)
Brilliant scene friends:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njuIKGNcTVE
[…] Jim on women and entrepreneurship. […]