This is the meta-solution to ethics

[Ecmandu]

@Human_Action

Well, it is if you’re comparing an annual rate to the life-long chance of a woman being raped or sexually assaulted, and using different definitions of rape/sexual assault (my sources are using the FBI definition of forcible rape, so things like date rape aren’t counted).

Women don’t have a 1-in-6 chance of being raped or sexually assaulted every year..

Any thoughts on the implications for your theory, which predicted that female suicides were correlated with violent crime?

Clearly, though, the ease of suicide isn’t the whole shebang, though. Suicide in the U.S., where firearms are easy to get and make for painless suicide, is half as common as in Japan, where firearms are almost impossible to get.

Well, you can form a hypothesis, but that’s all. You certainly can’t draw conclusions from a hypothesis.

Or, you can look at other ways to falsify your theory, that involve analyzing data, not performing experiments. I’ve given several.

The thing about suicide is it has to do with the torture in the environment relative to the ease of use… so an environment cannot be as torturous but have high ease of use, or an society could be much more torturous and have low ease of use.

An example of this is the scenario I set up for 1000 people being put in a 1000 rooms with only a butter knife, and then 1000 people being put in a 1000 rooms with a serrated knife. Now, the odds of anyone killing themsleves in those rooms is very small, if not zero. However, if some people came in and started to torture them all-day, everyday in a multitude of create ways, you would find that more people used the serrated knife than used the butter knife. If you additional descreased the suicidal tension by putting a shotgun in 1000 rooms with 1000 people, probably nobody would use it, but if you began to torture them, more people would use the shotgun even more than the serrated knife. The POINT of this, is that if you only torture people in the room with the butter knife, there will be more suicides than in the rooms with the serrated knife and the shotgun!!!

That’s the concept of suicidal tension at work. As I suggested before, perhaps there is some dynamic in the Japanese culture that is more oppressive (causes more torture) than the American culture, it still doesn’t refute suicidal tension.

No women throughout their lives have a rate of being raped, some argue 1:6, some argue 1:5 either way, it’s totally INSANE that that happens, the rate for lifetime for sexual assault is 1:3.

[Ecmandu]

@Ecmandu

The thing about suicide is it has to do with the torture in the environment relative to the ease of use… so an environment cannot be as torturous but have high ease of use, or an society could be much more torturous and have low ease of use.

An example of this is the scenario I set up for 1000 people being put in a 1000 rooms with only a butter knife, and then 1000 people being put in a 1000 rooms with a serrated knife. Now, the odds of anyone killing themsleves in those rooms is very small, if not zero. However, if some people came in and started to torture them all-day, everyday in a multitude of create ways, you would find that more people used the serrated knife than used the butter knife. If you additional descreased the suicidal tension by putting a shotgun in 1000 rooms with 1000 people, probably nobody would use it, but if you began to torture them, more people would use the shotgun even more than the serrated knife. The POINT of this, is that if you only torture people in the room with the butter knife, there will be more suicides than in the rooms with the serrated knife and the shotgun!!!

That’s the concept of suicidal tension at work. As I suggested before, perhaps there is some dynamic in the Japanese culture that is more oppressive (causes more torture) than the American culture, it still doesn’t refute suicidal tension.

No women throughout their lives have a rate of being raped, some argue 1:6, some argue 1:5 either way, it’s totally INSANE that that happens, the rate for lifetime for sexual assault is 1:3.

Quoting myself here because I thought of something along the same lines… you say that sexual choice doesn’t effect suicide… I know one thing about Japanese culture that is less true in American culture, the Japanese are REALLY big on, compared to americans, RAPE PORN, and FRODDERISM… which might suggest that the distributions towards bullies have a higher concentration in japan than the US.

[Jonathan_Chance]

@Czarcasm

Pages of you pulling theories, suppositions and numbers out of your ass, and you think the only problem here is that we haven’t busted our collective asses creating and conducting studies to prove you right? How do you fit that much scientifically wrong and intellectually lazy into one brain?

That’s too much. And possibly so is this thread.

One more bit. Just one. That doesn’t look like real debate and this thing is closed.

[Czarcasm]

@Ecmandu

Quoting myself here because I thought of something along the same lines… you say that sexual choice doesn’t effect suicide… I know one thing about Japanese culture that is less true in American culture, the Japanese are REALLY big on, compared to americans, RAPE PORN, and FRODDERISM… which might suggest that the distributions towards bullies have a higher concentration in japan than the US.

Frodderism?
edited to add: Got any stats that show there is a higher concentration of bullies in Japan?

[Ecmandu]

Well… it looks like the “cite” logical fallacy is going to be my undoing here… but I’ll type one more post before the thread gets shut down.

You want to talk about why the Japanese commit more suicide than the Americans do? The only way this can be understood is through sex.

The Japanese are WORLD famous for three things in porn, censoring genitilia, videos called “reverse gangbang” videos and rape porn.

The reason the Japanese censor genitilia is a very easy thing to demonstrate in any culture, which is that women work to commodify their nudity and men don’t.

The way that you demonstrate this is that you perform the exposure request and exposure offer tests. The exposure request test is to have men ask women in a safe place (not some deep dark alleyway) if they will show you their bodies without clothes, now, in any society in the world, you are likely to have the police called on you if you do this. Now to reverse the situation have women ask men this, and, not only will men not call the police, they probably will show their bodies without clothes on.

The exposure offer test is to approach women and ask them their opinion on your private parts in a SAFE place (not some deep dark alley way) and women will likely call the police on you. Have women perform the same exposure offer test to men, and men will not only not call the police, they’ll WAY more often than not say “yes”, while they are thinking in their minds “HELL YES!!!”.

The point is that men don’t horde nudity to create a commodity out of it and women do, and because you need to defend the female denial system to get sexual choice, both men and women police officers WILL arrest men for attempting to reduce the value of nudity (which triggers the female denial system).

Another way this can be observed, and I read a study recently performed that proved it, is that it’s not men who call women sluts, it’s actually women, and the reason women do this, is because women become absolutely vicious when anyone tries to devalue the commodity of nudity or sex. And because of the female denial system and the fact that the most aggressive men get more sex in Japan than the US, Japanese porn censors genitilia!

The reverse gangbang videos are still censored (unless made outside of Japan), and the architecture of these videos is to have a nice guy (usually a zen monk or a teacher) to have hordes of women swarm them and all of them give them sex… the reason the Japanese ones are world famous is because they use insane numbers for one man that no other country uses… numbers over 20 women at times. This pierces the psychology of men craving sexual choice for doing the right thing.

The third thing the Japanese are world famous for in porn is RAPE SEX videos, and, if you try to find rape sex videos, you will find that they are almost exclusively Japanese, and this also suggests a larger distribution towards the bullies in that culture than in the American culture.

Not to mention that Japan is WORLD famous for it’s incidents of Frotteurism (running ones genitals against someone against their consent).

Actually the case of Japan makes my case perfectly, which is that the distribution of sex towards the bullies creates higher suicide rates.

I literally have hundreds of pages of evidence in my head, so it’s hard to tease it all out, but from what I’ve come to understand, I can give you experiments to perform and I can predict those experiments because of the way this species works.

[Ecmandu]

@Czarcasm

Frodderism?
edited to add: Got any stats that show there is a higher concentration of bullies in Japan?

Not higher percentage of bullies… just that the sexual distribution gives the bullies a higher percentage of sexual selections than America, bullying is not just war.

[Czarcasm]

@Ecmandu

Not higher percentage of bullies… just that the sexual distribution gives the bullies a higher percentage of sexual selections than America, bullying is not just war.

I never mentioned war, so I don’t know where that came from. Where are the stats to back up your modified statement, then?
And what is “frodderism”?

[Ecmandu]

@Czarcasm

I never mentioned war, so I don’t know where that came from. Where are the stats to back up your modified statement, then?
And what is “frodderism”?

I explained it two posts up… I used a common misspelling for it and spelled it correctly the second time. Frotteurism is the non-consensual rubbing of ones genitals against someone… subways, streets, houses, etc…

[Czarcasm]

@Ecmandu

I literally have hundreds of pages of evidence in my head, so it’s hard to tease it all out, but from what I’ve come to understand, I can give you experiments to perform and I can predict those experiments because of the way this species works.

Not our job to do your work for you, sorry.
You say you have “hundreds of pages of evidence” in your head, but you can’t find any corresponding real life evidence that matches those hundreds of pages?

When something can be found in your head but not in real life, it isn’t referred to as “evidence”. It’s referred to as “imagination”.

[andros]

@Ecmandu

Well… it looks like the “cite” logical fallacy is going to be my undoing here…

Requesting evidence for erroneous and outlandish claims is not in any sense a logical fallacy.

[Human_Action]

@Ecmandu

No women throughout their lives have a rate of being raped, some argue 1:6, some argue 1:5 either way, it’s totally INSANE that that happens, the rate for lifetime for sexual assault is 1:3.

Yes, it is a problem.

Any comment on how the drop in violent crime without a corresponding drop in female suicides contradicts your theory?

[Human_Action]

@Ecmandu

You want to talk about why the Japanese commit more suicide than the Americans do? The only way this can be understood is through sex.

My goodness, it’s like Freud never died…

@Ecmandu

The reason the Japanese censor genitilia is a very easy thing to demonstrate in any culture, which is that women work to commodify their nudity and men don’t.

The way that you demonstrate this is that you perform the exposure request and exposure offer tests. The exposure request test is to have men ask women in a safe place (not some deep dark alleyway) if they will show you their bodies without clothes, now, in any society in the world, you are likely to have the police called on you if you do this. Now to reverse the situation have women ask men this, and, not only will men not call the police, they probably will show their bodies without clothes on.

The exposure offer test is to approach women and ask them their opinion on your private parts in a SAFE place (not some deep dark alley way) and women will likely call the police on you. Have women perform the same exposure offer test to men, and men will not only not call the police, they’ll WAY more often than not say “yes”, while they are thinking in their minds “HELL YES!!!”.

The point is that men don’t horde nudity to create a commodity out of it and women do, and because you need to defend the female denial system to get sexual choice, both men and women police officers WILL arrest men for attempting to reduce the value of nudity (which triggers the female denial system).

Another way this can be observed, and I read a study recently performed that proved it, is that it’s not men who call women sluts, it’s actually women, and the reason women do this, is because women become absolutely vicious when anyone tries to devalue the commodity of nudity or sex. And because of the female denial system and the fact that the most aggressive men get more sex in Japan than the US, Japanese porn censors genitilia!

You understand that men and women are physically different, yes? That male and female biology leads to different reproductive strategies? You seem completely ignorant of the most basic concepts of human sexuality. Please, read about these things before forming elaborate, misogynistic, theories about them. Why men place more value on casual sex with strangers than women do should not be a mystery to you.

@Edmandu

The reverse gangbang videos are still censored (unless made outside of Japan), and the architecture of these videos is to have a nice guy (usually a zen monk or a teacher) to have hordes of women swarm them and all of them give them sex… the reason the Japanese ones are world famous is because they use insane numbers for one man that no other country uses… numbers over 20 women at times. This pierces the psychology of men craving sexual choice for doing the right thing.

The third thing the Japanese are world famous for in porn is RAPE SEX videos, and, if you try to find rape sex videos, you will find that they are almost exclusively Japanese, and this also suggests a larger distribution towards the bullies in that culture than in the American culture.

Not to mention that Japan is WORLD famous for it’s incidents of Frotteurism (running ones genitals against someone against their consent).

Actually the case of Japan makes my case perfectly, which is that the distribution of sex towards the bullies creates higher suicide rates.

Your theory is rapidly losing predictive power here, now that you’ve stated that it’s both the nice guys, and built-ridden “bullies” that commit suicide. Why, that’s indistinguishable from suicide that’s totally unrelated to your theory…

[Ecmandu]

@Human_Action

Yes, it is a problem.

Any comment on how the drop in violent crime without a corresponding drop in female suicides contradicts your theory?

There’s one possibility that I can think of right now, and it may not be the right one.

From my model, the worst thing you can do to a human being, is to sexually neglect behavior that reduces conflict (it actually took me a long time to figure this out!), and to sexually flood behavior that increases it. ONE answer COULD be, that what happens more on the male side, can also happen on the female side, just with less frequency. So I have a theory of secondary causes from the most primary cause, and also a theory that the primary cause can also happen with the other gender as well, occasionally (perhaps).

I definitely read that the two top reasons listed for suicide were lack of a partner and loss of a job, regardless of whether these people are classified as mentally ill, which you are putting forth.

Now, we know two things for a fact about this and basically every other species on earth… the males are more sexually neglected than the females. We also know, because of the exposure request and exposure offer “thought experiment” (although I actually found a woman to do this study with me, so I know it’s true), that women seek to horde sex as a resource to buy and get very angry when someone tries to lower the price of nudity and sex (it triggers their denial system).

From this, we can surmise that since males are the most sexually neglected, and women are basically prostitutes relative to men… that if sexual neglect were the leading cause of suicide and loss of a job were the leading cause of suicide, that this would have the most impact on men and not women. What we see in the suicide rates, reflects that.

[Human_Action]

@Ecmandu

There’s one possibility that I can think of right now, and it may not be the right one.

From my model, the worst thing you can do to a human being, is to sexually neglect behavior that reduces conflict (it actually took me a long time to figure this out!), and to sexually flood behavior that increases it. ONE answer COULD be, that what happens more on the male side, can also happen on the female side, just with less frequency. So I have a theory of secondary causes from the most primary cause, and also a theory that the primary cause can also happen with the other gender as well, occasionally (perhaps).

That can’t be the worst thing. Your model defines what’s best as what reduces the suicide rate the most. Homosexuals kill themselves more than heterosexuals do. Therefore, anti-gay bigotry is worse than any sexual anything heterosexuals are engaged in. QED.

@Ecmandu

I definitely read that the two top reasons listed for suicide were lack of a partner and loss of a job, regardless of whether these people are classified as mentally ill, which you are putting forth.

You have a source that claims trigger events are the underlying cause of most suicides, rather than being trigger events? By all means, share it!

@Ecmandu

Now, we know two things for a fact about this and basically every other species on earth… the males are more sexually neglected than the females.

No, I don’t know that for a fact.

@Ecmandu

We also know, because of the exposure request and exposure offer “thought experiment” (although I actually found a woman to do this study with me, so I know it’s true), that women seek to horde sex as a resource to buy and get very angry when someone tries to lower the price of nudity and sex (it triggers their denial system).

You think one subject constitutes a study that proves something? :smack:

Do you understand the concept of reproductive strategies?

@Ecmandu

From this, we can surmise that since males are the most sexually neglected, and women are basically prostitutes relative to men… that if sexual neglect were the leading cause of suicide and loss of a job were the leading cause of suicide, that this would have the most impact on men and not women. What we see in the suicide rates, reflects that.

So why do women kill themselves? You said it was due to rape and murder, I pointed out that this was dis-proven by the data…and you haven’t addressed that, the above is just why you think men kill themselves more often than women do.

[Ecmandu]

@Human_Action

My goodness, it’s like Freud never died…

You understand that men and women are physically different, yes? That male and female biology leads to different reproductive strategies? You seem completely ignorant of the most basic concepts of human sexuality. Please, read about these things before forming elaborate, misogynistic, theories about them. Why men place more value on casual sex with strangers than women do should not be a mystery to you.

Your theory is rapidly losing predictive power here, now that you’ve stated that it’s both the nice guys, and built-ridden “bullies” that commit suicide. Why, that’s indistinguishable from suicide that’s totally unrelated to your theory…

I think the theorists are wrong. Please don’t assume I haven’t read up on this stuff because I disagree with you. The basic theory that all social scientists have (not necessarily, but also a lot of evolutionary psychologists) is that men are less choosy than women are, but you can easily PROVE this to be false, what you can prove is that men sexually shun conspicuous consumption aggression and that women flood it with sex. This can not only be demonstrated, it has explanatory power, it explains why women aren’t “gruff” people and why you don’t see women blasting stereos on the street or in their cars, or modifying their tail-pipes or screaming at people, and this is just a fraction of the tip of the ice-berg. What is happening is that conspicuous consumption aggression is HIGHLY selected in men and has been for millions of years, and conspicuous consumption aggression is highly de-selected in women and has been for millions of years. From this, you can actually PROVE that sexual choice has more of an impact on violence than VIOLENT PEOPLE! If you don’t believe me, then do the studies I outlined.

You must be one of those people who buys the argument that women need to secure more resources for their offspring than men do, so they need to be more choosy (showing nudity is not sex!).

I understand that men and women are physically different??? Are you kidding?? Every nice guy knows that crossing the sexual di-morphism boundary causes rape and war and suicide. That’s why we have the phrase “nice guys finish last”! Assholes know this! But apparently, I can’t site it, even though the assholes know that if they break nice guy code they get sex for sure, and if they follow nice guy code they won’t get sex… nice guy code is the MODEL that assholes use, to BREAK, to get sex. That’s why you have millions of guys, who know exactly what I’m talking about, saying the phrase, “Don’t hate the player, hate the game.” “Game” MEANS “WOMEN”. But they can’t come right out and say it, because women might not have as much sex with them.

And you people are calling me naïve?

I do believe that guilt-ridden bullies can commit suicide… and the REASON, is because they want to be a nice guy, but them they figure out that if they are, they will no longer get sex… and it works with my theory, because sexual neglect of sexually meritous behavior is the worst crime that can be committed in a reproductive species.

Honestly, I get you guys, and this shit is going to be frozen or deleted.

I KNOW the female denial system. Calling people misogynists is the same as trying to shame non-bullies who don’t get sex as pity-sexers. When I had the talk earlier about disproving Cantor, I said, "You lost this argument before you even began (notice that real scientists who deal in logic don’t spam “cite”) and it’s true… but I knew before I even started this thread, that I lost, not because I’m wrong, but because of female sexual blackmail of the male cognition. Any reasonable human could see that this is occurring. And to be perfectly honest, nice guys have been telling people this shit since humans started talking. And you wonder why this world is such a mess? Look around, I’m telling you everything you can know.

sigh

But I didn’t cite anything…

[Ecmandu]

@Human_Action

That can’t be the worst thing. Your model defines what’s best as what reduces the suicide rate the most. Homosexuals kill themselves more than heterosexuals do. Therefore, anti-gay bigotry is worse than any sexual anything heterosexuals are engaged in. QED.

You have a source that claims trigger events are the underlying cause of most suicides, rather than being trigger events? By all means, share it!

No, I don’t know that for a fact.

You think one subject constitutes a study that proves something? :smack:

Do you understand the concept of reproductive strategies?

So why do women kill themselves? You said it was due to rape and murder, I pointed out that this was dis-proven by the data…and you haven’t addressed that, the above is just why you think men kill themselves more often than women do.

The two places where women commit more suicide than men are in rural parts of india and china… and the one thing these places both have in common is arranged marriages and killing female babies.

I also explained that it’s possible that some female suicides are from sexual neglect.

[zoid]

@Ecmandu

The two places where women commit more suicide than men are in rural parts of india and china… and the one thing these places both have in common is arranged marriages and killing female babies.

You keep presenting stuff like this as fact. As far as we know you’re completely making all of this up.

[Human_Action]

@Ecmandu

I think the theorists are wrong.

The list of branches of science you claim have it all wrong grows.

@Ecmandu

Please don’t assume I haven’t read up on this stuff because I disagree with you. The basic theory that all social scientists have (not necessarily, but also a lot of evolutionary psychologists) is that men are less choosy than women are, but you can easily PROVE this to be false, what you can prove is that men sexually shun conspicuous consumption aggression and that women flood it with sex.

You just got through claiming that men approached for sex by a stranger said yes 75% of the time, and women 0%. Then, you claim that men are more choosy in sexual partners than women are.

That’s contradictory.

And no, rich women and women with loud car stereos aren’t sexually shunned.

@Ecmandu

This can not only be demonstrated, it has explanatory power, it explains why women aren’t “gruff” people and why you don’t see women blasting stereos on the street or in their cars, or modifying their tail-pipes or screaming at people, and this is just a fraction of the tip of the ice-berg. What is happening is that conspicuous consumption aggression is HIGHLY selected in men and has been for millions of years, and conspicuous consumption aggression is highly de-selected in women and has been for millions of years.

Of course, you can’t explain why women would select for aggression.

@Ecmandu

From this, you can actually PROVE that sexual choice has more of an impact on violence than VIOLENT PEOPLE! If you don’t believe me, then do the studies I outlined.

I don’t believe you, and the burden of proof is on you.

@Ecmandu

You must be one of those people who buys the argument that women need to secure more resources for their offspring than men do, so they need to be more choosy (showing nudity is not sex!).

Yep. Warning: Educated opinions of scientists ahead.

5. Men historically have been constrained in their reproductive success primarily by the number of fertile women they can inseminate. This reproductive constraint on men can be separated into four relatively distinct problems that men historically had to solve to effectively pursue a short-term mating strategy: a) the problem of partner number, b) the problem of identifying which women are sexually accessible, c) the problem of identifying which women are fertile, and d) the problem of minimizing commitment and investment.
   …

6. Women historically have have been constrained in their reproductive success not by the number of men they can gain sexual access to but rather primarily the quantity and quality of the external resources they can secure for themselves and their children and perhaps secondarily by the quality of the man’s genes.

@Ecmandu

I understand that men and women are physically different??? Are you kidding??

No. You seem aware that men on average are larger and stronger, but that seems to be the extent of your thoughts on the matter. For one, you’ve only discussed sex in terms of rewards and pleasure, and not reproduction.

@Ecmandu

Every nice guy knows that crossing the sexual di-morphism boundary causes rape and war and suicide.

Yeah, I doubt that.

@Ecmandu

That’s why we have the phrase “nice guys finish last”! Assholes know this! But apparently, I can’t site it, even though the assholes know that if they break nice guy code they get sex for sure, and if they follow nice guy code they won’t get sex… nice guy code is the MODEL that assholes use, to BREAK, to get sex. That’s why you have millions of guys, who know exactly what I’m talking about, saying the phrase, “Don’t hate the player, hate the game.” “Game” MEANS “WOMEN”. But they can’t come right out and say it, because women might not have as much sex with them.

Your opinions. I’m already well aware of them.

@Ecmandu

And you people are calling me naïve?

I don’t think you’re naive.

@Ecmandu

I do believe that guilt-ridden bullies can commit suicide… and the REASON, is because they want to be a nice guy, but them they figure out that if they are, they will no longer get sex… and it works with my theory, because sexual neglect of sexually meritous behavior is the worst crime that can be committed in a reproductive species.

Again, you’re trading any sort of rigor or predictive power, for being able to answer these pointed questions about the holes in your theory. If nice guys kill themselves, but also bullies, and also women, but only due to violence, or maybe not, because of sex too, or culture, or bigotry…you’re just saying “people kill themselves”, and listing all the types of people.

@Ecmandu

Honestly, I get you guys, and this shit is going to be frozen or deleted.

It’ll be locked if it stops being a debate. It’ll get deleted under unusual circumstances, generally pertaining to sock puppetry and the like. They aren’t value judgments, SDMB doesn’t operate that way.

@Ecmandu

I KNOW the female denial system. Calling people misogynists is the same as trying to shame non-bullies who don’t get sex as pity-sexers. When I had the talk earlier about disproving Cantor, I said, "You lost this argument before you even began (notice that real scientists who deal in logic don’t spam “cite”) and it’s true… but I knew before I even started this thread, that I lost, not because I’m wrong, but because of female sexual blackmail of the male cognition. Any reasonable human could see that this is occurring. And to be perfectly honest, nice guys have been telling people this shit since humans started talking. And you wonder why this world is such a mess? Look around, I’m telling you everything you can know.

sigh

Again, playing this card, that we’re all mindless and blackmailed and brainwashed, ends debate. Debate is only possible when both sides are operating in good faith.

@Ecmandu

But I didn’t cite anything…

Maybe get a blog? I don’t know what to tell you. This forum on this board is about what can be proven, not opinions. We have other fora for that.

[andros]

@Human_Action

This forum on this board is about what can be proven, not opinions.

Or, if not proven, then at least supported by actual evidence.

[Human_Action]

@andros

Or, if not proven, then at least supported by actual evidence.

I’d certainly settle for that, in this case.