• 19 Posts
  • 124 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: April 1st, 2024

help-circle

















  • “Sex, Lies, and Brain Scans” talks about IQ and the problems with IQ. There’s also “Delusions of Gender” by Cordelia Fine, and “Neurolinguistics and Linguistic Aphasia.”

    First, I have had a neuropsych evaluation done and an IQ test. It has areas that are subjective and open to interpretation by the test administrator, already making IQ tests suspect. There is no way to quantify intelligence using actually measurable data. Sound is measured in Hz, light in nanometers, and these things fit nicely on a scale with numbers. Intelligence doesn’t require something so discrete. Octopuses, parrots, elephants, all have different brain anatomy from us and each other and are all quite intelligent. It’s hard to say what the secret sauce even is, let alone measure it quantifiably.

    Many neuropsych tests aren’t actually able to prove anything substantial about the brain itself or a person’s abilities, short of serious cognitive tests like the clock test which is also fallible. The reason for this is that most human intelligence is pretty close to each other and it’s actually hard to find substantial, consistent differences in the population. Think of how close in intelligence a bear is to a human - trash can design at Yellowstone is famously difficult because bear and human intelligence overlap so much. Humans are much more alike cognitively with each other than a bear.

    Second, we have the issue of implicit bias and priming. That tells certain groups if they are allowed to be “good” at something, if something is “meant” for them, if they will do well at it. When controlled for cognitive bias, IQ levels across most groups are equal and IQ tends to start to measure persistence/“resiliency” between the groups - which can be affected by something as simple as a coffee that morning or bad sleep.

    Last, we have actual medical conditions that make it hard to communicate and pass an IQ test, but the person’s IQ is intact/normal for them. There are musical geniuses that aren’t picked up by IQ tests, as well as athletic geniuses (Wayne Gretsky), artistic geniuses, and social geniuses.



  • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.worldtoFunny: Home of the Haha@lemmy.worldTaxes...
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    And homeowners don’t actually “own” their home, what we call homeownership here is really the government acting as your landlord and renting your house/property to you in the form of taxes.

    Whatever your yearly tax rate is, is your yearly rent. Which is why they can imminent domain that or kick you out for nonpayment of taxes. That’s why they can raise taxes if the value on “their” property increases, regardless of what causes the price increase.

    We make homeowners a special class of renter so that they can build wealth/equity while also getting more freedom to modify their home. That’s also why it takes longer to “evict” them. Homes cost so much to buy initially (but are better over time and if you move/sell) specifically as a filter to keep them for the wealthy unless you participate in the military, farm industry, or colonization via USDA loans (VA loans ofc for the military)




  • Lol this whole thread is so funny to me, as someone who regularly dates millionaires.

    Ya’ll are not a cash cow. Don’t worry, real gold diggers go after gold. You’re safe from gold diggers. That of course does not make you immune from financial abuse but that’s different than gold digging.

    Second, these dating forums are all roleplay. There’s a pretty big chance those are men role-playing as the greedy women of their stupid nightmares. No woman ever gets in proximity to a man only based on money. The idea is laughable to women. Even full service sex workers decline men and have actual correspondences with each other blacklisting men in the area to keep everyone safe. No woman ONLY cares about the money. They can’t afford to. However, men engaging with other men think like that because they don’t have to worry about the risk of violence as much. That’s why I think this is probably roleplay.

    Third, I hear men talking about their potential future wives like this all the time, including financially, if they’d date a fat girl, if they’d date a girl who doesn’t do oral, etc etc etc. Even if women are doing this, men do it too (and i bet you never called it out). Marriage is a contract that ties finances together so it matters. Personally, I’m never getting married but for those who do, it can really affect their ability to get housing or other stuff. It’s a sad feature of capitalism.

    And yes, capitalists gain a lot from this structure. They fish for sex workers in every industry, including modeling. This causes women to br traded like commodities and so the most valuable women per their standards they can eugenics into their line, will be the one they marry. A lot of men’s attraction for women is just based on how valuable she is as a human commodity. This is why “objectification” gets brought up so much.

    https://youtu.be/3n-yU_BpA4M?si=-CwuVC_45nn5vKUD

    Last, the above is the attitude of real gold diggers, which is open and frankly discussed with their actual source of gold. It is not financial abuse and to be clear financial abuse is wrong - it is instead a negotiation so that she can live at the same comfort level as him and enjoy her life. No rich man is confused about this. Most would be kinda embarrassed to not take care of her, like going to a fancy restaurant and she orders a small appetizer+water in her budget while he gets a wine tasting and a steak just makes him look bad. That’s how I know none of you are actually near this lifestyle, because you don’t innately understand this.

    Again, I am not getting married, I’m never having kids, and I’m poly; I demand these aspects specifically to bypass the interpersonal dynamic of me being treated as a commodity, and instead this forces my partners and myself to love in the moment, to actively choose each other, and to give resources freely and not coerced through a contract.