They’re mostly getting dunked on, but they’re wriggling around all over the thread raging about science being made “political.”

wojak-nooo frothingfash pit clown-to-clown-communication clown-to-clown-conversation grill-broke elmofire Bwaaa NOOOOO

  • happybadger [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    8 months ago

    In Braiding Sweetgrass the author mentions this Native American tribe where hunting is predominantly done by men but is only taught to boys by grandmothers. They de-masculinise it so that it doesn’t become a toxic competition for male virtues. Instead it’s taught as doing a hard but necessary thing in the context of stewardship and reciprocity for the land. They’re also learning the plants from the predominantly female gatherers since that’s necessary information when you’re away from camp. Segregating information based on sex only makes sense if one side is so disproportionately powerful that they think they can completely subjugate the other. That’s stupid when you have a limited number of hands and a set number of tasks required to survive.

    • ChaosMaterialist [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      That’s stupid when you have a limited number of hands and a set number of tasks required to survive.

      graeber Fragments

      violence, particularly structural violence, where all the power is on one side, creates ignorance. If you have the power to hit people over the head whenever you want, you don’t have to trouble yourself too much figuring out what they think is going on, and therefore, generally speaking, you don’t. Hence the sure-fire way to simplify social arrangements, to ignore the incredibly complex play of perspectives, passions, insights, desires, and mutual understandings that human life is really made of, is to make a rule and threaten to attack anyone who breaks it. This is why violence has always been the favored recourse of the stupid: it is the one form of stupidity to which it is almost impossible to come up with an intelligent response. It is also of course the basis of the state.

      • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        This is why violence has always been the favored recourse of the stupid: it is the one form of stupidity to which it is almost impossible to come up with an intelligent response. It is also of course the basis of the state.

        This resonates all the way to the USMC where they celebrate the crayon eating meme/joke as a personal identifier.

    • Poogona [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Unto Others has a section in it that has always stuck with me about division of labor in large groups vs small ones. Members of small groups tend towards being jacks of all trades, and their roles and duties look very similar to one another, and few functional distinctions can be made between them because anyone might have to do anything at any time. Large groups have a lot more specialization of labor within their structure.

      It’s not specifically a book about humans, more of a dry text about the evolutionary theories surrounding altruism. Humans demonstrate it well, but it’s a dynamic that other social animals like ants demonstrate too.

      • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        8 months ago

        Pretty much this. When you’re in a small band or tribe it’s “all hands on deck” all the time. There might be lowered expectations of the young and the old but everyone does something to benefit the group.

    • GarfieldYaoi [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      8 months ago

      Weird how they call for minorities to always be ready to justify not being purged by eugenics at any given moment, but they will demand a world where their worldview is NEVER challenged. It’s correct because they say so, it’s only a wacky coincidence that being “redpilled to the harsh truth” just so happens to say that they are super special and deserve extra privileges in society.

    • BountifulEggnog [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Yup, pc article that’s gonna be posted on femcentric sites to push a delusional narrative.

      Women had far fewer periods? Why? And why do you think they wouldn’t have been as focused on fertility as modern society? It’s literally their biological purpose, as it is for men.

      The woman went out hunting with the only source of food for the children attached to her chest… [of course not]

      As long as you don’t have any shitlings running around, it makes sense for every capable person to be involved.

      It’s pretty easy to research your way out of obvious truths. Even if there is just a marginal advantage for male hunters over female, it’s common sense that you wouldn’t want women to come because it would lead to people flirting and being distracted. I also don’t think there is a linear relationship where if you add more hunters it increases your success rate, if anything you will reach diminishing returns, so there is no benefit to bringing the whole tribe along

      My wife was raised by her grandfather who was born in an igloo in winter 1920. She’s Inuit and men being the hunters and women being the gatherers/home keepers (tending children, making and mending clothing, everything not related to hunting) is part of living memory from a stone age culture. Sure women were capable of hunting, fishing and trapping but it was primarily a male responsibility. Again, this is in living memory from a stone age culture not guesswork from anthropologists.

      Some of these are not full comments, just the funny parts in those comments.

  • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    8 months ago

    They are deeply emotionally invested in the idea that being aggressive assholes that struggle with basic hygiene expectations is because of some primordial caveman power level and not just them being aggressive assholes that struggle with basic hygiene expectations. nerd

  • M68040 [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    8 months ago

    People have never, at any point in human history, been that simple. Just because you don’t have access to transistors or combustion engines or whatever doesn’t mean personalities and interpersonal relations aren’t complex.

  • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    8 months ago

    The top comment is

    More people able to bring back dinner. It makes sense.

    And overall people seem to be agreeing with the comment. Dunno if this post was way before that happened or what but it seems to be the opposite what the title says

    • Orannis62 [ze/hir]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      8 months ago

      The next top level comment down from that one is “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, let’s keep believing the old hypothesis anyway” malding lol

    • KobaCumTribute [she/her]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s been long enough the mods may have cleaned it up, but there was a lot of brainwormed shit downthread. There are some quotes of it elsewhere in this thread.

  • iByteABit [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    8 months ago

    At this point it’s nothing revolutionary, there are multiple books saying the same. As always indigenous people and hunter gatherers are preferred to be seen as simplistic beings because admitting the opposite would quickly break quite a few narratives.

    People are complex beings and always have been, there were many different ways that they formed their societies differing from group to group. Some had equality of genders, some were patriarchal, some matriarchal. It’s intuitive if you don’t believe in those bullshit distinctions in the first place.

    • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      8 months ago

      it seems obvious given how unique people are

      People are so unique that you still want to pigeonhole them into a pair of preset biotruthy castes. galaxy-brain

        • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Then what were you saying? Take a stand instead of shuffling around holding the goalposts until you appear like the superior one in the room.

          • sixCats@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Emergent behaviours emerge from simple observations, the existence of exceptions to an observation isn’t a statement about the emergent behaviour of the population

            Your straw manning isn’t me moving goalposts, if you feel the need to resort to name calling in a discussion, it’s probably worth taking a step back from the monitor for a few minutes

            • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Emergent behaviours emerge from simple observations

              I don’t think it’s possible to deliver that in a more condescending and Reddity way while providing less explanation of where you actually stand.

              Your straw manning isn’t me moving goalposts

              Your masturbatory sense of inflated self-regard would make you plenty of fairweather friends in a lower division STEM class, but otherwise all I see is a “nuh uh.”

              glasses-off

              isn’t a statement about the emergent behaviour of the population

              All I see is glasses-on

              I believe that FEEEEEMALES statistically select for conveniently helpmeet roles in a way that makes exceptions and different cultures irrelevant because biotruths, and I do it in a plausibly deniable way that doesn’t sound like misogyny, bucko. up-yours-woke-moralists

              it’s probably worth taking a step back from the monitor for a few minutes

              You first, and take your fedora with you after tipping it.

                • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I hope you find whatever you’re searching for in life

                  Reddit-brained “totally not misogynist, buuuuuuuuuuut” misogynists try to walk away from arguments without smug concern trolling attempts challenge. Difficulty level: expert-shapiro