As an almost 70 year old man, I have some advice for young men.
-
4. Most "Heroes" are just selfish and insecure arseholes. Write down 10 guys who are supposeldly big heroes, and then actually research them. Eight of them will turn out to be total shitheads - greedy, selfish, and pompous fucknuts, and also mostly sex pests
Ergo. Stop looking for heroes, and immediately be suspicious of anyone who claims to be or who other people say is a big hero. This counts for almost exactly 100% of online influencers. They are 100% flogging you scams and grifts and lying
@screwturn along those lines, most kings and emperors were miserable fools whose compulsive power seeking led to constant paranoia and violence, even towards their their immediate family (and regularly towards cousins).
-
I pity your ignorance. You’re also rude and vulgar, but I forgive you for that. You can’t help it. Rudeness and vulgarity stem from ignorance.
Ignorance can be cured. Start here:
-
I pity your ignorance. You’re also rude and vulgar, but I forgive you for that. You can’t help it. Rudeness and vulgarity stem from ignorance.
Ignorance can be cured. Start here:
But wait. There’s more:
Female hunters of the early Americas
Sexual division of labor with females as gatherers and males as hunters is a major empirical regularity of hunter-gatherer ethnography, suggesting an ancestral behavioral pattern. We present an archeological discovery and meta-analysis that challenge the man-the-hunter hypothesis. Excavations at the Andean highland site of Wilamaya Patjxa reveal a 9000-year-old human burial (WMP6) associated with a hunting toolkit of stone projectile points and animal processing tools. Osteological, proteomic, and isotopic analyses indicate that this early hunter was a young adult female who subsisted on terrestrial plants and animals. Analysis of Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene burial practices throughout the Americas situate WMP6 as the earliest and most secure hunter burial in a sample that includes 10 other females in statistical parity with early male hunter burials. The findings are consistent with nongendered labor practices in which early hunter-gatherer females were big-game hunters.
Despite such theoretical considerations, some scholars have been reluctant to ascribe hunting functionality to tools associated with female burials (20–22). Concerning the Paleoindian Gordon Creek burial, Breternitz et al. (23) grappled, 'Since the burial has been determined to be a female, the inclusion of a projectile point preform has been difficult to explain. However, if the artifact had been used as a knife or scraper, typically women’s tools, then its inclusion with the burial is a more consistent association.' Nelson (24) challenged a DNA-based sex determination at Toca dos Coqueiros (25) partially on the grounds that '...[t]he presence of inferred funerary offerings in the form of chipped stone points and other tools and flakes appear to support [male estimation]....' On the one hand, such reluctance may reflect a degree of contemporary gender bias r ethnographic bias. On the other hand, ethnographically informed models of gendered subsistence labor remain plausible as quantitative phenomena or given the multiple pathways by which objects can come to be spuriously associated in the archeological record. Toward resolving the question of gendered big-game hunting practices among early hunter-gatherer populations in the Americas, we report the discovery of two Early Holocene [pre–8 thousand years (ka)] hunter-gatherer burials in association with big-game hunting paraphernalia and place these findings in the context of Early Holocene and Late Pleistocene burial practices throughout the Americas."
-
11. On the whole, women have had a raw deal for the entire history of the species, and the reason you aren't getting as much physical attention or getting a great job or a nice house is not their fault. Be nice to women without expecting to be compensated for it. They have more than enough shit on their plate, so be understanding and helpful, and try not to get in the way or make things worse for them
Make more women friends, you might be surpised at how nice that is
Also, women aren't a prize
@screwturn can't agree with you about sex, it's been one of the best things about my life, but everything else, yeah.
-
But wait. There’s more:
Female hunters of the early Americas
Sexual division of labor with females as gatherers and males as hunters is a major empirical regularity of hunter-gatherer ethnography, suggesting an ancestral behavioral pattern. We present an archeological discovery and meta-analysis that challenge the man-the-hunter hypothesis. Excavations at the Andean highland site of Wilamaya Patjxa reveal a 9000-year-old human burial (WMP6) associated with a hunting toolkit of stone projectile points and animal processing tools. Osteological, proteomic, and isotopic analyses indicate that this early hunter was a young adult female who subsisted on terrestrial plants and animals. Analysis of Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene burial practices throughout the Americas situate WMP6 as the earliest and most secure hunter burial in a sample that includes 10 other females in statistical parity with early male hunter burials. The findings are consistent with nongendered labor practices in which early hunter-gatherer females were big-game hunters.
Despite such theoretical considerations, some scholars have been reluctant to ascribe hunting functionality to tools associated with female burials (20–22). Concerning the Paleoindian Gordon Creek burial, Breternitz et al. (23) grappled, 'Since the burial has been determined to be a female, the inclusion of a projectile point preform has been difficult to explain. However, if the artifact had been used as a knife or scraper, typically women’s tools, then its inclusion with the burial is a more consistent association.' Nelson (24) challenged a DNA-based sex determination at Toca dos Coqueiros (25) partially on the grounds that '...[t]he presence of inferred funerary offerings in the form of chipped stone points and other tools and flakes appear to support [male estimation]....' On the one hand, such reluctance may reflect a degree of contemporary gender bias r ethnographic bias. On the other hand, ethnographically informed models of gendered subsistence labor remain plausible as quantitative phenomena or given the multiple pathways by which objects can come to be spuriously associated in the archeological record. Toward resolving the question of gendered big-game hunting practices among early hunter-gatherer populations in the Americas, we report the discovery of two Early Holocene [pre–8 thousand years (ka)] hunter-gatherer burials in association with big-game hunting paraphernalia and place these findings in the context of Early Holocene and Late Pleistocene burial practices throughout the Americas."
And . . .
"Early Women Were Hunters, Not Just Gatherers, Study Suggests
Regardless of maternal status, women hunted in almost 80 percent of recent and present-day foraging societies in a new study
People have long said that in prehistoric foraging societies, labor was divided by gender: Women gathered and men hunted. But now, a new study adds to the growing body of work challenging this idea, suggesting that prehistoric women were just as skilled at killing game as men were.
'We’ve had scattered reports here and there about women’s hunting,’ Vivek Venkataraman, an evolutionary anthropologist at the University of Calgary in Canada who was not involved with the research, tells Science’s Bridget Alex. But the new research 'pulls a lot of these things together.'
In the paper, published Wednesday in the journal PLOS ONE, a team of international researchers identified 391 foraging societies across the world, from the 1800s to present day. (Scientists use modern foraging societies as a window into past human behavior, reports NPR’s Nurith Aizenman.) Of these, they obtained data on hunting from 63 societies.
'We were reading papers written by people who had lived with these groups and had studied their behavior,’ study co-author Cara Wall-Scheffler, a professor and co-chair of biology at Seattle Pacific University, tells Live Science’s Jennifer Nalewicki. 'They were looking at people and recording what they did.'
Their analysis revealed that regardless of maternal status, women hunted in 50 of these societies—or about 79 percent. And more than 70 percent of female hunting appeared to be intentional—rather than opportunistically killing animals while doing other activities, per the study. In societies where hunting was the most important activity for subsistence, women participated in hunting 100 percent of the time.
'The hunting was purposeful,‘ Wall-Scheffler tells NPR. 'Women had their own tool kit. They had favorite weapons. Grandmas were the best hunters of the village.'
The researchers also found that women played an active role in teaching hunting, and they used a wider variety of weapons and hunting strategies than men did. For example, while men tended to hunt alone or in pairs, women hunted alone, with a man or with groups of women, children or dogs. Women hunted small game in 46 percent of the studied societies and took down medium or large game in 48 percent of them. In 4 percent of societies, they hunted game of all sizes.
While previous research has found that women may have rivaled males when it came to taking down big game, historically, scientists have dismissed females’ hunting prowess, possibly because of researcher bias, per the paper. But recent studies have increasingly shown women as hunters: In the Americas, a 2020 study found that females likely represented up to 50 percent of prehistoric big game hunters, suggesting the practice was gender neutral.
And the remains of women, like men, have been discovered buried alongside hunting weapons. Yet, while researchers presume stone projectiles found buried with men are hunting tools, they are “'ess persuaded when projectiles are associated with females,' per the new paper.
Wall-Scheffler tells NPR that stories of gender differences in our ancestors have percolated into our society today, which can lead people to assume dividing labor based on gender is a more natural way to live.
‘It can be damaging,’ Nurith Aizenman reports for NPR. ‘They use that to argue that gender roles should be more rigid today.’"
-
As an almost 70 year old man, I have some advice for young men.
Please boost this if you think it will help
1. Your voice doesn't need to be heard. In fact, realizing that you don’t HAVE to have an opinion on everything and voice opinions or ideas in meetings or social gatherings, is amazingly liberating. You can actually just shut up, and relieve yourself of all that effort and stress. Let Bob utter his embarrassingly dumb idea, let Shirley have a say. You can just let it be for the most part
@screwturn This really put point #1 in perspective for me.
-
And . . .
"Early Women Were Hunters, Not Just Gatherers, Study Suggests
Regardless of maternal status, women hunted in almost 80 percent of recent and present-day foraging societies in a new study
People have long said that in prehistoric foraging societies, labor was divided by gender: Women gathered and men hunted. But now, a new study adds to the growing body of work challenging this idea, suggesting that prehistoric women were just as skilled at killing game as men were.
'We’ve had scattered reports here and there about women’s hunting,’ Vivek Venkataraman, an evolutionary anthropologist at the University of Calgary in Canada who was not involved with the research, tells Science’s Bridget Alex. But the new research 'pulls a lot of these things together.'
In the paper, published Wednesday in the journal PLOS ONE, a team of international researchers identified 391 foraging societies across the world, from the 1800s to present day. (Scientists use modern foraging societies as a window into past human behavior, reports NPR’s Nurith Aizenman.) Of these, they obtained data on hunting from 63 societies.
'We were reading papers written by people who had lived with these groups and had studied their behavior,’ study co-author Cara Wall-Scheffler, a professor and co-chair of biology at Seattle Pacific University, tells Live Science’s Jennifer Nalewicki. 'They were looking at people and recording what they did.'
Their analysis revealed that regardless of maternal status, women hunted in 50 of these societies—or about 79 percent. And more than 70 percent of female hunting appeared to be intentional—rather than opportunistically killing animals while doing other activities, per the study. In societies where hunting was the most important activity for subsistence, women participated in hunting 100 percent of the time.
'The hunting was purposeful,‘ Wall-Scheffler tells NPR. 'Women had their own tool kit. They had favorite weapons. Grandmas were the best hunters of the village.'
The researchers also found that women played an active role in teaching hunting, and they used a wider variety of weapons and hunting strategies than men did. For example, while men tended to hunt alone or in pairs, women hunted alone, with a man or with groups of women, children or dogs. Women hunted small game in 46 percent of the studied societies and took down medium or large game in 48 percent of them. In 4 percent of societies, they hunted game of all sizes.
While previous research has found that women may have rivaled males when it came to taking down big game, historically, scientists have dismissed females’ hunting prowess, possibly because of researcher bias, per the paper. But recent studies have increasingly shown women as hunters: In the Americas, a 2020 study found that females likely represented up to 50 percent of prehistoric big game hunters, suggesting the practice was gender neutral.
And the remains of women, like men, have been discovered buried alongside hunting weapons. Yet, while researchers presume stone projectiles found buried with men are hunting tools, they are “'ess persuaded when projectiles are associated with females,' per the new paper.
Wall-Scheffler tells NPR that stories of gender differences in our ancestors have percolated into our society today, which can lead people to assume dividing labor based on gender is a more natural way to live.
‘It can be damaging,’ Nurith Aizenman reports for NPR. ‘They use that to argue that gender roles should be more rigid today.’"
-
@LevZadov @screwturn this is an absurd thing to say. women have not, historically, have had control over their own reproductive capacity. that's a Very New Thing in terms of human society. Being pregnant for most of your life, not necessarily by choice, is a pretty fucking raw deal.
-
I pity your ignorance. You’re also rude and vulgar, but I forgive you for that. You can’t help it. Rudeness and vulgarity stem from ignorance.
Ignorance can be cured. Start here:
@LevZadov
Again, "Lev" fuck offI don't need nor desire your "forgiveness".
I refer you back to point 1.Your voice, which now exceeds several foolscap pages of red-herring-do, amply illustrates why some men.., nay, men in general, should rather shut the fuck up and not offer their embarrassingly off-key opinions.
Here is my gift to you, "Lev": shut up more
-
@screwturn Modern world. Archeology has been showing that women were warriors, etc.
@CStamp very few, very seldom, and vastly counterweighted by millenia of servitude and mistreatment
-
As an almost 70 year old man, I have some advice for young men.
Please boost this if you think it will help
1. Your voice doesn't need to be heard. In fact, realizing that you don’t HAVE to have an opinion on everything and voice opinions or ideas in meetings or social gatherings, is amazingly liberating. You can actually just shut up, and relieve yourself of all that effort and stress. Let Bob utter his embarrassingly dumb idea, let Shirley have a say. You can just let it be for the most part
As my Dad used to say:
"Better to keep your mouth shut and let folks think you might be an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."
-
As an almost 70 year old man, I have some advice for young men.
Please boost this if you think it will help
1. Your voice doesn't need to be heard. In fact, realizing that you don’t HAVE to have an opinion on everything and voice opinions or ideas in meetings or social gatherings, is amazingly liberating. You can actually just shut up, and relieve yourself of all that effort and stress. Let Bob utter his embarrassingly dumb idea, let Shirley have a say. You can just let it be for the most part
@screwturn 22-year old Gen Zer (somewhat a man? i am genderfluid) here. much thanks. lots of good stuff.
-
7. The "Alpha Male" schtick is a leaky bag of bullshit on stilts. There is no science behind this, it doesn't survive a scrutiny, and the guys who claim the title are always insecure, overcompensating, grifters. Allways.
It is also obviously bullshit. You can't possibly be top dog in everything, and the more you are top dog in anything, the narrower that specialty will be, and the shorter the time before someone better comes along. All that trumpeting actually tells you he's an insecure numpty
@screwturn Most real leaders don't say a goddam thing. They act a certain way and you instinctively follow. While the alpha male posers are barking, real leaders are getting stuff done usually by lifting people up around them.
-
@LevZadov @screwturn this is an absurd thing to say. women have not, historically, have had control over their own reproductive capacity. that's a Very New Thing in terms of human society. Being pregnant for most of your life, not necessarily by choice, is a pretty fucking raw deal.
@ggggbbybby
"Lev" wants to take a handfull of highly contested grave remains as evidence that in 300,000 years of modern humans, that FOR THE MOST PART, women have not generally had the suckier part of it. -
@screwturn can't agree with you about sex, it's been one of the best things about my life, but everything else, yeah.
+ 1 and same also for 'playing with oneself'
-
As an almost 70 year old man, I have some advice for young men.
Please boost this if you think it will help
1. Your voice doesn't need to be heard. In fact, realizing that you don’t HAVE to have an opinion on everything and voice opinions or ideas in meetings or social gatherings, is amazingly liberating. You can actually just shut up, and relieve yourself of all that effort and stress. Let Bob utter his embarrassingly dumb idea, let Shirley have a say. You can just let it be for the most part
@screwturn
Nice thread. Hope they listen.
(69yo woman, 70 next Monday. WTF!) -
@LevZadov
Again, "Lev" fuck offI don't need nor desire your "forgiveness".
I refer you back to point 1.Your voice, which now exceeds several foolscap pages of red-herring-do, amply illustrates why some men.., nay, men in general, should rather shut the fuck up and not offer their embarrassingly off-key opinions.
Here is my gift to you, "Lev": shut up more
This person is more than just rude and ignorant, they’re an apologist for the (relatively recent) rise of patriarchy.
Are the propagandists of patriarchy welcome on Mastodon? Not on this 77 year old man’s watch.
I’d like to also point out that “screwturn” not only fails to provide evidence that anything I said was untrue or irrelevant, he has no way of knowing for sure that I *am* a man. For all he knows for certain, I’m virtual crossdressing, so for all he knows for certain, he’s insulting a woman. He’s *definitely* insulting women in general. By denying women’s history he’s denying women's agency.
He’s also lying. No, it was not “always” like this, nor shall it be forever. Even today there are groups and circumstances in which women are equals. Have doubts? Read up on anarchist culture.
The rise patriarchy, like the even more recent rise of capitalism, was a collective mistake. We’ll get over it like we got over the divine right of kings.
Don’t trust him. He’s a closet patriarchist, preaching defeatism. No, women don’t need to “lie back and enjoy it” because “that’s just Nature’s way”. Women have always resisted male (or any) domination, sometimes with “extreme prejudice".
-
11. On the whole, women have had a raw deal for the entire history of the species, and the reason you aren't getting as much physical attention or getting a great job or a nice house is not their fault. Be nice to women without expecting to be compensated for it. They have more than enough shit on their plate, so be understanding and helpful, and try not to get in the way or make things worse for them
Make more women friends, you might be surpised at how nice that is
Also, women aren't a prize
12. Consider a great many patently foolish and ludicrously risky things. I'm not saying DO them, because that would mostly be foolish, but CONSIDER them. Consider joining the SAS, being a supermodel, driving a formula-1 racing car, competing in the Isle of Mann TT, being a Michelin Star chef. Think through what it would take, would be like, and what it would likely cost in blood and money
Explore them, deeply feel them, and for the most part, thank fuck you won't ever do them. Learn about you
-
12. Consider a great many patently foolish and ludicrously risky things. I'm not saying DO them, because that would mostly be foolish, but CONSIDER them. Consider joining the SAS, being a supermodel, driving a formula-1 racing car, competing in the Isle of Mann TT, being a Michelin Star chef. Think through what it would take, would be like, and what it would likely cost in blood and money
Explore them, deeply feel them, and for the most part, thank fuck you won't ever do them. Learn about you
If you have enjoyed or found these useful, maybe consider reading my short stories or books, and consider leaving a review.
About half of my shorts are available for free at Physician's Weekly, my eBooks are on Kobo, and my paperbacks are orderable at most any bookseller. My novels are mostly about endearingly psychopathic girls.
First read the free chapters, though.
My fiction is as pithy, but has far more murder and amusingly fatal accidents
-
This person is more than just rude and ignorant, they’re an apologist for the (relatively recent) rise of patriarchy.
Are the propagandists of patriarchy welcome on Mastodon? Not on this 77 year old man’s watch.
I’d like to also point out that “screwturn” not only fails to provide evidence that anything I said was untrue or irrelevant, he has no way of knowing for sure that I *am* a man. For all he knows for certain, I’m virtual crossdressing, so for all he knows for certain, he’s insulting a woman. He’s *definitely* insulting women in general. By denying women’s history he’s denying women's agency.
He’s also lying. No, it was not “always” like this, nor shall it be forever. Even today there are groups and circumstances in which women are equals. Have doubts? Read up on anarchist culture.
The rise patriarchy, like the even more recent rise of capitalism, was a collective mistake. We’ll get over it like we got over the divine right of kings.
Don’t trust him. He’s a closet patriarchist, preaching defeatism. No, women don’t need to “lie back and enjoy it” because “that’s just Nature’s way”. Women have always resisted male (or any) domination, sometimes with “extreme prejudice".
Lev, please
1. You don’t need to be heard. Rather shut up. (See link)
2. You clearly misunderstood what I wrote. Maybe lay off the sauce or change meds
3. You clearly misunderstood the scholarship on the (very contested) interpretation of (very rare) grave goods that (may) suggest that *some* women, in *some* cultures, were *sometimes* also *periodic* participants in warfare in the 300,000 or so years of modern humans.Also
Fuck off, you blowhard
