Good lord… it was a joke. She’s a Dr…Radiologist. I train her. We collaborate on my Fb and IG videos but no… she’s entirely too busy but she’d also know my post was obviously said in jest. Does that relieve your BURNing at all ?
2 Likes
No, not really. Not at all, actually. You’re quite a man! I’m just curious to meet the woman who’s taken you on.
Sure Em… My private life and our relationship is kept private for good reason. I did discuss her at length on a recent Youtube video with another T-Nation member, however. She’s an extraordinary human. And stunningly beautiful. I’m very fortunate.
3 Likes
In complete sincerity - I’m very happy for you.
Thanks. I will probably listen on my ride home.
1 Like
Ty 
Let’s talk metal
Oh, I was going to link a new video about NYHC in the extreme music thread and tag you a few days ago. I’ll link it in that thread if I can find it again.
New Agnostic Front is out… Roger basically incoherently mumbles anymore
1 Like
I think birth control was created to give people freedom from unwanted children (at the cost of children).
And I think people generally dont want children until they’ve sowed their own wild oats… which tends to take longer when the world is designed to give you hyper optionality in everything.
So by the time people decide that maybe they want kids - they’re aging out of child-rearing capacity.
Many young men aren’t ready to become fathers, but are pushed to becoming ready much faster when they have no choice. This tends to be good for society.
1 Like
@EmilyQ I finished the podcast. It was good. Thanks. I might get Dr. Hooven’s book.
Oh good! I haven’t listened to it, as I’m trying to become more competent in treating both psychotic disorders and patients experiencing dementia, as I have both at the moment, but I get Attia’s emails and thought you’d like this one.
Should I make time for it?
1 Like
In think you’ll like it and agree with much of the content.
Spot on.
Not so long ago men and women in their early 20s had to act like… uh… men and women… with homes and three children. Hence I haven’t been computing the frontal-lobe question.
I’m a Xenial, so unfortunately I was raised in big-baby culture. When my peers and I were in our late teens and early 20s, we had the mental makeups of children in some ways. Some of my generation and older still have big-baby characteristics.
Much popular entertainment media of the 70s to 90s, though some of the movies were genuinely funny and had great acting, were all about being perpetual clowns and numbskulls.
2 Likes
Different Strokes
1 Like
How so? I do not really have the opposite position but, want to know where you stand before trying to steelman the argument.
You have often written about the issues of past generations and child rearing. Absentee fathers, latch key kids, emotional detachment, stigma around affection and open communication.
Could this not be tied to immaturity and lack of experience/mental growth?
Why is it an issue that people are having less children or having them older?
No, I don’t think so considering I’ve spoken about parents over 25 years old, for which the frontal-lobe question wouldn’t apply anyway.
Eighteen to 25 year olds were and are infantalized, including me, I believe. Either that or they choose or chose to be selectively irresponsible. My sentiment is a chunk of the parents I grew up around simply didn’t care, or didn’t care enough. The terms “on Mars,” and “out to lunch,” apply. Permissive or neglectful parenting apply. On the flipside, I am not into helicopter parenting, and I don’t intend on doing it.
I admit my biased from a specific location and era.
If they are that generally stunted, why do we allow them to do the following?
- Study difficult subject matter they will put into practice, in some cases highly-consequential positions.
- Freely associate with, date, and screw who they want.
- Shoot guns.
- Drive buses and operate trains.
- Serve in the military.
- Provide drugs and treat severe wounds as nurses.
- Work as firemen and cops.
- Teach children.
- Operate heavy machinery.
- Work EMT.
- And so on and so on.
That’s my take. What do you think?
You just outed yourself as the type to argue a position you don’t have, and then asked me to explain myself?
Nah, I’m good bro.
1 Like
Not at all. You said, “This tends to be good for society” without expounding and I do not want to out words in your mouth.
It is not about having the position or not. I can see both sides. This is a discussion. No one here is actually making change at scale.
I posted earlier how the biggest indicator of marriage and children is income. Money, status, the ability to provide is still king. Those that are “winning” are still having children.
Is that not what is best for society? Having the winners succeed?
Society is moving forward/evolving. It takes higher IQ and mental makeup to compete. It is no longer possible for the lower IQ individual to raise a family with a factory job.
So, if a man/woman is not able to do this younger or a woman cannot find a man capable of providing why not wait until they are more established in life?
The poor do not care about being able to provide everything they continue to have children. It is all the same to them. Those that can are having children early but, do the calculus of the cost of raising children and decide to have less. The rich/wealthy are still having many children.
It is the middle, average, the “midwit” that struggles. They are able to recognize the issues but, tend to overthink and are unable to solve issues. They are stuck. They become anxious, depressed, etc. Those are the incels.
I can see that side. I can also see the issues that can come with this.
Like I said just a discussion.
1 Like
Not if this only applies to a small minority of high-status men.