<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The error of conservatism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.jim.com/politics/the-error-of-conservatism.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.jim.com/politics/the-error-of-conservatism.html</link>
	<description>Liberty in an unfree world</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:41:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: jim</title>
		<link>http://blog.jim.com/politics/the-error-of-conservatism.html/comment-page-1#comment-2204</link>
		<dc:creator>jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:40:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jim.com/?p=516#comment-2204</guid>
		<description>kkr wrote:
&lt;blockquote&gt;These fantasies just don’t describe anything outside of quite small slice of unusually sexually active urbanites. &lt;/blockquote&gt;
Possibly - yet statistics show that marriage is diminishing substantially, consistent with anecdote based on a population that might be highly unrepresentative.

&lt;blockquote&gt;Looking over the sexual scene of people in their 20s the feature that leaps out at me is the number of guys simply not bothered with the mere basics of meeting women in the first place.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Your perception is incorrect.  A male in his twenties thinks about sex every thirty seconds or so.  Whatever is preventing him from approaching women is not that he cannot be bothered.
&lt;blockquote&gt; I see lonely and often long sexless girls trying hard to get affection from comparable guys who ignore them in favor of porn and video games.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
I see lonely and often long sexless girls trying hard to get affection from guys who are not in the least comparable who ignore them in favor of a dozen girls that are hotter, more pleasant, and more emotionally available.  There is no male looking at heterosexual porn who would not interrupt it in an instant in favor of the touch of a real woman.  Perhaps you mean you see lonely forty year old men ignoring desperate and eager forty year old women - but a forty year old man is not comparable to a forty year old woman.
&lt;blockquote&gt;I see loneliness in both genders and broken down social structures, a la “Bowling Alone”, more than anything.&lt;/blockquote&gt;   Sure, entirely true, but the girls are lonely because they don&#039;t want to sleep with the guys that want to sleep with them, while the guys are lonely because no one wants to sleep with them - or at least no woman in her fertile years.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>kkr wrote:</p>
<blockquote><p>These fantasies just don’t describe anything outside of quite small slice of unusually sexually active urbanites. </p></blockquote>
<p>Possibly &#8211; yet statistics show that marriage is diminishing substantially, consistent with anecdote based on a population that might be highly unrepresentative.</p>
<blockquote><p>Looking over the sexual scene of people in their 20s the feature that leaps out at me is the number of guys simply not bothered with the mere basics of meeting women in the first place.</p></blockquote>
<p>Your perception is incorrect.  A male in his twenties thinks about sex every thirty seconds or so.  Whatever is preventing him from approaching women is not that he cannot be bothered.</p>
<blockquote><p> I see lonely and often long sexless girls trying hard to get affection from comparable guys who ignore them in favor of porn and video games.</p></blockquote>
<p>I see lonely and often long sexless girls trying hard to get affection from guys who are not in the least comparable who ignore them in favor of a dozen girls that are hotter, more pleasant, and more emotionally available.  There is no male looking at heterosexual porn who would not interrupt it in an instant in favor of the touch of a real woman.  Perhaps you mean you see lonely forty year old men ignoring desperate and eager forty year old women &#8211; but a forty year old man is not comparable to a forty year old woman.</p>
<blockquote><p>I see loneliness in both genders and broken down social structures, a la “Bowling Alone”, more than anything.</p></blockquote>
<p>   Sure, entirely true, but the girls are lonely because they don&#8217;t want to sleep with the guys that want to sleep with them, while the guys are lonely because no one wants to sleep with them &#8211; or at least no woman in her fertile years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kkr</title>
		<link>http://blog.jim.com/politics/the-error-of-conservatism.html/comment-page-1#comment-2200</link>
		<dc:creator>kkr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 06:46:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jim.com/?p=516#comment-2200</guid>
		<description>Anyone who uses the terms &quot;alpha&quot; and &quot;beta&quot; is part of an absurd internet circle-jerk detached from reality.  These fantasies just don&#039;t describe anything outside of quite small slice of unusually sexually active urbanites.  Nobody has pieced together that the people who use these terms are self aggrandizing?  It&#039;s all a bunch of non-empirical bullshit.

Looking over the sexual scene of people in their 20s the feature that leaps out at me is the number of guys simply not bothered with the mere basics of meeting women in the first place.  This picture where the mass of guys are losing out in a competitive market place to &quot;winners&quot; simply does not compute.  In fact, the really good looking and/or high earning guys I know have been locked up in monogamous relationships/marriages since their early 20s.  I see lonely and often long sexless girls trying hard to get affection from comparable guys who ignore them in favor of porn and video games.

The whole soft-polygamy thesis might have limited validity among the lower proles.  But middle class interweb tards talk about it like it&#039;s relevant to their social reality.  I just don&#039;t see it.  I see loneliness in both genders and broken down social structures, a la &quot;Bowling Alone&quot;, more than anything.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone who uses the terms &#8220;alpha&#8221; and &#8220;beta&#8221; is part of an absurd internet circle-jerk detached from reality.  These fantasies just don&#8217;t describe anything outside of quite small slice of unusually sexually active urbanites.  Nobody has pieced together that the people who use these terms are self aggrandizing?  It&#8217;s all a bunch of non-empirical bullshit.</p>
<p>Looking over the sexual scene of people in their 20s the feature that leaps out at me is the number of guys simply not bothered with the mere basics of meeting women in the first place.  This picture where the mass of guys are losing out in a competitive market place to &#8220;winners&#8221; simply does not compute.  In fact, the really good looking and/or high earning guys I know have been locked up in monogamous relationships/marriages since their early 20s.  I see lonely and often long sexless girls trying hard to get affection from comparable guys who ignore them in favor of porn and video games.</p>
<p>The whole soft-polygamy thesis might have limited validity among the lower proles.  But middle class interweb tards talk about it like it&#8217;s relevant to their social reality.  I just don&#8217;t see it.  I see loneliness in both genders and broken down social structures, a la &#8220;Bowling Alone&#8221;, more than anything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

