“Hey DDD, men will sleep with anything? Right?🐷” Oh boy! That’s a view I’ve heard many times before. Like a lot of folk psychology, there’s a tiny kernel of truth🌽here that's blown way out of proportion. And I think I know what it is… [1/17]

First of all: There's a full spectrum of mating pickiness both sexes. Men so picky they never lose their virginity and women with unusually low standards. There’s a lot of noise and variation. Thus, we should be sceptical about neat black and white🐧claims about the sexes. [2/17]
That being said, there are often patterns to be found in the noise. Enough to draw some conclusions about the *typical* mating behaviour of each sex, but not enough to predict the behaviour of individuals with a high degree of accuracy. [3/17]
One of those patterns appears to be that more men than women “lower their standards” when it comes to sex. But, and here’s the important part, it’s in a particular context: short-term mating. [4/17]
Humans, by and large are pair-bonded mammals. From megacities to small bands of hunter gatherers, humans seek a special partner to fall in love💕and share their life with. And as far as we know, this has been the case thousands (perhaps millions) of years. [5/17]
Because of this, humans are *really* picky about their long-term mates. Both sexes! We’re not like peafowl where one sex makes the effort🦚and the other chooses. If we were, then first dates would look very different… men all dressed up and women in their pyjamas! [6/17]
No, humans are quite picky and for good reason - investing in a relationship (and maybe children) is a big commitment. We want to make sure that we’re committing to the best possible person and that they’re just as devoted to us and not wasting our time🕓. [7/17]
But, here’s the thing… long-term mating, while a popular choice, isn't the only thing on the human mating menu. We’re capable of short-term, casual mating too. A strategy which may have provided its own evolutionary benefits – benefits which differed between the sexes. [8/17]
For women, short-term mating might have served to capture the attention of a particularly desirable man – a gateway to a long-term relationship. It may have also allowed them to benefit from accessing the resources and protection of multiple men rather than just one. [9/17]
But this strategy would have been risky to sexual health and reputation, and would have left some to raise a child with no paternal investment. Thus, women evolved to use this strategy cautiously, maintaining a high level of pickiness as they did so. [10/17]
For men, short-term mating served as a way of having sex without commitment; plain and simple. A no strings attached✂️liaison might have led to him passing on his genes to future generations without the parental responsibility that usually accompanies this. [11/17]

More from Society

Tomorrow, January 6th, MAGA chuds, Proud Boys, and white supremacists are planned to descend on Washington D.C. to contest the election. Among them will be NSC-131, a New England based neo-Nazi organization. Let's welcome them by saying hi to one of their members, Eddie Stuart!


Edward Stuart, from Chester, New Hampshire, has been a member of Nationalist Social Club (NSC) since the very beginning and is a staple participant in their actions. He is known in NSC chats as "Carl Jung" and is well connected in the New England Nazi scene.
2/


NSC-131 is a neo-Nazi group that was started in Massachusetts in early 2020 by Chris Hood. You can learn more about NSC and it's members in these threads:


Eddie describes his ideology as "Esoteric Hitlerism" which is an occult form of Nazism that literally worships Adolf Hitler as a god, or, specifically, as an incarnation of the Hindu God Vishnu. Here is Ed holding the RigVeda with some of his occult Nazi pals. Interesting Ed!
4/


Much of this ideological insight was gained from Eddie's Twitter, where he originally used his "Carl Jung" persona and reposts explicit neo-fascist content and racist memes. In one edited picture, Eddie can be seen at an NSC event in late June 2020 holding a Nazi Sonnenrad flag
5

You May Also Like

A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.