Post: #26

(09-02-2014 12:40 AM)Thomas the Rhymer Wrote:  Where's the fun in that? Some of the most amazing discoveries in science have been due to people coming up with crazy ideas..... But the DNA idea sounds so much more cool to me though.

My post on this subject will be on the issue of approach and methodology when writing about science on a Game forum. My take will be on the issue of Rigour versus Speculation on RooshVForum, when it comes to technical subjects.

I think on a game forum like the RVF, there is little obligation for nuances or rigour when discussing science. That is why i agree with Thomas the Rhymer attitude when he says "Where's the fun in that?"

Texas_tryhard talks about these responsibilities as scientists, etcetera, etcetera. I don't really care, unless under 3 conditions:

#1. If there is a very specific scientific request by the RVF community about a subject matter. In such a case, i can see how you are obligated to provide nuance if you chose to comment.e.g this thread by CJ_W.

#2. If there is a GROSS misrepresentation of a technical issue, then i can see how you are obligated to set the record straight if you chose to comment e.g this cancer thread(reason i ended up giving Texas_tryhard a rep point.) or this thread on high frequency trading subject.(how i ended up giving ElBorrachoInfamoso a rep point). This is critical to the veracity of data on RVF that when you see something erroneously stated as FACTS, you bring science to solidly correct it.

#3. If you are dropping a serious, lifestyle datasheet on a subject. In such a case, i can see why it is critical to utilize the tools of science, e.g. This solid acid/base post in the Apple Cider Vinegar thread(that is how i ended up giving Objectivist Tree a rep point.).

On the other hand, there IS ABOSULTELY NOTHING WRONG with generating hypothesis or conjectures using scientific data. In my opinion, if Thomas the Rhymer post were listed in the Lifestyle section as a datasheet, then, it is incumbent upon him to treat the issue with the right amount of scepticism and some good dose of rigour. However, this is obviously not a datasheet-- this is an obvious speculative piece posted on the everything else section, alongside threads with links to nude photos of celebrities.

Another critical point: RVF is not a science forum, it is a Game forum.

Thomas the Rhymer is entitled to speculative flights of fancy and hypothetical thoughts. Just because he has science background and is writing about science, doesn't mean he cannot engage in conjectures and scenarios that pick his fancy like everybody else does.

The anxiety about what the manosphere will then negatively thinks about scientists-- if Thomas the Rhymer let loose with some fancy speculation -- is overblown, in my opinion. As long as Thomas the Rhymer makes it clear-- which he does -- that what he is writing is just speculation on his part.

He is not writing this for scientific publication, he is writing this for the bloody Roosh V. fucking Forum. So why does he need to state his position with utmost nuance and rigour? What he wrote about is different from his post on Science fiction and Mental illness.


The Lizard of Oz and I engage in private PM conversations about technical stuff all the time, we discussed these issues on a more serious level. Our conversation on that level is not fitting for the public forum of RVF: It is very, very nuanced. If we were to discuss such matter in the public forum, we will have to dilute it and make it very accessible. What is the point of communication(or information) if it is not accessible?

In my view, the first and most important rule on discussing science at RVF is: make it accessible. Make it fun and interesting. e.g. this post on hepatitis C with words like "one-armed amputee", "twisted ladder", etc. you try to paint a picture with words-- that is the point of explaining science to those not familiar with it. My very long arse post on Dystopian Manospheric Vision & Science was specifically written like that to make it accessible, evidently, you will sacrifice nuance to write to non-science audience. RVF is basically a non-science audience, since this is game forum. As long as you are not outright lying, then it is fine in my opinion. Now, if people interests are pique on the subject, you can then provided a more nuanced and rigorous treatment of the subject matter.

Like i told commentator *TheKantian* on the "Quantum Drive" thread

(08-10-2014 06:44 PM)Nemencine Wrote:  ^^^
Why are you stating the obvious?

RVF is not a science forum, it is a game forum-- this is not the comment section of phys.org.......

Majority of the RVF crowd are not interested in any bloody scalar tensors theories of gravity, or the fucking momentum of electro-magnetic zero-point fluctuations. They just want an easy, very accessible discussion/potential explanation of what is going on. That is it. The more technically inclined RVF members could, by themselves, then find the actual papers and go nuts on it just like i did.

I don't understand the whole position/demand of writing nuanced, rigorous posts on technical science matter on a Game forum like RVF. It makes no sense to me. There is absolutely nothing wrong with generating fun hypothesis and throwing ideas around like rugby ball, as long as you make it clear that is what you are doing.

regards,

Nemencine

Post: #27

If this is true it would also have implications for men who eat pussy as they are literally sucking up a woman's bodily fluids.

Don't eat pussy.

Post: #28

Might have something to do with the 'once you go black you never go back' type of thing. I know once I went yellow every other chick looked like a fellow.

Honestly, I never would have considered banging a yellow girl until I started nailing my Latin gf. Then I went nuts looking for her 'eyes' in other women and found out that she had 'Asian' features. I slept with a Jap after that, and found that NOTHING else but complete yellow features would do it for me. Now I look back at women of my own race and unless they have distinctly yellow leaning features, they just look like long nosed trolls, while so-so Asians cause the boner effect. I need to hear women with that super high tinny voice or I don't even identify them as women.. the more Asian women I slept with, the more my preference for exotic/stereotypical Asian features took over. Japs don't even do it for me anymore, they are too white... it needs to be purebred.

What I identify as beautiful now, is something with a small chest, small frame, long hair, very thin almond shaped eyes and straight, jet black hair. Its pretty far removed from my first girl who was a Black as night Brazilian with curly hair. I think Thomas might be on to something.

Post: #29

(09-01-2014 01:43 PM)MrXY Wrote:  Fascinating theory but:

Agreed! Could someone please post clear examples of the Stare as opposed to chicks who have a 'genuine' smile?

Pics of some celebs hidden behind layers of cake are useless. I want to see everyday girls with the state. Otherwise I find this whole theory hard to believe...

Post: #30

That mommy brain thing is very interesting. My wife has changed enough for me to notice. She has alot of street sense and common sense, but she has actually for once had a handful of blonde moments, which is kinda strange for a serious minded Chinese girl. She is much more nurturing than she was before. She is an ENTJ which is rare for females, so she has a great deal of practicality in her personality. I was nervous that she would not bond well with the baby when she was pregnant, but now that concern is gone. She is totally locked onto the baby. She also makes clumsy moves more often too. It could just be that she is still stressed and lacking sleep, but I cannot give her anti-inflammatory/andrenal gland repairing tea like I drink because it would stop her ability to make breast milk. When she gets normal sleep back I wonder if she will be more like her usual self before the baby or still have ditzy moments from time to time.

Post: #31

Found a good one:


I wonder how that chick looked like before her carousel adventure...

Post: #32

From Chateau Heartiste: (This was the image that inspired my hypothesis)


From this blog post: http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/08/2...ous-women/

Post: #33

My gut feeling is that there may be some truth to this. I like the theory. But I would think that the quantity of biological material would have to be high in order to produce any noticeable effect.

I don't know how much "DNA" can be absorbed by a woman in an ejaculation. Would excessive kissing "transmit" DNA sufficient to a woman to alter her physically or emotionally? I tend to doubt it.

Where would we draw the line? Maybe someone should conduct "field" studies....!

Post: #34

At this point, the original post is more science fiction than anything else. It's so ridiculous I can't believe you guys are fixated on it. Seriously, more than a century of human blood transfusions not to mention organ transplants. Hemophiliacs should be pretty fucked up with zombie eyes if that were the case.

On the other hand, here's this backing up what I said early relating to "Mommy Brain."

1. Endocrinology. 2010 Nov;151(11):5380-8. doi: 10.1210/en.2009-1168. Epub 2010 Sep 15.
Effect of chronic hCG administration on Alzheimer's-related cognition and A beta accumulation in PS1KI mice.
Barron AM1, Verdile G, Taddei K, Bates KA, Martins RN.
Author information:
1School of Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, 6009, Australia.

Abstract
Age-associated changes in the reproductive hormones-the gonadal steroid hormones and the gonadotropins-have been identified as potential risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, levels of gonadotropins and estrogens are closely linked in vivo, and it has proven difficult to separate the effects of gonadotropins from the well-documented estrogenic effects on AD-related neuropathology in experimental models of menopause. To assess the effects of gonadotropins on cognition and AD biochemical markers independent of estrogenic effects, a potent analog of luteinizing hormone [human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)] was administered to ovariectomized presenilin1 knock-in mice (PS1KI). Gonadotropin administration was found to induce hyperactivity and anxiety (Open Field Maze and Taste Neophobia Task) and working memory dysfunction, without altering reference memory (Morris Water Maze). Although gonadotropin administration modestly altered β amyloid (Aβ40) levels, levels of the longer more toxic form (Aβ42) were unaffected. Furthermore, altered Aβ40 levels were not associated with observed behavioral and cognitive impairments. These findings provide proof, in principle, that the gonadotropin hormones play a role in the modulation of AD-related behavior, cognition, and neuropathology.
PMID: 20844010 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Icon for Atypon


1. Cell Mol Neurobiol. 2013 Aug;33(6):747-51. doi: 10.1007/s10571-013-9954-3. Epub 2013 Jun 28.
Human chorionic gonadotropin increases β-cleavage of amyloid precursor protein in SH-SY5Y cells.
Saberi S1, Du YP, Christie M, Goldsbury C.
Author information:
1Brain and Mind Research Institute, School of Medical Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Abstract
Elevated levels of amyloid-β (Aβ) peptides, the main component of amyloid plaques in Alzheimer's disease, are the result of excessive β- and γ-cleavage of the amyloid precursor protein (APP) and/or impaired Aβ clearance in the brain. It has been suggested that high concentrations of luteinizing hormone (LH) in women contribute to increased Aβ generation after menopause, but the mechanism for this is incompletely understood. We investigated the effect of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), an LH receptor agonist, on APP β-cleavage in the SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cell line. Treatment of these cells with hCG-induced elevated β-cleavage in a dose-dependent manner: administration of 30 mIU but not 10 mIU/ml of hCG significantly increased sAPPβ levels in the cell medium 1.7-fold as measured by ELISA. These results support the notion that LH contributes to elevated Aβ levels at least in part by increasing β-cleavage of APP by β-site APP cleaving enzyme.

PMID: 23812658 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE

Post: #35

(09-03-2014 02:58 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  My gut feeling is that there may be some truth to this. I like the theory. But I would think that the quantity of biological material would have to be high in order to produce any noticeable effect.

I don't know how much "DNA" can be absorbed by a woman in an ejaculation. Would excessive kissing "transmit" DNA sufficient to a woman to alter her physically or emotionally? I tend to doubt it.

Where would we draw the line? Maybe someone should conduct "field" studies....!

I concur; it’s a very interesting concept. There are many consequences to being a cum dumpster. To properly research this theory, one would have to do research on both pre and post birth control pill usage (going back to the early 1960s when BCPs were given FDA approval).

Post: #36

Sometimes I think girls with that look in their eyes are just barred out.

Also, I didn't know women could absorb DNA like that. Shit reminds me of Cell from Dragon Ball Z or maybe Mortal Kombat.

There needs to be a scifi porno where a woman gets more and more powerful the more guys she fucks.. I mean yeah it's kind of a feminist plot but it would make fucking money! Sasha Grey could do it, the thousand cock stare is her default countenance.





YOUR CAWK..IZZ MINE

Post: #37

Wasn't there a thread on RVF in this subforum that had something about semen inside a woman relieving pain or something? I cannot find it.

Post: #38

(09-03-2014 05:34 PM)TravelerKai Wrote:  Wasn't there a thread on RVF in this subforum that had something about semen inside a woman relieving pain or something? I cannot find it.

Not sure about that. But orgasms can help relieve women's menstrual pain.

Post: #39

While I have my doubt about this theory, I wouldn't be suprised that messing with biochemical and biological flow has effects.

Post: #40

The Thousand Cocks Stare TM:

Post: #41

(09-04-2014 06:50 AM)corners Wrote:  The Thousand Cocks Stare TM:

You know she's a lesbian right?

Post: #42

Allegedly she is. Who knows if she has taken a hard one before in the past though. Still not a 1000 cock stare candidate in my book though. Is there a thing about 1000 dildo stare?

Post: #43

Belle Knox of Duke U:



http://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/porn-i...-porn-star

Post: #44

This girl is barely 16 and she already DOES have a 1.000 c*ck stare:



Source:
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.c...ce-uk.html

Post: #45

SHIT! UK girls be like 1000-cock-staring me while I sweet talk the Lithuanian chick in my lecture into giving me notes....

Post: #46

(09-04-2014 07:28 AM)Deluge Wrote:  

(09-04-2014 06:50 AM)corners Wrote:  The Thousand Cocks Stare TM:

You know she's a lesbian right?

Is she a born-again lesbian?

Quote:"I swear I thought it was just a plain old futon, and not a casting couch. All 999 of those cocks don't count, cos the only man in my life I need now is Jesus.

So if you ever see Jesus Ramirez, let him know that Ellen Page, the crazy canuck, is looking for him. Ah, those swarthy Central Americans. It's all right [name of lesbian lover], that's all in the past. And if you dare bring it up in an argument, then we'll both know you're racist. Besides, why would we need to have sex when we can connect on the spiritual level?

It's not like you didn't know...I mean, how hard is it to abstain, when lesbian bed death is a fact of life? What do you mean you're a sexual creature? There are so many better ways to bond! We don't need sex to express the love we have for each other.

That's what a domestic violence suit is for."

Etc etc etc hamster squeak squeak

Post: #47

Post: #48

OK, enough of the semen DNA casuses female brain damage. Here's my own autist's take:

There are studies that show how soldiers need to short-circuit their empathy in order to function on the battlefield. This is why basic training involves dehumanizing the enemy (think Full Metal Jacket). Seems like a terrible thing but it's necessary and that mental switch is actually baked into the human animal (at least with men). It flips on and hopefully flips off again, but this is why veterans have trouble readjusting to civilian life and keep anguishing past memories.

That's just an extreme case, but something similar to that is at work when you engage in a lot of casual sex. Guys are more adapted to be able to screw without emotional connections, but even guys can "fool around and fall in love" as it were. You go into a sexual encounter purely for physical gratification and during the process, hormones are released that attempt to rope you into more lasting commitment.

The reason why I used the analogy of soldiers in wartime is that I feel women who enter into the cock carousel are trying to short-circuit that automatic bonding impulse. But just as it doesn't feel good for men to repress their empathy...it doesn't feel good for women to repress their ability to pair-bond. It's a tradeoff that has negative downstream consequences.

Men associate casual sex as a notch whereas women associate no-strings casual sex as a net loss, that the guy somehow took something away from her. Women see sex as transactional where the mutual pleasure doesn't count. There has to be something else extracted otherwise she got "used". Today's culture may be trying to teach women otherwise, but biologically, that's what her body tells her each time she executes the walk of shame after a ONS. This also explains a lot of cognitive dissonance of #MeToo, that women are on the cock carousel while simultaneously demonizing men. They may say they don't care about shame but they sure as hell spend a lot of time trying to convince everyone not to shame them for being sluts, so down deep they still care a great deal. The hamster is on constant overdrive.

The few more well-adjusted women out there who adhere to sex-positivity are able to reframe casual sex as more of a process of mutual giving of pleasure and not simply taking pleasure and running away, a net gain, not a loss. This is not an easy mental shift, but since these sorts of sex-positivity figures tend to come from the porn industry (like Nina Hartley) you can think of them as psychological survival tactics. They're also probably freaks of nature anyway in the first place (like Harltey being bisexual). But these women tended to have never gotten married or at least never had kids. You just can't lead a freewheeling swinger lifestyle and be a soccer mom at the same time. So there are still tradeoffs.

Post: #49

(09-03-2014 11:14 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  That mommy brain thing is very interesting. My wife has changed enough for me to notice. She has alot of street sense and common sense, but she has actually for once had a handful of blonde moments, which is kinda strange for a serious minded Chinese girl. She is much more nurturing than she was before. She is an ENTJ which is rare for females, so she has a great deal of practicality in her personality. I was nervous that she would not bond well with the baby when she was pregnant, but now that concern is gone. She is totally locked onto the baby. She also makes clumsy moves more often too. It could just be that she is still stressed and lacking sleep, but I cannot give her anti-inflammatory/andrenal gland repairing tea like I drink because it would stop her ability to make breast milk. When she gets normal sleep back I wonder if she will be more like her usual self before the baby or still have ditzy moments from time to time.

TravelerKai, you wrote this 4 years ago.

Can you give us an update how your wife's "mommy brain" developed over the course of the last 4 years ? Did it stay the same or did she go back to her former self (meaning the mental state prior to birth of her 1st child) after she stopped breastfeeding ?

Post: #50

(10-24-2018 01:02 PM)Caduceus Wrote:  

(09-03-2014 11:14 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  That mommy brain thing is very interesting. My wife has changed enough for me to notice. She has alot of street sense and common sense, but she has actually for once had a handful of blonde moments, which is kinda strange for a serious minded Chinese girl. She is much more nurturing than she was before. She is an ENTJ which is rare for females, so she has a great deal of practicality in her personality. I was nervous that she would not bond well with the baby when she was pregnant, but now that concern is gone. She is totally locked onto the baby. She also makes clumsy moves more often too. It could just be that she is still stressed and lacking sleep, but I cannot give her anti-inflammatory/andrenal gland repairing tea like I drink because it would stop her ability to make breast milk. When she gets normal sleep back I wonder if she will be more like her usual self before the baby or still have ditzy moments from time to time.

TravelerKai, you wrote this 4 years ago.

Can you give us an update how your wife's "mommy brain" developed over the course of the last 4 years ? Did it stay the same or did she go back to her former self (meaning the mental state prior to birth of her 1st child) after she stopped breastfeeding ?

Cot damn. I forgot all about this post.

She went back to normal when the first kid turned ~2. Then she went right back into Mommy Brain syndrome again because of being pregnant with kid number two.

Now kid number 2 is almost 2 years old and while she is not as ditzy or airheaded as before, she is still clumsy (dropping things, etc.) I think clumsy is probably her personality. I don't think that is going away. She is still a big chested Chinese version Blonde.

The cliff notes is that it seems to take around 2 years (plus or minus 6 months) after birth for the hormone levels to level off and stop giving them the mental fog. I wish I had gotten blood work done on her to compare and contrast it. Maybe some guys super knowledgeable on hormones on the forum may have insight on female hormones during pregnancy and post pregnancy. I recently got on TRT myself and my mental fog is completely gone, so it does make me curious. As for the breastfeeding, the breast feeding stopped before 2 years, but did not impact anything as far as I can tell. Women can still squeeze a drop out sometimes even if they cut off the milk. Again, that is hormone driven.

Another thing I noticed is that it did take a little longer for her to lose the weight from the second baby compared to the first and the mommy brain seemed to be correlated to that as well, because it did not seem to go away when the weight started to fall off.

So to sum up, is it all just elevated estrogen (estradiol) and progesterone, etc. levels?