David Collum: The Next Recession Will Be A Barn-Burner

News & Current Events Public News & Current Events
,
41

Here is the questionnaire:  It might be helpful if you have all the questions and their subheadings randomly administered to you and your loved ones, and see if you are a rapist or a rape victim, and if you agree with the CDC's designation.
http://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/24726

Afterwards, listen to this response by "the Factual Feminist".  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNsJ1DhqQ-s

I am actually quite curious how folks respond to the actual questionnaire and conclusions. 

I offer this with respect, and awareness of my own confirmation bias.

 

42

An interesting and worthwhile addition to this thread.  However I think the jist of the thread is more about chest thumping whose statistics are right rather than understanding the complexity, pain and social dynamics of sexual abuse and violence.  And as far as statistics go they are all wrong because there is a very large number of victims who never report.  Of all the women I know every one as been affected by some kind of sexual violence, perhaps not themselves but  a neighbor, a friend, a co-worker, a daughter-in-law, the child next door, their hairdresser and so on.  Put 10 women in a room and you will hear 10 intimate stories. It's just not talked about but it's more pervasive than you ever, ever imagine!
Good luck Sam I suspect your rabbit hole will not be of interest to many.  Too bad it sheds light on the complexity of the issue.

AK Granny

43

Yes, that was a good video to post.
AKGranny, did you hear the part where Cristina Hoff Summers (aka the Factual Feminist) says

Unfortunately, when it comes to research on sexual violence, exaggeration and sensation are not the exception, they are the rule.
Also, did you hear the part where she refers to the CDC's methodology as "defective"? Did you hear the part where she says
With this method, known as advocacy research, you can manufacture a women's crisis.
And if course she goes on to explain that the kind of exaggerations dealt out by the CDC trivializes the fate of the smaller number of females who truly are victims of violence.... (her own words are better than mine, I encourage all readers to watch to video and get all of her nuance).

In case anybody was wondering, I am strongly against rape and all forms of violence and coercion.

 

44

It is hard to get out there and advocate for what you know to be right. The whole concept of degrowth is difficult for people as it connotes 'less', and people are used to moving towards 'more'.
Here is a detailed discussion of the basic problems with even defining  degrowth: 

http://www.unevenearth.org/?p=972

 

 

 

45

My son rescued a young person from someone who's pastime was evidently cruising parting for the intoxicated and bringing them back to his off campus room for extra curricular activities.  Some time after talking his way into his room and allowing the young woman to leave who was drunk and pleading for help, the person who was upset because his "fun" was spoiled came downstairs and attached my son.  Well he choose the wrong person to pick a fight with.
The result was that I had a bunch of legal bills and my son wound up with academic probation for protecting himself (he was at what would be considered a very "liberal" university at the time of this event).  The woman who was rescued never came forward out of shame and embarrassment.  The guy who caused the trouble, scot-free, no issues for him.  My son told me after it all, he would do it again, because it was the right thing to do.  I'm right behind him.

Though this is anecdotal evidence, this in my mind more the general tenor of what is happening.  If our biggest problem was a bunch of "angry feminists" chasing around innocent guys for having relations with them after a few beers, we would be on other side of "the long emergency".  All our sister, daughters, mothers and friends, whether it's 20% or 1% are taking on the brunt of this problem, not the reverse. I am very tempted to give out some pretty hostile and politically incorrect fatherly advice, but perhaps I am a bit sensitive to this, because of this and other stories I could tell.  But lets leave it here, apologies ahead of time.

46

First of all, it is really difficult to objectively measure sensitive information (drug use, sexual activity, etc.) in a population. People are typically reluctant to discuss these issues with friends and family, let alone strangers. The category of people who agree to discuss these issues may differ from people who will not, making generalization of study results to a population difficult. This may also account for low numbers of people who agree to participate in any particular study.
See summary of issues at : https://mainweb-v.musc.edu/vawprevention/research/sa.shtml

The video stresses the nature of the survey questions biasing the outcome of the CDC work. As every survey designer knows, how you frame the question, and where the question occurs in a survey influences the answer. I do not have access to the Bureau of Justice questionnaire, but this poster explores some of the differences in methodology among surveys: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/bjs_amrsa_poster.pdf

It is also important to recognize that rape is an evolving definition in our society. For example, during the mid 20th century in the US, the potential for rape in marriage was not recognized. 'Date rape' was not considered 'real rape' until the 1980's.  Indeed, the FBI just revised their definition of rape in 2013:

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/recent-program-updates/new-rape-definition-frequently-asked-questions

I do no think one survey is right or wrong. I am saying that we do not know exactly as we do not have good methods and tools. What I do know is that rape is extremely under-reported, and that it is a major problem for young people, especially females in this society.

I suggest that teaching young people about the pitfalls associated with sexual activity at least include the necessity for ultra-clear communication, and the potential legal hazards associated with sex during drug or alcohol use. 

Just ask Bill Cosby…

 

47

Thank you Pyranablade I did hear those quotes and know there will always be someone discounting a problem.   Like peak oil, that's not a problem either according to many. Also I appreciate that you and other readers are against violence and coercion.  Did you thoroughly read the written questionnaire? It helps to explain the complexity of the situation.
 Here is a nugget to add to the mix.

As I indicated previously I live in a state with the highest number of rapes per capita.  There was a documentary a few years ago describing the difficulty in investigating and prosecuting cases up here.  It seems that in a number of indigenous cultures there was/is no word for rape.  So how do you deal with a culture whose 1st language is not English and has no definition for a such an act.  It created challenges for law enforcement when investigating such situations.  It was almost impossible to accuse someone of something for which there is no definition! Would these investigations be added to the statistics or dismissed?  I would bet statistics would not include these numbers?  And, remember a large portion of victims never report an assault so those numbers are not included either. So whether these is a crisis or not depends upon ones perspective.

Just food for thought.

AK Granny

48

Good discussion.  Back in the 80's I worked in the Sex Offender unit of a prison psyche facility.  I remember rigidly holding myself back, as I listened to a young man manner of factly describe sodomizing an infant, then start piteously weeping as he described his own arrest.  I wanted to leap across the table and rip his throat out, but didn't.  So Granny, Tall, Tree, "I feel you…".
I was also training in an intense, but unorthodox style of psychotherapy, and remember how a close-knit, like minded group was vitally supportive, but could also become quite the echo chamber.

I think this support/distortion tradeoff is true for any painful topic,  Sexual Abuse, DeGrowth, Addiction, Global Climate Change, The Aliens, Money/Currency, Peak Everything.  So I applaud the general tone here at PP, and urge us all to politely challenge each other with reality, because , well, It's just …hard to know this stuff.

I really appreciate CM's opening comments to PP, "as the data change, so will my mind ", or words to that effect.  A tip of the hat to Mark Cochrane and his Climate Change thread.  That's the way to do it.  Polite, tough, detailed,  data, data. 

A lot of smart people on PP, and I particularly appreciate a previous exchange with CM about a military issue.  CM was probably correct on the macro (smarter weapons render expensive massive older weapons obsolete), but wrong on the micro, the specific mechanics.  This is the kind of reality testing needed.  No one can be sharp on everything. 

Similarly, a comment by Archdruid about medicine being distorted by money.  Amen to that!  Any doctor or nurse would say "well, Duh!!"  Absolutely correct on the macro.  His reasoning?  Avoiding alternative/complementary treatment of a severe asthmatic?  Wrong on the micro.  More likely prudent risk aversion.  And I love Archdruid's stuff, BTW.  No one can be sharp on everything.  

For that reason, I would love some interviews with people with world views slightly off from PP concensus.  Amory Lovins and Catherine Austin Fitts come to mind. 

Finally, what do I make of the CDC "1 in 5"?  I think they do a great disservice to a field that requires more clarity, not less.  IMHO, they "mined" the credibility of the CDC in service of their cause.  By making a claim that any rational person, and even folks "in the choir" can discount, they make it easier for everyone else to avoid thinking about this particular painful reality.  

I believe, the more important and painful the topic, the more careful and honest should you make your alarming announcement.  If you don't really know, the best thing to say is "we don't really know, but are really worried".  Then when you do know something, maybe people will trust what you say.  

And thank you for politely challenging any of the above. 

 

 

 

49

Thank you for your thoughtful contribution.  I too would love to hear Catherine Austin Fitts on a podcast.
I loved the sentence, "we don't really know but are really worried"!  It's frustrating when we argue over the statistical numbers which discounts the issue of rape and diminishes the victims.  From personal experience I know the numbers are not accurate but don't know what exactly is accurate, but the numbers aren't what matters anyway.

Hope you will post more Sam it's nice to have a few more who bring balance to a subject and your comments are well thought out and you have unique insight.

AK Granny

50

If I have learned one thing from reading alt sites like this one as well as digging more deeply elsewhere to get information that has decent credibility, it is that I cannot trust much put out by government institutions when it comes to statistics. Economic data is regularly skewed to suit, as are medical trials, as are climate facts, as are just about everything else that is fed to us. When we have major corporations fudging figures and data all in the name of profits, such as Volkswagen, how are we supposed to have any faith in any institutional studies or fact? The IMF is not credible so why would the CDC be any more credible?
There are two things I see in this discussion re rape: a woman trying to make a point about women - me being one of the ones she was referring to - as being absent from so many discussions on this site due to perceived male dominance as well as perceived double standards as to what is and is not acceptable. This has been discussed before and the issue seems to crop up when a hot button issue is being talked about. There are some things that I continue to not be able to understand with regard to the site administration when it comes to strong and emotional viewpoints. For example in the past year or so there seems to have been a lot of racist comments being made by one male member but I rarely if at all have I seen the moderators or the member really hold him accountable. What gives guys? Why is overt racism - which is an emotional expression - by a male member acceptable while the moment a women expresses herself in a similar manner gets shot down and called sanctimonious? Will someone please enlighten me?

The second point is the gender divide that arises when discussions of rape arise. I too work in a field that gives me better than average knowledge of this issue. All I can say is that I do not think we will ever be able  to bridge the gulf that exists between the genders re the understanding of rape and rape culture. I think this gulf has in fact widened exponentially as a result of the proliferation and accessibility of porn on the Internet. For many, the lines between fantasy and reality, respect and self-respect have been moved to a whole new field, one that IMHO is moving us further along towards social collapse.

Rape has always been and always will be an act that is used in time of war as a weapon to degrade and anger, to exercise power and control, to dominate. Sadly this has been moving out of the war arena andd into society at large. What else are we to think when we hear people saying they want to hate f*** a woman? And get applauded for it? Or when guys think it is fun to run up to a female reporter on live air and yell out F*** her right in the pus*** as has been seen in the past year?  And why is it that we do not seem to have any women yelling in male reporters mics f*** him right up the ass?  Why do we gave young men doing shootings because they are not getting their perceived sexual entitlement/allotment?

The above is why there is always going to be a gulf in understanding on sexual harassment and rape. When you are not on the receiving end of the majority of it, you are simply unable to understand how it feels, even if just watching another woman be subjected to it. I know many men are sensitive and empathetic, but clearly there are not enough in this camp, for if there were, we would not be having this discussion…

Jan

51

I agree with WestCoastJan's last post, and what I believe is AKGranny's underlying impression, that sexual encounters conducted by force are greatly underreported and may be even "ubiquitous experience" among women.
I have learned that several close women friends have been raped and not reported the incident.  The reasons are important.

1.  One was involved in an activity and situation at the time of the incident that she did not want to have widely discussed publicly.  Reporting a rape essentially involves discussing in public (and later reading about it in the newspaper) an intimate and very distressing event.  All your co-workers get to talk through the whole thing around the water cooler.

2.  The second was raped by a friend of the family and her children were close friends of the assailants children.  She chose to not report the incident so as to not disrupt the world of all the children.

I have heard of others who did not report because they just couldn't handle the stress of a second massive event while still being so overwhelmed the rape itself.

52

Thanks for the support Sandpuppy - it is much appreciated - by me and other women!
Happy New Year everyone. I am writing this post with the hope that we can collectively work towards helping PP get back on track in some ways. I am sure of course there are some of you who think it ain't broke and therefore don't fix it, and what they heck is she talking about anyway! But trust me, there are a few things "broke". I want to see this site do well and prosper! Always have, always will. But I also want the site to be a model of respect and acceptance of all contributors, for that is the key ingredient to balanced debates & discussions that are both fruitful and enlightening. And I am assuming that is a goal on this site?!?  I do note that Sandpuppy is the only man to respond thus far to my questions in my last post, which were not rhetorical - I want responses gentlemen - ye of hallowed minds and admirable vocabularies - please and thank you. Non responses from those who have opined in this thread will not be getting any brownie points from the Janster!

Admittedly this is now sort of off tangent from the article. I do want to chip in with something that was said by Ken in post #2 that I think may have influenced AKGranny to post something re benefiting from the hardships of others. To put into context, we here in BC have a law that prevents profiteering from emergencies. For example if your store sells generators and the power goes out you are not allowed to jack up the prices beyond a predetermined legislated level so that you do not take advantage of the situation. Now some would read that as BS and want to be able to get whatever the highest bidder will pay, and others would be more community minded and not take excessive profits from an emergency situation. For me this ties in with the whole concept of building community. I do think the guy who ends up charging 10K for a generator is not going to be well loved down the road in his community…

It is obvious to me there is a wealthy cohort in this online community and as per the Chinese saying "crisis = opportunity", it appears that some of you are wanting to/trying to position yourselves to make a killing if/when the SHTF. I can understand that since we in the first world have seen our thinking evolve to make us want to go this route - at least that is how I see it. We are programmed to want financial success. Some of us buy into it more than others. But somehow, and I think this is what AKGranny was trying to convey, it seems like some of you are striving to be the guy with the generators who can sell them for 10K…

If we put this into a larger, perhaps global community building context, does having a financial buy list make us a good global community member? Well I guess it depends what that buy list is, as Adam opined. Somehow though, when I see millions of refugees - from war, from water, from climate and from poor economic conditions all on the move trying to find a new home to find that which I think we all have - waking up warm and cozy with food in the fridge;when I see millions of North Americans without jobs, losing their homes, struggling to feed their families, stuck in circumstances created by BIG MONEY AND CORRUPT BANKERS AND POLITICIANS I personally have a really hard time with the idea that those with the big bucks are positioning themselves to make ever more financial fortune when they are already so wealthy beyond your average person. How about forgetting the markets and helping your fellow man? In this great big melting pot can we not help proactively, and be content with what we have?

Re the rape conversation, clearly the men are uncomfortable with this change in direction of conversation. i know that many of you are husbands, fathers, brothers and uncles and grampas. You should be concerned gentlemen!! Rape culture is real, it is widespread and we still have judges who, to quote one recent Canadian judge who has since been suspended, "why didn't you just close your knees?"  You should be scared, for even if you are fine, upstanding gentlemen, there are millions who are not. And you should thank god you live in NA and not India!

The past year or two has seen a number of really remarkable women leave this site because they felt ganged up on and not supported by the site administrators. One was even banned. So much for freedom of speech! I am sure I myself was close to the line at one point as I tried to support one of those women when the site owners felt threatened by what we were saying. Gee, I guess we do have some power after all! But you know, the PP community is all the poorer for the loss of these women and others who do not post due to the whole male dominance thing. I find that the great engaging discussions we had are gone. Other good members are largely absent - in addition to the women Gillbilly and Treemagnet, Bob, James Lemieux to name a few. I miss good discussions where the back and forth is/was fun and engaging.

With the launch of you new book, this is the time to get back on track Chris and Adam. We women want to support resilience and prosperity, and we are well positioned to help you succeed, but not if we are treated like second class citizens. That is so redundant… so its up to you to make your decisions re how you want to administer the site. You can either welcome all and moderate without bias, or you can keep heading on the path you are on. I do hope you will see the light and embrace the former.

I proudly sign my name in the spirit of peace and good will to all my friends here on PP. My life has changed a lot because of my interactions with all of you. I hope that we can find ways to work together to maintain a balanced and oh so important website. Happy 2016!

Jan

Jan

53

…the questions you pose point out that even in our liberal and secular society – which has come a long way and still has a long way to go on many issues – there are entitled Y chromosome carriers running around being brutish and violent and have a misogynist skew to their worldview.  Women are objects.  Etc.
Setting aside the truth that there are plenty of "good men" out there, if I had a daughter or a sister I would be getting them into martial arts, shooting and all that.  No, it's not fair that the women have to go learn how to defend themselves from the bad men.  The bad men should change their behavior.  But like I said above, even in these 'good" times we get bad action.  As times get tougher?  The bad acting will get worse, I think.

My Sweet Sweet Lady and I are actively studying a martial art and have asked our Sifu to start adding in lesson material about practical day-to-day situations, including the use of a small (legal to carry) knife called a karambit.  We are looking into her carrying a stun-gun and/or pepper spray (or at least having them in her car).  

As much as I am active in trying to make the world and our culture a better/safer place for women (I volunteer & teach each week at a women's recovery shelter) I also recognize that it's likely enough going to get more difficult for women and not less so.  Then – as several have pointed out in this thread – it's going to get more dangerous for bad men/rapists.  Like lose your manparts and/or life. 

In my day I have more or less picked a fight with a guy on the street in NYC because he was verbally and physically abusing his girlfriend.  Interposed myself.  I was pretty scary big in that day, which helped because he was no wisp of a guy.  People actually kept trying to get me to butt OUT.  I didn't know what I thought I was going to accomplish (humiliate the guy and he'll probably take the woman home and beat her) but I couldn't just walk by the way almost everybody else was.  I suspect in this day and age dozens would have their cellphones out and recording and a phalanx of angry NYC women would be backing the up against the nearest wall.  So maybe we have made progress.  Still a long road ahead.

I'm sorry this is the way it is.  There's great good in many men and sadly many others lift themselves by pushing women down.  I can't speak to what has gone on here at PP in recent times because I have been largely absent rebuilding my life from scratch (what, again?!).  It's my sincere hope some or any of this is useful to you and/or the discussion at large.

VIVA – Sager

54

Just curious Jan, who was banned? 

55

So will the good acting. Get worse, that is.

56

I can't speak for the culture of the site, it's owners  or  your perception of it as male dominated  other than to say that is a legitimate perspective to air, and you do so eloquently.

If I were to respond to you instead, that your thoughts are "utterly offensive lets not go down this path"  than  would I not be guilty of discouraging conversation?  of censoring you?   How would that be a model of respect for all contributors?

  This particular conversation regarding rape culture stemmed from a discussion of  the validity of  an oft stated and disputed statistic and the definitions of rape.   Is there a rape culture?  Yes.  Is rape under reported? again undoubtedly yes.    Is it one in 4 or  5?  I don't happen to think it is that high based on previously discussed factors.  And more to the point, I think that is a legitimate point for discussion or debate.  Instead the response was to somehow turn this question into a referendum on "is rape not such a bad thing after all?"

Even though I don't think rape as it is legally and commonsensicaly  defined occurs at that frequency  This year for Xmass I bought my 16 year old daughter  a mace key chain, a self defense cat key ring,  and  the book and course "when the unthinkable happens a complete guide to womans self defense."     Note that this is on top of nine years of martial arts training, where I helped guide her into the top of the National rankings as a competitor. 

Part of that was encouraging her and empowering her to see herself as a capable young woman equal to any male, even in physical combat endeavors. In fact she once won the Montana open in the male  heavy weight division as a female light weight.  More important than the physical stuff was what I tried to impart mentally

Perhaps most importantly  what I taught her was not to buy into stereotypes that our culture hands down, to think critically and question and evaluate all assumptions even her own and especially mine.

Therein lies the biggest problem I have with what I perceive as the subtext of  your appeal for top down moderation to somehow implicitly balance or equalize a gender bias.  To my mind such issues especially contentious and painful issues need to find their strength through their own merit. and that is best served in the unfettered 'market place of ideas.

I recognize that I am oversimplifying your concerns, for the purpose of brevity   and may have mischaracterized your intent, (please note, I am not familiar with the issues that you cited regarding previous disputes and people being banned)  but I trust that you will be able to correct me.

 

mememonkey

 

57

that I will have to leave to site administrators to divulge and/or indicate their reasoning. They have a business to run and I respect that totally. But I also have a healthy respect for freedom of expression. They have a fine line to balance without being censors. I do not envy them!
But I will add that some of us seem to express feelings/thoughts with varying vocabularies and abilities to express ourselves. That in and of itself should not preclude someone from expressing an opinion. Everyone has the ability to influence our thoughts in some manner - if we let them. But if we start to exercise even minor censorship - perhaps because there is too much emotion - then we too start down the slippery slope.

I get something from each and everyone of you. I may not agree with you - even those extolling "his people"! Why? Because I do not live in a vacuum, and neither should you. I grow and evolve because each of you make me think differently on some level and help me to challenge inbred thinking. I hope I make you think too :slight_smile:

Thanks for your responses guys - I hope more chime in! This is worth talking about!

Jan

58

Hi Jan. I think I appreciated your comment (#51), although you and I will disagree on some things, it was nice of you to ask us commenters to keep this conversation going. Some things, of course, won't get resolved, but we can identify them and move on from there. And yes, we kind of owe David Collum something like an apology, since much of the thread veered into gender issues. It started with a good and well-received post from (was it Treebeard?)… but just one thing about his post annoyed me

When statistics say that 20 to 25% of women will be sexually assaulted during their college career, is not that the driving problem
And I responded to that and AKgranny replied to me. By the time I got back online, Mememonkey had defended me in such an appropriate way that I didn't feel I needed to say anything more.

I willingly fork over $300 each year to this site because we discuss things here that I cannot discuss with friends and family. Many of you probably feel the same way. So even though there was more stuff about gender issues that came to my mind recently, I let it go (although I made another comment later on, I chose not to bring up additional gender issues - I knew it could be potentially divisive). Since Jan asked, I will say one thing more for all of us to think about, but first, let me finish my thoughts about our responsibilities to this website. 

I use the "ignore user" option and I recommend it for any of us who are "rubbed the wrong way" by any other "online personalities." There is an online personality known as "T2H" on this site whose posts I didn't like at a very early point and so I "ignored" him. Another online personality known as "Arthur" didn't offend me, but none of his first 10 or 12 comments made any sense to me at all, so I figured why waste the time and I "ignored" him too. [Btw, in real life maybe I could be friends with T2H or Arthur, but they aren't in my real life, they are simply online personalities.]  

I think Mememonkey is right to question the ability of some kind of imposed gender neutralizer to work without hurting the site. At this same time, I'm grateful to have somebody like Jan on this site because she is contributing to our diversity in an appropriate way - no attacks on the character of those she disagrees with.

So here is my (hopefully) non-divisive observation about gender issues. A quote from I don't know who:

Man's essential weakness is his appearance of strength. Woman's essential strength is her appearance of weakness.
 

Happy New Year to all PPers,

Jeff

 

59

While we certainly have a self-centered culture, it's not based on "survival of the fittest" or any other type of individual merit, unless you consider talent at political corruption to be a sign of "fitness".  Massive redistribution of wealth from middle class workers to the poor makes it much more difficult for producers to survive.  [By producers I mean the workers who actually do things in the physical world, not those who've become expert at financial manipulations.] The whole article was describing how a corrupt Fed is damaging the productive middle in order to support expropriation of assets by the 1% who are buying political power in order to stack the regulatory deck in their own favor.  While the well-publicized idea of the corrupt 1% might be that the self-centered are productive, it's like the gangster robbing banks because that's where the money is.  Like bank robbers, those who are so self-centered that they'll do almost anything to take things from others who've created value (rather than producing for themselves) can indeed become rich.  That doesn't make them "fit" and indeed if the producers stopped making things for them to appropriate, they'd starve pretty quickly.

What we're really seeing here is a culture of spoiled, self-centered takers.  The rich see no reason to create things themselves, because they can sustain their lifestyles with financial manipulations.  The poor see the middle working harder and harder for less and less and see no reason to make the effort our grandparents did to get into this rigged game, since social safety nets (funded by the dwindling assets of the middle) will keep them from starving. Neither Wall Street nor corrupt Federal regulators grow your food or keep your lights on.  Neither do overpaid CEOs of energy companies or agribusiness.  

Yes, it is a systemic problem and we should not withhold our outrage until they start to mess with our personal things.  However, the problem has nothing to do with fitness and when we parrot that phrase we only support their corrupt view of how an economy works.  

60

Mr Darwin is the final arbiter of who survives. Therefore it pays to study evolution.
There is a trade off between quantity of offspring and quality of offspring.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory
This underlies some very heated arguments.
Those who tend toward quantity see those who favor quality of offspring as nasty elitist Racists.
In an expansionary environment such as the end of an ice age or the discovery of a new energy source (fossil fuels) the fast breeders have the advantage. Marriage commitment is loose. Young mothers are the rule.
In an adverse environment it takes a lot of commitment to successfully raise offspring. Therefore marriages are stable. Females won’t breed until they have enough bodily resources therefore they breed later.
Either we find another energy source and expand into the le Grange points or we will flip our behavior into K mode (Quality).
r mode behavior will be become the minority view and the philosophy of quantity over quality will be quietly forgotten.
Will K mode breeding be kinder? Absolutely not. However it will certainly clean out the genepool.
These are not ideals. These are observations.