Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Male cryonicists versus hostile companion females


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#1 advancedatheist

  • Registered User Atheist
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 11 September 2008 - 01:21 AM


A joint publication from Mike Darwin and Mr. & Mrs. De Wolf:

http://www.depressed...dfs/hostile.pdf
  • 0

#2 Shannon Vyff

  • Lifetime Member, Director Lead Moderator
  • 3,831 posts
  • 509
  • Location:Lubbock, TX
  • yes

Posted 11 September 2008 - 05:09 AM

wow, I really hated reading that--and I don't hate much....
  • 0

#3 forever freedom

  • Registered User
  • 2,334 posts
  • 58

Posted 11 September 2008 - 05:38 AM

Shannon, but the article, although it poses questions and possiblities, doesn't make any concrete conclusion.


It is a very interesting article. I wouldn't jump to conclusions, but neither did the authors. The fact is that, in general, men are more receptive to cryonics than women, but we can only speculate as to the reasons.

Edited by sam988, 11 September 2008 - 05:39 AM.

  • 0

#4 xlifex

  • Registered User
  • 79 posts
  • 0

Posted 11 September 2008 - 06:05 PM

Shannon, but the article, although it poses questions and possiblities, doesn't make any concrete conclusion.


It is a very interesting article. I wouldn't jump to conclusions, but neither did the authors. The fact is that, in general, men are more receptive to cryonics than women, but we can only speculate as to the reasons.


Yes. This problem is not confined to cryonics. Similar observations can be made about about life extension and transhumanism. In cryonics of course, this phenomenon can have really personal implications.

The authors raise the point that this phenomenon may just reflect disparities between men and women in making cryonics arrangements, but that just brings back the same question. Why are men more receptive to cryonics than women?

Recent Alcor membership stats: Males – 667 Females - 198:

http://www.alcornews...statistics.html

Edited by xlifex, 11 September 2008 - 06:05 PM.

  • 0

#5 Cyberbrain

  • Registered User, F@H
  • 1,755 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 11 September 2008 - 06:10 PM

I know a couple that's just the opposite where the wife is thrilled about cryonics and the husband is against it.
  • 0

#6 xlifex

  • Registered User
  • 79 posts
  • 0

Posted 11 September 2008 - 06:20 PM

I know a couple that's just the opposite where the wife is thrilled about cryonics and the husband is against it.


Yes, the authors also mention a number of those cases.

When you say "against it", do you mean that he is discouraging her to make arrangements, or that he just does not want cryonics for himself?

Edited by xlifex, 11 September 2008 - 06:22 PM.

  • 0

#7 JLL

  • Registered User
  • 2,192 posts
  • 155

Posted 11 September 2008 - 06:28 PM

My hypothesis is that women are more into immortalizing themselves through passing on their genes than men and hence less willing/able to think about these things rationally. This is of course understandable from an evolutionary standpoint, but it's a problem nonetheless.
  • 0

#8 Mind

  • Lifetime Member, Moderator, Secretary
  • 13,364 posts
  • 3,766
  • Location:Wausau, WI
  • yes

Posted 11 September 2008 - 06:30 PM

Whenever mainstream media cover WTA, Singinst, or other related conferences they almost always invariably remark "the audience was full of white males". The phenomenon is real. I don't know why, but I hope it changes. When I interviewed Anne Corwin this Summer she said it boiled down to culture/society. Some of you might remember the question I asked a few years ago.
  • 0

#9 advancedatheist

  • Registered User Atheist
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 11 September 2008 - 06:38 PM

I know of cases where women signed up for cryotransport to please the current men in their lives, but then dropped the arrangements after the breakup or divorce.

I've also heard of cases where children of cryonicist parents cancelled their suspension arrangements upon turning 18 or so, which throws into question of whether "cryonicist families" can make a devotion to cryonics generationally transmissible.
  • 0

#10 advancedatheist

  • Registered User Atheist
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 11 September 2008 - 06:56 PM

Whenever mainstream media cover WTA, Singinst, or other related conferences they almost always invariably remark "the audience was full of white males".


You could say the same thing about the people standing on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, shown on CNBC most days of the week. The white male audiences attending transhumanist events signal to other members of America's dominant tribe that they should pay attention to these ideas.
  • 0

#11 Mind

  • Lifetime Member, Moderator, Secretary
  • 13,364 posts
  • 3,766
  • Location:Wausau, WI
  • yes

Posted 11 September 2008 - 07:02 PM

I've also heard of cases where children of cryonicist parents cancelled their suspension arrangements upon turning 18 or so, which throws into question of whether "cryonicist families" can make a devotion to cryonics generationally transmissible.


You have to remember that 18 year old children (and teenagers in general) tend to reject nearly everything their parents try to impress upon them.
  • 0

#12 Cyberbrain

  • Registered User, F@H
  • 1,755 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 11 September 2008 - 08:19 PM

I know a couple that's just the opposite where the wife is thrilled about cryonics and the husband is against it.


Yes, the authors also mention a number of those cases.

When you say "against it", do you mean that he is discouraging her to make arrangements, or that he just does not want cryonics for himself?

Well for him it's more off a economical and peer pressure thing. He says if everyone supported it and if it was cheap, he too would support it too. He says he doesn't want to put his children and grandchildren at an economical disadvantage by having his life insurance money go directly to preserving him. Plus it's also a family issue for him. If his parents and relatives supported it, he would too. He say's whats the point of living in the future if all your friends and family are gone.

He's not really discouraging her to make arrangements, I mean if she signed up, he'll probably sign up too (you know how love is). He just doesn't like the idea too much due to these 3 factors:

1. Too expansive; money could go to better use such as to his kids
2. "Whats the point of living in the future if all your friends and family are died"
3. No guarantee of revival; science not perfected; could be a waste of money (this ties with the first point)

A minor factor:

4. "Living long is nice, but I don't want immortality"
5. Living a new life in the future may be hard and depressing (getting used to the new technologies, culture, etc.)
  • 0

#13 advancedatheist

  • Registered User Atheist
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 11 September 2008 - 10:58 PM

He's not really discouraging her to make arrangements, I mean if she signed up, he'll probably sign up too (you know how love is). He just doesn't like the idea too much due to these 3 factors:
. . .
2. "Whats the point of living in the future if all your friends and family are died"


If cryonics works, and if some of your friends and family sign up and survive with you, then that looks like an ill-considered objection.

Even then, people have always suffered from such losses, dealt with their grief and then went on to rebuild worthwhile lives around new friends and even new families. In fact, we tend to admire people who display that sort of resiliency.

5. Living a new life in the future may be hard and depressing (getting used to the new technologies, culture, etc.)


Hell, I grew up in this society, and I've felt that way about it much of my life. A future society, or some subculture within it, might work better for me if it has values I find more agreeable.
  • 0

#14 Cyberbrain

  • Registered User, F@H
  • 1,755 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 11 September 2008 - 11:30 PM

If cryonics works, and if some of your friends and family sign up and survive with you, then that looks like an ill-considered objection.

It has to first work (revival and rejuvenation). Otherwise most people will look upon it as waste of money.

I love cryonics, but we all have to face the truth and that is: if we have no guarantee it will work, we have no guarantee people will have faith in it. So either we'll need to hire the best PR firm in the world (to convince people its importance) or get cracking with research to perfect the technology as fast as possible.

Hell, I grew up in this society, and I've felt that way about it much of my life. A future society, or some subculture within it, might work better for me if it has values I find more agreeable.

Me too. I kind of want to be like Frey from futurama where he wakes up in the year 3000 and loves it. ;)
  • 0

#15 John_Ventureville

  • Registered User
  • 279 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Planet Earth

Posted 12 September 2008 - 12:35 AM

I thought the article was excellent. It thoroughly covered the many reasons women may take a negative stance against cryonics. I look at women like Shannon Vyff, Jennifer Chapman, Tanya Jones and Music Chapman and I am amazed and impressed by their interest and dedication. I see them in a way as mutants (but good mutants!, hey, I'm a huge X-Men fan, lol).

I've privately heard many horror stories of men who despite providing well for their families upon their death, still had their cryonics arrangements ripped apart by the wife and adult children, "vulture style."

Kostas wrote:
Me too. I kind of want to be like Frey from futurama where he wakes up in the year 3000 and loves it. ;)
>>>

Yes, I'm waiting to meet my personal Leela! :)

John Grigg : )
  • 0

#16 abolitionist

  • Registered User
  • 716 posts
  • -4
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 12 September 2008 - 09:13 AM

Yes, I'm waiting to meet my personal Leela! ;)


wouldn't a cyborg sex slave be better? I've given up on a personal Leela, the odds are not good.

Most women find transhumanist thinking very threatening, anti-social in terms of present norms, and therefore unattractive. Being seen as not being comfortable with staying the way you are is apparently unattractive - many women see it as a sign of weakness and immaturity.

"you want to freeze yourself and connect your brain to computers? ewwwww" - who needs that!

Edited by abolitionist, 12 September 2008 - 09:14 AM.

  • 0

#17 John_Ventureville

  • Registered User
  • 279 posts
  • 6
  • Location:Planet Earth

Posted 12 September 2008 - 11:56 AM

I wrote:
>Yes, I'm waiting to meet my personal Leela! ;)

abolitionist replied:
wouldn't a cyborg sex slave be better? I've given up on a personal Leela, the odds are not good.
>>

And people wonder why white male cryonicists can't get dates! LOL! When I wrote "yes, I'm waiting for my personal Leela", I meant that I expected to meet such a lady only after being reanimated from cryonic suspension (I would think the odds would be very good then). But it would be cool to meet a wonderful woman in this current phase of my existence.

you continued:
Most women find transhumanist thinking very threatening, anti-social in terms of present norms, and therefore unattractive. Being seen as not being comfortable with staying the way you are is apparently unattractive - many women see it as a sign of weakness and immaturity.
>>

Ahh..., but many women *are not* comfortable with staying the way they are and so they go to a cosmetic surgeon for modification. In time we will see women going to *effective* super-longevity clinics to greatly slow or even reverse aging. And with advanced bio/nanotech we will eventually see body sculpting to equal the imagination of any science fiction artist a common sight.

you continued:
"you want to freeze yourself and connect your brain to computers? ewwwww" - who needs that!
>>

Cryonics is a hard sell for most females but considering how most women treasure their cell phone type gizmos, I expect an upcoming generation of young women to heartily embrace brain/computer interfaces so they can *instantly* keep in touch with their friends.

When *suspended animation* comes into its own, I see women being very accepting of it as they view the technology being used by paramedics and doctors to save the critically injured or those with terminal diseases. But it will not be as extreme a technique as cryonics and bringing people back from such a state will be a proven thing.

John Grigg : )
  • 0

#18 Luna

  • Registered User, F@H
  • 2,528 posts
  • 67
  • Location:Israel

Posted 12 September 2008 - 02:00 PM

Hey John that's actually a great scam.
First we sell "tele-chips" that connect to your brain and allow you to communicate via voice or thought instantly around the globe,
Then we add memory chips to them (and you), calculators, games and GPS!
How can anyone resist it then, no one will even notice it is what they refused for years!
  • 0

#19 abolitionist

  • Registered User
  • 716 posts
  • -4
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 13 September 2008 - 07:38 AM

And people wonder why white male cryonicists can't get dates! LOL! When I wrote "yes, I'm waiting for my personal Leela", I meant that I expected to meet such a lady only after being reanimated from cryonic suspension (I would think the odds would be very good then). But it would be cool to meet a wonderful woman in this current phase of my existence.

Ahh..., but many women *are not* comfortable with staying the way they are and so they go to a cosmetic surgeon for modification. In time we will see women going to *effective* super-longevity clinics to greatly slow or even reverse aging. And with advanced bio/nanotech we will eventually see body sculpting to equal the imagination of any science fiction artist a common sight.

Cryonics is a hard sell for most females but considering how most women treasure their cell phone type gizmos, I expect an upcoming generation of young women to heartily embrace brain/computer interfaces so they can *instantly* keep in touch with their friends.


thanks for the laugh - I hope you do meet one of the rare Transhumanist females and hit it off!

Yes, it isn't very cool to say that you'd rather have a cyborg than a Darwinian female - but really everyone is looking for attributes from their mates - a cyborg can potentially have better attributes.

Sounds heartless, but hey - so is the social stratification/dating game. Better to find satisfaction than to need another Darwinian to satisfy you.

Edited by abolitionist, 13 September 2008 - 07:40 AM.

  • 0

#20 solbanger

  • Registered User
  • 197 posts
  • 9

Posted 20 September 2008 - 09:12 AM

Shannon, but the article, although it poses questions and possiblities, doesn't make any concrete conclusion.


It is a very interesting article. I wouldn't jump to conclusions, but neither did the authors. The fact is that, in general, men are more receptive to cryonics than women, but we can only speculate as to the reasons.


Simple. It's for the same reasons men are more interested in immortality. Big egos. There's much less of a cost in inseminating females forever than in having to bare children. Also on top of that men are in constant competition with each other to impress women. Women don't truly compete for men by attempting to destroy other women, like men do to each other. There's no impulse to conquest and defeat challengers. Men have these tendencies because for millions of years in most mammalian communities the top male bred with the lionshare of the females, and the outer ring of men got almost nothing but the crooked looking ones. This is the main cause of the persistence of beta females, you know Ugly Betty types. So women have much less of a compulsion to live forever - they fundamentally know that they bare the reproductive burden and the debilitating submissiveness that comes with pregnancy, some going so far as being grateful when they hit menopause. The long-term genetic burden of child rearing also extends into a woman's role in raising offspring. Women realize that children come with long term obligations, and the father may not be supportive through the years. Now imagine having to make that choice for thousands of years. With that psychological crown weighing on a woman's head for eternity, or at least during the timelessness of youth, you can understand why women are more likely to embrace death. This doesn't apply to all women, some women are born without the desire to have children. They simply become economic beacons for their step-children. We all have that successful Aunt who never had kids.

Ego is the main reason anybody wants to live forever. If you think about it. The whole idea that "I am important and my views are valuable." is just a self-rationalization for the desire to replicate oneself, and make others submissive to your abilities. Ego.

Rationally there is no point in doing anything if it does not affect someone else to your advantage. Without an ego we would all just kill ourselves when we get bored with life, since there would be no discernible goal to eventually best, or impress another human challenger in the future. Without the need to possess and, thus, trump other humans in the genetic sweepstakes we have little point in existing. Take away the ego and you're just a genetic vector like a virus or a hive of bees. Dampen your ego a little bit and you become feminine.
  • 0

#21 Luna

  • Registered User, F@H
  • 2,528 posts
  • 67
  • Location:Israel

Posted 20 September 2008 - 12:49 PM

How could just living be anything about ego anyways?
The reasons I want to live forever is not to just "live longer" and definitely has nothing to do with comparing one life to the other.
The reasons are and should be:
Because I enjoy living.
Because I don't want to die and be non existent.

Even though the second reason might be translated by one to something about ego, it is not about leaving a mark, it comes back to the first one and to the simple fact not being existing is.. far from desirable.

It is also, unlike Solbanger said, nothing about impressing females or being important.
No one is truly that important, if you are alive it does not make you important, it makes you alive.
Living has nothing to do with ego, it is like asking would you eat icecream or dust? there is no benefit in dust, you don't care of all the world will eat ice cream with you, you only care to choose what appears more to your liking, regardless of ego.
  • 0

#22 Mind

  • Lifetime Member, Moderator, Secretary
  • 13,364 posts
  • 3,766
  • Location:Wausau, WI
  • yes

Posted 20 September 2008 - 02:11 PM

I agree that there is the genetically based ego-drive to live forever, but is there also a knowledge-drive to live forever? I enjoy learning new things and it seems there are an infinite number of things to learn and explore, thus I would like to live a lot longer than 100 years. I suppose you could somehow link this back to genetics and maybe ego, but I think there is something qualitatively different about the quest for knowledge.
  • 0

#23 forever freedom

  • Registered User
  • 2,334 posts
  • 58

Posted 20 September 2008 - 05:22 PM

I agree that there is the genetically based ego-drive to live forever, but is there also a knowledge-drive to live forever? I enjoy learning new things and it seems there are an infinite number of things to learn and explore, thus I would like to live a lot longer than 100 years. I suppose you could somehow link this back to genetics and maybe ego, but I think there is something qualitatively different about the quest for knowledge.


I agree, i don't think that ego is the main (at least mine) reason to live forever.
  • 0

#24 Solipsism

  • Registered User
  • 52 posts
  • 0

Posted 21 September 2008 - 02:29 AM

it's fun to see the reason why a person change his mind on cryonics, I just hope I wont change my mind later and decide to die cremated or buried.. nobody know the future so I cant tell if I will change my mind with cryonics, I hope not.. but nothing is sure..right now I am at my apogee with my view of my life, I want to preserve it etc.. but would it be as important as of now later? I think Mike Darwin is a wonderful player who donated alot of his life to cryonics and I hope I will do the same in my life. Mike Darwin is one of my model. Too bad he is not chatting here with us :-D
  • 0

#25 Cyberbrain

  • Registered User, F@H
  • 1,755 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 21 September 2008 - 04:28 AM

I agree that there is the genetically based ego-drive to live forever, but is there also a knowledge-drive to live forever? I enjoy learning new things and it seems there are an infinite number of things to learn and explore, thus I would like to live a lot longer than 100 years. I suppose you could somehow link this back to genetics and maybe ego, but I think there is something qualitatively different about the quest for knowledge.


I agree, i don't think that ego is the main (at least mine) reason to live forever.

I thought it was well established in the life extension community, that the desire to live longer stems directly out of our general desire to live - to survive.

Isn't this our purpose as life - to maximize well being and survivability?
  • 0

#26 Solipsism

  • Registered User
  • 52 posts
  • 0

Posted 21 September 2008 - 06:12 AM

"Isn't this our purpose as life - to maximize well being and survivability?"

the problem is that we suffer often and alot sometime, at the point that we want to die. There is also religious faith, conviction and fear of the future.

All that and I know because I try to convince my mother to be cryopreserved, her argument against it is: When it's finish, it's finish. Well then I say: I am not finish then.. and will never be.

--Solip
  • 0

#27 abolitionist

  • Registered User
  • 716 posts
  • -4
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 21 September 2008 - 06:57 AM

"Isn't this our purpose as life - to maximize well being and survivability?"

the problem is that we suffer often and alot sometime, at the point that we want to die. There is also religious faith, conviction and fear of the future.

All that and I know because I try to convince my mother to be cryopreserved, her argument against it is: When it's finish, it's finish. Well then I say: I am not finish then.. and will never be.

--Solip


cryonics still isn't comforting to most people because the idea that they will wake up whole and healthy lacks credibility - thus they don't support it

Edited by abolitionist, 21 September 2008 - 06:57 AM.

  • 0

#28 Solipsism

  • Registered User
  • 52 posts
  • 0

Posted 21 September 2008 - 10:41 AM

"cryonics still isn't comforting to most people because the idea that they will wake up whole and healthy lacks credibility - thus they don't support it"

yes absolutely! :-D they cant see nanomachines, bionics and rejuvenation.
  • 0

#29 Solipsism

  • Registered User
  • 52 posts
  • 0

Posted 21 September 2008 - 10:49 AM

I find the alcor staff very quiet on forums like these here..
  • 0

#30 Waelwulf

  • Registered User
  • 20 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Seattle, WA

Posted 28 September 2008 - 02:11 AM

Aschwin de Wolf has to be the smartest writer we have out there for cryonics. Her (his?) blog, Depressed Metabolism, is absolutely fantastic.
  • 1




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users