Patience:

farnam street:

People wait in different ways. Some are passive. Others are active. These two approaches are as different as the results they yield.

Passive patience is waiting for the world to give you the thing you want. A lot of people live their life with passive patience. Rather than go after the promotion at work they expect it to fall in their lap. Rather than go after the love of their life, they sit back and expect to be courted. Rather than chase their dreams, they wait for just the right opening that always seems around the corner but never comes. These people have the wrong kind of patience.

Active patience is different. Active patience demands action and intention, even while waiting for results. Active patience means not only applying for the promotion but taking your time to build the skills you need to put yourself in the best position to succeed. Active patience means starting the business, writing the book, going after the love of your life.

Active patience puts you in the best position to get what you want. There is almost always an action you can take to improve the odds.

-----

On Writing:

“We write for the same reason that we walk, talk, climb mountains or swim the oceans — because we can. We have some impulse within us that makes us want to explain ourselves to other human beings. That’s why we paint, that’s why we dare to love someone- because we have the impulse to explain who we are. Not just how tall we are, or thin… but who we are internally…"

Doing Hard Things:

Cal Newport:

Sanderson starts by pushing back on our common instinct to tell kids “you can do anything you want to” or “follow your dreams.” He argues that these aphorisms inflict a disservice on impressionable minds as they obfuscate the complexity, and frustration, and nuance involved in actually pursuing remarkable goals.

He retorts that the following claim is much more realistic:

“I can do hard things. Doing hard things has intrinsic value, and they will make me a better person, even if I end up failing.”

Husband’s income, wife’s income, and number of biological children in the U.S.

Rosemary L. Hopcroft

Abstract

Previous studies have found that the positive relationship between personal income and fertility for men in the United States is primarily due to childlessness among low-income men. Yet because of the opposite effects of income on fertility for men and women, it is important to examine the effects of income net of spouse’s income. An analysis of income from all sources and biological fertility data for husbands and wives from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (2014) shows that for men their own income is positively associated with the number of their biological children, while their spouse’s income is negatively associated with total children ever fathered. The reverse is true for women. These results are not because of childlessness among low-income men and high-income women, but also hold true among all those with children. For men and women aged 45–65, who likely have completed fertility, these results hold regardless of whether or not education is controlled. These findings suggest that if status is measured as personal income for men and husband’s income for women, the positive relationship between status and fertility persists in a postdemographic transition society.

Good Luck:

"You can't control luck directly, but you can move from a game with bad odds to a game with good odds. The world is like a reverse casino. In a casino, if you gamble long enough, you're certainly going to lose. But in the real world, where the only thing you're gambling is, say, your time or your embarrassment, then the more stuff you do, the more you give luck a chance to find you. If you do one thing and stop, you didn't give luck a chance to find you. You only need one thing to work."

Scott Adams

Confusion:

Imposter Syndrome:

How do you advise people that are dealing with imposter syndrome?

Jordan Peterson:

Oh everyone deals with that. Every time you make a status shift as you move upwards of course you have imposter syndrome, because when you first make a transition into a new role you are an imposter, because you're a beginner. You don't know what you're doing.

A meta-analysis of the association between male dimorphism and fitness outcomes in humans

Linda H. Lidborg, Catharine Penelope Cross, Lynda G. Boothroyd

Abstract

Humans are sexually dimorphic: men and women differ in body build and composition, craniofacial structure, and voice pitch, likely mediated in part by developmental testosterone. Sexual selection hypotheses posit that, ancestrally, more 'masculine' men may have acquired more mates and/or sired more viable offspring. Thus far, however, evidence for either association is unclear. Here, we meta-analyze the relationships between six masculine traits and mating/reproductive outcomes (96 studies, 474 effects, N = 177,044). Voice pitch, height, and testosterone all predicted mating; however, strength/muscularity was the strongest and only consistent predictor of both mating and reproduction. Facial masculinity and digit ratios did not significantly predict either. There was no clear evidence for any effects of masculinity on offspring viability. Our findings support arguments that strength/muscularity may be sexually selected in humans, but cast doubt regarding selection for other forms of masculinity and highlight the need to increase tests of evolutionary hypotheses outside of industrialized populations.