See evolution from sex positions

As human, the main reason we study on the human sex positions is only for baby conception. Today, I want to stand in the prospective of evolution to have a look at the animals’ sex positions. First, we have to know how many sex positions animals have on the earth. One is rear entry (doggie style), the other is face to face.

1, Rear entry

In this position, male have the penetration into vagina behind the female. It is also called doggie style, because animals mostly have sex in this position as same as dog. Of course rear entry has lots of variation, such as the standing canine, spooning, the cuissade, and so on, but the core of these positions is penetration from the back of female. According to the people who hold the theory of penis envy, this position is good for stroking female G-spot, because penetration is quite deep in this position. I really have to admit that this position indeed offers a deep penetration during sex, but unfortunately the G-spot never exist. With the skin gone, what can the hair adhere to?

2, Face to face

In this position, male penetrates female face to face. If you have ever seen other animals mating, you know that face to face position is pretty much unique to humans, so far we only find two animals who do the sex face to face: Bonobo and Chimpanzee, undoubtedly they are the closest relatives to humans we have found. Missionary position is the most popular in human, and it offers the deepest penetration thereby allowing semen to easily enter the cervix. Of course missionary position also has lots of variation, such as the lap dancing, the female superior position, the scissors position, and so on, but the core of these positions is penetrating female face to face.

Do you ever think why almost animals, except human, only have the rear entry sex position? Why face to face position only happens during human, bonobo and chimpanzee? What is the difference between the two positions in evolution? What makes face to face happened on human, but not on other animals? Is face to face sex position the result of human evolution? 

Here I try to explain these questions step by step.

First, if earth’s entire history was just 24 hours long,

Life on Earth (app. 3.8 Ga)  4:10 AM

Metazoans (1.2 Ga?)  17:44 PM

Chordates (565 Ma)  21:03 PM

Land dwelling plants (475 Ma)  21:31 PM

Land dwelling animals  21:46 PM

Reptiles  (340 Ma)  22:13 PM

Dinosaurs (235 Ma)  22:46 PM

Mammals (225 Ma)  22:49 PM

Common ape-human ancestor (7 Ma)  23:57 PM

Homo sapiens (165.000)  23:59:56,9 PM

Oldest civilizations (3.500)  23:59:59,9 PM

Industrial revolution (250)  23:59:59,999 ?

From the history of evolution, undoubtedly the face to face sex position occurs far behind rear entry sex position, because sex reproduction occurs in 18:08 PM, but human occurs in 11:58:43 PM. So we can claim that rear entry really has a long history than face to face, and it also means face to face is really the result of evolution.

Second, I think one of the reasons why face to face happens on human is that people want to see and communicate with each other during sex process, at least one side wants. It illustrates that other animals don’t have the desire to see the partner during the sex. Why? Sex also ends as male ejaculation, what makes the difference between human and animals? I think the only reason is that the purposes they have sex is different. The purpose animals have sex is just for reproduction, so male only have sex with female during the estrus, maybe once a year or twice a year. In general, they mates only during female estrus. Look back to our human. Man nearly want to have sex with a woman all the time, whatever she is in estrus or not, whatever she is in fertility age or menopause age. Apparently, we can claim that human have sex not only for the reproduction, but also for some other purpose, maybe for pleasure or self sex desire. In modern time, I think reproduction is only a by-product for a man to have sex.

Third, what makes human have the other purpose to have a sex rather than reproduction different from other animals? I think the answer is evolution, not only physical evolution, but also psychology evolution. In physical evolution, human is the only animals who always walk upright, and scientists think the first mammal that walked upright was the ape-like australopithecines - believed by scientists to be an ancestor of early humans – which lived about five million years ago in Africa. Walking upright significantly frees up the hands to carry objects, also creates the physical conditions for face-to-face mating. But only physical evolution is not enough in short history of human. In psychology evolution, self-awareness shows up. Frankly speaking, I am not an idealist, but I really agree with some points of Descartes. Human need more than basic physical needs which only in the first floor during Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Undoubtedly, the self-awareness of human is the strongest among all animals, then human are going to pursue the other four needs, like safety needs, social needs, esteem needs, self-actualization. Do you notice that: the higher up in the model of Maslow, the more words “Self” he used, such as self-esteem in forth floor, self-actualization top floor, and of course, self-awareness makes humans so significant difference from others. I don’t mean that self-awareness can exist without brain, but the form of its existing is really different from substance, for example, if people got drunk, they were unconscious, but the brain still there. Self-awareness is going to start make human to have a clear perception of internal and external things, including personality, thoughts, beliefs, motivation, and emotions, so human began to a real evolution in comparison with other animals. As human grow in self-awareness, we will understand who we are and what we want and why we want it. So men found that they were more willing to enjoy the special pleasure during sex, not only for the original purpose: reproduction, as a species. I can claim that the phenomenon of human having sex all the time is the product of development of human self-awareness, precisely to say, just man self-awareness.

Finally, sex positions evolved. Because chimpanzee females are highly promiscuous, some scientists thought chimpanzee females are more likely to achieve orgasm by mating sequentially with multiple males. This is big mistake. The main reason I think chimpanzee females can’t achieve orgasm is just because they mate with multiple males sequentially. If they really have an orgasm, they must have the refractory period right after orgasm, and can’t get into another mating. As a woman, I have to admit that the evolutions of man and woman are not synchronous, apparently, the evolution of female, in many areas, lagged behind male. As men, they have already walked out the trap of reproduction, but women are still trapped in the cave. Evolution is always moving forward. Human and our closest relatives are already evolved far forward than other animals, and the most significant sign is the appearance of face to face sex position, because only in this position, female have a chance to stimulate the clitoris shaft by accident, and then women's self-consciousness can be awakened. Women will know that sooner or later the true meaning of sex is “genital rubbing”, the problem is that male genital is penis, but female genital is clitoris shaft, not vagina.

Many times history is unfair, especially in the reproduction of species. Even we can say that the reproduction is so selfish and cruel, not only can it sacrifice the interests of other species, and also even can sacrifice some group of their own species. Fortunately, evolution is still moving forward, we are only on the middle way of long evolutionary history. Human have lots of things waiting to be changed, human females have more. It is really time for women to get out the trap of reproduction.

Female multiple orgasms VS Communism

Recently, I found that so-called female multiple orgasms and communism have lots of things in common. So far, no one believes what I said that female multiple orgasms is bullshit, and women never have the ability to get multiple orgasms, and the pleasure women experienced mistaken for female multiple orgasms is just a series of urinary incontinence. Frankly speaking, women in my eyes are as same as the people in North Korea in the West eyes, and women drop into the trap of reproduction as same as people in North Korea can’t walk out of the great deception of communism. Female multiple orgasms is a beautiful lie as same as communism. Let me explain to you one by one. It is very interesting.

Thomas Sowell divided people into two camps (according to the Positive Psychology in Harvard open course) Constrained vision and Unconstrained vision. The Fundamental difference of the two views is whether human nature was born selfish or selfless.

Constrained vision is based on man is inherently and irredeemably selfish. Human nature can not be changed, it is immutable, and we have certain instincts. What you were born with, as species, is all we have. The flaws that we are out there are inevitable, they can’t be changed. We need to accept them for what they are, that is only thing we can do with these flaws. Francis Bacon said “nature to be commanded must be obeyed”, whether it is physical nature, or human nature. People who have the constrained vision think our instincts, our inclinations, our basic nature is immutable, and then what they do rather than resign, they channel it. Generally people on constrained view are people politically, not always, but usually people who would support capitalism. Let’s channel imperfect, perhaps flawed human nature toward the good.

Unconstrained vision relies heavily on the belief that human nature is essentially good, it can be improved, can be changed. It is up to us to do so, it is perfectible. We don’t need to accept these flaws as inevitable. People who are more on the unconstrained vision would tend toward utopianism or communism. Because let’s change the human nature, self-interest is not good, it hurts in the long term and therefore we need to change it.

In my opinion, I think human nature is fixed as same as Tal, and we have inclination, we have certain instincts that are there, and we have been formed either God-given or evolutionary given for millions of years that we have been formed. They are not going to change any time soon. It is fixed, we have to accept them whether good or ill. All we can do after we accept this nature, is to first understand it through research, and the after we understand it, make the best of it.

What is communism? I use my words to explain: Every property belongs to all citizens, nothing is private. Communist Party really depicts an ideal and wonderful society as same as the fantasy that man and woman can achieve orgasms together at the same time. There is a big question in my mind: The Communist Party is led by the proletariat, and what does proletariat mean? Just as its name implies, proletariat are the people who don’t have any property, so they only need to obtain resources to change their situation through revolution. Proletarians don’t want society to be stable, the only one thing they want do is revolution, revolution, revolution. On the contrary, property owners want society to be stable, because they have assets, they do not want society to be unrest and revolution. As proletarians, they have nothing, and how do they lead people to the Communism, it is like many female professors who claim that she is sexual expert, counseling or sexual educator, but in fact, they have never experienced a real female orgasm, how do they educate other women to get a real orgasm? Finally, the only result is misleading, misleading, continue to mislead people. There is only a shameless lie left: There is an area called G-spot in vagina, as long as the sex movement lasts enough, man can help woman to get multiple G-spot orgasms. It is as same as Communist Party said to the citizens “As long as we stick to the socialist road, we will be able to achieve the ideal, wonderful and perfect communist society.” Kim rules North Korea with autocracy under the guise of Communist as same as man rules woman’s body with sex autocracy under the guise of that women only can get multiple orgasms through the G-spot in vagina. The poor women, as same as the stupid North Korean people, still live in this great deception.

Human nature is selfish, whether it is on wealth, power, or sex, it is fixed, we have to accept them. The only thing we can do is to establish a good system, which not only can develop the good and positive side in human nature, but also can contain the bad and negative side in human nature. I think it is very difficult to change the situation based on external factors, whatever in social change or sexuality change, and the only one thing we have to rely on is to wake up people’ self-awareness.

Montesquieu said “Political liberty in a citizen is that peace of mind that comes from the opinion each person has of his safety, and to have this liberty, the government must be such that a citizen can not afraid of another.”

We have the permission to be human, normal human, not only in freedom, democracy, but also in human rights. Women deserve to know the facts about female orgasm, and don’t be deceived or fool anymore.

To July 4 Independence Day

July 4 is Independence Day in the United States, I want to write something to celebrate this festival, but because of my poor language and short history knowledge, I only write something about my own opinion. Nowadays, U.S. military switches its focus to western Pacific, and a total of 22 countries joined this military exercises, but without China. There is no doubt, in Southeast Asia all countries which have a dispute with China, without exception, jumped into the embrace of the United States. In fact, the behavior and actions of these countries all depend on the attitude of the U.S., I have to ask what factors on earth determine the attitude of the United States? What does the United States really care about?

1, the United States

Although American economy, military, culture, politics, are not perfect individually, it is by far the best in the world. But America needs to understand that the biggest weapon today is not military, but culture. Although America only has less than 300 years history, it doesn’t mean American culture is not advanced, because history does not always bring people positive effect, and a lot of people in many countries which have thousands-year history are kidnapped by the decadent culture, but American don’t have the long spiritual shackles at all. That is the key why the United States has a strong and advanced culture, but in some other long history countries, Classes are very significantly, and the social system is a top-down, and people have to learn to obey their superiors since born, and women have low status in society, they only have to rely on men to survive. Why? Because they live under the old rules, decadent culture. This is the most important reason why I don’t agree with David Buss's theory. His theory only can apply to human being in the past, but not apply to the future.

There is no doubt that the U.S. is very generous to their allies, and this point is the biggest difference from Soviet Union. I think that is key point why so many countries tried to forge an alliance with United States, but what should America choose? First, America should keep the eyes open and figure out who is a trustworthy friend and who only wants to use United States to get the private purpose. Of course, every country has its own purpose, but America should have to know it very clearly and make the right choice between the Democracy and Pro-Americanism, and don’t make the result as an anti-American dictator falls, and another pro-American dictator stands up. The alliance is an art, not only do you need to know what exactly you want, but also know the other wants, you need to think very carefully about it. Second, don’t easily go to war, but war must be won. The United States must learn from the lessons of the Korean and Vietnam wars, the less developed countries, the more invincible. Last, the foundation of the U.S. is human rights and democracy. America should wake up the stupid people’s self-awareness in authoritarian states and let people around the world to know that the enemies of the United States is only authoritarian governments and dictators, not the ordinary people, and try to make them understand the American culture, human rights, and polity, and try best to inspire their pursuit of equality and freedom in the minds. It is very important to let people know you are here to liberate you, not to invade you.

2, European Union

First, no doubt, in the anti-dictatorship and democratic process, the European is the largest partner for the United States. The biggest crisis the EU faces now is sovereign-debt crisis. In this problem, Britain, France and Germany as leaders in Europe must give a hand to other countries, because if the proletariat comes to power, Europe is facing the risk of being communization. British should not stay out, you should understand the English Channel can't stop the long-range missiles. So work together to survive the economic difficulties. Second, accept the countries from the east of European especial independence from USSR. A people stands in front of two doors, which is leading to Heaven, which one is leading to Hell, if the door to Heaven is closed in advance before he chooses, there is no choice left and he only chooses the Hell. If I were Polish, I would hate the Soviet Union more than Germany, because of the Katyn massacre. “With the Germans we run the risk of losing our liberty, and with the Russians we will lose our soul.” Finally, since the Europe was involved into the World War I and II, the Europeans seem to be disgusted with war, but I hope the Europeans would remember the mistake of Policy of appeasement during the World War II. You must put your eyes on the long-term benefits, not only immediate interests, and European Union must take the responsibility especially on the issue of North Africa and Middle East. As long as Europe is united, it can contain Russia's action in the Far East maximally, after all, the fundamental interest of Russia is always in Eastern Europe.

3, Russia

Russia, I have to mention the Soviet Union which is already disintegrated in 1991. There is no doubt that Russia is also a Kratocracy country. Putin is a political strongman as same as Stalin. In his eyes, country's interests rank above the people’s lives, so Beslan massacre happened. Storming, of course, is not the root cause of this tragedy, but it is truly the direct cause. Vladimir Putin: if those people were your families, you may sacrifice them, but they were not. You are not qualified to hold more than 1,300 lives of innocent civilians as the cost to destroy the Chechen. Putin exaggerated the national honor too much, but disregarded the lives of ordinary people. He did not understand the meaning of a country, the significance of a country existence is to protect the life and property safety of national people, if your people are dead, what is useful to have this country? I’ like to ask those people who voted for Putin, if you or your son or your daughter is the one of the 1300 individuals, do you agree storming disregarding of your son life? I really hope today Russia is not going to go back to Stalin's Soviet totalitarian model again.

Warsaw Treaty Organization, led by the Russia, apparently went from Eastern Europe to Asia, because Russia obviously feels that Europe would not go with him, and Africa is too far to his reach, and it is under the control of Britain and France, and of course, Russia don’t want to make two enemies during one time in the west and the east line. So Asia is Russia's important interests particularly the Middle East, Central Asia and the Far East areas.

4，China

China, no doubt, is the most embarrassing country now in a very passive position, and 22 countries have the military exercise in the Western Pacific, even including Russia a so-called strategic partner to China, but without China. First, Chinese government must have a clear understanding of this situation very well, and all the shameless acts of betraying allies in the history of Soviet Union. You only can get into the Hell, if you follow him. The biggest difference between United States and Soviet Union is that United States treats his allies as friends, and Soviet Union treats his allies as slaves. Second, Chinese people must reflect that China was the victor in the World War II, Japan was the loser who is the only country suffered by atomic bomb attack on the earth, but 60 years after, what exactly make so difference between them? We were the United States' greatest ally in Asia, who made us lost our friend? Why Japan would quickly rise after the war? As both yellows, why is the gap so much? Who caused today's status of Chinese people? Shouldn't Chinese look at the servility of own bodies?

5, People's self-awareness

I hope if you live in authoritarian states, you should think what exactly do you want, what is most important to you, why are you alive? You should look back at the history to see how difference democratic state and totalitarian country deal with the enemy. The Marshall Plan: because of the Soviets Blockade of Berlin in 1948. Over 4,000 tons of supplies per day were required by the Berlin population during the airlift. To achieve this, the United States Air Force, Royal Air Force and other Commonwealth nations flew over provision of supplies to West Germany, 200,000 flights providing 13,000 tons of food daily to Berlin in an operation lasting almost a year. You can use a little math, one day has 1440 minutes, there is almost an aircraft taking off and landing during every 2.5 minutes. Katyn Massacre: both as the Slavic peoples, what did Soviet Union do to Poland? If a country takes a high-handed policy to national people and ignore the lives of their citizens, and takes slaughter to foreign countries in order to expand, as a person, will you support him? I will not. I hope everyone can choose the right side. Maybe the next step is Hell.

As individuals, we are so small in the history of human being, but we should think what we can get from history? Due to World War I and World War II, women came out for work from the kitchen, and after the war, it is impossible to make women to get into kitchen again, so the war make feminism rise in Europe. Any dictator is not willing to exit the stage of history. Truth is the child of time, you can deceive everyone in a moment, and you can also deceive some people forever, but you can not deceive all people forever. God bless every innocent people.

I don’t agree with David Buss about his theory of evolutionary psychology.

David Buss’s theory can be summarized as sexual selection is only for reproduction, and also operates in human beings as well. He found that men and women seek out the mates, who best suit their reproductive needs. Women look for men who can give them resources and protection, and men look for women who appear best able to conceive and give birth to healthy and strong offspring. Through surveys, he found that women were more jealous of emotional infidelity while men were more jealous of sexual infidelity, so Buss hypothesized that women find emotional infidelity more threatening because it could lead to the loss of resources she have gained in that mate and would have to raise children on her own, if the mate really leaves her and has real relationships with another woman. He then hypothesized that men found sexual infidelity threatening because they could risk spending resources on a child that may not be their own.

I don’t deny the results of his survey, but I have to say that Buss is really misled by the results of the survey. Frankly speaking, Buss’s theory is only looking for an excuse for men’s sex instinct in male-dominated society where women can only be dependent on men to get her resources for survival. The biggest limitation of his theory is it is only applicable to human in the past time, but not in future. In other words, Buss’s theory is only applicable to some kinds of societies like China, Japan and Korea, where men hold the dominant position, and women suffer the low status. In China, because of the lack of law, people always have the preference for sons especially in rural. Why does it happen? We have to admit that when food was scarce and violence raged, male physical advantage indeed is much larger than females, but the society like this has nothing difference from animal world. This model in these countries is definitely not the future of human beings. I think a good theory not only can explain what we know, but also can point the direction to what we don’t know it yet, and we should look at Western and Northern Europe. When women can rely on their own labor and mind instead of men to get the resources to survive, when with the development of social civilization, woman can rely on social laws instead of men to protect themselves, when women realize that so-called female multiple orgasms is as shit as Communism, when women identify that they only can get real orgasm by their selves, not by men, even they don’t have to take the pant off, what are women going to choose? What about men? Are they willing to take the yoke of reproduction, while they have sex every time? Is the only purpose men have sex is to reproduce? Is a man who is reluctant to reproduce any more not going to look for young and beautiful women? Absolutely not.

Here are some questions proposed by the students in intimate relationships class from UCLA. I try to give my explanation to these good questions which Buss’ theory can’t explain well.

1 First of all, Buss’s theory can not be applied to same sex relationships. Professor Benjamin Karney gives a far-fetched explanation that same sex relationships between men should be much more open, or accepting of extra relational sexual activity that same sex relationships between women. I don’t think so. The central idea of Buss’s theory is sexual selection is only for reproduction, as women, they want to get good resources from men to raise the babies, as men, they want to get youth and fertility to make their genes pass down. Benjamin’s explanation is fact, but putting the cart before the horse. Buss’s theory claims that the reason of men much more interested in having sex with multiple partners than women is men want to seek someone who can give healthy and strong offspring, but in same sex relationships between men, the only reason is not exist, we have to notice here: men are always looking for more partners than women, regardless same sex relationships or heterosexual relationships. I think looking for better mates to produce is not central reason, because the facts tell us men having more interested in have sex with multiple partners have nothing to do with reproduction.

2 What about people who wear condoms? In current society, during many sex, the purpose of men having sex is not reproduction, but only for the last sudden of few seconds pleasure, so they wear condoms in order to not make women pregnant. How do you explain that? You can’t say that men don’t like young and beautiful women who wear condoms every time.

3 In class, Britney asked what’s going on now with attraction to really skinny women. That is very good question, Buss’s theory also can’t give a rational explanation. I can give you another example for this item, almost in the eyes of people around the world, Diana is much more beautiful and young than Camilla, she gave two handsome and healthy princes to Charles, but everyone knows the result Charles chose Camilla who is one year older than him. God, I hope you are not going to tell me that Charles wants to have a baby with Camilla. I firmly believe that Camilla must have some extraordinary personal charm we don’t know and appreciate, but Charles does. Apparently, he chose Camilla not for reproduction.

4 If everything is only for the reproduction, I want to ask you why men also want to make love with partners in the period of no ovulation. Obviously, animals have sex only during female estrus period, but why men want to have sex in any time. Buss’s theory also can’t explain this difference well between human beings and animals.

In summary, I don’t want to deny the contributions of Buss’s theory, but I think his theory just can be applied to the animal’s world where the purpose of having sex is only for reproduction, but his theory is not applied to human world. Maybe that is why human with much smaller and less strong, can rule the earth, but other big and strong animals can not. Maybe the self-awareness in human being is the biggest difference from other animals during the history of human evolution. I think after I unlock the mystery of female orgasm, Buss would like to change his theory for a little bit. I my opinion, the reason why men like to have multiple sex partners is as same as food is human basic physiological needs, some people like rice very much, but if they eat rice every day, they would like to eat noodle for some fresh, but the result is always getting full. The reason why women don’t have strong sex drive is women never get full, so they don’t care eat this or that. What men do is human biological instincts, but women just get deceived by something. Maybe it is cruel reproduction for human beings.

I feel very lonely.

I have almost contacted all professors who research on female orgasm or human sexuality, but they are ignorant as always. No one trusted me; no one gave me a chance.

Do I need to use my blood or my life to wake them? I think I was born 100 years early. Who can teach me what I should do now? I am so tired and frustrated.

Separating equilibrium in Game Theory - Open Yale Course

Separating equilibrium is proposed by Michael Spence. This model told us the only thing that distinguishes the costs of good workers from bad workers in education is it is so painful to do the work. According to the class, separating equilibrium does not only concern the real money, but also adds the personal interest, talent, pain and suffering in cost difference.

I have some views different from Ben Polak’s. Let me introduce mine first. In my opinion, the income can be controlled, but the cost depends on some kinds like individual’s talent and very hard to change. In a normal and ideal society, the income of various occupations should not be too much, it means you almost get the same income, whatever you drive a dump truck or teach students in college. What exactly determines a person to become truck driver or professor is only the individual cost in different two things. In reality, the two incomes of teacher and driver are certainly not the same, but I think the different income is only determined by supply and demand. Here I don’t add this definition in.

Due to income – cost = profit

We can assume the two professions have the same income as 30.

Somebody A, who is very talented and interested in driving (the cost is 2), but not in teaching (the cost is 20), has two choices.

If he drives a dump truck, his profit is 30 – 2 =28

If he teaches the course like game theory in Yale University, his profit is only 30 – 20 =10.

In the class, he has to tolerate the naughty students, and prepare the class everyday. It is too horrible and so much pain and suffering for him. Apparently, 28 > 10, the comparative advantage for A is choosing driving dump truck.

Somebody B, who is very talented and interested in teaching (the cost is 5), but not in driving (the cost is 10), also has two choices.

If he drives a dump truck, his payoff is 30 – 10 =20

If he teaches the course like game theory in Yale University, his payoff is 30 – 5 =25.

Maybe he also has to tolerate the naughty students in the class, and prepare the class everyday, but the pain and suffering in the class is better than driving a dump truck. Apparently, 20 < 25, the comparative advantage for B is choosing teaching in class.

In this ideal society, each person would play their respective roles in their own areas of expertise. In other words, no matter what kind of occupation you do, you get paid well. Which profession you want to do is entirely determined by your talent and interest, and perhaps you will find driving a dump truck is happier than teaching in class.

What if there is too difference during the two income.

Also depends on Benefit – cost = profit.

But this time, the two professions have very quite different paid.

As a driver, he only can get 30.

As a professor, he can get 300.

Somebody A also has two choices. The cost of driving is still 2, because he has the same talent and interest in driving, the cost of teaching is still 20, because he also hates the naughty students very much. But this case is very different from above.

If he drives a dump truck, his profit is 30 – 2 =28

If he teaches the course, his profit is 300 – 20 =280

The result is though he hates teaching very much, but he has to tolerant all of this for the huge profit. Apparently, 28<<280, as a rational person A is going to choose teaching, even though he has lots of pain and suffering in class.

For somebody B also has two choices. The cost of driving is still 10, because he still don’t have much talent and interest in driving, the cost of teaching is still 5.

If he drives a dump truck, his profit is 30 – 10 =20

If he teaches the course, his profit is 300 – 5 =295

Apparently, 20<<295, as a rational person B is going to choose teaching.

Under this abnormal profit-driven, lots of people without teaching talent are going to join the teacher group, only in order to chase the good paid.

Here I agree Ben’s claim that some children have to be left behind, I don’t agree that education increases inequality, because teach students in accordance of their aptitude, it doesn’t mean unfair,. Dr. Ben was born in England, and got Dr. in U.S., so I can understand he cares about the weak side, but I have to note the purpose we establish the rules to distinguish the good from bad is not to distinguish them in their income, but help them to choose the best position. I think if Ben was born in China, he must know the harm of every person not in his position. When you can’t establish a good rule to achieve a separating equilibrium for everyone, people must take the advanced position with the only purpose that is maximize its own payoff. The person who didn’t have ability to be a judge is to be a judge, and the person who didn’t have ability to be a chairman is to be a chairman. The process when all children go to university is the process which is the dilution of elite education. The only result is qualification inflation, and you will see that in the country there are so many people who can get Dr. Degree, but lots of them suffer unemployment. In any period of human development, we all need one or two, like Nicolaus Copernicus or Isaac Newton who has unique point of difference, to lead the world people open a new page, but the public education must be going to make everyone average. Here I admit the disadvantages of elite education, which will make big gap between them, so I think the public education should be replaced by skills education.

Establishment of good rules is more important than whoever join the rules. This point reminds me the event of ConocoPhillips’ Bohai bay oil spill. Here I am not going to blame the United States company ConocoPhillips, because if I were the company, I also didn’t care about oil spill or not. Did any company dare to do that in U.S. or Canada? I don’t think so, the reason is very simple any company is going to be punished to pay huge cost by the law in U.S., but according to Chinese bullshit law, they only have pay 200 thousands Yuan at most. I remember some words by Thomas J. Dunning. “With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain 10 percent will ensure its employment anywhere; 20 percent certain will produce eagerness; 50 percent, positive audacity; 100 percent will make it ready to trample on all human laws; 300 percent., and there is not a crime at which it will scruple, nor a risk it will not run, even to the chance of its owner being hanged. ”

Each person or company prefers to maximize its own payoff, whatever from capitalism which is based on private ownership or socialism which under the name of public ownership, but is only for some privileged class self-interest. Every person or company is neutral, there is no good or bad person or company, but only good rules or bad rules.

   The problem of China food safety is very very serious. In previous years, maybe there are some companies didn’t do the bad things, but current, no company is not going to do bad things. Reasons are simple.

When a company A does the legitimate business, he can get income as 100, the cost is 80 and profit is 100-80=20.

When a company B does the illegal business, he also can get income as 100, but the cost is only 30, because he only uses the toxic and hazardous chemical materials, and his profit is 100-30=70.

Even if company A has a conscience and always does the safe food, the company B also can defeat the company A, just through the price war. Moreover, in a country without laws, you can’t rely on a moral or conscience to restrain a person or a company.

Prostitution and the Onion theory

Prostitution is a common problem we have met for a long time. From IMF Chief Kahn on rape charges in 2011, to Obama's bodyguards in prostitution scandal recently, we have to admit that prostitution never left our sight. Prostitution is legal in some countries, but illegal in other many countries. Here is a picture which can show you the details about prostitution in different countries. Apparently, red areas are much more than green and blue areas. As human beings, how do we rationally treat the problem of prostitution?

In order to treat this problem correctly, we must make thorough analysis to it. First, we have to figure out what the nature of the prostitution. In my opinion, the nature of prostitution is just a deal. We can take a look around those prostitutes, and most of them are living at the bottom without any skill for living, and they only depend on selling their vagina to survive, what is just natural resource given by God. According to the lesser of two evils principle, frankly speaking, choosing to rent the vagina is rational choice between itself and death. Of course, their choices also conform to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and survival is most important. In nature, prostitutes are as same as those, who are blue-collar workers depending on skills for living, or who are professors depending on their mind and knowledge for living in famous universities, or who are great players depending on strong bodies and superb skills on basketball court or football field to get  10 millions dollars in pocket a year. The reason why they can get good pay is that the tangible or intangible assets they have can not be replaced, such as superb skills, wise minds or height, but the reason why prostitutes suffers so cheap is every female has a same cheap body asset – vagina. We can imagine that one day there is only one woman left, and how much is it if you want to have a sex with her. I think she will be priceless of the world. Prostitution is as same as other profession, just pays something out in order to get something back.

Why does prostitution suffer so serious criticisms? I think there are two main reasons:

1, due to people has not a very real understanding of sex, and we also link prostitution and sex together and think prostitution as immoral, evil and dirty.

2, in some male chauvinists or shameless scholars' eyes, prostitution is an unfair thing, because they claim that women can get double harvest both on physically and money, but men not only need to pay the money, but also have to work hard in vagina sweatily for women. This statement is very outrageous and absurd. I can give you an anti-example here: what if a man gets on an inflatable doll or a dead female body replaced a living woman, the man also will work hard on the top of them, and do you think male only work hard for the inflatable doll or dead body? The point that male work hard in vagina on bed just for women’s benefit is nonsense. Males are only for their own benefit to work so hard, of course the benefit is orgasm about 7 seconds shudder as return.

Every coin has two sides, costs and benefits. In fact, this theory just can be understood through mathematics in middle school. In my opinion, any sciences are connected, and start with one or two laws, and you can deduce everything just according to different areas.

We can define a formula like this:

B is the benefit what your want.

C is the cost what you have to pay in order to get the benefit B.

When C = 0, the formula of 

is meaningless or undefined.

Apparently, from mathematical point of view, we can deduce that the game only with benefit you want, but without any cost you should pay does not exist. Since division by zero is unbounded, it has no meaning, and so is not interpreted mathematically. So mathematicians say that, 'Division by zero is undefined.'

When P = 0, the formula of  

                            is always equal to zero.

It means that in any game, whatever you do or pay, you always can’t get your purpose from this game. You always get nothing, and then what should you do now? Mathematician will tell you only one way: make C also equal to zero, because in mathematics,  is called indeterminate form. Apparently, it

 tells us you can’t waste any cost in any game, if you can get nothing from it.

A classical example is “Not in my backyard”. In Taiwan, early NIMBY campaign under the slogan “chicken shit stayed in my backyard, the egg is in someone else”. Intelligent and rational people always don’t like to pay for the benefit of others.

The hierarchy of interests of every person is like an onion layers. The central interest is the core interest which person could give up anything to defend. Every rational person would give up the interests of the outer layer, in order to get the interests of the inner layer.

This onion theory is very similar to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, but there are still some differences between them.

1, Maslow’s theory is in two-dimensional, he just put the basic needs in the bottom, but onion theory is three-dimensional, I put it in the middle.

2, Maslow’s theory didn’t show the relationship between the two needs in the same level, but onion theory can show every need’s position in a person’s value.

3, Maslow’s needs are stable, not variable, and it can’t explain why somebody can sacrifice him/her self for a great aim, such as art, science or for special person, but onion theory thinks that every body has different hierarchy of interests in different situation, the hierarchy can be alterable under special case, and it also means the sequence can be changed by different case.

4, Maslow only told us people’ needs, but didn’t tell us the cost people would pay. Onion theory not only tells you the hierarchy of every one’s desire, but also the logical relationship between them.

On the issue of prostitution, the onion theory can explain it well.

According to the onion theory of prostitutes, living is in the center of every thing, more important than orgasm, and they can accept to rent her vagina to make living. So the deal is female get money to survive from male, but need to pay vagina out.

According to the onion theory of clients, having an orgasm on a woman is more close to the center than paying money. So the deal is male get a vagina to ejaculate from female, but need to pay money out.

I think money is the cheapest in people’s hierarchy of interests, because money is only used to satisfy the various needs of the people. I dare to say that if the client relies on the money to survive, he would never spend money on prostitutes, because he can masturbate to achieve orgasm.

About hard working in woman’s vagina is another deal, there is necessary and sufficient conditions between working hard and obtaining orgasm, in short, rubbing hard on his penis is sufficient condition of orgasm. I think one day women can figure out what is real female orgasm and how to get it, they also need hard working on her clitoral shaft to get the last shudder about 7 second.

Let's go back to the onion theory. I wrote that in my blog North Korea would never give up its nuclear test, regardless of whether U.S. gives food aid or not. In the eyes of that fat, his reign is the core interest of his onion, he didn’t care about nationals' survival or death at all. In other words, food aid from U.S. only benefits general public, but not him, the only one thing which can benefit him is nuclear threat. So if you want to have a deal with someone, you must have to know firstly what most important thing he cares. Wake up some ignorant people in the mind is rather more important than give them food. When whatever you pay, you always can’t get your purpose, there is only one rational decision you should make: make C also equal to 0. I think U.S. should take some more effective ways, not only just exercise in futility.

Finally, I just want to say, if you are a female, please don’t despise prostitutes, because you are a more unfortunate prostitute in some sense, but without pay. Maybe you are not lucky enough to be a female dung beetle, who only watch the males agonize over rolling the ball over to the hole while the female rides relaxed, just prepare to plant her eggs inside it (according to the Global Problems of Population Growth from Yale open course).

A famous Japanese AV girl called Aoi Sola once said that “The only purpose I am lying naked in front of a camera is just for living, but someone standing in front of a camera with well dressed is only for his lust and desire.”