Hypergamy: Women desire relationships with men of higher caste, social status or sexual capital than themselves. The peasant girl will marry a prince, but the princess will never marry a peasant boy (the princess may sleep with a dashing, handsome rogue, but will not marry him until his status is higher than hers). When a woman finds a man of even higher status than the one she has, she will find an excuse to let go of her current man and latch on to the higher-status man.
Briffault's Law: “the female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.” Women wield the ultimate veto power in the mating game. It is women who give thumbs-up or thumbs-down to any advances or proposals from men.
The Light Switch Effect: When relationships go bad, women re-write the history of the relationship, discrediting all the past good, so that "it has always been bad and was NEVER good" It doesn't matter that she was sending you love notes and texts a month ago. She has been unhappy for a long time now.
The War Brides Dynamic: Women easily transition psychologically from one dominant male to another. In war, men are killed but women are a prize to be preserved for the conquering tribe. Psychologically, women adjust quite easily to this because it preserves women's reproductive opportunities.
I would add a fifth:
Solipsism: The philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. All reality is an extenstion of her will. Other people have no independent motivations, desires, etc., but exist only as extensions of her motivations, desires, etc. "If your girlfriend cheats on you, you need to understand that you lacked something that made her cheat, so instead of leaving her for another girl, find out the error in yourself, apologize to her and be a Better man."
True. It would probably be more accurately described by "the power of least interest." Men have a higher libido than women, which means women have the power of least interest. But if a woman's biological clock is ticking very loudly, she may be desperate to find a man and in those cases, the men would have the power of least interest.
1. Be all round attractive and dynamic enough that women with hit on you.
Great. Be fit. Be the best you you can be. But intentionally flirting with other women just to make your wife feel insecure is crappy and manipulative. If the tables were tuned and I was on here saying I intentionally flirted with other men so I could keep a psychological hold on my S.O., all you guys would be howling about what an evil manipulative bitch I was and isnt that just like a wahman.
You are trying to rework this into some sort of honesty issue. But you clearly stated that its advantageous to intentionally pursue flirtations with other women. The way to avoid problems like faithless hypergamous wives is to marry women with good values. Alot of men pursue shallow women and then complain when they get burned and cry that all women are evil. There are lots of nice honest women who dont need to be manipulated like a toddler to keep them in a marriage.
Great. Be fit. Be the best you you can be. But intentionally flirting with other women just to make your wife feel insecure is crappy and manipulative.
This will not make your wife insecure, being desired by other women will in fact boost the confidence of one's wife.
If the tables were tuned and I was on here saying I intentionally flirted with other men so I could keep a psychological hold on my S.O., all you guys would be howling about what an evil manipulative bitch I was and isnt that just like a wahman.
It would be unlikely to have the same effect on a man. It would increase confidence in a male partner if that person was already confident to some degree and was combined with overt demonstrations of intense and faultless loyalty within the relationship.
To cut a long story short, this boils down to 2 principles. Firstly the 'old African saying' of "mother baby, father maybe" and the calorific, danger, physical impact and time disparity between men and women in the event of pregnancy.
It's why men can deal with rejection but women not so much.
A good analogy is that as men, we are offering a handful of beans to trade, women are offering a brand new lexus. When a woman rejects the 'trade' well its a shitty trade. When a man rejects that same trade, it hits home. How bad must that car be if he's not even willing to trade a handful of beans for it.
If the man's value set is in the right place he will reject that woman - women do not flirt with men they wouldn't fuck*
Hypergamy is present in all women, including you. It's not a bad thing. It's only a bad thing if you don't understand that fact.
Understand that if everyone of your partners friends and coworkers tell him to his face that your ugly or stupid or anything else negative, it won't effect his feelings for you.
But if all your friends and coworkers made it known that they thought your man was a waste man not worthy of their time, your attraction would diminish.
The implicit thrust of this post is that females have mercenary evolutionary motives, but that somehow men don’t. This is a babyish, biased view of sex, similar to feminism. Somehow, men are just unwitting dupes that have been ensnared by black widow-esque conniving females. That’s because OP is an ass and mgtow is retarded
If we are going to examine female motives and behaviors cynically or objectively than we should have the courage to do the same with men’s behaviors and motives as well, and not be a whiny faggot with massive bias, playing the victim.
In general, males invest less resources in reproduction than females, for most species. This is why males (of most species) tend to be more promiscuous and more violent: males can fertilize many females if they can kill off enough of the male competition. Therefore, androgens generally prime males with high libido and homocidal behavior. Males tend to pursue a more quantity over quality reproductive strategy compared with females must be more selective about their mates, given a higher investment in offspring. Males tend to fuck off. This is the basis of Briffault’s law which is actually more of a trend than a law, and not particularly applicable to patrilineal white europeans.
In gorillas, for example, which are very polygynous, females are highly incentivized to mate with the most aggressive “alpha” males, who will produce agressive male offspring but won’t make very good dads. Thats fine because gorillas don’t pursue a “good dad” strategy. This is the incentive for hypergamy.
Niggers will tend to have a similar strategy to the gorilla. But every animal (or human) group do not have such an assymetric sexual pattern. Many populations are monogamous including some human groups. In these instances males will be less competitive and females will be less hypergamous. The differences in the behavior strategies between males and females will be smaller.
The peasant girl will marry a prince, but the princess will never marry a peasant boy
There are tons of examples of lower class males aspiring to upper class brides. Throughout european history
To say white women are hypergamous is like saying white men’s sexual strategy is to be slutty murderers and thieves. It’s true that the most promiscuous, murderous, and thieving whites are overwhelmingly white men, but it hardly characterizes them.
Briffault's Law: “the female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.”
Do you faggots think this is a conscious analysis that women and only women perform? This is true of any individual, not just females. Men are attracted to women that they can derive reproductive benefit from. Maybe you think this is a selfless true love on the part of males, but it is a genetic program developed to benefit them. Altruism of any sort is evolved to benefit the tribe’s reproductive success and survival.
Why some of you goats so nasty to postwallhelena?— you don’t see any utility in being nice to me. Muh “worthless empty egg carton” but also “why doesnt she love me for me!? Evil mercenary wahmen!”. Which is it? Don’t complain about it from others if you embrace it as a way of life.
What kind of a stupid bitch complains, “female altruism and affection isn’t really selfless— there’s a hidden evolutionary motive,” when that’s true of all altruism? If you dare to look behind the curtain of evolutionary mechanisms, don’t get mad that wahmen are not truly selfless! Men are exactly the same way ffs! Its fucking evolution. How weak and obtuse!
The Light Switch Effect: When relationships go bad, women re-write the history of the relationship, discrediting all the past good,
Men do this too. In fact, they do it more because they have less invested in any given pairing than the female. I fail to see how a phenomenon that occurs in men and women should only be noticed when women do it. More childish bias.
The War Brides Dynamic: Women easily transition psychologically from one dominant male to another. In war, men are killed but women are a prize to be preserved for the conquering tribe.
How many white women are likely to do this? I would imagine the behavior is commensurate to the frequency of white men who invade their fellow white man’s lands in order to poach brides and loot and make slaves out of their brothers. Because the behavior of tranferrable loyalty in females is bred into them through intersexual selection. That means that conquering white men favored this behavior in women and penalized white women who did not engage in it. Otherwise it wouldnt exist. The more it is observed in white women, the more it condemns white men as thieving warlords and enslavers of their fellow europeans. There’s no such thing as free will.
The underlying motive behind all war ( a strictly male endeavor) is to improve the sex ratio in favor of females ( more females than males) for the aggressor males, so they can have > than 1 female per male (gaining reproductive advantage), and to attain slaves and wealth that belong to the conquered to support their harems.
Stop blaming women for the war bride phenomenon, which has been cause by thousands of years of male aggression. Stop waging male wars. Or just stop complaining about the dysgenic fallout of male wars, at least.
Solipsism: The philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist
You could be referring to the total lack of awareness of selfish male behaviors as they relate to or cause these phenomena, but you’re not because you and OP are engaged in it right now.
I don't know you at all, but this hysterical, wall-of-text response filled with vulgarity and ad hominem name-calling reminds me of that old adage, "Never wrestle with a pig..."
Sorry I offended your delicate sensibilities and challenged you to read more than 3 sentences. But I think if you are throwing out fancy anthropological terms, you should be prepared for a thorough answer which challenges your laundry list of MGTOW fallacies.
I think it’s more likely that this is a feint and you just don’t want to open yourself up to debate. After all, you aren’t here to pursue the truth about men and women, just to drop a bunch of big words to make your side sound intellectual.
This is voat. I don’t have a problem with your ad hominem, just your hiding behind it while failing to defend you opinions. Let me know if you find a fault with any of my actual arguments. Till then.
So women are like lioness, when the dominant male is killed or driven off, all the lioness instantly go into heat for the new male pride leader.
When you are conquered, women will give themselves to the man who conquered them, even if they had just killed their fathers, brothers, sons, and husbands.
Women will support anything that would get their people invaded and conquered because they know that they and their mothers, sisters, and daughters will all be spared, at the cost of becoming brides to the invaders.
If anything they welcome the fall of their own civilizations.
Men will not stop attacking other men, brown men in particular will definitely never stop.
White men evolved from something like a nigger. Cold climates forced monogamy as the most successful mating regime in those areas. This selective pressure caused our people to stop acting like niggers. So what you are saying is not true. Polygamy causes male violence. Aggressive male competition is completely inefficient and unnecessary. The amish don’t do it.
We whites evolved to have more than a tenfold reduction in male violence since we diverged from niggers. Just by accident of moving to a cold climate. And you are saying we couldnt accomplish another tenfold reduction through artificial eugenics? Nonsense.
Now that humans understand natural selection and evolution we will be engineering our own descendants. Of course things like aggression can be changed. Hell, you could fix niggers if you wanted to. Behavior is a genetic program.
To even get to a place where it is possible to contemplate such a thing, we'd have to kill every last one, which involves...total war on a grand scale.
Not at all, if you achieved total white unity. You wouldn’t even need that. You could do it if you had total white male unity alone. If all white men agreed never to ally with browns to wage another war on their fellow whites you could achieve this. Purely economically.
There is no other way, such is life.
Nonsense. You are describing the nigger way. The animal way. Whites have evolved to have less traits for destructive competition. Whites have evolved to conserve their resources more carefully and behave more cooperatively.
Is there any difference between whites and niggers? Of course there is. Knowing our ancestors were once vicious chimps who changed into something like a nigger and then eventually into modern white man, how can you think these things are immutable? You think a scandinavian is the best we can do as a species? No of course not. We can improve upon Europeans. We can achieve greater efficiency and cooperation. Eugenics. If neccessary we can move to another planet. Eliminating inefficiencies like retarded male wars will make us advance much faster than any other group. All we have to do is ensure that this time we dont weaponize the shitskins with our high IQs (Im looking at you, white guys. White guys make browns when they colonize warmer climates and conquer niggers and fuck sheboons. Similar thing happened in asia)
Therefore, the most important attribute about a man or group of men is their ability and willingness to wage war against other men.
I have noticed so many overthink relationships. Just follow your instincts. If things feel funny bug out, if things feel good commit and take a chance but dont get so butt hurt if it does not work out. Keep trying it is just a numbers game and have some patiences.
If you are striking out 100/100 times you are going for the wrong girls. Really it is all about talking and not being a pussy or a weirdo. Guys can get above their looks score easier than a woman but it is more rare, so going after more realistic girls is something to factor in. 5'8 with pimple but has the gift for gab can land a hot chick but it is rare. Better to go for the 4 or 5 girls if they want to not strike out all the time.
At least 2 of those 4 are explainable as cognitive dissonance at its core.
Meaning the mind does logical / fact changes starting at the result then going backwards to change the facts. It happens unknowingly at a before conscious level. Cept idiots and immoral people never correct it.
Oh shocker. More female hate to blackpill men agaisnt getting married and having babies.
men are good hearted and rational. Women are psychotic machiavellians who sit around twirling their mustaches and plotting divorce rape
I call bullshit.
I dont have time to tear apart this retarded anti-female antiwhite post right now. I will be back to make mince meat of it it later. Take your shots now mgturds. I will explain how you are wrong.
Women are worthless disloyal sluts that would betray God himself if they "thought" (lmao) it would benefit them.
God said Man needed a partner, and I see nothing. He said it isn't good for a man to be alone, yet it's the only right thing to do. He said be fruitful and multiply, but why would one multiply with a godless whore?
[ + ] silverairplane
[ - ] silverairplane 12 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 13:17:55 ago (+12/-0)*
Briffault's Law: “the female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.” Women wield the ultimate veto power in the mating game. It is women who give thumbs-up or thumbs-down to any advances or proposals from men.
The Light Switch Effect: When relationships go bad, women re-write the history of the relationship, discrediting all the past good, so that "it has always been bad and was NEVER good" It doesn't matter that she was sending you love notes and texts a month ago. She has been unhappy for a long time now.
The War Brides Dynamic: Women easily transition psychologically from one dominant male to another. In war, men are killed but women are a prize to be preserved for the conquering tribe. Psychologically, women adjust quite easily to this because it preserves women's reproductive opportunities.
I would add a fifth:
Solipsism: The philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. All reality is an extenstion of her will. Other people have no independent motivations, desires, etc., but exist only as extensions of her motivations, desires, etc. "If your girlfriend cheats on you, you need to understand that you lacked something that made her cheat, so instead of leaving her for another girl, find out the error in yourself, apologize to her and be a Better man."
[ + ] observation1
[ - ] observation1 4 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 13:43:01 ago (+4/-0)
Briffault seems to be a fallacy though. Of course the man, too, can decide. Has the same decision making ability. Its called keep it in your pants.
Light switch effect can go both ways also.
[ + ] silverairplane
[ - ] silverairplane 3 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 13:50:21 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] ClaytonBigsby313
[ - ] ClaytonBigsby313 2 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 14:12:54 ago (+2/-0)
Worst experience of my life was watching her crawl back. I hope none of you ever have to go through something like that.
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 22:42:30 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] WanderingToast
[ - ] WanderingToast 1 point 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 16:30:47 ago (+1/-0)
Think about toddlers and toys. They want what others want.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 17:46:55 ago (+1/-1)
Sounds like an awesome plan.
[ + ] WanderingToast
[ - ] WanderingToast 1 point 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 18:37:17 ago (+1/-0)
It's not about waging psychological war. If anything it's just about being honest.
1. Be all round attractive and dynamic enough that women with hit on you.
2. Be honest with your partner when this happens.
I don't do secrets from my wife. Her running joke is "I'd know if you cheated on me, because you'd tell me".
If you can't be your authentic self to your partner what's the point?
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 20:49:39 ago (+0/-0)
Great. Be fit. Be the best you you can be. But intentionally flirting with other women just to make your wife feel insecure is crappy and manipulative. If the tables were tuned and I was on here saying I intentionally flirted with other men so I could keep a psychological hold on my S.O., all you guys would be howling about what an evil manipulative bitch I was and isnt that just like a wahman.
You are trying to rework this into some sort of honesty issue. But you clearly stated that its advantageous to intentionally pursue flirtations with other women. The way to avoid problems like faithless hypergamous wives is to marry women with good values. Alot of men pursue shallow women and then complain when they get burned and cry that all women are evil. There are lots of nice honest women who dont need to be manipulated like a toddler to keep them in a marriage.
[ + ] WanderingToast
[ - ] WanderingToast 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 9, 2023 00:32:47 ago (+0/-0)
This will not make your wife insecure, being desired by other women will in fact boost the confidence of one's wife.
It would be unlikely to have the same effect on a man. It would increase confidence in a male partner if that person was already confident to some degree and was combined with overt demonstrations of intense and faultless loyalty within the relationship.
To cut a long story short, this boils down to 2 principles.
Firstly the 'old African saying' of "mother baby, father maybe" and the calorific, danger, physical impact and time disparity between men and women in the event of pregnancy.
It's why men can deal with rejection but women not so much.
A good analogy is that as men, we are offering a handful of beans to trade, women are offering a brand new lexus. When a woman rejects the 'trade' well its a shitty trade. When a man rejects that same trade, it hits home. How bad must that car be if he's not even willing to trade a handful of beans for it.
If the man's value set is in the right place he will reject that woman - women do not flirt with men they wouldn't fuck*
Hypergamy is present in all women, including you. It's not a bad thing. It's only a bad thing if you don't understand that fact.
Understand that if everyone of your partners friends and coworkers tell him to his face that your ugly or stupid or anything else negative, it won't effect his feelings for you.
But if all your friends and coworkers made it known that they thought your man was a waste man not worthy of their time, your attraction would diminish.
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 14:51:28 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -1 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 16:34:44 ago (+1/-2)*
If we are going to examine female motives and behaviors cynically or objectively than we should have the courage to do the same with men’s behaviors and motives as well, and not be a whiny faggot with massive bias, playing the victim.
In general, males invest less resources in reproduction than females, for most species. This is why males (of most species) tend to be more promiscuous and more violent: males can fertilize many females if they can kill off enough of the male competition. Therefore, androgens generally prime males with high libido and homocidal behavior. Males tend to pursue a more quantity over quality reproductive strategy compared with females must be more selective about their mates, given a higher investment in offspring. Males tend to fuck off. This is the basis of Briffault’s law which is actually more of a trend than a law, and not particularly applicable to patrilineal white europeans.
In gorillas, for example, which are very polygynous, females are highly incentivized to mate with the most aggressive “alpha” males, who will produce agressive male offspring but won’t make very good dads. Thats fine because gorillas don’t pursue a “good dad” strategy. This is the incentive for hypergamy.
Niggers will tend to have a similar strategy to the gorilla. But every animal (or human) group do not have such an assymetric sexual pattern. Many populations are monogamous including some human groups. In these instances males will be less competitive and females will be less hypergamous. The differences in the behavior strategies between males and females will be smaller.
There are tons of examples of lower class males aspiring to upper class brides. Throughout european history
To say white women are hypergamous is like saying white men’s sexual strategy is to be slutty murderers and thieves. It’s true that the most promiscuous, murderous, and thieving whites are overwhelmingly white men, but it hardly characterizes them.
Do you faggots think this is a conscious analysis that women and only women perform? This is true of any individual, not just females. Men are attracted to women that they can derive reproductive benefit from. Maybe you think this is a selfless true love on the part of males, but it is a genetic program developed to benefit them. Altruism of any sort is evolved to benefit the tribe’s reproductive success and survival.
Why some of you goats so nasty to postwallhelena?— you don’t see any utility in being nice to me. Muh “worthless empty egg carton” but also “why doesnt she love me for me!? Evil mercenary wahmen!”. Which is it? Don’t complain about it from others if you embrace it as a way of life.
What kind of a stupid bitch complains, “female altruism and affection isn’t really selfless— there’s a hidden evolutionary motive,” when that’s true of all altruism? If you dare to look behind the curtain of evolutionary mechanisms, don’t get mad that wahmen are not truly selfless! Men are exactly the same way ffs! Its fucking evolution. How weak and obtuse!
Men do this too. In fact, they do it more because they have less invested in any given pairing than the female. I fail to see how a phenomenon that occurs in men and women should only be noticed when women do it. More childish bias.
How many white women are likely to do this? I would imagine the behavior is commensurate to the frequency of white men who invade their fellow white man’s lands in order to poach brides and loot and make slaves out of their brothers. Because the behavior of tranferrable loyalty in females is bred into them through intersexual selection. That means that conquering white men favored this behavior in women and penalized white women who did not engage in it. Otherwise it wouldnt exist. The more it is observed in white women, the more it condemns white men as thieving warlords and enslavers of their fellow europeans. There’s no such thing as free will.
The underlying motive behind all war ( a strictly male endeavor) is to improve the sex ratio in favor of females ( more females than males) for the aggressor males, so they can have > than 1 female per male (gaining reproductive advantage), and to attain slaves and wealth that belong to the conquered to support their harems.
Stop blaming women for the war bride phenomenon, which has been cause by thousands of years of male aggression. Stop waging male wars. Or just stop complaining about the dysgenic fallout of male wars, at least.
You could be referring to the total lack of awareness of selfish male behaviors as they relate to or cause these phenomena, but you’re not because you and OP are engaged in it right now.
[ + ] silverairplane
[ - ] silverairplane 2 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 17:22:32 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -1 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 17:45:07 ago (+1/-2)
I think it’s more likely that this is a feint and you just don’t want to open yourself up to debate. After all, you aren’t here to pursue the truth about men and women, just to drop a bunch of big words to make your side sound intellectual.
This is voat. I don’t have a problem with your ad hominem, just your hiding behind it while failing to defend you opinions. Let me know if you find a fault with any of my actual arguments. Till then.
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 4 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 09:45:33 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] Stonkmar
[ - ] Stonkmar 3 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 10:21:21 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 3 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 10:24:52 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 1 point 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 22:44:59 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 2 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 09:52:42 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] PhantomXLII
[ - ] PhantomXLII 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 10:04:00 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist 2 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 10:43:25 ago (+3/-1)
When you are conquered, women will give themselves to the man who conquered them, even if they had just killed their fathers, brothers, sons, and husbands.
Women will support anything that would get their people invaded and conquered because they know that they and their mothers, sisters, and daughters will all be spared, at the cost of becoming brides to the invaders.
If anything they welcome the fall of their own civilizations.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -1 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 10:55:29 ago (+2/-3)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 2 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 14:22:07 ago (+2/-0)*
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -3 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 17:15:20 ago (+0/-3)
White men evolved from something like a nigger. Cold climates forced monogamy as the most successful mating regime in those areas. This selective pressure caused our people to stop acting like niggers. So what you are saying is not true. Polygamy causes male violence. Aggressive male competition is completely inefficient and unnecessary. The amish don’t do it.
We whites evolved to have more than a tenfold reduction in male violence since we diverged from niggers. Just by accident of moving to a cold climate. And you are saying we couldnt accomplish another tenfold reduction through artificial eugenics? Nonsense.
Now that humans understand natural selection and evolution we will be engineering our own descendants. Of course things like aggression can be changed. Hell, you could fix niggers if you wanted to. Behavior is a genetic program.
Not at all, if you achieved total white unity. You wouldn’t even need that. You could do it if you had total white male unity alone. If all white men agreed never to ally with browns to wage another war on their fellow whites you could achieve this. Purely economically.
Nonsense. You are describing the nigger way. The animal way. Whites have evolved to have less traits for destructive competition. Whites have evolved to conserve their resources more carefully and behave more cooperatively.
Is there any difference between whites and niggers? Of course there is. Knowing our ancestors were once vicious chimps who changed into something like a nigger and then eventually into modern white man, how can you think these things are immutable? You think a scandinavian is the best we can do as a species? No of course not. We can improve upon Europeans. We can achieve greater efficiency and cooperation. Eugenics. If neccessary we can move to another planet. Eliminating inefficiencies like retarded male wars will make us advance much faster than any other group. All we have to do is ensure that this time we dont weaponize the shitskins with our high IQs (Im looking at you, white guys. White guys make browns when they colonize warmer climates and conquer niggers and fuck sheboons. Similar thing happened in asia)
Oh? That must be why niggers are so successful.
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 2 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 22:23:38 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Hoobeejoo
[ - ] Hoobeejoo 1 point 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 11:59:15 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] TheBigGuyFromQueens
[ - ] TheBigGuyFromQueens 1 point 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 18:13:49 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Ragnar
[ - ] Ragnar 1 point 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 11:49:54 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] DanielR
[ - ] DanielR 1 point 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 09:46:25 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PhantomXLII
[ - ] PhantomXLII -1 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 10:05:19 ago (+1/-2)
[ + ] TheNoticing
[ - ] TheNoticing 1 point 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 09:29:18 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -1 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 10:53:08 ago (+1/-2)
[ + ] Bigdeal
[ - ] Bigdeal 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 13:06:10 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 14:41:11 ago (+0/-0)*
[ + ] Bigdeal
[ - ] Bigdeal 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 10, 2023 11:18:44 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 10, 2023 11:23:30 ago (+0/-0)*
[ + ] CoronaHoax
[ - ] CoronaHoax 0 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 10:20:48 ago (+0/-0)
Meaning the mind does logical / fact changes starting at the result then going backwards to change the facts. It happens unknowingly at a before conscious level. Cept idiots and immoral people never correct it.
[ + ] AryanPrime
[ - ] AryanPrime -1 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 13:56:13 ago (+1/-2)
Typical kike post uncle kike
I can't wait til we start killing your kind
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -1 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 10:52:38 ago (+5/-6)
I call bullshit.
I dont have time to tear apart this retarded anti-female antiwhite post right now. I will be back to make mince meat of it it later. Take your shots now mgturds. I will explain how you are wrong.
[ + ] PhantomXLII
[ - ] PhantomXLII -3 points 1.9 yearsAug 8, 2023 09:41:47 ago (+2/-5)
Women are worthless disloyal sluts that would betray God himself if they "thought" (lmao) it would benefit them.
God said Man needed a partner, and I see nothing. He said it isn't good for a man to be alone, yet it's the only right thing to do. He said be fruitful and multiply, but why would one multiply with a godless whore?
There is no fixing this.