“The psychology of the sexes in youth is totally different. The ideas of the average young man are those of one who expects to become some day a producer or at least a worker; the ideas of the average young woman are those of one who expects and intends (for here, too, Youth sees only personal victory) to rise into the leisure, non-producing or supported class.“
“The young man expects to accomplish something in the world, to earn much money, or "high position," in order to be able to marry the most charming girl. The "most charming girl," if she be temporarily forced to earn her own living, expects to find somebody who will marry her, give her more luxuries than she has been accustomed to, and lift her far above her companions. She hopes to become a member of the leisure class even if she never attains it.“
“Women are potential parasites even if they never become real ones, and this is the gist of the matter we are discussing. Why are nearly all small farmers reactionary, individualistic, distrustful, competitive? Because they hope some day to become gentleman farmers. Why are most small business men narrow, egoistic, conservative? For the reason that they hope one day to become men of Big Business. The young woman in America today possesses the same psychology. Being young, she not only hopes, she expects, to rise into the leisure class when some young man asks her for the privilege of supporting her through life.“
“Women, as a sex, are the owners of a commodity vitally necessary to the health and well-being of man“ “As a sex, women occupy a position similar to the petty shop-keeper, because they possess a commodity to sell or to barter. Men, as a sex, are buyers of, or barterers for, this commodity.“
“[Man] has four vital needs to satisfy while woman has only three, and woman possesses, for barter, for sale, or for gift, the wherewithall to satisfy one of these.“
“The more economic power a group, or a class, or a sex possesses, the more the state throws the mantle of its protective laws about it. Women are owners of a commodity for which men are buyers or barterers, and our modern laws protect woman at the expense of man.“
“The beautiful woman sees no need for intelligence nor for understanding because she has always been able to outstrip her less attractive competitors in making the best match and securing the rich husbands. And so her neurones rarely "connect," or react, except to stimuli pertaining to things that will enhance her charms and increase her selling price.“
“That there are [virtually] no women hoboes in the civilized world today is, [...] incontestable proof of the superiority of the economic status of woman over man”.
“Men love to [..] provide [women] with luxurious surroundings, because this advertises to the world the fact that they are able to purchase a superior, i. e., a higher priced commodity“
“Why, do you imagine, the woman who brings to a penniless husband, not only herself but a fortune as well, is looked down upon in many countries? [...] Is it not because both are unconsciously violating the code, or the trade "understandings," in giving not only of themselves, but their substance as well? These women are selling below the market, or scabbing on the job.“
"It is one of the most absurd notions derived from eighteenth century enlightenment that in the beginning of society woman was the slave of man. Among all savages and barbarians of the lower and middle stages, sometimes even of the higher stage, women not only have freedom but are held in high esteem."
"No matter how little the provocation, legally or sentimentally, any woman may kill almost any man, and the jury will render a verdict of Not Guilty. She has only to say that he "deceived her.""
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -2 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 11:20:28 ago (+1/-3)
Shall I start with how you characterize female status seeking behavior as self-serving parasitic behavior while male status seeking is portrayed as selflessly productive?
Men seek to rise into the leisure, non-producing or supported class as much as women do if not moreso. Thats why men invented slavery and warfare and bureacracy. The most status seeking men all pursue “rent seeking behavior”, as no productive jobs lead to high status anymore, nor have they for a long time. Since maybe the neolithic.
We don’t live in a meritocracy. Duh. Men who seek “better” jobs are seeking more exploitive parasitic jobs, not more productive ones! Men pioneered the bureacratic scams passing for “better jobs” during the feudal period. Before that men were pioneering other well known forms of exploitation such as warlording and slavery. Whats a gentleman farmer? One with serfs or slaves. You don’t want to see that other males are your primary exploiters, which is predictable in an r/K paradigm. Men have increased intrasexual competition— which is why they have achieved higher rate of productivity than women but also achieved higher rates of exploitation , through crime and war and rent seeking behaviors. Women can’t hold a candle to the truly high achievers in exploitation and deception, who are all male. Males are high achievers in all areas, including all the shitty ones. Their productivity is cancelled out by their destructiveness, as a group. The science literally supports this. 😁
Your entire thesis is a fools errand. You want us to believe that the Agent of Evolution — which is indifferent nature— has “decided” to favor one sex as the noble selfless sex and one sex as the exploitive sex. This is preposterous and anti-scientific. Its literally NOT what the science says 🤤. Males ane females have different survival strategies and both strategy sets employ deceptive or exploitive strategies. Female forms of exploitation differ from male forms of exploitation. But youve chosen to paint a pretty picture of your “side” because you don’t get evolution at the most fundamental level.
Every paragraph here is false or a gross distortion of reality. Your “ode to male virtue” is one fallacy after another strung together to support an unsupportable hypothesis. Youre not interested in what history or science is telling you about the sexes.
You make no attempt at objectivity. Your discussion is inherently jewish. Youre interested in soothing your fragile ego with fairytales, same as the feminists, who perform similar cherrypicking to frame their equally simplistic narratives. You want the world to follow your simplistic narrative that White guys “dindu nuffin” when White guys in fact doomed our civilization by engaging in exploitive behavior against our own people, in several important ways. This doesn’t preclude female exploitive modes. But you are obviously incapable of having a balanced discussion. So please don’t appropriate a “science” guise because its a joke.
[ + ] Razzoriel
[ - ] Razzoriel 2 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 12:12:26 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 14:59:04 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] HeyJames
[ - ] HeyJames 1 point 1 monthApr 27, 2025 11:23:15 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Razzoriel
[ - ] Razzoriel 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 14:54:40 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 15:24:56 ago (+0/-0)
I always feel like theres this underlying “ Helena, you wahmen got some splaining to do!” kind of vibe being issued with a reply like this. If you are getting at the fact that some women lack loyalty and are mercenary, I agree. But so are some men. I can think of dozens of scenarios where men behave disloyally toward women. So can you. I can cherrypick shitty male behavior as well as you can cherrypick the reverse. The feminists do it all the time and you object to their tactics. But youre employing them.
Why would a man choose a low IQ woman with big tits over a high IQ woman with average tits? Why would a man divorce his wife and mother of his children to marry someone twenty years younger? We can guess at the reasons. r vs K strategy differences. Both men and women may choose aggressive ‘r’ reproductive strategies which seem shitty to ‘K’ people. Are you seriously arguing that men don’t do that ?
[ + ] taoV
[ - ] taoV 1 point 1 monthApr 27, 2025 12:52:36 ago (+1/-0)
"Why are most small business men narrow, egoistic, conservative? For the reason that they hope one day to become men of Big Business."
The text is clear that neither party is selfless, women just have a commodity men can't produce on their own. Maybe this dissonance is why you didn't articulate some counter theory, and instead ignored it's thesis to attack your own construct.
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 1 point 1 monthApr 27, 2025 13:44:00 ago (+1/-0)*
The brain evolved in layers of behavioral programming, wirh more unrestricted generalized goals like "eat" and then layers of restrictions forming over these like "stop eating when x condition is reached".
Think of the three laws of robotics and you get the picture. Objectives with nested rules and restrictions that must be obeyed in pursuit of said ultimate goals.
For a human male who has left the r-selected fast life history of hunter gatherers lifestyle for the k-selected slow life history of the farmer rancher lifestyle, The reproductive strategy has become: "find few to one females to mate with, establish pair bonds with them, then work together with them to raise our children".
The pair bond is central to the k selected mating strategy, without it the females will abandon the male at the earliest opportunity as soon as it is to their benefit to leave. You can't just abduct them and hold them hostage, they need to actively cooperate with you so you need the females to be trustworthy and genuinely committed to you znd the offspring you impregnate her with. If she were to fail to bond with you, this would be disastrous for the male and his children, but advantageous to the female as she could go from one male to the next as soon as the other is offering better genes or resources to her.
So how is the pair bond established? By sexual activities, by stimulating the female sexually, you trigger the neurochemicals and electrical processes within her body that wire her brain to be bonded with you. Basically, these are the purposes served by the female orgasm. Make her cum and she becomes addicted to you. Pair bond established. All human behavior and inner phenomena boils down to brain drugs and brain electricity. Remember that.
So why does this translate to pedophilia being a natural component of male sexual attractions?
Because neuroplasticity makes reprogramming the brain easier, and the younger you are the more easily molded your brain is, and the better hold the changes made in earlier youth are, staying around longer in proportion to how soon jnto your life you had been influenced.
Combine this with what the female mind is programmed to feel attracted to in male partners: bigger, stronger, more experienced, more confident, more dominant, and a caregiver, who offers protection and the provision of goods and services to her. Basically a second father. Girls and women evaluate men for sex on the same standards as they would evaluate their fathers. Their ideal mate is their ideal father figures. All women want is to fuck their dads, but maybe a younger more potent and virile version of their ideal daddy. Adult women only want to be made to feel like they are little girls again.
Even the most beta of males can be a Chad in the eyes of his child bride, as he is basically her daddy in both ways at once. As he us raising her while having sex with her.
Think the whitest kids you know song: "you are my child bride, I am your father groom, I'll give you everything, you just can't leave your room."
Anyways, because she is at her greatest neuroplasticity the younger she is, and because of the overlap between male parental roles over female children, and female sexual preferences for male partners who can fill those roles for her. The optimal choice for establishing the strongest pair bond is to mate with the youngest female partner. Aka, having sex with as young a girl as possible, is strategically the best move.
She's prepubescent, her first egg hasn't dropped yet, she lacks developed secondary sexual characteristics let alone the primary ones, she's not fertile yet, but this is actually to the male's advantage, as she offers him her full reproductive window, and by the time she reaches it, her body will have adapted to his sperm, meaning less hormonal and immune resistances, a greater chance of pregnancy and less coompications to the offspring.
However, maleshave since adapted more layers upon this that say not be attracted to too young a girl. Why is this?
Two reasons, one is that while the adult male and child female pairing is greatly advantageous to the male, for the female.it carries risks that make her come out worse in this arrangement.
Her body is more fragile, meaning she's at greater risk of injury when getting fucked by a grown up dick.
Her body's immune system is also still developing, meaning she's at greater risk of contracting an infection from the fluid exchange with him.
And she could have a precocious pregnancy, which could kill her by depriving her of nutrients or by rhe birthing process literally destroying her hoo-hah.
And as we covered, there's a dysgenic risk as every adult male is an alpha compared to her, so she's likely to end up with what an adult version of herself would consider to be a low tier quality mate.
Probably the last point is the most important one in influencing female behavioral evolution, the avoidance mating wirh unattractive men and bearing their offspring is treated by nature as the worst fate a female could endure.
Fittngly dariwnian in that it is also what males taking the "pedopill" of "ascending" from virginity via molesting a little girl so appealing within the incel communities: as "what's good for the goose is bad for the gander" and vice versa.
But these risks are all on her end, and so they wouldn't affect the evolution of male behavior, at least not directly. His genetic reproductive success is not too badly hampered by the potential harms his among strategy could pose to his mates. These are fringe cases and he can always find more prepubescent females to mate with.
However, when he becomes the father to his own daughters, he will fiercely safeguard them from other pedophiles, because of these risks to his girls that are the carriers of his genes. Hypocrisy is ingrained into us by evolution because in a world of competition, power dynamics, and scarcity, it's the winning strategy. Evolution encourages the behavioral patterns that most consistently produce success for the genes that generate these qualities in their organisms. It's as true of behaviors as it is of physical bodies.
So, we have men trying to fuck lolis, ideally getting the infamous baby fuck, while also trying to stop other men from defloweing their own little princesses before she reached puberty. And this produces the familiar pattern of everyone publicly condemning what they themselves were doing in private. Eventually everyone knew every other guy was in the same situation, so they'd enact harsh punishments on those discovered to be diddling little girls, and trying to expose each other as kiddie fiddlers, while being nonces themselves.
Sort of like the world of everyone developing nuclear weapons, designer diseases, and designer babies, while at the same time denouncing anyone who engaged in these areas of research and development.
Back to how this was responsible for forming the "but not too young" Layer of the male minds, and this was because it was harder to successfully breed girls and remain undiscovered when they erred under a certain age, pus it was harder to breed them with the consent of the father as well, since the dad taught it was too risky, so we began establishing baseline ages at which girls were off limits as a part of the rules of our society.
Similar to how we established rules around stealing, which was something that was good for you if you could get away with it, but bad if someone else did it to you. We made rules for how property could be acquired legitimately by ruling out parasitic forms of acquisition as invalid.
And over time, those who broke those rules and were subjected to punishment led them from being the types to steal whenever they could get away with it, to having an aversion to stealing that formed a mental block preventing it even when it was 100% to their advantage to do it.
Well, child molestation was the same, we developed an inherent aversion to it because the punishment for ot getting away with it created a selective pressure that weed out the those who got caught and punished. The best policy became not taking the risk, and over time our biology reflects that policy in our nature.
Similarly, you'd also develop a hatred for theives and child Rapists, in order to ensure others aren't reaping the evolutionary benefits of a strategy you evolved to discard.
However, the female brain was affected in a different way, they became more childlike for longer, ans we see this in studies on their neural development patterns as contracted against the development of male brains.
But in the end, the point is the same: pedophilia is not a paraphilia, but a natural component of male sexual psychology, it exists I all males, but in most of us there is also a higher layer we developed that makes us averse to taking mates from girls under a certain age.
Pedos merely lack that additional layer, and furthermore, their reproductive strategies might work well in a SHTF scenario.
Most pedophiles also have attractions to adults as well as children, and even exclusive Pedos are simply preferring prepubescent partners at the initiation of the relationship, meaning they are much the same as the guy who gets into a relationship with a college aged girl and stays attracted to her even into the years when she's elderly, because the pair bond established in their youth had kept them together.
Pedophilia is not a paraphilia, as it is a viable reproductive strategy and not uncommon amongst males, okay, but it's also not a sexuality either.
Pedophiles are not exclusively into one age group, and they are also not attracted to children of all sexes.
They have sex based sexual preferences. They are overwhelmingly heterosexual, aka straight, and overwhelmingly male.
It's almost all men who are interested only in girls, and not at all in boys, and also they like girls and women of all ages where they are still conventionally attractive.
Of note, there's three main forms of male attraction to female bodies: cuteness, sexiness, and beauty.
For prepubescent females, we have cuteness and beauty determining their sexiness ("hotness"), for postpubescent females, we can see cuteness and beauty and sexiness operating more independently in terms of facilitsting male arousal. For example, belle delphine made her career by making herself tick as many of the three boxes as she could: being cute, beautiful, and sexy.
But we do have a notable population of homosexual male pedophiles, and heterosexual female pedos, right?
Not really, in both cases rhe targets were usually pubescent or postpubesent boys, underaged minors still in development, sure, but not children in the strictest biological sense of the word.
Certainly there were a few cases of actual little boys being targeted by adult men and women, but they weren't the majority of cases, most tomes it was hormonal tweens and teens being taken advantage of by women who were dissatisfied with their marriages and undergoing middle age crisis, and perverted and often closeted guys whose repressed sexualities emerged with indiscriminate promiscuity.
BTW, gays are promiscuous for the same reason dykes are sexless, males have a high libido females have a low libido, pairing two guys together means they will fuck like Rabbits in heat, pairing two women means they will spend most nights just having out like roommates who nominally share the title of lovers. Gay men will go for anything with a dick that looks good enough and is accessible for sex before one gets a dick shoved up the other's ass. Lemons will require a checklist so that even a supermodel will need to pass a vetting test before they rub their cunts together.
BTW, the fact that a dickless woman could make another bitch cum hard just by kissing pussy lips together is a sign that your dick size means jack all about how good you are in bed with a foid, pleasing her is mostly about what you do with the outside of her genitals and even the inside bits that make her feel good are easily reached, the g spot is just the bulk interior part of her clit situated on the opposite end, on the inside of her love hole, its a cluster of nerves situated behind where her pink little pleasure bean is, and thats the female prostate, its so easy to hit you barely need to go into her to find it. The g spot and her clit are just two faces of one and the same structure, ones external the others internal. Think FUPA (frontal upper-pubic area).
Partially because sex was historically riskier for the female sex than the male sex, even in homosexuality, and not just true to diseases, which in fact dykes are at lower risk for then faggots, the true issue is with pair bonds. Males get bonded far less severely than females do. It's like being at a greater risk for addiction, the addiction being to oxytocin, dopamine, and serotonin, which the brain has wired itself to associate with the sexual partner via operant conditioning.
A female rape victim being fucked I to falling In live with her assilant(s) is not just some perverted hentai fantasy scenario, there's real science behind it.
[ + ] AlexanderMorose13
[ - ] AlexanderMorose13 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 11:42:24 ago (+0/-0)
While I agree in part that some men rise in status because they seek exploitative, low work and maintenance jobs as the head positions of companies or other businesses; it is natural. However, no company or business survives for long if the ones being promoted cannot complete their work in the most whole way possible to ensure that the foundation of work that they create can be built upon successfully by others ranging below in the business.
Most of the reason that men like me have gained promotions or higher positions in companies is due to what services we offer in return. My personal example, when I worked for a company back in the 2010s, I was promoted simply because I consistently worked more hours and took less sick days and vacation time than anyone else. And it was a slow process that took 2 years.
Very rarely are there women who outwork men when it comes to the evolution and eventual determination necessary to rise towards higher status positions. I am NOT saying that it is not possible; I am merely stating that it is uncommon. To reach better positions doesn't only require a large amount of work and dedication in a singular direction; it requires much work on one's own personal image and self-assurance. Many women get "stuck" on different stages of growth and development, mostly due to the fact that change doesn't always become a necessity when other options exist, especially when men are nearly always willing to compensate through their own desire not to be alone.
TL:DR. Women exploit men and men exploit women. Almost always, however, women get the better end of the deal, while men are always put more at risk of loss. It's nearly always an expectation that men will have to give over a great deal to women at the end of a relationship or marriage, and usually at great detriment.
[ + ] Sector2
[ - ] Sector2 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 12:35:55 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 13:43:28 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] NuckFiggers
[ - ] NuckFiggers -1 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 16:58:57 ago (+0/-1)
Listen slits, men know the deal. You get sex very very easily so you think very little of it and have it exponentially more than even top tier men. We understand that and we try not to think about it. When you bring it up or talk about sex so casually it is nauseating. Granted, some shit I've heard is clearly made up, but just the fact that you talk about sex, and therefore relationships, this way turns my stomach.
It's fucking gross. We don't want to think of you as the discarded cum rags you act like so if you ever want to be taken seriously by any man, try not to talk that way.
I would say don't act that way but we all know that's impossible. Let's start with something simple- don't talk and act like the gutter whores you act like.
Maybe there is some truth to the made up 'male loneliness epidemic' jews love to masturbate about, but it's nothing compared to the femcel epidemic.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -1 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 19:09:03 ago (+0/-1)
Thats not mathematically possible.
[ + ] CoronaHoax
[ - ] CoronaHoax 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 09:13:31 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] -2 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 09:54:23 ago (+4/-6)
No, that's literally what the science says, rape was supposed to be a valid reproductive strategy, and it's why women are the way they are.
They were evolved with the expectation that a man would grab them and force his cock into their pussies.
It's why all women are bisexual and even zoophilic, it's why women make loud noises during sexual stimulation, it's why women are total bitches, and why everything else about them is the way it is.
That's on the far end of the r-selected fast life history strats.
On the other end of the k-selecred slow life history strategy, it's not much prettier, we were still evolved to rape.
Pedophilia, it's wife husbandry, an adult male takes a female child and forms a pair bond with her as early into her life as possible, while her neuroplasticity is at its peak, this is done via having sex with the prepubescent female (to get that oxytocin high established and rewire her brain to associate it with you, thats "romantic love" for you, its a literal drug addiction to physical intimacy (or the idea thereof) with the person you are conditioned to associate the high with). Then you've got a pair bond entrenched into her brain so that when she's finally fertile, you jab access to her entire reproductive window, and furthermore, her body's immune and hormonal system are now adapted to your sperms, meaning an increased chance of pregnancy with a lowered chance of birth defects.
Keep in mind that being a pedo is just lacking that additional layer that forms over the command "you want sex with as young a female partner as possible" that restricts it with the command "but you don't want one who is too young", so they have no lower limit on the ages of what their brains tell then are an acceptable mate option, or, more frequently, they have that second layer, but its age cap is significantly lower than it is for normal guys.
That's the far end of the k-selection slow life history, of farmers and ranchers rather than hunters and gatherers.
Women get off on their own stimulation, what makes them feel things, either sensations or emotions or other experiences.
Men get off on how they imagine the woman is feeling, physically or emotionally or otherwise, so we get off on her stimulation as well.
Hence why porn aimed at men has a focus on how the girl is feeling, whether she's feeling good or bad or bad and then good,doesn't matter, so long as her experiences are intense, and porn aimed at women are focused on the capacity of her lover's to make her feel things intensely, again, it's not just positive physical stimulation that matters but also mental stimulation and negative stimulation.
So now you know why women fantasize about getting raped or being owned as slaves, heck, they also fantasize about guys just straight up killing them.
And why they get off on pain and fear so damn much, being scared and hurt for them might be foreplay for her being knocked up with the child of a strong worthy male, from an evolutionary perspective.
Lastly, women have hand fetishes where men have a fetish for feet. Women want big strong hands, and Men want small dainty feet.
Yeah, it's all kinds of fucked up.
[ + ] Razzoriel
[ - ] Razzoriel 2 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 10:09:21 ago (+2/-0)*
So marrying young happened and was successful for plenty of reasons, but requires a very intricate network of kin support which was lost in our modern age; people tried delegating that to the state through nurseries, and you can see the result today.
Rich people do not have money. Rich people have access to resources which ensures their children can optimally be raised to endure the tempests of time and become seasoned men and loving wives that will maintain your family name. You see that all the time through families squandering wealth and demolishing their hard-earned assets through dealing with jews. Its their MO for millenia; prop up the rot so it becomes trendy, watch the elite rot and take their means, while they try their best to not drink the kool-aid (spoiler: it never works and never will, and eventually those jews wither. Also the reason why their lineage is matrillineal btw)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 13:41:50 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 13:47:36 ago (+0/-0)*
Women and girls who didn't submit to Rapists ended up dead, those who did get horny from being subjugated by the guy that killed their fathers, brothers, husbands, and sons ended up passing on their genes through the sperm of a strong chadly alpha male conquerer type like ghenghis khan.
[ + ] Razzoriel
[ - ] Razzoriel 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 14:25:33 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 16:56:11 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 14:44:15 ago (+0/-0)*
They chose ages of adulthood first by physical capacity (spartan boys as young as 6 or earlier were adults if they could prove they had mastered their training), then by sexual fecundity (onset of puberty, which is observable, old enough to bleed old enough to breed) and then by the age at which they reached adult height (where we currently are), there's a campaign to raise it further in response to the maturation of the prefrontal cortex (which is in charge of capacity to provide meaningful informed and voluntary consent) which is estimated to peak in performance at around 24 years of age, so the age of adulthood should he set at 25.
The people who object to this could he called out as being pro-pedo, as the basis for wanting an age of consent (according to them) has always been concerned with the capsciy to meaningfully consent, and that is always deficient before sometime into the 24th year of life.
They are just upset because then those hot ass college aged girls will be off limits, most porn on the internet will be declassified as child pornography, and society will need to adjust inde against to the upping of age restrictions, like when ending the child workforce decimated the economy of society of Victorian England.
[ + ] Razzoriel
[ - ] Razzoriel 1 point 1 monthApr 27, 2025 14:53:22 ago (+1/-0)
Ancient Romans believed teenagers were possessed by evil spirits during their teens but it would eventually go away when they reached adulthood.
People didn't "knew", but they "knew", for centuries.
Spartans lost the war and ceased to exist because they were philosophically and spiritually eunuchs.
The problem with governments advocating age of consent is that its the government, not the parents, dictating what is possible and what isnt. Again, killing a man robbing a daughter's virginity was common. Shotgun weddings fixed a wrong with a half-right.
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 1 point 1 monthApr 27, 2025 18:56:26 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Razzoriel
[ - ] Razzoriel 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 19:29:30 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 15:33:31 ago (+0/-0)
Wrong weirdo. On what basis? Not on fertility.
Nooooo. Marrying young was always uncommon in whites, for thousands of years. One of the most salient white traits is late marriage of females.
Kin networks were always particularly weak in white societies, which is why we are the least collectivist and “clannish” of the races and the least corrupt. Its a function of low consanguinous marriage rates.
Jews are not matrilineal, in spite of their religious law. They are descended from ME jews patrilineally.
[ + ] DivineLight2
[ - ] DivineLight2 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 17:43:52 ago (+0/-0)
Women go through puberty first, becoming women anywhere from 14-17, men a few years later, 17-20, it varies, so 16 seemed reasonable and I'd agree.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1 monthApr 27, 2025 14:53:05 ago (+1/-0)*
We. You think you are team K if you rape? Because youre white right? Within the r/K paraadigm, males are team ‘r’. In fact its surprising how well the two sexes meet the conditions of an r/K dichotomy. Males are live fast die hard. Females take a far more conservative risk averse “slow” strategy. Males have cheap reproduction and females have expensive reproduction. Males have short lives, females have long lives. Males have higher internal competition which is why they exploit each other more than females do. Like cockroaches and niggers, males are ‘r’ strategist relative to females. More monogamous males will be closer to the ‘K’ end of the spectrum, like white men or lemurs. But they will never be more ‘K’ than females: femaleness is inherently ‘K’.
Anyway raping is never team K. It is the cheapest type of reproduction there is. Whites tend to be more ‘K’ than blacks and muslims because of behavior, not skin color.
The most you can say is that femaleness, which is older than humaness (as is maleness) has evolved during periods when rape was typical and so human females still have analagous instincts from that pre-human period as do human males. Estrogen, like testosterone is similar across many species which is why maleness and femaleness as behavior patterns are conserved. But its wrong to say female humans evolved to be raped. Quite the opposite, in fact. No one knows when a human female is fertile, so the success of rapists is low and the success of attentive males who seek women’s favor is much higher. Rape is one male strategy that may succeed in certain environments but not others. Your discussion is biased, incomplete, wrong.
All women are not bisexual. I promise you. Are women on average more bisexxual than men? I think so. But its not because of rape. Its because of the assymetrical sexual success of males which has more to do with male on male violence than rape
Proove it. Id love to see this explanation. Given all the goat fuckers in the world are men.
Why?
That makes no sense. If we were built to be raped and groomed from childhood to be males’ sexual playthings, how does being a bitch serve us? Being a bitch only serves women in high status positions who can’t be beaten into submission.
Really ? Rape explains all female traits? Thats a pretty sweeping statement
BTW if you acknowlege that males are essentially the only sex to rape and that its a natural behavior of some male populations ( shall we say a tool in the male toolbox) how does this reconcile with your argument that females are the parasitic sex? Does that argument make sense if males are natural rapists? If males are finely honed rape machines? But also somehow highly selfless and productive? Why would natural born rapists seek to better society, as you so aptly argued, in your paean to male splendor?
Or maybe you are arguing that female humans evolved to be raped (to love it even!) but not so for males being evolved rapists? Are the feminists right? Are you really all rapists? That view would be consistent with your argument. Do you guys all love rape and want to perpetrate it if you can get away with it? Some of you do for sure. Ive seen some of you proudly boasting about enjoying beating and hurting your lovers and claiming they love it. But is this true of all of you? Is Joe_McCarthy your idol or not?
The harder you go down this road, the more niggerish the male strategy would have to be. Did that occur to you?
Not true. High disparity of age, and sexual dimorphism only occurs in the polygynous “gorilla” model, where alpha males guard harems of females and male/male violence is highest and male reproductive success is most variable. Its a model seen in pastoralists, muslims (who tend to be pastoralists), abos, some niggers, fundy mormons, and alot of species like chickens, deer, gorillas, etc. Its an ‘r’ strategy and human males are not productive/good dads in such scenarios. They tend to be rape cultures and war cultures and slave cultures.
Polygamous “matriarchies” like you tend to see in some nigger groups and polynesians and some native americans, does not have high age disparity between male and female mates. This is the “chimpanzee” model— females mate with more than one male as they are highly receptive (not picky). Males compete by producing more sperm and being horny, not by raping, or grooming babies. Also an ‘r’ strategy.
Some males pursue more ‘K’ strategies like white men (relative to other non-white men). These are invariably monogamous societies similar to the “lemur model” family. Its a “good dad” strategy in which rape has little or no utility. So as much as Whiteness is a thing (recognition that White behavioral strategy is divergent from muslims and niggers), white women evolving to be raped is not a thing.
This is not true of men?
This is not true of women? Aren’t you fags always claiming that wahmen have pathological levels of empathy? But not here though! The less empathetic sex is magically empathetic during sex? The high female empathy is inexplicably absent in female sexual behavior, huh? None of your wahmen theories are consistent with each other. But thats what happens when you cherry pick and use fallacies to support your narrative rather than taking a systematic approach to the behavioral data.
Right. Now we’re supposed to believe that male targetted porn is more feelings-based than female targetted porn? The copes never end.
I think you fantasize about women fantasizing about getting raped for sure. I think women fantasizing about being raped or abused is about as common as men fantasizing about raping or abusing. And sometimes it goes the other way with women wanting to abuse and men wanting to be abused. They all have roots in our evolutionary history. But to say “this is how women are” is assinine. Most women find your suggestions revolting.
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 17:43:15 ago (+0/-0)
I made it clear that men get off on how they imagine the woman is feeling, I didn't say she needed to be feeling good, or even feeling things physically.
She could be feeling sexual pain and it's gratifying to men, about as good for us as when we think she's feeling pleasure, she could be feeling disgust towards a sexual partner she's forced to fuck with, and it's just as good for us as when she's feeling aroused by her partner and fucking them enthusiastically.
Her humiliation is as good ad her pride, her hate as good as her love. So Ling as she's feeling something, it's great.
Look at hentai, it is by far the most popular type of porn made for men because it had the female characters in ridiculous situations and outwardly proclaiming how she's feeling at all times, both physically and otherwise.
It's usually a jamming together of everything that turns the male audience on:.
the heroines often start out in a sexual situation they hate, one that hurts, or humiliates, or frightens them, often with an enemy they hate or a sexual partner they find sexually repulsive (not always because they are ugly or sexually unattractive to her: they could also be a member of her family, another species, the gender opposite her orientation of attraction, or of another racial or generational demographic, or of a differnt caste or faction, say an enemy faction or the socio-economic caste opposite theirs)
Whatever the case, they begin by having a bad time, and then, over the course of getting fucked, and possibly harmed at the same time (nonconsenual bdsm is as commonplace as other forms of rape) she eventually begins to like it, then love it, then be addicted to it.
It's not uncommon for her to come out the other end a polar opposite to the type of girl she was when she went in in some way, from a slave girl who hates the rich to an uncle Tom type who betrays the rebellion to them (and the rebels are often full of pretty girls for the nobles to make sex slaves of).
Mindbreaking is often the climactic event of rhe narrative, where the heroines character changes significantly due to her secual experiences.
When straight men talk about big dicks, and they are very interested in huge cocks, it's not because they are secretly gay or bi, instead it becuae they get off on the stimulation of the woman who's gonna be getting fucked with that thing.
And by stimulation, we often include pain in that, you complain that a mutant monster sizes dick is gonna hurt you, yes. It is, and thst makes us want to put it in you more than anything.
We like it when it hurts you, we also like it when it makes you feel good as well, ideally it does both, and there an interaction between pleasure and pain where you are enjoying both parts of it, and loving the pain masochistically.
If you want to see what makes men horny, look at the Japanese cartoons where cute animals girls get fucked - by each other, by men, by boys, by animals, by monsters (especially tentacles and slimes), and by robots, too.
Look at how we focus in thing like how her toes curl when she's getting stuff shoved into all her holes, including her peehole (urethra) and poop chute.
Men like feet because a woman's foot tells us a lot about how she's feeling, it's very expressive. The woman who animated k-on! Made it clear that ger focus on the girls legs and feet was because it allowd her to clearly characterized their personalities by showing just one part of the feminine anatomy.
K-on! Isn't even pornographic, it's a cute show about Japanese schoolgirls who try to start a rock band together, and their quest for making it big enough to play a sold-out show at the budokan. (At least that was the plot initially before it became moeshit cutesy-wootsy yuribaiting slice-of-life garbage.)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 20:04:29 ago (+0/-0)
Yeah, Im sensing a pattern. Women get of for selfish reasons and men get off for selfless ones. Your not predictiable at all! What do you base this on besides “Ladies suck” ? You don’t know what motivates female sexual arousal. Once again youre full of bias and baseless.
This is you. This is particular to your personality disorder. This is not a broad description of male sexual arousal.
Hentai is not the most popular type of porn. It appeals to a particular subset of men. Romantic “plot” porn marketed to women has lots of characters declaring their feelings. In fact I would argue that the most popular form of porn for women is the romance novel, which is all about feeling. The reader is constantly updated on the internal feelings of both characters. Ive never heard anyone assert that men care about the internal feelings of their partner more than women. Men are more aroused by visual stimuli and not feelings.
Thats supporting evidence that some males like rape fantasies or like to hurt women. Its not evidence that they are more empathetic of womens feelings or more tuned in to womens feelings than the reverse. Women are not hentai characters. Those are characters written by men. Are you sure youre not confused about what real women are like?
Because you think women are more stimulated by big cocks. If you were so empathetic you would know that isn’t true. But you like living vicariously through big cock guy more than how big cocks make a woman actually feel. Hence your mistake.
You are a sick fucking puppy. But whats worse, you didn’t adress any of my arguments., Men are ‘r’ strategists relative to ‘K’ women. I challenged you to explain why ‘r’ strategist males would have a “virtous” strategy but still be natural rapists: you ignored me. I challenged you to prove your assertions about women being bisexual, zoophiliac, noisy during sex and bitches, because of rape: you just ignored me. I explained to you how K strategy cannot possibly be reconciled with rape: you ignored me.
I explained the three major models of human sexuality: polygyny, polygamy and monogamy and I explained to you why polygyny — which is not universal in humans— is the only model with a high frequency of child sexual grooming, which is the direct result of an artificial scarcity of females— a situation created entirely by men. You ignored me.
It seems you don’t want to defend your retarded assertions, just wax on about your kinks. You say the science supports you, but you don’t want to cite it.
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthMay 12, 2025 20:20:16 ago (+0/-0)
Wham bam thank you ma'am types vs the you belong to me now and I will use you for whatever purposes I have of you (you are my child bride I am your father groom ill give you everything you just can't leave your room.)
[ + ] Gowithit
[ - ] Gowithit 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 13:20:42 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 13:53:22 ago (+0/-0)*
And no, most little girls who got fucked by adult pedodicks did survive, and grew up to become mothers of many children.
The reason women have so.much neoteny and retain childlike behaviors into adulthood is because these loli brides were reproductively successful.
The risks were great enough to encourage the adaptation of higher female coyness among prepubescent girls, sure, and it also made men fiercely protective of their daughters getting dicked down, to the poing of a genral moral revulsion towards child predators, yes, but the risks of adult male x child female sex were not the rule, they were still the exception, in most cases the pedo didn't have to worry about accidentally killing his child bride with his dick.
Injuries: usually didn't happen, and when they did not dangerous enough to last long, or contribute towards death, or even be noticeable, plus children heal easily and when they do they come back stronger.
Illnesses: not as much a factor in close communities, only got really bad when you had foreign men coming into your land and then into you daughter's cunnies.
In both cases the worst part for injuries and illnesses was the act of carrying the child and then birthing it, most child brides who dies did so via gestational pressures and complications of birth, the actual sex was not usually dangerous and was usually pleasurable for her, not painful.
And keep in mind that we are talking about ancient eras of low life expectancy for women and girls generally, especially those who gave birth.
Which is why the true danger of pedophilia is dygenics: to a little girl, any kind of man could be Chad.
If the k-selection slow life strategy was the result of weaker men who could not compete against the k-selected fast life strategy of tourney mating games, and he provided for himself by producing his own food via agriculture.
Then it stands to reason that it's these same sub-chad betas who were the ones the implement the idea of romantic love and committed relationships (repalacing rapes and casual hookups first with polygamous harems then with monogamy, but both with the introduction of cohabitation inside a home, rather than going different ways and living nomadically), it's the less attractive and less strong men who made the home, the farmlands, the city, specialized jobs, and civilization, because they couldn't get bitches otherwise.
And it's was these same sub-5 men who also were the ones to take female mated who would be able to love them despite their shortcomings. By becoming shorteyes, if you get them young, you get them for life, and loli brides eventually grow up into waifus for laifus. Pedophilia worked for them.
That's why it had to be taken over by yids: child molestation gave even the truest of incels a chance at continuing their genetic lines.
Later on, the fruits of the needs was dominated by the Chads, who made it the new normie to be a farmer rancher sort with a job living in a home in a city under a king and his laws enforced by guards.
This is similar to how they invaded every space that unattractive straight white men but for themselves and went to in order to escape what was for their era the current state of modernity. Eventually the hobby got popular, and with popularity came influence, and with influence came the fears of some resistance against the status quo, so the monoculture has to invade and tske control, assimilating what it can and destroying what it cannot, until you see the values of the elites dominating the space as the vlue of those within it, the original members who had founded the space are then removed and replaced with figures who toe the party line (Jewish agendas). Youre hobby just became the newest platform for kike propaganda.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 20:21:31 ago (+0/-0)
Is that why women develop breasts? To seem more childlike? That doesn’t make sense to me. I think youre full of shit. Men retain childlike behaviors. Are you arguing that women are more childlike in their behavior then men? Serious doubts on that score.
So male fathers recognize that their young daughters getting raped is not in the interest of their lineage. Imagine that . Theres pushback on the ole rape strategy. Now that youve acknowleged that rape is not optimal for anyone who is female or who has a daughter, sister, wife, you just dismiss this disincentive, you wave it away. Thats cool.
This is what polygynists do, because they run out of their own women. This is why men are the great race mixers: polygynist males steal other people’s women/girls.
Hahahahah, little girls don’t want to have sex with you. Youre a jackass and you have no knowlege of life as a girl. Life is not hentai, weirdo.
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthApr 28, 2025 07:21:20 ago (+0/-0)
It's good for a hungry man to eat food, and also good for him to prevent others from eating the food he might eat.
It's competition, it's about scoring points for yourself against others while preventing them from scoring on you.
Wrap your head around it. It's not a difficult concept to grasp.
It's about personal benefit, not universal moral standards.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 28, 2025 08:26:31 ago (+0/-0)
No it fucking isn’t. Youve just describe nigger society. Whats wrong with niggers? Youre scenario at the society level is totally inefficient. That is why we have moral taboos against raping. Its inefficient. How much time and energy to we have to expend just to control niggers and protect ourselves from them? Theres an alternative. Its called group selection, GROUP FUCKING SELECTION.. Nietzsche was not the last word in evolution. Wrap your head around that.
Moral standards are genetic. They are heritable. This is why rape and pedophilia are distastful. They are bad for the group— groups that found them repellent succeeded over those that didn’t.
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthMay 10, 2025 11:39:40 ago (+0/-0)
It's nothing but pure win if you or your genetic kin can do it and get away with it, but a loss if you see it done to you or to your genetic kin.
If a man gets a child bride, he gets all the advantages of having her, but for her the deal is very risky to her health, and the genetic payoff is not so good either.
Her genetic kin, like her father and brothers, are also posers in this scenario, so losses experienced for someine else's gains are balanced out with other losses inflicted back upon the perpetrator who profits from their actions.
As a result, when a mjor gain is made at the expense of the major loss of others, those who lose and their kin would retaliate, and it is by retaliation that causes actions like murdering, theiving, raping, or fucking lolis into a major loss should those placed at disadvantages or their kin manage to get their payback and even things out by punishing you.
It's is punishment that makes doing things that benefit you and are detrimental to others that causes such actions to be risky.
Crime is this something we are typically averse to, as it is to our disadvantage to incur the wrath of others, but what if we get away with it?
Well, then it'd only be to our genetic advantage for us to do it!
[ + ] Nosferatjew
[ - ] Nosferatjew 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 12:09:51 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] PuddinTame
[ - ] PuddinTame 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 16:16:38 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Crackinjokes
[ - ] Crackinjokes 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 18:47:16 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 18:51:47 ago (+0/-0)*
[ + ] VitaminSieg
[ - ] VitaminSieg 0 points 1 monthApr 28, 2025 16:16:02 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] ModernGuilt
[ - ] ModernGuilt 1 point 1 monthApr 27, 2025 08:47:49 ago (+2/-1)
What book?
[ + ] HeyJames
[ - ] HeyJames 2 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 11:21:29 ago (+2/-0)
What they're leaving out is the women's affinity for the "bad boy". Women will seek to have a drug dealer or outlaw biker to impregnate them. Preferably, while they're living the "leisure lifestyle" funded by a man too busy to pay attention. Women love dangerous losers who provide them with drugs and excitement.
Muslims have known this for years, which is why they kept their women locked up in harems with castrated guards. Jews have allowed us to believe women are saints guided by logic in mating habits, when in reality they're just as instinctual as Punxsutawney Phil the groundhog.
[ + ] TheYiddler
[ - ] TheYiddler 3 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 13:28:18 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 3 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 14:00:49 ago (+3/-0)*
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 15:35:07 ago (+0/-0)
Really? Why don’t you explain it to me? Speak slowly now.
[ + ] Razzoriel
[ - ] Razzoriel 1 point 1 monthApr 27, 2025 19:31:20 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 2 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 20:29:12 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 21:13:00 ago (+0/-0)
What have you got to say to that? Oops, never mind.
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 0 points 1 monthMay 4, 2025 13:09:57 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthMay 4, 2025 13:44:18 ago (+0/-0)
Because losing the urge to fuck men is a curse? 🤣
That makes alot of sense. I guess this means women can spontaneously unwall themselves multiple times. Good to know.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 21:13:25 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthMay 10, 2025 11:26:48 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthMay 10, 2025 11:37:29 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 15:44:05 ago (+0/-0)
But its not fact. Its bias.
The feminists got books of “facts” too.
If muslims are so smart, why is every muslim society a shit hole? You think their female hoarding has nothing to do with their corruption, lack of productivity, their violence, their low IQs, and their rape culture. But you’d be wrong. Mating patterns predict economic models. Like slavery. Polygyny is dependent on slavery. Muh “Islam is right about wahmen” but you can’t perceive that most of the males in those societies are low status slaves with no reproductive futures. This is the highest amount of reproductive variability for males that is possible. So why would males choose a system in which the majority of males fare the worst? Now that’s a fucking paradox. Its almost like you guys are irrational or something.
[ + ] Sleazy
[ - ] Sleazy 2 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 17:35:33 ago (+2/-0)
why don't women shame other women for being whores anymore?
they used to
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 19:06:19 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Sleazy
[ - ] Sleazy 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 20:01:05 ago (+0/-0)
I don't get it, but that seems prevalent
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1 monthApr 27, 2025 20:57:45 ago (+1/-0)
The first stage was a transition from monogamy to polygyny. Males were allowed to divorce their old wives for the trophy models, for the first time, if they had enough cash. That incentivized rent seeking behavior and destroyed egalitarian trust among males. Polygyny is a dog-eat-dog scenario where males try to hoard as many resources as possible to acquire as many females as possible. Its why the middle east is a shithole. Males are not incentivized to produce wealth in such a scenario but to steal it, by hook or crook. They are incentivized to steal kill and enslave.
The second stage was the trasition from polygyny to a mixed bag of polygyny and “matriarchal” polygamy. In polygamy, paternity is unimportant because females do the majority of the wealth productions and “father figures” are maternal uncles. Productivity is low in these societies and women are promiscuous. The importance of bread winning dads is low.
White men were generally on board for the first stage. This was only an easing of restrictions on men, for their own selfish benefit, so they thought. Men always think theyre going to be the Donald Trump/Mel Gibson figure and never realize that this policy leads to high incel levels among the average male, which they are more likely to be. Incel slaves are needed to support the harems of wealth males with harems. This is what will always happen if any males are allowed more than one female. Cuz fucking math. Then you hear the “muh hypergamy” wails and the gnashing of teeth. That occurs because men have broken their own rule— the one they used to enforce amongst themselves — LIMIT ONE PER CUSTOMER.
The second stage — polygamy—brings with it female promiscuity. It was fueled by women moving into the workplace, and also stuff like child support and alimony. Women figured “why should he run around while I only sleep with one partner?” So women who can, will sleep around. This is objectionable to males who were fine with only males being promiscuous. The only conclusion to make is that such males are hypocritical. Nobody likes a slut.
Boths shifts resulted in higher corruption and wealth disparity, higher exploitation, lower productivity, dysgenic behavioral traits. But you can’t blame women alone for the end of monogamy. Half of it was already broken by men. Polygyny does not create good societies. The middle east has proven that. Polygamy is closest to the nigger model: stronk single moms and unaccountable baby daddies.
Only monogamy is highly efficient economically while minimizing aggression and exploitation between males. Aggression between males is the biggest obstacle to “civilized” society. And its determined by promiscuity
[ + ] Sleazy
[ - ] Sleazy 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 21:52:46 ago (+0/-0)
people should keep the promises that they make
[ + ] 15MAR
[ - ] 15MAR 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 22:40:32 ago (+0/-0)
I have my own ideas as to why, however I find it most puzzling that it hasn't caught on more, given how simple of a concept it is; as you say, it's simple math. I definitely believe in another idea you've expressed before, that the kinds of people that are apt to notice the (((problems))) in our society happen to be some of the most disagreeable as well.
At any rate, for whatever it might be worth, I just wanted to let you know that your words haven't fallen on deaf ears in at least one instance. Or I suppose blind eyes would be more appropriate.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 28, 2025 09:19:33 ago (+0/-0)
If you are used to mathematical thinking you will recognize that with a sex ratio of 1:1, polygyny will work out as just as badly for a population of 100,000,000 as it will for a population of 10
Many of these guys are not good mathematical thinkers. Or at least they are untrained.
Also they feel that if theres a “natural impulse” to hoard women and guard their virtue that it must be a good idea. Theres also a false belief that old traditions or historical behaviors are always good. “Lets be like the Romans” while failing to appreciate the Romans don’t exist anymore.
And that has some bearing on this issue too. “Pattern recognition” functions are less likely to be ignored in individuals with low agreeability and there is a negative correlation between agreeability and maleness. In other words, testosterone may be partly responsible for rejection of these group narratives. High T males might be particularly difficult to corrale and control psychologically by cultural elites.
But that does not mean high T males have a high degree of self-awareness or rational thinking. I think high T males are angry renegades and polygyny is a good fit for angry renegades. I don’t mean that polygyny is ever a good idea, but I mean polygyny appeals to a behavioral type. So maybe there are a few angry renegades around here who frequently assert that “islam is right about wahmen” because of their own genetic programing. Its very hard to go against your own instincts.
I point out that if optimal marriage is between a 35 year old man and an 18 year old woman, then either men have to remain virgins until 35 or you will have to discard a portion of your female population to whoring rather than wiving/ mothering, which means some men will not have wives unless they marry retired whores. They literally don’t believe me.
Also they believe polygyny increases the birth rate. But the only reason that is true is because of child brides. Polygynous women start having kids at 15. I point out that they could be just as fertile as monogamous men by marrying child brides. They don’t like that idea. They don’t believe that as polygynists they would also become kiddie diddlers, just like all other polygynists , even white mormons. They think features of polygyny come a la carte, but polygyny is a package, with high violence, slavery, low trust, low productivity, and kiddie diddling.
Anyway thanks for the kind words.
[ + ] 15MAR
[ - ] 15MAR 0 points 1 monthApr 28, 2025 22:52:41 ago (+0/-0)
Perhaps. One of my theories is that it is simply a bias against anything that could be interpreted as "pro-women," especially if it can thence be construed as "anti-men." The reason I believe this is because often the theories you present are dismissed outright and offhand; there is rarely any true debate and rebuttal of the contents.
I think the war of the sexes has reached critical mass, such that many men are swearing off women entirely due to a (misplaced) sense that women as a group are leading the attack against men. And so, there is this prejudice against anything that even hints at men being imperfect and women being "not terrible."
In other words, the way our culture has shifted has left many men jaded at the prospect that they should be considerate of women, and instead believe they should either disregard women or else strike preemptively at their perceived enemy; you already know all about MGTOW and figures like Tate. The fact is, those "pro-men" perspectives appeal to many men, in the exact same way feminism appeals to many women. You've made this observation before, both of those perspectives are two sides of the same coin of self-centeredness and victimization.
I think that the reason those perspectives are so popular is due to a lack of not just racial consciousness but also group thinking, or nationalism. Many who claim to be nationalists are in fact not, because true nationalism has no place for infighting. The National Socialists were true nationalists, they didn't waste time arguing about Protestantism vs. Catholicism, or Christianity vs. Paganism, or men vs. women. The elites have succeeded in atomizing us to such an extent that we have a nation of individuals, all paranoid about each other instead of focusing on who holds the reins.
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 19:06:23 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] -1 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 18:55:22 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -1 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 20:24:25 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 1 monthApr 28, 2025 07:17:54 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthApr 28, 2025 07:18:19 ago (+0/-0)
Hypocrisy is the winning move, you help yourself and hurt your competitors, thereby helping yourself again.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthApr 28, 2025 08:36:14 ago (+0/-0)
We don’t have to live in nigger world forever.
Its the losing move. Its a catch 22. Parasitism is inherently inefficient. Excess sexual competition is inherently inefficient. If we’re not constantly warring against each other and destroying each other we can have nice things and nice lives. If jews and niggers are allowed to replace more productive people, the world collapses. Less parasitism is better. The best level of parasitism is no parasitism.
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthMay 1, 2025 13:56:24 ago (+0/-0)
Heck, all lifeforms are parasites if you consider that eating another organism is feeding on the energy they generated from what they ate.
Herbivores are parasites on plants, carnivores are second tier parasites on herbivores and by extension plants.
The only species that are truly non parasitic are the ones who eat parts of other organisms that are freely given up, which would be fruitivores, who eat only the fruits of trees.
Wanna be a fruitarian?
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 monthMay 1, 2025 14:10:28 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 0 points 1 monthMay 10, 2025 11:25:48 ago (+0/-0)
If they are outdoing us, then we need to reconsider what we must be like going forward in order to best their success.
[ + ] HonkyMcNiggerSpic
[ - ] HonkyMcNiggerSpic 3 points 1 monthApr 27, 2025 09:57:49 ago (+4/-1)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist [op] 1 point 1 monthApr 27, 2025 14:03:28 ago (+1/-0)
Thomas hobbes had it figured correctly, and machiavelli got to see it in person with the wars of Venitian princes after the hapsburg dynasty collapse.