Neurotoxin recently posted on the dysgenic nature of female sexual preference, and its evolutionary origins:
Neurotoxin:
Female sexuality is anti-social and dysgenic. It must be restrained for the good, and indeed, the survival, of the human race.
We begin with the truism that evolution selects for reproductive success and not any other trait. There is no restraint on evolution selecting for horribly anti-social sexual tendencies if such are reproductively optimal.
Observed fact: Women are fiercely attracted to men who play defect in the iterated prisoner’s dilemma game that is society. (Defecting in the classic prisoner’s dilemma is always better than cooperate no matter what the other player does.)
Suppose it’s the environment of evolutionary adaptation (EEA) in a time of food scarcity. A man who sneaks into another family’s hut while they’re asleep, kills them all, and takes their food will have better chance of survival, and so will his kids, than one who doesn’t.
No, it is not really that simple, because the rest of the village, if they find out about this, might kill him and his family. But (1) they might not find out, and (2) a displayed willingness to do such things means that he will do them if it is necessary; he doesn’t always have to do them. Also, (3) if he is observed to get away with it, then he has either guile or power to, well, get away with it.
Evolution doesn’t give a shit about nice. What we call “evolution” is simply cause and effect in the biological world. Also, there is a genetic component to personality. Suppose we start with some women who are not attracted to evil traits, or are even repelled by them, and some women who are attracted to them. There will be situations in which the repelled women’s children starve to death because she tied her fate to the wrong kind of man. Such a woman’s genes are not passed on to the next generation. The genes of the woman who mated with the amoral murderer are passed on.
So the next generation has a higher proportion of amoral males and females who are attracted to amoral males.
We stand at the end of a long evolutionary process. Current women are the result of the last million years (or however long) of the evolutionary process playing out. Modern women are the effects of evolutionary cause-and-effect processes.
(Modern men are too, along with palm trees, fruit flies, bullfrogs, etc. But that is neither here nor there for the moment.)
Humans can no more avoid evolutionary cause and effect than they can avoid physical cause and effect, like F = ma, etc.
The surprising thing is that there have been environments that evolutionarily selected for pro-social traits on a scale beyond one’s biological clan. This is a precious thing. It’s not at all obvious that if these traits are eliminated, they will ever come back.
(By the way, why isn’t this selection effect just as strong for men as women? Two points: A woman can’t feed herself (at least, she can’t hunt) or defend herself when she is 8 months pregnant. (They have enough trouble getting in and out of a car.) So her survival depends significantly on her mate. This effect isn’t present for men.
Also, since men are the sex that fights, including fighting other tribes, there is more selection pressure for cooperation operating on men. This is actually a well-known fact in evolutionary circles, apparently: At the level of competition between groups, cooperation is evolutionarily rewarded. But at the level of intra-group competition it’s not that simple. It’s not that defect/betray is always rewarded, but it is sometimes.)
So: Women are fiercely sexually attracted to men who can dominate other men and are psychologically inclined to do so. They are particularly drawn to men who kill and get away with it, because that is the ultimate example of power. The person the man killed was trying to resist being killed, yet the killer was able to kill him anyway. And a man who is powerful enough to kill someone who is doing everything he can to avoid being killed, has a large amount of power indeed. If you can kill and get away with it, you either have personal qualities that enable you to do that or are part of a social group with lots of power, that uses its power to support you.
In either case, it’s a good idea for a woman to hitch her reproductive wagon to your star, because you will try, and probably succeed, to protect and support the children you have with her.
So: Woman do not get wet for nice guys, never have, never will.
Empirically: Criminals, especially violent ones, reproduce at a higher rate than Jeff in Accounts Receivable.
Since there is a genetic component to personality, female sexual choice is not only dyscivilizational but dysgenic. It causes the next generation to be shifted in the direction of violent, amoral thugs. Such people are also observed to be low-intelligence. Cops apparently have a saying: “Criminals are dumb.” Female sexual choice breeds low IQ, high time preference/low patience, and anti-social (as in , murderously so) people.
Female sexual choice involves them typically mating with exactly the men that they should not be mating with, for the good of the human race.
Myself on solutions to this problem:
Love is war. All is fair in love and war.
Sex and reproduction is a game of prisoner’s dilemma.
We have defect/defect equilibrium between men and women. To successfully reproduce, need cooperate/cooperate equilibrium.
In order to successfully reproduce, State, State Church, society, kin, and family, have to impose peace, cooperate/cooperate equilibrium, between men and women. Time to end the state of war.
Defect/defect equilibrium between men and women is the game of players and bitches, cooperate/cooperate equilibrium is marriage 1.0, marriage as commanded in the New Testament. Peace between men and women is Biblical or Koranic marriage (Mohammed was right about women) War is what we have now, hence grandchildren are what we do not have now.
So the question is, what is preventing family formation, family formation being the proper telos of human sexuality. Why can so few men accomplish this telos?
Men want to bang every fertile age woman. Woman want to be banged by Mister one in thirty.
Women are allowed to successfully fulfill their goal, men are not allowed to fulfill their goal.
Men want to own a woman. Even successful players find it terribly disturbing and soul destroying that the woman that they bang has banged no end of men before them, and will soon bang someone else. This leads to player burnout. Even marginally successful players soon get burnout. The knowledge slowly soaks in that in the game of players and bitches, the bitches are winning, and even successful players are losing. One soon starts feeling homicidal, and is apt to kill the adulterous woman and or her latest lover. Players counsel other players “avoid oneitis” “She was never yours, it was just your turn”. Bullshit. This is the counsel of despair.
If one cultivates a detached attitude “It was just my turn, she did me a favor”, one avoids homicide, but this is not very satisfactory at all. If one abandons one’s telos, one is psychologically broken, hence player burnout. She was not doing you a favor. You were doing her a favor. If you adopt this attitude, you avoid homicide, but develop other disturbingly weird and unpleasant behaviors and attitudes. It is terribly stressful. Homicide is less stressful. There is a reason why the bible counsels to avoid sluts, but today, nothing but sluts, so what is a man to do?
Successful pursuit of telos requires ownership. One despairs or becomes homicidal because even if one get one dick wet from time to time, one is failing at accomplishing one’s telos. Player burnout is a manifestation of despair. One avoids homicide, but in a world with no female companionship other than sluts, loses one’s soul.
Women want to be owned by a man, but they resist ownership with great vigor, because they want to be owned by a sufficiently strong man. This resistance is a shit test, which is difficult to pass because the state puts its thumb on the scales, giving women social superweapons, allowing women to capriciously threaten men with arbitrary imprisonment or loss of job, property, and children.
To pass this shit test, it is necessary to have an outlaw attitude. One dare not be intimidated by these terrible and wicked threats and the state’s vast apparatus of coercion, for women smell this as weakness, and are apt to wander away from weak men.
Police are lazy, incompetent, and inefficient. One can get away with murder. And in practice, these threats are only ever carried out against those intimidated by them. Almost all who are convicted of rape are innocent, because women seldom if ever bring complaints against actual rapists. All rape charges are always bullshit like the Rolling Stone “A rape on campus incident”, a woman crying out for attention from mister one in thirty. All men convicted of wife beating are charged because of failure to beat their wives. No woman has ever complained about my workplace sexual harassment, and all the men I saw who suffered complaints against them of workplace sexual harassment were far too blue pilled and terrified of women for the charge to be credible.
That females successfully pursue the goal of getting banged by mister one in thirty, over and over and over again, prevents the formation of families and children, and results in few men successfully marrying, and reproductive failure. White fertility is no down to about one, halving population in each generation. Men are not getting laid, and not getting married, and women, instead of getting regularly banged by their husband, are hanging out by their phones hoping for their next eleven pm booty call from Jeremy Meeks, which never comes. They end up childless and alone.
When childless women hit the wall, when Jeremy Meeks no longer calls, they turn crazy and evil – observe public school teachers and old fat political commissars of Human Resources.
In order to reproduce successfully, we need cooperate cooperate equilibrium between men and women, but what we have is the game of players and bitches, defect defect equilibrium, as men pursue the fuck everyone goal, one in thirty of us successfully, and women pursue the fuck mister one in thirty goal, successfully enough, but aborting their children.
In order to successfully reproduce, we need a system where females, starting at a very early age, six or so, are restrained from private contact with males who are not close kin, except those that their fathers deem suitable for marriage. Biblical or Koranic marriage has to be imposed on women by state, state church, society, kin, and family. This requires either extremely early betrothal followed by extremely early marriage (the solution applied east of the Hajnal line) or extremely drastic coercion against women (the solution applied west of the Hajnal line), or some mixture of both.
In order to successfully reproduce, we need a system where if a female is behind closed doors for a minute with a male who is not close kin, it is assumed that sex took place, dad and society breaks out the shotgun, the happy couple get married or else, and the wife is compelled to honor, obey, and to never have sex with any other man. Female adultery, meaning females having sex with a second man while the first man is alive, needs to be a crime rather than a human right.
If the state puts its thumb on the other side of the scales, empowering husbands to pass shit tests and disempowering women from giving them, instead of giving women social superweapons, instead of allowing women to capriciously threaten men with arbitrary imprisonment or loss of job, property, and children, then it is easy to turn whores into wives, as the authorities in late eighteenth century early nineteenth century Australia demonstrated.
Disturbed by sex parties on the beach, the Australian authorities did not punish the men or the women involved. Instead they forced every woman to get married immediately, and punished them for speaking back to their husbands, putting a very firm thumb on the scales to enable men to pass shit tests, and forbid women from giving shit tests to their husbands.
The women reacted as if abducted by the stronger tribe, and completely internalized the values of the stronger tribe, in this case the values of middle class wifely respectability. Absolutely one hundred percent success in turning whores into wives ensued. Female misconduct dropped to zero.
Reproduction fails, obviously, when you get defect/defect equilibrium between women and men
Defect/defect equilibrium is the game of players and bitches. Reproduction is prisoner’s dilemma with few iterations, so you always get defect/defect without external enforcement.
Social enforcement only happens if society recognizes secure property rights in what is valuable, and the most valuable capital of all is eggs and wombs. Husbands have to have a secure, socially and legally enforced, property right in their women.
For this to work psychologically, women need to be virgins at marriage, which only happens if fathers have a secure, and legally enforced, property right in their daughters. Which right must end completely and irrevocably at marriage. Rape is dating a woman without the consent of her father. Female consent is opaque, and most opaque to the woman herself.
Women frequently resist prolonged and enforced virginity very forcefully. Late marriage leads to a whole lot of conflict, which requires extraordinary enforcement, utterly unthinkable and unimaginable by modern standards. I find the level of enforcement that was required disturbing and distasteful, and therefore favor early betrothal, eight to ten or so, and early marriage, twelve to sixteen or so, even though successful societies have tended to have very late marriage – eighteen to twenty four or so.
The middle eastern tradition on this is Sharia. Its western equivalent is coverture.
Even when we had stern patriarchy and very stern coverture in place there were no end of stories about the servant girl getting in trouble for helping her lover rob her master, or robbing her master to fund her lover, and the bride running off with the wedding singer.
The effective fix is that such are fallen women, very low status, and against such women extreme measures of control are natural, socially acceptable, and normal. No one cares what happens to a fallen woman. A womanâ’s status must depend on a man’s property right in her. Her status is that property right. Wrongful acts against women are punished as wrongful acts against the man who has a property right in her sexual, reproductive, and domestic services.
Coverture
A wife and a husband are one person, and that person is the husband. Thus a wife cannot herself own property, make contracts, etc.
Male chastity consists of respect for other men’s property rights in women. Not applicable to unowned fallen women.
Female chastity consists of respect for her man’s property right in her sexual and reproductive services. Sleeping with someone other than her husband is unchaste, and failure to sleep with her husband is unchaste.
Old Testament solution
Female immorality: Death.
Fornication or abduction of a married or betrothed woman: Death
Abduction of an unmarried unbetrothed virgin: Shotgun indissoluble marriage, or death if you bug out on the marriage part. (If she is with you without supervision, it is polite to the virgin and her father to assume that you abducted her, and inquiring whether she made it strangely easy to abduct her is impolite.)
Fornication or abduction of unmarried, unbetrothed, non virgin.
—
—
sounds of crickets chirping.
If you abduct an unmarried, unbetrothed virgin, and pop her, and the the father absolutely prohibits the marriage, the penalty is
Wait for it
Wait for it
You pay a substantial fine, but the father is socially shamed, and priesthood assigns him a humiliating monicker.
Nice to see my theory starting to spread. Of course I get no credit, but that’s okay. My original post is here http://www.mikraite.org/Human-Evolution-tp17.html and my latest is here http://www.arkian.net/about.html#dysgenics .
That’s a bold assertion, but the times call for boldness.
I want to get into this topic and I want to drag everyone into it. It can’t stay silo’d behind walls of text, jargon, and +145IQ big brain talk, so I will be the midwit translator. We need Joe Shmoe, Johnny Pickuptruck, and Stacy Stayathome to be able to easily and confidently carry “God made us with evolution” in their subconscious. How do you suggest we go about it?
I will go through your links here, add any more you deem worthwhile. I will start writing when the muse takes hold, and you will correct my errors and mistakes. Does that work for you?
Well, I thought I was pretty good at talking to normies, but doubtless a normie can do it better.
The scriptural side of it is that Genesis is not concrete history and geography of creation, but a spiritual account, conveying the moral and spiritual truths about creation, not so much the concrete truths which were uninteresting and incomprehensible to the audience and irrelevant to the purpose of the bible. It is the spiritual meaning that matters, and inappropriate concrete literalism winds up dodging the spiritual meaning. Young earth creationists are always blue pilled, and the blue pill is a post Christian heresy.
The bible speaks to men and of women. It is package designed for a people among whom husbands and fathers rule. It is religion of men. Hence only male priests. Translations using gender neutral language, or even a merely a gender neutral translation frame, are false. And young earth creationists are always inside this false frame.
Well now we know a lot more of the concrete truths of creation, and I myself, walking in the footsteps of Lyell and Leonardo da Vinci, have verified with a small pickaxe and prybar that the earth is immensely old.
And the concrete truths, as they relate to the nature of men and women, and thus the moral truths about how men and women must deal with each other, are, as you say silo’d behind walls of text, jargon, and +145IQ big brain talk,
That is the hard part. I and others have done the best we can. Likely you can do better.
But, evolutionary psychology is just hard for normies, and in order to understand, have to understand prisoner’s dilemma, and also to understand the sexy sons red queen race, exemplified by the problem that peacocks have.
And the red queen race is also a non trivial issue to understand. What is if fitter depends on what genes the rest of the population have, and a red queen race ensues whenever the majority genome provides an environment where some other genome is fitter, but the fitter genome, when it becomes the majority … no stable point of maximum fitness.
Interesting you’d say that. My impression is that what has sprung up on this blog is closely resembling a religion of men; women don’t read, don’t understand, what is going on here. But I find old generation Christian women to be full of honest faith. When such a woman says ‘Jesus died for our sins’ she automatically folds her hands into a prayer and looks up to the sky.
Which is not to say old type Christian men weren’t full of honest faith. What I’m more saying is, just like men are on stage, do we not want to give the women an easy role to play along with as well? But I guess that’s exactly what the old type Christian men did as well.
Women have a role. That role is to raise their children and help people in their community, under the direction of men.
That makes sense. So really, woman’s prime role is subservience to her husband, and everything else flows from that.
From Genesis. Woman is to be a helper and companion to Man, and to Man was given the prime commandment to be fruitful and multiply, and to subdue the world and make it our own.
This true in my experience. The problem I’ve been dealing with is trying to break them out of this mind prison. Everything in Genesis is literal but they ignore the bits about woman’s behavior. They endlessly invent excuses why the text doesn’t say what it says.
I have been arguing with a Nazi with on Gab.
I tell him “The Nazis promised the voters bread, delivered bread queues. The Taliban promised their warriors pussy and grandchildren. No one today cares about bread. The solution is red pilled Christian Nationalism.”
That argument is readily accessible to anyone – except that understanding red pilled Christianity is tough in a world where Christianity has been converged.
I see near total correlation between red pilled Christianity and old earth creationism – that material and effective causation is the Logos manifest. So, red pilled Christianity and Evolutionary Psychology go together like bacon and eggs.
But Evolutionary Psychology is rough on midwits.
If material and effective causation is the logos manifest, then the “ought” that follows from “is” should be consistent with divine revelation. And it is.
The “old earth” part implies the red pill. The “creationism” part implies that Christianity should be red pilled.
But you have to derive the red pill on women from “is” for it all to fit together.
The promise of pussy will take care of this. If we can offer men young fertile pussy, they will ape our memes.
Evangelism for its own sake seems like something to be avoided. Like women reading the Bible and children running with scissors. Our memes should come down from the sovereign the way a husband commands a wife. The only answer needed in the event of a challenge is “because I said soâ€.
It’s important that the sovereign understands our memes. It does not seem important that citizens in general understand them. It is not a democracy.
Exactly. It made everything I didn’t understand fit together the moment I heard it, but convincing mitwits of it is beyond me. They seem blind to the behavior of women despite the bible believing ones having it spelled out in the bible over and over again. It’s bad enough to ignore reality on the basis of faith, but it’s far worse to ignore what actual truths the bible is spitting about women.
Old Earth Creationism is a well packaged idea. I’ve been describing the universe as a game that God created and he uses the tools of that universe to shape it. Old Earth Creationism is likely to resonate better.
I don’t follow on the ought that follows from is. Could you explain that a bit more?
A secular account of morality derived from cause and effect: https://reaction.la/constant_on_good_and_evil.htm
Of course, the hot button is the application of this method of deriving morality to sex, reproduction, and family.
The public distinction that Constant alludes needs to be in this case, the right of men to keep banging their wives, the right of wives to get banged by their husbands, and lack of any right for them to be banged by anyone else – the question is the legality of male mate guarding behaviors and the legality of the inherently unequal mating dance.
Adultery needs to be a crime, and violent reaction to adultery not a crime. If you can violently defend your television, should be able to violently defend your wife even if she is rather reluctant to be violently defended.
Which if one starts from the presupposition that men and women are equal and interchangeable, is horribly oppressive, but women rather like to be horribly oppressed, for in the ancestral environment, that was the most successful reproductive strategy for women, and the worst possible for men.
The average person can’t understand evolution, so I wouldn’t worry about that. The traditional religious approach of “God made Man” without going into the details is good enough.
Where will you write? I don’t get email notification of replies here so I am not following this thread much.
The average person doesn’t need to understand evolution, they just need to understand that “everyone who matters believes (x).” In America today, all the “with it” proles believe in evolution (Trust the science), yet don’t believe in race (diversity is our strength); they believe in democracy (power to the people), yet they don’t believe in populism (the backwards can’t be trusted). They have not taken the time to think any of this through, nor do they have any kind of grasp on the actual relevant details, they just get very clear signals from above reinforced continually through education and media. Thus, from my point of view, all that is required is simplicity and repetition. It really is that simple, but the complexity arrives with the reality of the actual situation. Every population is immune to facts, logic, and truth, so long as their is a daily and a lifelong pipeline (2 different pipelines) of noise clouding their perception of reality. This is why USG will keep the media online long after the food or water runs out. Public education shapes the mind into a toilet bowl, and popular entertainment fills it with shit. To break this cycle, must disrupt one, then the other. Simple statement, terribly rough action.
We should make a hard and fast rule to reduce all of our memes to as simple a form as possible. We don’t have the luxury of paragraphs. We don’t have the utility of the public education system. What we do have is the realm of fiction, as well as the world of memes (contrasted from memetics). Thus, we must craft a memetic virus that can spread easily, that can be run with in many directions at once, that is maximally insidious.
“God made me with evolution.”
“Islam is right about women.”
“Gun ownership = freedom.”
“Fuck bitches, make money.”
“It’s ok to be white” or “White lives matter”
“Bros before hos.”
“Nice to see my theory starting to spread. Of course I get no credit…”
I haven’t followed the links, but if you’re referring to the topic of the post and much of this comments thread: it’s not surprising that different people interested in the truth would arrive at the same conclusions. It’s for the same reason that people interested in the truth would all conclude that snow is cold.
The lite, low-calorie version -“Chicks dig bad boys” – is so obvious that even many normies are aware of it.
Thoughts on this? It seems to be a contradiction to what you have said.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2005-01-03/high-iq-cuts-womens-marriage-prospects/612026
> The study found the likelihood of marriage increased by 35 per cent for boys for each 16 point increase in IQ.
But for girls, there is a 40 per cent drop for each 16-point rise, according to the survey by the universities of Aberdeen, Bristol, Edinburgh and Glasgow.
Women who go to University don’t marry or have kids. Pretty consist with what Jim’s been saying.
Standard female hypergamy.
Dude!
Is she younger than his daughter?
https://lehren.com/entertainment/hollywood/are-billy-ray-cyrus-and-firerose-engaged/150486/
[…] Blog: Female sexual preferences […]
“Old Testament solution
Female immorality: Death.
Fornication or abduction of a married or betrothed woman: Death”
Nathan didn’t seem to have any problem with the behavior of Batsheba when he chastised David.
Pagans are not welcome to argue Christian theology as it is by necessity a bad faith argument. The only acceptable method for this is excessive caveats about how it’s not relevant to you, you think none if it matters, and all observations are irrelevant regardless of impact or outcome. You have to bracket your observations with explicit admissions that they mean nothing to you and you believe none of it. Otherwise, you’re just living the “I don’t believe this but you might” meme. Here’s an example:
“While I think paganism is a stupid larp performed bymental midgets, I have some thoughts on how you should line up your barbie doll idols on your hearthstone which I fully intend on shattering after I murder you and your sons before raping your women.”
In this way, you can easily dismiss out of hand my bad faith argument, and if I somehow have made a good point about the thing I don’t believe in or take seriously, you are free to contend with it or not publicly without being shamed.
I consider pagans in occidental clay a tool of our adversaries. Pagans in their ancestral lands have every right to assume the same about Christian whites on their clay. You are a spiritual wigger, in a sense.
Bathsheba wasn’t blamed because it wasn’t really possible for her to refuse a royal command even if she wanted to (and most women can’t resist the king anyway but even if they want to its very dangerous) and she had never sought to attract the king’s attention, even with her conniving in trying to commit paternity fraud was perhaps an attempt to avoid her husband being killed and failing to do so (Uriah wouldn’t go to her) he was killed via being sent on a suicide mission.
Your purple pill nature is showing bro. That hoe was bathing on a rooftop in sight of the palace. I bet she wasn’t the only one either, just the one recorded in the Bible.
Perhaps though she wasn’t on the roof David was.
So a quick check on what is in the bible, in 2 Samuel 11:2 it says that David was on top of “the king’s” roof, a.k.a. his roof.
Still, if David frequently was taking a walking in the evening on the roof, several women would likely notice, and then “Indecently” decide that is a good time to bath…
A woman is forever going just a little bit out of her way to get alpha male attention. I believe it was Heartiste who said it best, “a woman’s heart is betrayalâ€. It is a constant, like gravity. If you have any reservations about owning a woman the way you own your home or your car, you will be played for a fool.
Well my car isn’t going to go and offer itself to someone else while I’m not looking…
What was Uriah supposed to do, leave his wife locked in the house while he was away at the battlefront?
Better than the alternative.
Red pilled..,
Jim rightly uses Jeremy Meeks as an example of female sexual preference.
However, I believe it is necessary to bring up the example of Josef Fritzl, who fathered several children with his imprisoned daughter. He even killed one of his children with her by throwing it into the incinerator.
Fritzl eventually received hundreds of love letters from women while in prison, and he was even defended by some of his admirers who said that he was trying to protect his daughter. Josef Fritzl is also a -1/10 in looks compared to Jeremy Meeks.
There is no comparable amount of female attention for tech giants such as Jeff Bazos, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg. These men even have problems with their romantic relationships as if they cannot find any devoted admirers like Fritzl the Casanova enjoys from prison.
Therefore, women should have their marriage life decided by a loving father who can perceive good men better than their hormones and Darwinian id allows them to.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1024092/Cellar-monster-Josef-Fritzl-receives-hundreds-love-letters.html