- Joined
- Nov 6, 2014
It is, but it isn't selecting traits that are good for humanity or its civilisation on purpose. It is in caveman mode and is selecting the thuggest Tyrone.Even if I were to take this position at face value, every non-reproductive woman will correlate to at least one non-reproductive man.
However, I disagree that women are facing a reproductively crisis. It is increasingly viable for women to raise a child as a single mother with the western social welfare system and child support laws. Very few reproducing males are required to sustain this system.
I think natural selection is having a field day at the moment. Men, especially those with Peter Pan syndrome are being heavily selected out of the gene pool. Women to a lesser extent, because modern medicine allows them to reproduce at their leisure until their 40s.
It won't end well but it will be Designated and funny from a distance.Parasitizing male taxpayers are though. You pay for kids that aren't yours whether or not you have some to support already.
And they're selecting a bunch of third world rapist brownies as our replacement. I'm sure it'll end well.
[insert businesswoman who froze her eggs but all her IVFs failed here]
There is literally a positive correlation between high intelligence and sexual failure. The more intelligent you are the less likely you are to have had a girlfriend, been married, or had casual sex, maybe women self select for physical traits like high levels of musculature but I see plenty of women with flabby junkies so even that might be dubious but women absolutely do not select for intelligence.
The most sexually successful men in America are unemployed black men with felony records.
Well, yes. Women look for partners who are physically intimidating, exciting and wild. Tyrone with 50 tattoos, a gold plated gun, and more roids than Hulk Hogan's closet is a very good bait for monkey brain. This is because such men were a better bet for pre-civilisation times. You wanted someone strong, who will adventure to new lands and use your womb to populate it, and fend off any predators. Taking a few punches for that, as far as evolution was concerned, is a good deal.So you’re saying our future is literally idiocracy.
The problem is that they are calibrated to find the most aggressive cavemen they can find. Evolution doesn't work in a few generations that way. Even with heavy eugenics it would take a few generations to take effect. But that isn't on the table for the west.Thousands of years of evolution has enabled women to sniff out genetic dead ends with incredible efficiency.
It will be an interesting reset for sure. While that is a romantic idea, the cities will be taken over by yellows or arabs. The west does not exist in its own little bubble, untouchable by the rest of the world. Will the next Cortez be called Chang, or will it be Abdul? Hopefully he won't be called Pajeet.But what if all we ended up doing in the end was feeding them, sterilizing ourselves, and going extinct, leaving them to go back to the Stone Age and wander the bones of our now-depopulated cities?
Tyrone isn't the cream of the crop. Evolution isn't a sapient divinity, it is a simple bio-chemical process. Idiocracy on a natural level, just look at how sexual selection can smash and slam a species like peacocks. It is a common liberal atheist delusion to still ascribe to it traits that are theocratic, same with nature. Gaia and Evolution aren't deities with their own personality and plans, they are physical systems that are based on physics, chemistry, biology. Like any automated script, it can go horribly wrong.My overall opinion is the cream of the crop for men are statistically the ones who find a way to reproduce in this genetic gauntlet.
The problem is that they aren't evolved for that. They are evolved to find a caveman that can fend off predators and hunt for them.Women, for better or worse, primarily make decisions with their gut. The reason for this is an evolutionary mechanism designed to root out abuse. Men make abstract decisions through rational reasoning and physical drives, such as the sexual urge.
The childish way they put it is a good indicator that it is a monkey brain, low IQ function that doesn't work in the modern world. This was even lampooned in a comedy video about a made up female school. A student presses "no" to a picture of a nerd, and the teacher shakes her head: "You are wrong, this is programmer, he also makes lots of money."My position is a woman’s intuition about abuse is the most effective factor we know of in predicting violent abuse. I have extrapolated this fact to inform my opinion on a woman’s “ick.”
Well, not with Islam and Jeet. Evolution applies to every other country too, and the brown horse apples may win this genetic race. Nature cares not about methods, only end results, as it is mindless and without ethics.Au contraire, rape, slavery, and arranged marriages are viable methods of reproduction. Evolution doesn’t care. A shame all three have fallen out of favor recently. Quite the crisis in reproductivity.
This is it, the problem is the lack of danger signals. Incels are basically bearded women. Women see them as invisible because they are physically not imposing, nor are a credible rival, though terfs may disagree as trannyism becomes ever more prevalent. This triggers the instincts and instantly disqualifies the incel, because incel vs cave bear would end badly, for the incel.incels are incels because they do not let out threat signals, not because they do and women can pick up on it
their problem, besides lack of opportunity and not being physical specimens to write home about, is how little of a threat they are and how little drama they'd invite to woman's life as their prospective other
In past ages with better upbringing and social system women had been trained to associate this with increased income and make a conscious choice to marry the more intelligent but physically not that imposing specimen, with the help of societal pressure. This is nowdays what we would call Beta Bux, but without the Chad Cock Carousel and the Pill.
Our society is artificial, it is not a creation of evolution nor nature. Nature is street shitting and Haiti cannibalism.
Well most rapists aren't mentally well balanced or they are stupid niggers, so harder punishments may not deter them. A skizo or a nignog won't care as he can't really think ahead of time.This probably sounds horribly misogynistic and hateful. But, I am another women who has completely befuddled by this attitude for years and years because I actually DO want to stop rape. After all this time, and running into above situation over and over, I can't come to any other conclusion but that they don't really want to stop it, or are perhaps unable. It's not even suggesting politically motivated things like stop refugees that causes a reaction like above, it's suggesting ANYTHING. If you don't just repeat "teach men not to rape", you're persona non grata. That's literally the only suggestion that most women will accept. I'm not out there telling women to wear different clothes or anything like that. It's literally just stuff like "hey maybe we should punish rapists harder?" "NO THAT WON'T WORK" "why?" "IT JUST DOESN'T". Or "if that guy is raping people maybe you should report him or warn people or something?" "NO, HOW DARE YOU"
But the crux of the issue is the above mentioned evolutionary mechanism. Most rapists are thugs, niggers, immigrants, who are just exactly the dangerous bad boy that makes the monkey brain tingle. Women like aggressive, angry and muscle bound men. But these men also do the rape, which puts them into a catch 22.
If it was skinny armed, fat bellied star wars nerds doing the rapes, they would yell for their heads to be mounted on pikes.
This is a very simple biological issue. Societies do, or did in the past factor this in with tradition and patriarchy, but the current modernity is just not equipped to deal with this problem, which is spawned by caveman era instincts that got reinforced for possibly a million years and back to pre-human times.
I love sperging about nature stuff. Melty is totally, logically right in her assessment, but the problem is that this issue isn't based on logic or reason, but on animal instincts. Monkey see, monkey do.
Social justice also, ironically, doesn't want women to take agency in this. Don't dress reavelingly in the bad part of town, don't hang out with miscreants, draw attention* to you if you feel you are in danger are all old time western woman tricks to "stealth" against rape. No matter if they work or not, these are automatically discarded as they require effort on the victim's part. Getting out of an area when nignog thugs show up is no longer common sense, but heckin' racismerino bigotism. This is learned helplessness.
*This one requires a high trust society to work, where you can rely on strangers to call the police at least. May not work in San Niggisco's Nignog central. This method was showcased in a Japanese case recently, when a stalker groped a cosplayer. She screamed and the other attending men intervened on her behalf.
If we take history into account, Sharia makes much more sense if we factor in rowing bandits. The dumpstar bag clothes are mimicry to not stand out. The male relative is a protector against marauders. It is a solution that was made for a problem that became much lesser than it used to be.
Last edited: