Theme: Sex Differences

  • THE NATURAL ORDER by Bill Joslin Patriarchy is older than humans. Patriarchy evo

    THE NATURAL ORDER

    by Bill Joslin

    Patriarchy is older than humans. Patriarchy evolves naturally because nature rewards ability and action (and nothing else).

    Patriarchy is driven by female sexual selection in all animals (including humans until the counter culture). Females with offspring produce demands (food, protection, shelter etc). Males provide supply (build shelters, provide protection, find food etc) and limits to consumption.

    Men are better equipped to secure communities (and nations) than women. Further to that men are expendable (do not produce children, can mate in seconds then die etc – where as women need gestation time and to raise children i.e. expensive) thus men are a better choice for dangerous work (protections, hunting, high-risk occupations). Women who chose men who are better able to provide and this increase their likelihood to survive. Those who choose differently will not thrive. Those men better disposed to these task will rise above others. This results in patriarchy.

    Patriarchy will always rise, if not explicitly it will be implicit (even the modern feminist manifestation only exists because of the support by a stack of powerful men )

    When our laws take in consideration natural phenomena and also what undergirds these phenomena (survival strategies) then a proper patriarchy will be restored. A proper aristocracy will be restored.

    Islam won’t do this. Why? It’s a River Delta survival strategy adapted to a desert people (raider’s strategy). It scales up well, but crumbles under its own weight and tends to destroy human flourishing.

    Anglos got it right – velocity via natural law (judge discovered law), empiricism and shallow -via negativa- moral foundations (which results in velocity). This produces the best survival strategy

    Where this has failed has been universalism and idealistic moral foundations both of which are a result of Abrahamic rhetoric – the first middle eastern invasion of Europe .


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-18 11:12:00 UTC

  • I SEE ARISTOCRACY (FAMILY) NOT PATRIARCHY (MALE) Where you see patriarchy(male)

    I SEE ARISTOCRACY (FAMILY) NOT PATRIARCHY (MALE)

    Where you see patriarchy(male) I see aristocracy (family), with female and offspring via-positiva generating demand (Problems) and testing limits, and male and peers via-negativa fulfilling demand (Solutions) and limits.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-18 10:31:00 UTC

  • REVERSING LOW RATES OF REPRODUCTION —“I would like to hear your opinion on tha

    REVERSING LOW RATES OF REPRODUCTION

    —“I would like to hear your opinion on that. What are your suggestions to reverse low fertility rate? How much are you concerned about this? Any idea on how to improve incentives for women to have more children?”—-Paulo Eduardo Marques

    If you reverse the disincentives to middle class reproduction and reverse the incentives for underclass reproduction and you reverse immigration, restore the family as the insurer as a unit of measure, and zone areas of economic opportunity for families then the problem will sort itself out.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-18 09:26:00 UTC

  • RT @DegenRolf: Lesbian women, but not gay men, whose parents had been divorced s

    RT @DegenRolf: Lesbian women, but not gay men, whose parents had been divorced showed lower relationship commitment https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01494929.2018.1503988?journalCode=wmfr20…


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-16 19:39:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1063516992043450368

  • THE GENETIC – DENIERS AND PLOMIN’S UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH (important sequence of ar

    THE GENETIC – DENIERS AND PLOMIN’S UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH

    (important sequence of arguments)

    There are reasons why so many people in the postwar, postmodern, feminist, and underclass movements are rigid deniers of our indifference from breeding of any other domesticated animals, and the similar differences in trait expression. We know those reasons. The fact that people believe the ‘nurture’ fallacy correlates with all other similar social cognitive biases and related fallacies, because people actively select for these falsehoods because their genes encourage and force them to. Even if confronted with the overwhelming evidence that the pseudosciences of Boas, Marx, Freud, Adorno, Derrida et all, they will admit the science but deny its application in order to defend their genetic drives. We can easily measure these differences in brain structure with female biased brains favoring this “herd-prey illusion” and male brains favoring the purely empirical “pack-hunter” bias. Evolution gave us those genetic biases for obvious reasons given the distribution of reproductive responsibilities.

    Genese do not exist in isolation, no, however:

    (a) modification of genetic disposition is endocrine and developmental it does not modify the genome

    (b) In the nature-nurture debate it’s 80% nature, and the rest adaptation to circumstances that FAVOR that nature.

    (c) Nurture can only HARM but not improve the individual

    (d) Education only falsifies tests but over time all of us grow into (form to) our genes.

    (e) The most important decision you can make for your children is who you mate with, since regression to the mean is impossible to avoid without controlled breeding (what europeans did for the past 1300 years until 1960)

    (f) This is contrary to mother’s instincts (they intuit everything through amplified perception because they must given the fragility of young, and high pre-modern child mortality rates) and contrary to the instincts of feminized males, but it is incontrovertible in the data. This amplified perception begins in puberty, and is the source of the overwhelmingly common female mental illness when women are not supplied with sufficient child rearing responsibilities in order to burden the cognitive-emotional load.

    (g) These facts are impossible for the pseudoscientists and sophists (created by Boas, Marx, Freud, Adorno, Derrida et al) in the marxist, postmodern, feminist movements to accept because it means (correctly) that:

    i) man was not oppressed but domesticated like every other animal and plant, and that those who are on the left are still incompletely domesticated.

    ii) classes are natural reflections of necessity given the abilities of the individuals to both process information and suppress animal impulses, the most common of which is gratification-delay,

    iii) no marxist, postmodern, feminist revolution is possible because the competence structure necessary for the preservation of human standards of living cannot tolerate any other distribution than the Pareto.

    iv) the optimum possible social order requires continuation of the Truth over Face of western civilization that requires we all understand our sexual, social, economic, political, and military market value (our ‘status’) is genetically determined, and that we can only create small homogenous ethnocentric polities that due to kin selection are biased to the highly redistributive. But that you are stuck with your ‘status’ at birth unless you are overwhelmingly lucky to match extreme effort with extreme luck.

    So no, Plomin tries very hard to mollify the Genetic-Denialist movement but the data is in and incontestable – Genetic determinism is what it is and we are no different from breeds of dogs, and the differences between individuals as well as groups is the same as the difference between breeds of animals, or in the case of great apes, that we are effectively as different a series of species as are bonobos and chimpanzees.

    This is totally intolerable to the feminine-marxist-postmodernist-feminist dysgenic religion of pseudoscience, sophism, and denialism, invented by boas, marx, freud, adorno, and derrida etc as a counter-revolution against Darwin, Spencer, Nietzsche, Maxwell, Poincare, and the second, german, scientific revolution.

    The eugenicists were right and the chinese will get there first and they will win the war – unless we end the pseudoscience, sophism, denial, and deceit of the left cult of equality.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-15 13:27:00 UTC

  • (Going to be interesting to watch how white women respond now that the left has

    (Going to be interesting to watch how white women respond now that the left has targeted white women as they have targeted white men. Traitors always pay double. )


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-14 16:09:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1062739191371587585

  • (Going to be interesting to watch how white women respond now that the left has

    (Going to be interesting to watch how white women respond now that the left has targeted white women as they have targeted white men. Traitors always pay double. )


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-14 11:08:00 UTC

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/46089495_10156776407482264_761308204

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/46089495_10156776407482264_7613082046172233728_n_10156776407477264.jpg Jon JonathanAlso note the greated number of methylated (imprinted) genes in tournament species vs pair bonding speciesNov 13, 2018, 8:08 PMRoss LampersSize of brain: larger in childhood vs smaller as adult

    … Can someone expand on that?Nov 13, 2018, 8:12 PMJon JonathanShould be generally larger on the left and generally smaller on the right.

    The basic concept is if youre an alpha male and you only have a limited opportunity to do as much mating as possible during your tenure you want your offspring to have genes to encourage them to grow as fast as possible even at the expense of the mother’s future reproductive health. The mother on the other hand would prefer to retain her future reproductive health so females will develop genes that are only expressed when inherited by the mother to reduce fetal growth to compensate for the growth acceleration genes the males developed.

    Pair bonding species dont have as much of this going on because when the male is going to continue mating with the same female maintaining her health is in his best interest.Nov 13, 2018, 8:27 PMNick’s ReasonIt’s not an all-encompassing theory (a complete science) of human development and gene expression. There are many more confounding variables at play. However, it does serve as a general description of some of the extreme differences we see in Sexual Dimorphism.Nov 13, 2018, 8:34 PMJon JonathanI dont think its showing what you think you think its showing

    http://www.biology-pages.info/I/Imprinting.htmlNov 13, 2018, 8:39 PMNick’s ReasonI don’t know how what you have just linked me disputes my comment.Nov 13, 2018, 8:41 PMVincent HebertIf bias met science and muddied its cherry with hand selected data – this graph would be their unwanted summary child.Nov 13, 2018, 9:48 PMJennifer Deanhttps://openpsychometrics.org/tests/EQSQ.phpNov 13, 2018, 10:34 PMJames SantagataI have personally “imprinted” a few brains myself. Very cathartic.Nov 14, 2018, 7:43 AMAndrea RoyallShush….. confessions! 😉Nov 14, 2018, 8:02 AMSolomon VolodymyrHello is this the policeNov 15, 2018, 5:21 AMAndrea Royalloh James is kidding. Anyone who’s ever used a hammer for imprinting brains uses the claw side..Nov 15, 2018, 5:26 AMJames SantagataPlus, I’m right handed.Nov 15, 2018, 5:27 AMKari Anne DorstadWhere does the transsexual fit In ?Jan 7, 2019, 9:08 PMNick HeywoodI knew it!

    I’m a hermaphrodite! :)Jan 8, 2019, 4:36 AMTobias DarbyDon’t crush their skulls… We need them for the PyramidsJan 8, 2019, 5:15 AM


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-13 20:04:00 UTC

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/46153337_10156776338902264_367316403

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/46153337_10156776338902264_3673164037081792512_o_10156776338877264.jpg Jeffrey Fogelhttps://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/males-and-females-with-autism-show-an-extreme-of-the-typical-male-mind

    Are you referencing this theory? I haven’t seen you directly reference it, but yes indirectly (idk if incidental though). Lots of data showing autism is just ‘extreme maleness’.Nov 13, 2018, 7:40 PMAndrew ClaytonI like his conclusionNov 13, 2018, 7:45 PMBarb SpurlockNov 13, 2018, 8:01 PMBradley MorganWhere is this from? I’m literally half of each. Don’t think it is all-encompassing by any means.Nov 13, 2018, 9:53 PMJennifer DeanI’m about half of each too. It’s not an either/or. And I would change “psychotic” to “psychic.”Nov 13, 2018, 10:19 PMJennifer DeanMy finger ratio is female on one hand, male on the other.Nov 13, 2018, 10:21 PMCurt DoolittleJennifer Dean unicorn.. see?Nov 13, 2018, 10:31 PMJennifer DeanBut Curt…where do the unicorns go when the packs separate from the herd? We don’t belong in either one.Nov 14, 2018, 1:56 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-13 19:32:00 UTC

  • My argument is always the same. Separate the feminine/r-selected/herd/dysgenic p

    My argument is always the same. Separate the feminine/r-selected/herd/dysgenic pool from the masculine/k-selected/pack/eugenic pool. We are wealthy enough to afford the production of preferred but DIFFERENT commons, and if the dysgenic herd wants to produce their preferred commons and the eugenic pack wants to produce their preferred commons the only thing preventing both achieving their goals is the current monopoly commons. The solution is to separate (secede) and devolve normative regulation and commons production to the groups and let them speciate. The question MIGHT be race, but it’s not. It’s genetic strategy. The dysgenic and the eugenic. I’m perfectly happy if you folks want to construct india and brazil as long as those of us who want otherwise continue the western tradition of eugenic social order and continuous production of prosperity.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-12 18:41:00 UTC