Female preference for scum revisited

[Cornfed]

^ I used to think this a couple of years ago, but no, r vs. K selection theory explains why the r-selected gene set prefers scum men whether dominant or not, and this tallies with observations.

[Adama]

^ I used to think this a couple of years ago, but no, r vs. K selection theory explains why the r-selected gene set prefers scum men whether dominant or not, and this tallies with observations.

I don't know what you're talking about with r vs K selection. I think you'll believe what you want to though.

There used to be some guy on another forum who insisted that women prefer bad boys because bad boys are actually superior. His evidence for that was their success with women. It just could not be another variable for him. Success = genetically superior. He even went on to say how they will have more children, which proves they are genetically superior even more. But to me it just looked like another circular argument.

Besides all this doesnt matter. There are 3-4 billion women on this planet. All you have to do is find one who wants you.

[Cornfed]

^ I used to think this a couple of years ago, but no, r vs. K selection theory explains why the r-selected gene set prefers scum men whether dominant or not, and this tallies with observations.

I don't know what you're talking about with r vs K selection. I think you'll believe what you want to though.

There used to be some guy on another forum who insisted that women prefer bad boys because bad boys are actually superior. His evidence for that was their success with women. It just could not be another variable for him. Success = genetically superior. He even went on to say how they will have more children, which proves they are genetically superior even more. But to me it just looked like another circular argument.

I believe the empirical evidence, which I used to find baffling. What I believe is not what I want to believe, because it sucks, but the simplest theory that accounts for what actually happens. If you are that interested in r vs. K selection, then google on it and listen to Stefan Molyneux's series on it. Or just try to digest the OP. There are perfectly good non-circular arguments, put by me several times in this forum, as to why male scum have more children. Of course circular arguments in this area are somewhat valid, because females simply go with the flow in their choice of males, which in turn causes the males to have more children, thus validating the females' choice of males etc. All of this is ultimately propped up by the elite's policies.

[Adama]

^ I used to think this a couple of years ago, but no, r vs. K selection theory explains why the r-selected gene set prefers scum men whether dominant or not, and this tallies with observations.

I don't know what you're talking about with r vs K selection. I think you'll believe what you want to though.

There used to be some guy on another forum who insisted that women prefer bad boys because bad boys are actually superior. His evidence for that was their success with women. It just could not be another variable for him. Success = genetically superior. He even went on to say how they will have more children, which proves they are genetically superior even more. But to me it just looked like another circular argument.

I believe the empirical evidence, which I used to find baffling. What I believe is not what I want to believe, because it sucks, but the simplest theory that accounts for what actually happens. If you are that interested in r vs. K selection, then google on it and listen to Stefan Molyneux's series on it. Or just try to digest the OP. There are perfectly good non-circular arguments, put by me several times in this forum, as to why male scum have more children. Of course circular arguments in this area are somewhat valid, because females simply go with the flow in their choice of males, which in turn causes the males to have more children, thus validating the females' choice of males etc. All of this is ultimately propped up by the elite's policies.

How many women are counted in the empirical evidence though?

I can't watch Stefan Molyneux. He's one arrogant son of a gun. I can't listen to him. He literally thinks he knows everything there is to know about everything. Plus he hates God, loves homosexuals, puts down anyone who disagrees with them, and he thinks he is some super psychologist.

[Adama]

Let's assume for a moment you are right, Cornfed. Assuming women go for men who are wortlless scum, what does this say about the women? You treat them as if they are essentially children, who have to be guided in everything and can't make up their mind. That the minute they see a dominant, immoral man, they get weak to their knees and the moment they see him take drugs or stab someone, they'll spread their legs...

To me this is preposterous and not exactly agrees with my own observation. But assuming it is true, then these women are worthless. Any woman who would pick a criminal over a genuinely good fellow, is worthless anyway. Who is to say she won't go back to some criminal lover the second you head off to work? Who is to say she won't have his kids and you will unknowingly raise them? If your theory is true, then 95% of women are complete and utter scum themselves.

And if 95% of women are complete and utter scum, what is even the point in trying? The type of beliefs you walk around with, Cornfed, would make a lesser man suicidal. Your level of 'red pill' is lethal.

I think the outspoken women in the past treated me very badly. That is, the quiet women were in the background and they mostly go unnoticed, because they are reserved. Whereas the real witches in life come to the forefront, because they are loud and stick out like a sore thumb. When I thought of women, I never thought of these quiet women. I always thought of the women who were attempting to hurt me because they are beasts.

There are also some bimbos who do not see other people are truly human beings because they aren't very bright. They're stuck so deep in their own arrogance that they can not see that other people have feelings too. These may be the people labeled with personality disorders (which just means they are extremely selfish individuals who do not see others as persons but as objects and pawns). These women will hurt people intentionally and unintentionally because they are unable to empathize with others. The moment something goes wrong, even if it is their fault, they can weave a lie even to themselves and believe it, which absolves them of responsibility and puts it all upon the man. This is what I mean by a bimbo.

The solution is the find a woman who is willing to please. That way you know she is submissive and you know that she views you as a true human being, instead of one who is just her pawn to be used and abused. In other words, make the woman work for you, which is the way they were designed. The moment the man starts to cater to a woman it is over, because that gives the woman power to abuse him.

So I used to think that all women were evil too, but that was my emotions blocking me from seeing reality. I was operating under a false belief system (that women are better than men socially, socially more intelligent, never afraid of men, and all the other beliefs our mangina friends will tell us when we ask for advice). When you operate under a false belief system, all the evidence you gather will conform to the theory you've already chosen. You won't be able to see conflicting evidence, or it will be dismissed as an anomaly.

That's why universal assumptions and opinions are destructive. The men who think all women are evil believe that they are protecting themselves from women. They are really just forcing themselves into isolation. If no woman anywhere is good, then what is the point of even thinking about women? Might as well just become a monk, or go live in a log cabin in the woods of Alaska. That would be more productive than thinking about women when they are purely entirely evil to the last woman on earth.

[Cornfed]

Let's assume for a moment you are right, Cornfed. Assuming women go for men who are wortlless scum, what does this say about the women? You treat them as if they are essentially children, who have to be guided in everything and can't make up their mind. That the minute they see a dominant, immoral man, they get weak to their knees and the moment they see him take drugs or stab someone, they'll spread their legs...

To me this is preposterous and not exactly agrees with my own observation. But assuming it is true, then these women are worthless. Any woman who would pick a criminal over a genuinely good fellow, is worthless anyway. And even if you found a "good one", who is to say she won't go back to some criminal lover the second you head off to work? Who is to say she won't have his kids and you will unknowingly raise them? If your theory is true, then 95% of women are complete and utter scum themselves.

And if 95% of women are complete and utter scum, what is even the point in trying? The type of beliefs you walk around with, Cornfed, would make a lesser man suicidal. Your level of 'red pill' is lethal.

We always have the option of standing around with our hair on fire claiming we can't smell smoke, but perhaps the idea would be to believe the truth of the matter, however horrific. Denying reality won't make it go away. The thing we can take from this situation is that women are simple biological robots designed to incubate the next generation in whatever situation they happen to find themselves in. That they are horrible scum-humping monsters at this time is because in the current environment this seems to be the best way to go according to their programming. Of course the results aren't so great, but it is not their fault. Their condition has been hacked, in the same way that the manufacturers of crappy food can hack the usually positive instinctive appetites of children by adding lots of sugar to everything. When the current dystopia ends, we are going to have to work very hard to integrate Western females back into the human race. The more honest we are about their current squalid condition, the more chance we have of success.

[Cornfed]

Here is Roger Devlin of Sexual Utopia in Power fame being interviewed of Red Ice Radio. He deserves credit as a pioneer on the subject, but his analysis actually seems a bit less advanced than ours. He doesn’t seem to understand the dysgenic nature of female sexual r-based selection in the current environment, believing that it is the best men who get the females, rather than the worst. He also cheerily believes the situation will change because the traditionally-minded fecund people will give rise to a traditionally-minded future generation, ignoring the fact that most traditionally-minded men have no opportunities for successful marriages to Western females, while the scum can breed at GovCorp's expense.

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/20 ... 150710.php

[Yohan]

...the quiet women were in the background and they mostly go unnoticed, because they are reserved. Whereas the real witches in life come to the forefront,,,

How many women are left unnoticed in the background? And how many women are running to the forefront?
Does this background you mention even exist? What kind of women could they be? A single mom with 4 children? A business-woman just released from jail because of fraud and forgery? Who? My observation is that even Western female outsiders find men easily.

I have never seen any Western women in the background except those few ones who were already married while still young and who stood firmly with their husband. These women were a tiny minority and of course not available.

[Adama]

...the quiet women were in the background and they mostly go unnoticed, because they are reserved. Whereas the real witches in life come to the forefront,,,

How many women are left unnoticed in the background? And how many women are running to the forefront?
Does this background you mention even exist? What kind of women could they be? A single mom with 4 children? A business-woman just released from jail because of fraud and forgery? Who? My observation is that even Western female outsiders find men easily.

I have never seen any Western women in the background except those few ones who were already married while still young and who stood firmly with their husband. These women were a tiny minority and of course not available.

Your observation doesnt mean much of anything. You live in Japan, and you have not lived in a Western society since the age of 25, and now you are near 60 years old.

There are shier women in the background. They are shy, which makes them go unnoticed by many men. Whereas the beasts who are looking for attention are the ones who are doing the damage. Is the ratio one to one? Definitely there are many more worthless women than there are worth while women. But when you think about it, you might be able to say that about everything in life.

Does that mean that shy women get zero attention? No, it certainly does not.

There is a lot of trash in US society. There is no doubt about that. The key is to stop complaining about it. You know what trash is. Screen for it. If she has four children, if she is a business woman of any kind, if she has committed fraud, then move on. Cross her off your list. I know that's fairly obvious, but it needs to be stated, because somehow people think I am suggesting that men go for trash. Or maybe they want to equate what I am saying with that, which is not true. Stop focusing on trashy people. Instead avoid them. That must be a very hard choice.

Now if you truly believe that every single last American woman is scum, then you have been infected with an anti-woman mindset. That's all there is to it. That would be like saying that every black person is an N word.

It's okay though, cause water seeks its own level. Like goes to like.

But I think the real problem is desperation and a lack of discernment skills, which has been exhibited by this board in these comments over and over again.

[jamesbond]

I can't watch Stefan Molyneux. He puts down anyone who disagrees with him.

He sounds like you Adama, you like to put down anyone who disagrees with you on certain topics like religion and your belief that there are actually lots of good women in America who are marriage material.

[Adama]

Let's assume for a moment you are right, Cornfed. Assuming women go for men who are wortlless scum, what does this say about the women? You treat them as if they are essentially children, who have to be guided in everything and can't make up their mind. That the minute they see a dominant, immoral man, they get weak to their knees and the moment they see him take drugs or stab someone, they'll spread their legs...

To me this is preposterous and not exactly agrees with my own observation. But assuming it is true, then these women are worthless. Any woman who would pick a criminal over a genuinely good fellow, is worthless anyway. And even if you found a "good one", who is to say she won't go back to some criminal lover the second you head off to work? Who is to say she won't have his kids and you will unknowingly raise them? If your theory is true, then 95% of women are complete and utter scum themselves.

And if 95% of women are complete and utter scum, what is even the point in trying? The type of beliefs you walk around with, Cornfed, would make a lesser man suicidal. Your level of 'red pill' is lethal.

We always have the option of standing around with our hair on fire claiming we can't smell smoke, but perhaps the idea would be to believe the truth of the matter, however horrific. Denying reality won't make it go away. The thing we can take from this situation is that women are simple biological robots designed to incubate the next generation in whatever situation they happen to find themselves in. That they are horrible scum-humping monsters at this time is because in the current environment this seems to be the best way to go according to their programming. Of course the results aren't so great, but it is not their fault. Their condition has been hacked, in the same way that the manufacturers of crappy food can hack the usually positive instinctive appetites of children by adding lots of sugar to everything. When the current dystopia ends, we are going to have to work very hard to integrate Western females back into the human race. The more honest we are about their current squalid condition, the more chance we have of success.

That's right. It is their programming. Now that you realize that, you should see, it is not entirely their fault. They are a product of their cultures. This culture has been intentionally turned against men. But to be honest, I do not even think that is the biggest factor (probably number 2). I think the biggest problem is that the government gives women incentive to act like beasts in every way possible: They encourage female on false DV charges, mother only custody, undeserved and unearned divorce settlements, etc. If we had a government that was actually pro-men, we would probably have zero problems with American women. It is the government which has turned women against men. Women are just following the script.

Keep in mind though, there is a remnant of women whose biological programming has always dominated their cultural programming. Some of them still want to be wives and mothers. Just as it is hard for us to find good women, now it is probably hard for them to find an old fashioned man.

[Blue Murder]

Stefan Molyneux isn't new. That's literally 90% of people these days. You make an argument, and anyone who disagrees is automatically a member of the opposing group and a/n (insert insult here). Again, this is something that applies to most of the users here.

[romparoo]

Wow.....4 pages of debate that goes nowhere, but good reading though!
It's just a numbers game nowadays. Takes 20% of total marriageable age women off the dating pool, whether they are career women, picky or just riding the cock carousels, and it immediately affects the male-female dynamics.
Even without feminism, western countries would still be a sausage fest because there will simply be more young single men than young single women, because of the opportunity to earn more and men being more courageous to work in any countries for a bigger buck. Like it or not, men will just have to adapt to this new reality.
Go where the numbers favour you. Go to a place where there are more women serious about starting a family. Go to a place where women do not shut you off from intimacies. Go to a place where your dollar let you roll longer and further. Stop wasting time debating and whining.

[Adama]

I can't watch Stefan Molyneux. He puts down anyone who disagrees with him.

He sounds like you Adama, you like to put down anyone who disagrees with you on certain topics like religion and your belief that there are actually lots of good women in America who are marriage material.

I don't wish to put anyone down, and if I have ever put you down, JamesBond, I sincerely apologize. It isnt my wish to alienate you in any way. One day you will realize that I was trying to show you the truth. That day will be too late though.

As for American women being marriage material, I would say that you can find a good American woman. Are there many of them? Probably not. However, I do believe that God loves His children. If you want to go overseas to find a wife, then by all means do so. But, my point is that just as God doesnt require you to go to Colombia to get a drink of water or a bite to eat, He would not make finding a wife so difficult. He will provide for you and your needs anywhere in the world. Why would you think He wouldnt do that for you, if you are His son?

And why do you worry about x,y and z happening, when God's children are under his protection? Proverbs says the curse causeless shall not happen. God wouldnt let the worst happen to you, unless of course you have done something to merit it, or you're disobeying Him. Follow His commandments, believe in Jesus Christ, then let God lead you.

If God is leading you to go to find a foreign wife then do it. I will never speak against that. I just think that it isnt necessary, because just as you aren't forced to look for a job in India, and you aren't forced to go to Canada to get a drink of water, God can provide for His children anywhere, and that includes finding his sons wives and has daughters husbands. In other words, I have great faith in the Lord in this aspect of my life.

If you are a believer, you should not listen to Stephan M. He hates God. He loves homosexuals. He hates God because God doesnt approve of homosexuality. Why does Stephan love homosexuals so much that he would hate God for it? (God made men in His own image, which is why men with men is an abomination; men weren't designed for that, and it shows disrespect to God, because men are made in the image of God; and we should be Holy, like He is.) Why would you listen to some man who has already condemned himself to hell because he loves homosexuality?

[jamesbond]

If you are a believer, you should not listen to Stephan M. He hates God. He loves homosexuals.

I have never heard Stephan say he loves homosexuals, as a matter of fact I have heard him say he is against same sex marriage. I am not saying I agree with everything he says, I am disappointed to find out he is an atheist. I haven't listened to him in a while, maybe he was a believer and now is not (which is unfortunate).

I like his stance on immigration (that the migrants coming into Europe are a horrible idea both politically and economically). I really don't know his views on lot's of other issues, I guess I need to watch more of his videos.