Jester wrote:EvilBaga wrote:
It is possible its completely environmental. Certainly partially environmental.
But heres a different view :
http://www.love-shy.com/phpBB3/viewtopi ... tas#p76660
Quoted from that article, written by fschmidt
This is the key point that you are missing. When you understand why stupid immoral men are the optimal choice for women in feminist societies, everything else will fall into place. So here goes:
The men that women seek in feminist cultures are omegas, not alphas. I have explained this many times. I also discuss the different male mating strategies in my description of co-alpha males. So let's review the different male mating strategies and see when each strategy works best. But first, we must remember that evolution is based on survival and reproduction. The goal is to survive, reproduce, and have your offspring do the same. So let's look at the options.
alpha - A successful alpha can have many children but takes high survival risks to do it. To make the risks worth while, the alpha has a harem that he mate-guards. The prize for getting to the top is exclusive access to a large number of females. In modern times, survival risks are low. But mate-guarding is banned in feminist societies, particularly with multiple females. The alpha instinct will drive this man to success and dominance in the male hierarchy but all this effort is wasted because the prize is not available. There is little evolutionary benefit to becoming a fortune 500 CEO. The best that the alpha can do is to have a sequence of wives and have slightly above average number of children. So women today consider alphas somewhat attractive based on this.
beta - This is a compromise strategy of allying with an alpha to be part of the winning team. If your team wins, you get access to females, not as many as the alpha, but still some. And if your team loses, you are less exposed to survival risk. This strategy requires being a dependable guy that the alpha can count on without being too ambitious. In modern times, this strategy leads to becoming a good employee. This man is dedicated to his work and is a reliable provider. In modern times, this strategy has little evolutionary benefit. Thanks to feminism, mate-guarding is prohibited. The lower survival risk is no benefit now. So this strategy is inferior to alpha today. As a result, women today find betas unattractive and will only use them as needed for material benefits.
omega - These are the lowest men in status. They are not good providers and so are not good for long term relationships. These men reproduce through seduction. Their evolutionary advantage is their immorality. Since they are not part of any alliance with alphas or betas, they do not hesitate to chase other men's wives. Women are attracted to these men specifically based on their seduction skill because this, passed on to the woman's sons, will spread her genes. The effectiveness of the omega strategy depends on the effectiveness of mate-guarding in a culture. In primitive times, mate-guarding was moderately effective, so omega survived but didn't thrive. In patriarchal societies, mate-guarding is highly effective and omegas become complete losers who are avoided by women. But in modern feminist cultures, mate-guarding is banned so omegas have by far the best strategy. Omegas are immoral but not necessarily stupid. But feminist culture combined with contraception has made stupidity a huge benefit. Smart omegas who want to avoid being stuck with child support will use contraception. It is generally the stupid omegas who don't use contraception. So by far the best male strategy today is to be a stupid omega. Women recognize this, which is why they are sexually excited by these winners (stupid omegas). It's true that women don't recognize this consciously. What women do recognize instinctually is which types of men are most successful at reproducing, and then women seek this type of man.
co-alpha - These men cooperative dominate a society and divide up the women using monogamy. The co-alpha strategy is about the same survival risk level as beta and about the same reproductive potential. The advantage of co-alpha is that a co-alpha tribe will beat a alpha/beta tribe in warfare because co-alphas all have more of a vested interest in tribal success. (The betas are always at risk of losing favor with the alpha, thereby losing reproductive access, so they have less of a vested interest in the tribe than co-alphas do.) The co-alpha strategy is the most effective mate-guarding strategy because co-alphas mate-guard cooperatively, protecting each other's wives, which makes things impossible for omegas. Co-alphas completely depend on cooperation. For this reason, co-alphas are highly moral and worry about things like justice all the time. When co-alphas are in control, you have patriarchy and a great respect for all traits that contribute to society, including intelligence, honesty, etc. In modern times, co-alphas are the ultimate losers. Mate-guarding is banned and cooperation fails. While modern women have no respect for betas, they are still willing to marry them for the material benefit and will simply cheat on their beta husband with omegas. But modern women will avoid co-alpha males like the plague because co-alphas are harder to cheat on and their failure to cooperate means that they have no advantage of any kind in modern culture. Co-alphas will likely be incels.
I think the argument speaks for itself. I do not know how much of it is right, but definitely it is part of the story. The 'thugs' are not 'genetically superior'. Indeed they will lead civilization back to the likes of current day Zimbabwe in due time. But they are superior at convincing women that they can get other women to sleep with them. By the sexy son hypothesis(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexy_son_hypothesis), this would make them attractive.
This is brilliant, brilliant stuff. Explains a lot.
I say again: brilliant stuff.
I was thinking about this in connection with the Philippines. An Alpha/Beta society. leaders at the top can have discreet harems. Thanks to conservative Catholicism, marriage is respected for Betas, too, so we have a patriarchal society where Betas can have stable marriages. Mate-guarding lives.
Except - except for the fact that Filipinas date out, and they go abroad to work. So the misery of the Filipino Beta is increased by the fact that his potential or actual bride can go abroad to work. If they were smart, they would limit girls going abroad. Well, now that i think about it, they do. I think you have to be 25 before you can go abroad as a maid. So they are preserving the under-25 bride-pool for the working class males to have a crack at them before they leave the country. Good for the Philippines!
Come to think of it, Belarus, Cambodia and one place in Central Asia also have restrictions on mail order brides. I always assumed it was because of jealous dictators. But maybe I should give the dictators more credit. Limiting women's options actually may preserve patriarchy at home for the Beta masses.
And how about another example of FSchmidt's theory in action. Armenians. Not the FSU kind, the Middle East kind. Monogamous and patriarchal. Stable permanent marriages. No option for women except to stay loyal and subservient to their husband. And guess what? Incredibly resilient tribe, victorious in war and street fights against more numerous enemies, feared and respected everywhere, persistent and prosperous wherever they go. They are an example of a "co-Alpha" culture. Did they become co-Alpha because of Christianity? Or for survival reasons? Chicken or egg? But now I can see why Middle East Armenians will fool around, but never really have a second family. It doesn't fit.
FSU of course is going to be more of an Alpha/Beta place, still patriarchal. You do well if you're an oligarch, or a "biznesman", or even a corrupt Church official. But this is why we caution each other about trying to tame a Ukrainian gal over here. With no patriarchal environment to restrict her, one would expect change.
If I go to the FSU, I can get a gal, but since I won't be rich, I can only be Beta - and monogamous.
And smalltown Armenian areas in general are looking less attractive. Can be an Alpha, sure, with my American aura, but it's a co-Alpha culture. A pretty young virgin would be obtainable, but not open multiple relationships in the same area.
If I go to a "Third World" country, where I will be Alpha (most of SEA, and poorer cities in LA), and whose women are freely allowed to "date out" (Phil's, Peru), then I should have the best of all possible worlds.
Phil's is looking better and better. Easier to be a social Alpha via doing a little TV and radio where I am fluent in one of the languages. Plus there's karioke!
