Vestiges

vestiges

The greatest inconsistency that most people discussing Social Darwinism fall into is the “survival of the fittest” falacy. Nowhere in any of Darwin’s writtings will you ever see this terminology refered to in the context of natural selection. It’s not survival of the fitest, it is survival of the species best able to adapt to it’s changing conditions and environments. Dinosaurs ruled the earth as the preeminent species for eons (far longer than humans). Then in the relative blink of an eye, they were extinct because a radical environmental change, for which they were, biologically, completely unprepared wiped them out wholesale. They simply couldn’t adapt to that environment.

This is what people fail to see; adaptation is the coin of the realm in evolution. 68% of the population in the U.S. is overweight, not because of “bad” genes, but because the environment has changed and people have adapted to it. Our bodies naturally store fat. We evolved from a necessity to do so since food sources were scarce in our biological past, however now the environment has changed. Food is too abundant, too convenient, too calorie dense, etc. for us not to be fat. Our metabolism favors carbohydrates over protien and stored fat, why? Because our environmental reality thousands of years ago meant that a good sugar kick made for a better chance of evading a predator. Now this biological legacy only makes us fatter when you can buy ding dongs at any 7-11.

Legacies

With regards to monogamy or polygyny, essentially what we’re observing in this era is a result of a restructuring of adaptive methodologies to account for changes in our environment. Single motherhood, readily available forms of birth control, greater potential for security provisioning for men and women that isn’t based on physical prowess, etc. Yet, in light of all that we still struggle with the legacy of our biological pasts.

Men and women, biologically, have different methodologies for reproduction. It is in a woman’s biological best interest to mate with the genetically superior male best able to provide long term provisioning for her and any potential offspring. Again, it is in her best interest to find a man best fitted to share in parental investment. This is due to her comparatively prolonged period of gestation (9 months), the rigors of rearing a child to self-sufficiency (at least adolescence) as well as her own insured survival. They ovulate in a 28 day cycle and are at a peak of feritlity 5-7 years after puberty. They posess a limited number of eggs and become biologically inviable after a certain age (at or around menopause). Their hormone and endorphin biochemistry also reflect this reproductive schema; they produce in bulk oxytocin and estrogen, both responsible for prompting feelings of nurturing as well as serving as buffers for sexual indescretions. At the peak of their menstrual cycles they produce more testosterone in preparation for sexual activity and in the low periods produce more estrogens and progesterones. In addition, both during and after pregnancy they produce high levels of progesterone and oxytocin, both primary in engendering feelings of love and nuturement for offspring.

Men’s methodologies are much different. Biologically, we produce 12.5 times the amount of testosterone than women. As a result we have higher accuity of vision, hearing and touch. We have more muscularity, lean towards feelings of aggression in preference to sadness. And of course we are easily prompted to a state of sexual arousal – we’re always ready for it in our natural state. We produce millions of reproductive cells daily and are sexually viable until very late in life. Our reproductive methodology revolves around “spreading the seed” as indiscriminately as possible. Ours is quanity, women’s is quality.

Now, having done the break down of this, you can see the conflict in mating methods; thus enters adaptive sociological and psychological mechanisms to regulate this process. Thus, being social animals, we introduce ethics, morality and implied responsibilities to buffer both methodolgies. In our biological past, sexual arousal in both men and women was mitigated by physical prowess. Large breasts in women, an appropriate hips to waist ratio, physical symetry in both sexes, muscularity in men, physical manifestations of testosterone (square jaw for example) etc. we’re the call signs for sexual activity. Physicality was (and still is) the primary motivator for sexual activity and this is literally encoded into our genetics.

However, as society progressed, conditions and environments changed, thus social adaptation changed. A lot of freshly unplugged guy’s make an astute observation in this progression – Why is it that women are still hot for:

  • Celebrities
  • Musicians
  • Criminals
  • Drug dealers
  • Daredevils and risk-takers

Social proof began to become a secondary consideration for intimate acceptance (from a female mating methodology) for women as society progressed. Physical prowess, while still a primary sexual attractor and indicator of prefered genetics, didn’t necessarily ensure a continued committment to parental investment. Men and women’s reproductive methodologies have always been in a see-saw balance since we began as hunter-gatherer tribal societies. As society (see environment) changed other factors for parental investment became important. Artists became attractive bcause they possessed creative intelligence and this was manifested in their creative abilities to solve problems. When you see the broke musician with the dutiful girlfriend this is that legacy at work.

Social proof and intersexual competition, while always present, began to move into the psychological. It was far more efficient for women to compete for a desirable male covertly – usually by not confirming his acceptance – than to do so overtly. As society further progressed, male competition moved away from the physical and into a provisioning capacity. A drug dealer and a high powered corporate executive could both be “alpha” males – both have high social proof and provisioning capacity – albeit in different social strata.

Polygyny and Monogamy are natural human methodologies. Polygyny serves a mans biological imperative better, while monogamy serves a woman’s better. The conflict arises when either is compromised. A single man who’s non-exclusively dating is essentially in a state of polygyny, while a married woman is in her prefered state of secured monogamy. Either sex must surrender their prefered methodology to accommodate the other’s. This is why, socially, we have stages in our modern lives where one is exercised over another.

Animal Planet

I was recently watching an animal planet special on dogs and cats that compared their “domestic” behaviors with those of their wild counterparts, like preadatory cats and wolves. Not so surpisingly a dog will instinctively do circles and tramp down his bed in exactly the same fashion as a wolf will his sleeping area. So too will cats cover up their own excrement, burying it so predators wont catch their scent so readily, just like house cats will. To us, these and many other behaviors seem cute, but entirely unnecessary for domesticated animals to habitually perform. One would think that after literally thousands of years of domestication, as well as selective breeding, these behaviors would be less prominent or entirely “bred out” of them, but this is obviously not the case. They are hardwired, unlearned behaviors that are imprinted into them from birth that proved to be valuable in their species’ survival over the course of generations.

Using this analogy, how much more complex are our behaviors and the motivations behind them? There are many global studies that compare physical features in attraction across culture and race for both sexes that show very frequent commonalities for physical attraction. Broad shoulders, squared jawline and chest to waist ratio in men and symetry of facial features, breast size and hips to waist ratios in women are universal attractors for each respective sex. In fact the very common propensity for women to exclude men shorter than themselves from their consideration for intimacy is specifically derived from what evolutioanry psychologists call vestigial sexual selection.

Bear in mind this is attraction and how our subconscious interprets external cues for prompting desire. You see a naked woman in Playboy and the result is a hard on. External prompt – biological response, pure and simple. That’s a quick and easy one, but there’s a variety of other reponses that occur too – quickening of heart rate, release of hormones and endorphines, dialation of pupils, flushing of skin, etc. Again this is a reaction that was unlearned and part of our chemical make up.

A lot of frustration most men and women endure in our modern socio-sexual education is the result of a psychological attempt to reconcile the vestigial behaviors and predilections of our feral past with the need for adaptation in our present environment. Hypergamy is the prime directive for women, but precious few are cognitively aware of it, and even the ones who may be still find themselves subject to it. Hypergamy is a vestigial, mental subroutine running in women’s peripheral awarenesses. So vital was this species survival methodology in our past that it had to become part of a woman’s limbic understanding of herself.

So when these processes are brought into our awareness (i.e. feminine hypergamy, male polygyny, etc.) we tend to play them down or dismiss them wholesale. Sometimes the truths of these vestiges are ugly – in fact the reason we find them uncomfortable or offensive is the result of a societal effort to keep them under the surface in ourselves. They offend our sense of justice, or notions of equitability, but they did serve to bring us to where we are now as a society.

A lot of critics of evo-psych (in particular), as well as the revealers of some of the more unsettling aspects of human social and sexual evolution, like to start their criticisms by conflating the revelations of these dynamics with condoning  the behaviors that are results of them. Yes, hypergamy, in all its permutations, can be a very ugly truth to witness, but exposing it, attempting to understand it, is not tantamount to endorsing it. Human beings can’t handle too much reality, so the recourse is to attempt to stuff the Genie back into the bottle. Being aware of our feral natures and attempting to deconstruct the vestiges of those we deal with today is not the same as expecting absolution from the consequences of them.

Just because you know the reasons for your behaviors doesn’t grant you a license to engage in them. Yet neither should anyone be discouraged from legitimate inquiry into the natures of our primal selves for fear of the shame that others would want to apply to you to ease their own discomfort.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

Leave a Reply

  Subscribe  
Notify of
FuriousFerret
Guest
FuriousFerret
Offline

@Anna Men gaining worldly experience and wealth is ideal, but this will harm most women in the long run. During their early 20s women should be looking to marry a high value man. That’s the best strategy for them. Only the beautiful have the option to have all that free fun without an enormous cost. Do you understand the concept of selling your stock at peak value? You can’t simply want experience and job success to apply to women as it applies to men and have it to be true. Locking down commitment to a high value man is hard… Read more »

Kate
Guest
Kate
Offline

“YaReally gives good advice to MEN. Applying it to women will have consequences because we have competing reproductive paradigms. It’s like telling a linebacker that the best way to be successful in the NFL is working on his route running and catching ability because it works so well for an NFL reciever.”

Very good points. Thinking what applies to men applies to women is the root of all of these problems.

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Furious Ferret Understood, but I still kinda disagree. If a woman completes high school at 19, marries at 20-22, and starts having babies at 23, then raises them each to age 19…that puts her to at least age 40 before she can have a life of her own…probably closer to 43-45 due to spacings between births. I’m not saying that women should go out and fuck every guy they see or waste money on a degree they’ll never use, or even try to have a much sought after job (especially if they’re just going to get preggers and quit 2… Read more »

taterearl
Guest
taterearl
Offline

The best thing for a man to do is live alone in his 20s. You will learn how to take care of yourself, rely on yourself to fix problems, rely on yourself to go out into the world to find your own fun and hobbies…etc. You learn independence. It’s by that you learn problem solving skills you need to take care of others who will be dependant on you. When shit hits the fan…you’ve gone through it before. Momma’s boys and guys who are shacked up perpetually with ladies never get this great life experience. Women however shouldn’t do that… Read more »

Tam the Bam
Guest
Tam the Bam
Offline

About the tail thing: one word. Huldra. It’s a kind of troll-wife.
There’s a new slightly horrorish film out, Thale.
Enjoy.
Knew a girl who had a vestigial coccyx-extension, but it was only about as long as the last joint of your pinky. More irritating than captivating, as it was very prone to injury, and she was a bit over-embarrassed about it, even though nobody (that knew about it) cared a toss. Maybe because she couldn’t make it wiggle smile

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@Matthew King (King A) The Buddha, Christian asceticism, and the first precept of The Tao of Steve say otherwise. To become perfectly desireless is to attain nirvana. To avoid adultery and extinguish the very thought of adultery is to be “be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” These self-destructive urges are properly categorized as external to the true self, or demonic to those who require a more blunt rendering for the lesson to sink in. To assume it impossible to eliminate your desire is a tacit authorization of desire, no matter whether you act upon it. To control your… Read more »

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

“Women however shouldn’t do that unless you want to be truly independent. Most women should be looking for a man that lives this way.”

Precisely what I’m saying. Just know what type you are before you make a mess of your life and those around you.

FuriousFerret
Guest
FuriousFerret
Offline

“Of course, this could just be the way *I* look at it, since I have never desired a husband/children. ” The huge problem is that the vast majority of women really do want the high value husband with kids and giving the strong independent woman advice royally fucks them in the ass simply because it makes them unhappy in the long term. Young women might say or even superfically think they want the feminist path but by the time they realize they want the more traditional lifestyle they much less likely to get an optimal one. However try to explain… Read more »

taterearl
Guest
taterearl
Offline

“However, the wild card in this equation is just stay thin. The woman with one chin in the land of the landwhale is Queen. So funny that what was the norm 60 years ago is worth it’s weight in gold.”

Amazing how easy it is to up your value these days when it used to be the norm up until feminism reared its ugly head.

Women…stay thin and act pleasant.
Men…act confident, be interesting, and live independent.

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Furious Ferret I don’t know if I’d say I come to Rollo’s blog “so often”. Unless I’m remembering incorrectly, this is only the 3rd post I’ve ever commented on. As for why I read and respond, it’s because I enjoy the exchange of ideas and information, especially when it’s an interesting topic. I mean, why does ANYONE subscribe to a blog or forum? And you may be right, who knows? It is possible (though not probable) that I’ll “hit the wall” 10 years from now. Maybe I’ll be 38 and sad that I didn’t get married or have children yet.… Read more »

FuriousFerret
Guest
FuriousFerret
Offline

“So, I’ve gone from being 172 lbs in December to being 162 now (and will hopefully be my goal weight of 155 by February.)” “”It is possible (though not probable) that I’ll “hit the wall” 10 years from now” At your age of 27, I’d say you’re on a direct collision course as we speak. You weigh as much as I do, a 5’11 15 – 18 percent body fat man. As age increases, we have to be in better shape. That’s what women don’t seem to understand. They burn brighter and although they know that the beauty will burn… Read more »

Rollo Tomassi
Guest
chris
Guest
chris
Offline

“A lot of critics of evo-psych (in particular), as well as the revealers of some of the more unsettling aspects of human social and sexual evolution, like to start their criticisms by conflating the revelations of these dynamics with condoning the behaviors that are results of them.”

My response to these people is; while yes, it is natural to rape, murder and cheat, it is also natural for us to oppose the engagement in of these behaviours by others.

Kate
Guest
Kate
Offline

“I can’t live in the present if I’m only looking at a theoretical future.”

But this is exactly what more people should be doing: delaying gratificaction by building a foundation for future happiness. Not to say you never enjoy anything along the way.

“rather than hanging up my aspirations and dreams to raise a family I’d be resentful of for tying me down.”

You may really think you are atypical, but its more likely you’re not. Biology trumps everything. Deny your biological destiny at your own peril, I say.

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@Anna …If a woman completes high school at 19, marries at 20-22, and starts having babies at 23, then raises them each to age 19…that puts her to at least age 40 before she can have a life of her own… Point of order, the father of those children isn’t exactly going-his-own way and having a blast on his own during these 19 years either. Female sacrifice for family does not exist on its own in a vacuum. Raising a family is an equal sacrifice of interesting life experiences by BOTH partners… but this is presuming it’s much of a… Read more »

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Kate Well, I’ve been an ovo-lacto vegetarian since I was 13, so i guess I’m good at “denying my biology” already, lol. To be blunt, the idea of being pregnant really freaks me out. @Furious Ferret I’ve already reached my February goal of being 155, and as soon as spring comes around I’m going to try for another 5 to 8 lbs off. Then I think I’ll be at a wonderful healthy weight. But yeah, I’m a geek/nerd…not very plain though, I’ve been told by numerous men that I’m a 7/10. @Jeremy You make the most sense, in my humble… Read more »

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@Martel

…. Oh my god… I think I am going to be sick. I think that was too much red pill for one sitting.

Martel
Guest
Martel
Offline

@ Jeremy What did I say???

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

Way worse. (I go into more detail here: http://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/the-blood-red-pill/

bob
Guest
bob
Offline

“I couldn’t agree more. People need to go out, live, and experience LIFE. This whole guilting men and women into getting married at age 20-25 is bogus…how are you supposed to be able to make any type of long term decision when you’ve nothing to compare it to? I firmly believe that we need to travel, get a good job, and learn to depend on ourselves BEFORE we try to depend on someone else for the rest of our lives.” Well, that’s why we had family not so long ago. To help us with their wisdom. Authority works like that… Read more »

Case
Guest
Case
Offline

As I sometimes do I’m coming late to this conversation, hope it’s still on I read all the comments. As always seems to happen with hypergamy we seem to get in a rut between the need to beat in the power it holds for those blind to it versus it’s own limits as a force and between its reality as a determinant for female mating behavior and it’s tendency to not be the only determinant Men want the hottest hotties and quicky learn to sublimate this desire and still want hot hotties but consider more dimensions. Women want the actor… Read more »

Case
Guest
Case
Offline

In comment above “superfamily” was supposed to read hypergamy. Damn predictive keyboard.

Case
Guest
Case
Offline

Part of the trouble discussing hypergamy is the word itself. We’re all using it, but some people using it get it in a strictly conceptual sense while others have a more experienced-based grasp of it. One way to describe hypergamy is this: Hypergamy is ALL the game you need. Does a 9/10 hottie need a good personality? Does she have to be smart or have a college degree or good prospects? Those are all nice things, but push-come-shove, looks of 9-10 will carry her as far as attracting men, in spades. She need do nothing – the men will simply… Read more »

Kate
Guest
Kate
Offline

Anna: Everything about being a woman used to freak me out! Now there are only a few things that still give me a hard time smile

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Bob I’ve never personally experienced hypergamy, but that wasn’t the intended point of my initial comment. Yes, hypergamy exists…I see it all the time on television, inferred in commercials, in comments on Facebook or from observing/listening to my friends and customers. However, I’m still unsure as to why my opinion that both sexes should have SOME world experience is being translated into “women should sleep around and decrease their SMP value”? That’s not what I’m saying at all. If I go to see the Hagia Sophia, do I have to bang a Turkish man while I’m there? If I visit… Read more »

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Kate

Like what?

Tam the Bam
Guest
Tam the Bam
Offline

“.. women are able to see a slightly broader range of colors and can hear high noises better. Again, this is most likely due to needing to listen for children crying .. Speaking for myself and my mates, and even my sons, at least, it’s maybe got more to do with women being less inclined to spend every opportunity they could headbanging to the likes of Napalm Death or BoltThrower in nasty bunker-like venues, sweat running down the walls and piss on the floor, during their formative years. Pardon? What was that? Yeah yeah, Guys do Stupid Shit, Part XVII.… Read more »

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@Martel

Regarding that blog post of yours, following the links brings you to this:
http://educationnext.org/actingwhite/

Reading that page brings to mind Urkel, and the literally culturally ingrained disdain for being smart in minority communities. Reading it solidifies my complete contempt for shows such as “Big Bang Theory”, which seem to try to create culturally acceptable social dismissal of smart white males. A very disturbing trend.

Rollo Tomassi
Guest

I should probably Google the link for this, but when I was in college I remember reading an experimental study for psych about how fathers were better able to identify their own children’s faces in a crowd than their mothers. They basically had all these kids dressed in identical school uniforms, boy’s hair short, girl’s pulled back, so their only identifying features were their faces and hair color. The father’s overwhelmingly out performed the mothers for time in making a facial recognition of their own children. The study was intended to validate the idea that men had a psychologically evolved… Read more »

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@Rollo, That’s pattern recognition, which men generally excel at. I’ve also been able to recognize people I know from much longer distances than the people I’m usually standing with. I don’t do this by facial recognition. I realized a long time ago that I (like most males) didn’t ONLY look at peoples faces to recognize them. Instead I also watch their stance and how they walk. I literally memorize the way my friends/family stand and walk, and that becomes the first thing I look for when looking for someone from distance. I’ve even been able to name someone just by… Read more »

Kate
Guest
Kate
Offline

That’s fascinating. When I was living in Europe, I once ran into a cousin of mine I hadn’t seen in years (so, I was really unfamiliar with exactly how he looked) in a comedy club while waiting in line for the bathroom. He saw and recognized me first. Neither of us knew the other was abroad and it was one of the strangest experiences of my life. Very surreal to be able to identify “family” that way.

Matthew King (King A)
Guest

YOHAMI, we’re really in the weeds here. It’s hard to maintain dialectical flow by fisking each other’s blockquotes. Particularly since much of our typewritten conversation is thinking out loud and testing concepts whose integrity we are not certain of, which is why we throw them out there for challenge. Toss it all against the wall; see what sticks. Suffice it to say, the mastery of instinct is the basis for all civilization. Hypergamy is an attraction to the telltale signs of domination, not an attraction to domination per se because domination includes the control or elimination of the hypergamous instinct… Read more »

Matthew King (King A)
Guest

Jeremy wrote: Matt, desire is passion. What you are arguing for is the extinguishing of human passion. I can’t think of anything more horrific to argue for. I don’t care what those religions say about removing desire, religions can create whatever psychological fantasy they want and hold it in front of people as an ideal to attain. What you’re saying is you worship “passion” (however you define it apart from desire), and you take exception at me for blaspheming your creed. Religion is whatever we place highest in our lives. No one said anything about “extinguishing human passion” altogether, so… Read more »

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Rollo

Thanks for the link, it was an interesting read. I don’t agree with some of it, but it’s cool to see a different point of view and rationale for some of the comments here.

And, as always, it was wonderfully written. smile

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@Matthew King (King A) What you’re saying is you worship “passion” (however you define it apart from desire), and you take exception at me for blaspheming your creed. Is that what I’m saying? I don’t recall saying that. I also don’t recall taking exception to any contradiction of dogma. In fact I recall finding your use of other peoples dogma on how humans are supposed to live as proof that humans “can” control desire thus they “should” control desire fairly tiresome and banal. While we’re making up ad hominems for each other, I find your examples on how you think… Read more »

Matthew King (King A)
Guest

Zzzzz.

I gotta get out of here.

trackback

[…] the comments to Rollo’s recent post, Yohami (a decidedly quality blogger in his own right) […]

Afonso Henriques
Guest

Some man and some wolfs are monogamous.

Hey There
Guest
Hey There
Offline

@ Anna I totally agree. I’m 22 and am already successful and was tempted into marriage with a girl a year older because of her looks, it didn’t work out, lucky for me. Now I’m free to build a foundation of success until I’m 30-35 and then I can settle down with a really hot 18-22 year old. Girls are welcome to do the same, but they have to realize that actions have consequences. We are slaves to our biology. Girls didn’t fuck me when I was broke and rich and successful guys want young, feminine, women. That’s why I… Read more »

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Hey There Well, I think everyone is entitled to basic human respect, but I get what you mean. People have to work for any further respect…at least in my book. I’m glad to hear you are successful this early in life, it’s a great feeling when your plans and finances come together. I agree that marrying so young could’ve been detrimental in the long run (though I know some couples it has seemingly worked for so far). I guess I just have a difficult time imagining myself as a “traditional” woman. I would hate the idea of staying home, not… Read more »

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Hey There

I’ve also never had anything I’ve ever said described as “devious” before…or had anyone claim that female independence is “sassy”. It’s certainly a different experience, I’ll grant you that! smile

Rollo Tomassi
Guest
Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Rollo Just finished reading your link. I’ve noticed this many, MANY times with other women…they expect all menfolk to give complete and utter respect to them (as though they are visiting royalty), and yet give little to none in return. This is nonsense, pure and simple. Every living thing has *some* value. Men have just as much value as women, even if the reasons for that value is different. As such, you should never kick a guy in the genitals unless you are also willing to do it to a gal. You shouldn’t punch someone without fully expecting a punch… Read more »

Fender
Guest
Fender
Offline

@YaReally

About monogamy, I actually think that Dan Savage had very interesting things to say about it. It might help your friends.

Westcoaster
Guest
Westcoaster
Offline

I just got off a sports message board where the first post asked how quickly after post-nuptuals did men not get sex? The lead poster said 3 weeks and the thread — not a male site, a sports message board — went on for 50-plus pages. No sh-t. Some of the results were startling. Some classic AFC’s and some guys who knew better. But it was alarming. I might go link this site to go unplug that Matrix.

Hey There
Guest
Hey There
Offline

Yes, Anna everybody is entitled to basic human respect. Having said that, in this world we are all competing for resources, except traditional women are letting their men compete for them. i respect those women as civilians so to speak. They are part of the “women and children” who are off limits in war. I believe in traditional values, and traditionally women are respected just for being women, so, if a woman takes on a traditional role she has earned my respect just for that. What I meant was that once a woman is an adult and has decided to… Read more »

YaReally
Guest
YaReally
Offline

@Fender

Awesome thanks for that video, that’s a great way of explaining it to the blue-pill types. I’ll be linking it to some friends. As a PUA my view goes way too deep into it and my friends don’t want to be PUAs so they take my advice with a pound of salt lol. This is an explanation that might help them sort out their feelings and guilt that’s just fucking them up 24/7 lately.

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Hey There Thanks for the response. I wholeheartedly agree that the majority of women would be happier if they followed your advice to be “traditional”. I dislike the fact that so many of my sex claim to be “independent” when they actually rely on Big Gov to provide them with specialized loans, grants, business opportunities and other assistance that is not afforded to our country’s menfolk. I find it ridiculous to say you are a self sufficient adult when you constantly seek handouts…that’s not being an adult, that’s being a child. But as I’ve pointed out before, I do not… Read more »

Hey There
Guest
Hey There
Offline

Anna, Anna, Anna, you misquote me. I didn’t say I don’t not respect independent women, just that they have to earn it just like men do. I also understand some women are FORCED to forge a life for themselves on their own. And some, excel in the real world. I’ve met them, they are smart, capable, and strong. A minority maybe, but they exist. I’m just saying it’s a lot easier for an attractive girl to be a good wife than to be the next Hillary Clinton or next Angela Merkel. American culture is screwed up this way. Look, you… Read more »

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Hey There Fair enough. I will accept that 99% of modern women would actually be happier and/or more fulfilled in a traditional role if you accept that the other 1% of us would be miserable in it. But I think you’re correct in that this discussion has run it’s course…I dislike that it has gone on this long. I’m constantly perturbed by the fact that I am against misandry, speak out against unfair/unequal laws online and in public, and am basically on “your side”, but it is always an issue that I’m not of a traditional mindset. Honestly, man, it… Read more »

Anna
Guest
Anna
Offline

@Hey There

Also, I’m sorry if I misquoted you…it really didn’t seem that way since you said;

“…but when you forego that role, my default respect is taken away.”

This made it sound as though you had NO respect for self reliant women, not that you respected them as you would a man (as a competitor, in other words). I have absolutely no problem being seen as a competitor in the workplace…I imagine that any bachelor without a family would be seen the same way.

Hey There
Guest
Hey There
Offline

Anna, I know what you mean about being an outlier….I didn’t follow the 9-5 path and was able to gain success, so, people have trouble putting me in a box too.

Höllenhund
Guest
Höllenhund
Offline

Yohami and M3 are just being completely obtuse idiots in this thread, while imnobody and Martel are the voices of reason. Look, if someone is so dumb that it he expects an explanation why people’s base sexual urges should be regulated, why it’s a bad idea to strip the majority of men of the opportunity to start and build families, it’s pointless to talk to them. If you think civilization equals the law of the jungle because some people have more power and authority than others, you’re a dumbass. You know what? You won’t find hospitals, schools, indoor plumbing and… Read more »

Simon Corso
Guest
Simon Corso
Offline

I’m starting to wonder if we’ll ever see new content here again.

Please Rollo , if for no other reason than to push that “Vestiges” pic down the page. This weekend someone asked me “Whats worse than seeing Lena Dunham naked ? ” I sent them that pic.

Simon
Guest
Simon
Offline

I’m a bit late on this post, but I wanted to ask: what if we hate ourselves for understanding the processes behind our behaviours? Something learned cannot be unlearned. This results in un-necessary analysis that affects your perceptions and behaviours albeit being very interesting.

How are we supposed to deal with the disgust we feel towards our species as a result of understanding how they work?

YOHAMI
Guest
YOHAMI
Offline

you change your taste.

trackback

[…] easy to make the association of how this ‘check-the-baby’ dynamic is a vestige of what evolved to make our species so successful; if it didn’t annoy us, more distressed […]

boomlinde
Guest
boomlinde
Offline

Keep writing stupid crap, but at least get your facts straight.

“This preservation of favourable variations, and the destruction of injurious variations, I call Natural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest.” — Darwin, Charles (1869), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (5th ed.)

boomlinde
Guest
boomlinde
Offline

“This preservation of favourable variations, and the destruction of injurious variations, I call Natural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest.” — Darwin, Charles (1869), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (5th ed.)

trackback

[…] could go into detail about how men giving each other shit is an evolutionary (and useful) vestige of tribalism and how men would use this “challenging” to ensure the strength and survivability […]

Macbeth
Guest
Macbeth
Offline

“Just because you know the reasons for your behaviors doesn’t grant you a license to engage in them.”

Oh Rollo, such a rational expectation!

trackback

[…] motivated by what’s been coded into its instinctual firmware as a result of what’s been evolutionarily beneficial to the survival of the canine species. The operant conditioning is training that dog to perform desired behaviors counter to that […]

trackback

[…] I explored this topic in my essay, Vestiges. […]

trackback

[…] our ancestors had, but the environment they evolved in is largely gone and forgotten. However, the vestiges of this evolution are something we need to contend with today. I think it’s ironic how ready […]

trackback

[…] by order of degree. Dogs, for example, rely primarily on the instinctual process and the mental (vestigial) firmware they’re born with to solve most of their existential/environmental problems. That […]

trackback

[…] by order of degree. Dogs, for example, rely primarily on the instinctual process and the mental (vestigial) firmware they’re born with to solve most of their existential/environmental problems. That […]

kfg
Guest
kfg
Online

“. . . I remember reading an experimental study for psych about how fathers were better able to identify their own children’s faces in a crowd than their mothers. ”

And in another study, strangers could match pictures of children’s faces ,with their fathers,
but not their mothers.

%d bloggers like this: