Saturday, March 27, 2010

New Pearls.

Since people are dumb and they need to have things said in different ways in order to comprehend them and since this stuff bears repeating, I am posting some more. (Though most everything necessary has already been said.)

Cosmic determinism.

Cause and effect domino effects. Nothing mystical.

Domino effects on the scale of hydrogen-cloud(nebulae) collapse (created by some pressure density event [wave]); then stars and their planets; then star ist kaput creating new pressure density events.

Just like with that, there is cause and effect on the planets too. It gets a little more complicated to say the least but it still is simple determinism. Just like the star birth cause and effect --"cosmic determinism".

Dimorphic sex for vertebrates and how understanding that is relevant to 'our' cause...

The point is to keep her stunted.

There is no reason to allow here to mature: she will just masculinize and make trouble for men. Especially make trouble for men who are specifically stunted by modern peace goals. (Peace goals are created by men as their attempted solution to the culling matches female sexual value naturally instigates.) These peace goals between the males cause the males to be bred/culled and trained to be gits so as to make them less threatening to each other.

The females if allowed to mature are _naturally_ triggered into dominance attempts--and other behaviors hurtful to the men of the 'peace bred society'--by the display the 'peaceful' males exhibit.

The more sappy the society makes males the more sappy and stunted the females have to be in order to still be the females.

A little analogy to help the dense understand... If we turn our grizzly bear species into a panda bear species, we have to make sure and make the females into pandas too. If not, the grizzly females--normally dominated by and triggered into submission to the male grizzlies-- will make mince meat out of the panda males.

Note that our society is about to collapse specifically because of a stated and unstated goal to stop "uppity" females. If the liberal males of the last few centuries would have simply stunted the females too along with trying to forge the new peaceful man, their liberal society might have worked. But by not stunting the females --and indeed allowing and prompting female aggression (which is the inevitable side effect of too many git males in her presence)-- they damned their society at its inception.

Most of you are too stupid --for genetic reasons-- to get this simple, simple stuff. Unfortunately.

All our "opinions" about this are not equal (regardless of what your mother tells you). I understand more about the root fundamentals than most. (The fact you all didn't learn these fundamentals for yourselves as you grew is note worthy and a grand indictment of the "age of reason".) As such I see the way it all works in practice better.

The other aspect of dim sex and how it is relevant to our struggle is fem sex value...

Females are "more valuable". This is why males are better at everything: Sperm egg ratio is such that a bottle necks forms around the egg. The males battle through this bottle neck; selection only allows some males through thus making them 'better'.

Either male vs male direct aggression is the culling force [eg bears or lion etc] or female choice is the culling force [eg flying birds, insects, some fish etc].

That is fact of Universe.

If you don't like the way that fact is spun at academia or media then you don't advocate suppression of this fact. You advocate murder of the git males (elimination of their bio chemistries) who create the fem empowerment spin.

Killing those git males is ultimately part of your/my reproductive strategy for getting through that bottleneck. As the git's spin of nature _used as deference payment to female vanity_ is their strategy for getting through that bottleneck. Since the gits are cowards and runts, deference to female caprice is their only hope of winning reproduction.

Note that you and I --we-- are trying to reinstate the bear or lion form of culling. While the gits in charge of this modern upside world are trying to more fully cement in their bird strategy for culling "us" bears/lions out of the way... as we all spiral towards the egg through the bottle neck.

"Either male vs male direct aggression is the culling force [eg bears or lion etc] or female choice is the culling force [eg flying birds, insects, some fish etc]."

Either way, females are "more valuable".

This is a great irony of dimorphic sexuality since dim sex originates(for proto vertebrates) as an emasculation attack by the mature hermaphrodite (male) directed at a younger hermaphrodite (female). The irony is the victors through their victory (ie creating females) actually made things tougher on themselves since males do have tougher lives (whether in male combat species [bears/lions] or female-as-chooser species [birds, insects]).

But yes, the females are still emasculated stunted males by nature*. That's what you want to hear. You are looking for an empowerment argument from nature; same as liberals. Liberals just have to pound square pegs into round holes and then censor the challenges to the illogic. (*female as stunted creature by nature is massively suppressed fact of our evolution _by all sides._)

Liberals hype up the fem sex value aspect of dim sex; And also the specifically female choice dynamics [eg birds, insects etc] and extrapolate to all nature and use as an "argument ad naturalism" to vindicate the modern western female-as-chooser bird-like dynamic [which gits need --it's their only possible chance]; Meanwhile conservatives try to hype up the male vigor aspects of the male as warrior dynamics (bears, lions). Conservatives are hamstrung in their empowerment attempt by their allies in the anti nature creationist and fuddy duddy "moralist"(effete) community. (Moralist fuddy duddies are the bird-like gits that vectored us into this female-as-chooser dynamic in the first place.)


A good example of the absurdity that comes from spinning biology into "nature as female empowerment display" is "females come before males".

Nonsense. A-sexual organisms come first; then hermaphrodites; then dim sex. One can not have "females" or "males" without the other--absurd. (Dim Sex formed a couple separate times through parallelism.)

They concoct the 'fems come first' absurdity from the fact that A-sexual organisms have parts that later become female parts.

"Female lions pick mates." They observed females go to new brunette stuffed males more than new blond/red males. Fine. But how blinded by political "relativism" does one need to be to not see male lions KILLING EACH OTHER IN WARS complete with coalition flanking and diversionary maneuvering!!? (Panzer Battalion strikes again! [It's actually Pz Abteilung.])

Same with the elephant "matriarchy". Nonsense. Male elephants fight to the death and the winner male fucks his choice at his leisure. It is like claiming that a harem parlor --filled with lounging dames-- is a matriarchy cause sometimes Sultan isn't in there. _How blinded with bigotry does one have to be to not see a giant --no, a JUMBO-- male elephant in must?_

(That is a main reason I ignore this "matriarchy/ patriarchy" blabber. It is all ill defined just so tales.)

A specifically human example of the absurdity that comes from trying to spin everything bio science into pro female display is "female open callosum" brain is better than male human single hemisphere brain". ...Pigs, deers, horses, crocodiles etc all have open callosum brains. The male human has the single hemi focused brain and only the male human has left Erda. Coincidence?

Not to mention liberals are shameless hypocrites: One minute it is "we are all the same and biology isn't real"; the next it is "biology is real and females are better --even if we gotta pound square pegs into round holes and shamelessly censor --and excommunicate those 'in league with the devil'-- to make it so".

There are tons of socio anthro babble [not really biology per se] matriarchy /patriarchy fem empowerment absurdities. (List some yourselves.)

We are definitely in a dark age when it comes to bio science -- and especially gender bio science. You conservatives--most especially Americans-- played your part in building that by being stubborn gits who couldn't(and still can't) get certain stuff. Liberals exploited accordingly until their citadel like control was complete. Now we are in a dark age.

FYI, Erda is an old Norse goddess; it is our modern word Earth.

I meant men have built all this crap, including stuff _that leaves Earth_ --even though "handicapped" by only having half a brain. (poor dears) :roll: Meanwhile the mighty wimmins/mouse/crocodile open brain has... um has... Now give me a second and I'll come up with something.

Ah got it: gossiped about ass.


Dame wrote: "I thought China and Asian cultures in general have always favored boys, culturally speaking."

That is a complexity issue that people always point to as another example of how non natural humans are --how above reality itself we are.

While I don't have it figured out entirely it is something like this...

The fathers (and his top sons) are achieving and holding rank so that they can be as reproductively valuable as the females. (Note females do nothing but just show up and be healthy to be as valuable.) The way _those_ fathers hold rank is by having lots of mules that work and fight on behalf of him (and his number one son(s)) and the land needed to sustain that continuum. Those main 'top dog' genes are the main things making it through the bottle neck of fem sex value; the extra sons are a type of husk around the kernels.

This question and concern of your's is more valid than a dame's last one about "self awareness"/ Why creatures are motivated to do what they do. (I explained that one. She was simply wrong there because wimmins are "too close" in their thinking; they lack big picture objectivity.) This 'I want sons' thing is a more important thing you have brought up.

There are other similar examples like that too. Wife immolation(healthy fem killed and buried with high rank man); dowry paid to boys family.

Like I said I don't have this all figured out yet. But the dim sex premise I explained earlier is still valid and accurate. This "I am compelled to want sons" [compulsions are created by chemical modules] is simply a "god of the gaps" issue. ("God of the gaps" = a profundity that hasn't been figured out which doubters use to throw a monkey wrench into the premise.) It is a complexity issue that doesn't negate the premise; it just muddies it.

Also the whole thing might be spandrels. A trait that is just going along for the ride --like ornaments on a cathedral.

(More later if I think of a better, smoother way of explaining this. Good shot dopey girl!)

(Just FYI note "culture" is some kind of expression of underlying natural reality.)


Self awareness and compulsions...

Males aspire because they have compulsions to achieve. (A compulsion is created by chemical chain reactions.) These specific compulsions have been selected more often than other compulsions, from the litter of extended siblings, given the energy conservation principle[finite food] and specifically female sexual value(bottle neck growing from the sperm to egg ratio).

Female humans aspire because they have compulsions to make it harder for males to just get "some" easily; "shit test". These compulsions have been selected once again by energy conversion/conservation BUT specifically... creating chaos and boundaries around reproductions is making her children (ie her compulsions /chemical conversion trends) more effective in some way. (Simply, it is inducing competition and then having that chaos separate the men from the boys.)

(Chemical chain reactions vary. Only some will be selected as efficient at converting more finite food into more of that chain reaction assembly line. The deemed-efficient is selected by an unwitting varying environment.)

To put it even more simply. A male aspires to rock stardom so he can get a chick to become a weak kneed dick sucker. A female aspires to rock stardom so her knees won't just become weak when a male rock star points at his package.

But to say people join up for "honor" or "protection" reasons...

...A red mud tribe(ocher in hair) was asked why they were at war with the blue mud tribe(wode in hair) [they both descend from the white lime in hair culture earlier --blue tribe finding itself by a part of a river bank where wode was exposed, and red tribe finding itself by some other bank of the river where ocher was exposed]. A rud mudder says "Well duh, just look at them... They have blue mud in their hair".

Deeper analysis is not something a joiner has a compulsion towards.

I put that little bit above about the tribes not really knowing what they were fighting for other than their collective feeling that the other tribe sucked ass so as to try to grapple with something. It was meant to be poetic.

Once there was a whale watching boat. College girls on it and a man. (Lets call that man Sean.)

So the whales jump out of the water and smash back down on to the water. Sean says, "do you know why they do that? Only boy whales do it."

...Confused silence.

Sean continues, "it is reproductive display scaring other males away using the conductivity of water to convey size and strength."

The girls, basically in unison, go "Nuh uh. It probably just feels good." [And the 'nays' have it. ...Gotta love democracy.]

Well of course it feels good. But good feelings are compulsions created by bio chemical modules. Out of all the bio chemical modules that formed (rolling around on the ocean floor, pissing in your own face, standing upside down in a volcano plume) --all of which feel good to the doer-- that "jumping out of the water makes me feel good" module did best; ie was 'selected' by the complex unwitting environment more often.

I --er uh Sean-- stated why that module got selected ("scared other males away") but Sean didn't say the whale knew this about his motivation. It simply felt good to him. Sean didn't think that he had to break it down to CAVEMAN BRAIN level for the um "feminine mind" of the world to get it.

Male Lions' midnight belly-grunt festival is the same as the whale jump: an impulse that feels good to the doer but it got unwittingly selected for "intimidation display" reasons (it scared younger smaller male(s) away).

To understand how unwitting selection of modules works, think leopard spots (a cutaneous system bio chemical module). Out of all the other kitten variations, the module that coincidentally unwittingly [since it is just some protein polymers in a goop] created a pattern that mimic'd dappled sunlight did best for reasons unknown to the victorious over-the-other-kittens leopard him/her self.

We then as humans from an outside looking in perspective figure out why that particular cutaneous module did best. We say: stalk pounce ambush predator [as opposed to run the prey down predator] benefits from having camouflage; the camo could mimic some environment feature (or be pattern diffusion/confusion like Zebras or WWI battleships). Eg dappled sunlight coming thru trees.

Same with orgasm module. Same with any other module that has benefited the host it makes up. The modules don't --and the host itself doesn't-- need to know it is the most efficient energy converting trait in an amoral energy based universe for it to "win". It simply "wins" for reasons that go over its "head".

Now back to pussy (the be all end all of our little corner of the universe here)...

Avril Lavign (or who ever) aspires because it feels good. But by doing so she limits (even further) the amount of boys who are eligible breeding stock. Shit test. Avril Lavign doesn't need to know this about the module that compels "aspiring".

GI Joe aspires because it feels good to him. Ie he has modules which compel 'this a way' and not 'that a way'. The particular modules which make him feel happy when he stomps face have gotten selected because they limit the amount of males in his area. GI JOE doesn't know this about himself or his modules; He simply, "knows" (is compelled to feel) that those other dudes `suck ass.

Now given the species we come from so far --not what we are becoming now-- the female human's desire to stomp face of other is not there so as to limit the amount of males in her vicinity. It is there to make it harder for the surviving males (on her side) of the face stomping hoedown to get twat. Shit test.

If Mankind continues to become a male-less hive (and it will --even after this little fall a comin') then the females will diversify --specialize--into different roles. Like the female-only caste of a hive. Then yes that hive's female-warrior-specialist-compulsion (to stomp face and see others as "suck asses") can be said to be something other than shit test impulse.

Do you understand CAVE WOMAN?


I don't quote others; others quote me. (And you can quote me.)

Some solutions and observations

Luxuriating in the afterglow...


I believe Western culture needs to eliminate the bad blood/breeds that created the problems (we are suffering under). This probably entails civil war.

Killing cockroaches is not sociopathy. ...Unless one is a cockroach.

I believe in owning the female.

I believe in disciplining the female.

I believe she is not equal intellectually or physically or morally (with anyone but the cockroaches).

None of the above is "sociopathy".

But conforming to feminist edicts and calling break-away from them 'sociopathy' is typical conservative conformist cowardice. This is exactly what liberalism time immemorial relies on to impose its snowballing revolution, generation after generation through all history.

Also your contention that [evil doers] will be put on a big bad "List" by the scary government is silly.

Big deal: I'm on a list now.

I like helicopters. The last ones were delicious.

You change a system by putting stress on it.

That takes courage.

Cowardice is for slaves.


Laws are arbitrary ever changing constructs.

Eg this notion that young girls are off limits is a new law --created by men's enemies (the real sociopaths).

It needs to be changed.

Saying that is not sociopathy. But conforming to some law is cowardice. The very cowardice that is the root of feminism in the first place.


The 'good pastor' is trying to stop feminism by attempting to evidence how it is bad for females.

"Equality is bad for females --they might pull a muscle!"

Good! I hope they do; their babymakers too. Yep.

I ain't give no fuck if female 'empowahment hurts females.

Even if paternalism/fem protectionism worked at stopping this phase of feminism, the situation created would be the perfect condition for feminism to start up again anew even more virulently.


The problem is getting back there [an acceptable to 'me' cultural dynamic] and staying there forever. Note that we came from such a dynamic but snowballed out of it to this disaster.

The reason we snowballed out of that to the breed we've become now is the "alpha beta gamma" --coup d ta-- cycle of human (and proto human) history and pre history.

To thwart the coup d ta that destroys that cultural dynamic, all dudes need to be the same. Either through strict culling or bio tech making them the same.

Why didn't telling the state to "go stuff it" work back when men were still in charge of the family and quasi self sufficient hunters and such?

Feminism happened because of cosmic determinism. Snowballs.

Understanding that allows us to --possibly-- make the current/snowball go where we want it to. And that would be determinism too.

The state is not an enemy. This state is. This state came into being because men embraced the bizarre mentally ill fantasy that a world with out a state was/is possible.


If there was any evidence that an actual company paid a wimmins less, Gloria Allred types would be all over it along with the media, and the Equal.O.C-type unconstitutional wimmins' government bureaus.

The 77 cents on the dollar means all men at large have generated more than all wimmins at large. But it is presented as though some chick at an interview was paid less than a man.

Not to mention the stat itself was debunked as a fem stat coming from some college dept that couldn't vindicate the stat itself. Just like with the DV and rape stats. Once challenged, there is no source for the stat but it grows legs and that becomes the stat. Note the 77 cents changes every year and depending on speech it could be as low as 75 to 70 cents; hell sometimes they'll be a decimal tail on it LOL.

When one actually studies the given thing that feminism complains about, he'll find that the females are actually advantaged in the given situation that the trumped up femstat complained about. Eg the military: only 25 % fem officers. Horrible! Until one considers that only 14% of military is female. Same with hospitals: more wimmins die in them you see ...cause men don't go there at all; and fewer wimmins used as _guinea pigs_ by new pharmaceuticals --the outrage!. Well it's the same with this money thing: the females are actually over advantaged by corporations and Human Resources than the men for less real work generated.

And none of that even begins to address the more important underlying and surrounding issue which is "fem sex value" and male competition over it. The only reason people work and have "positions" in the first place.