The Science of Love Save for later Reblogpost

TimBucks
@TimBucks

Send Private MessageSubscribe50

Backup video from Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/video/9VZzlIDkgSQ/

Interesting science, brought together by TFM… So now that we know some of the basic science of men and women and things like hyper-gamy and dominance and love, how do we deal with all this science? How do we deal the the real life consequences of biological truth? How do we use this science to construct better gender relations?

Here’s my take:

As TFM said, in the past, religion used to restrain female sexual drives. This is true in all religions. Then we in The West mostly got rid of the religious leash that humans evolved, to control female sexuality. Like a dog without a leash, women are running wild. The bitches are still in heat, but have no leash on. We are going back to a state of nature, where there were no leashes on female sexual drives. This is not culturally sustainable for long, as the bottom video by Black Pigeon Speaks shows us. Humans evolved religion in the past, to control female sexual drives, because female hyper-gamy was so dangerous, it destabilized society….for obvious reasons.

I don’t know what all the solutions will be, now that we have more or less tossed out religion as a main restraining leash on female sexuality, but the leash has to come back on women, in one form or another, or we will be destroyed as a culture. So now….what to do?

I would add a few observations to TFM’s scientific explanation about the biological and chemical nature of love and hyper-gamy. All these instincts and drives, which he describes so well, they operate in the human animal at a chemical level, which he points out, but they also operate simultaneously at a conscious as well as subconscious human level, as well as at a social level and cultural level, within the natural evolutionary life cycle of a human being. It should be re-stated, that which TFM states clearly and accurately: Women are not the problem. Hyper-gamy in women is not the problem. Not restraining hyper-gamy is the problem. As TFM points out: Remove hyper-gamy from females,  and the consequence is human evolution falls apart, because female pickiness in mate selection is necessary and absolutely fundamental and vital in our evolution. Mess with Mother Nature, at your peril. What women are doing by acting in their natural hyper-gamous state,  is just fine…….

However, a quick reading of history and evolution shows us the obvious: What made civilization possible, was restraining human sexuality…..particularly female sexuality. Till we humans invented the birth control pill, there were plenty of leashes on female behavior. The primary leash was religious enforcement to deal with all that pregnancy, all the babies that were born, when there was no birth control. Having babies means a leash appears on women, for many reasons. Now that we have the pill, females in evolution now can have consequence free sex: no babies. This may not be as great as it sounds. It means there are fewer reasons to restrain female sexuality….so religion, which is the main past leash restraining female sexual impulses, it disappeared. This removes leashes on female hyper-gamy. So far the outcomes of that social change are not good, to say the least.

It seems to me that keeping a civilization going requires putting a leash on female sexuality. Consequence free sex may destroy us, because it removes the restraints on female sexual behavior. It may destroy us, if leashes are not put back on female behavior. Civilization only works if we have leashes on female behavior, as J.D. Unwin pointed out.

Homunizam explained the basics, in this brilliant post on link you:

https://linkyou.blog/j-d-unwin-warned-feminism-would-destroy-culture-30-years-before-womens-lib/

It doesn’t have to be religion and frankly I doubt if it will be religion, but it has to be something which is culturally enforced, to restrain female hyper-gamy. Again, female hyper-gamy is not the problem. What is, then? Not restraining that hyper-gamy is the problem. Why do I say that? Basically because that has proved to be a workable solution in the past….in every culture, in every era, female sexuality has been restrained in order for civilization of any sort, to be maintained. In essence: Men need leashes. Women need leashes. That is the essence of civilization. Civilization only works if most men have a reason to get up in the morning and participate in that civilization. The likely root reason leashes are needed has to do with how female and male sexuality work: women tend to only want the top men, men tend to want a lot of women, to have sex with them and impregnate them, as TFM points out. However, a society which allows men to impregnate as many women as they like, while allowing women to only sleep with the top men, such societies have not survived in the past, because they sexually leave out, too many men, for those societies to remain stable. So we invented monogamy and religion, so society keeps stable, as most men get sex. Leashes were put on human beings, because of the nature of human sexuality….in women and men….and the practicalities that entailed in keeping a civilization going. We need our leashes, to sustain civilization, but due to feminism and the invention of the Pill and subsequent Sexual Revolution….the leashes have come off. A new leash pattern has emerged:

Right now men have a great many leashes on them. Women have few leashes on them. That is the problem, in essence. Before we attempt any solutions, to put a leash back on female hyper-gamy, let me sketch out the basics of evolution, for men and women, as far as evolution is concerned.

In the Age of Science, we need to construct any new “leashes” on female behavior and male behavior, by keeping in mind, the basics of evolution which we all can agree on….and prove, through science. Fact based, provable science has to behind any new leashes we put on female sexuality….or male sexuality for that matter. Such provable, fact based logic needs to be built into any conscious choices we make, of which leashes to put on, which sex. Both sexes need to understand how evolution and nature itself sets the basis for the need for whatever leashes we humans put on ourselves. All this requires us to understand and agree upon the science, before proceeding to construct, agreed upon leashes, for men and women. We need to agree to this because religion is largely gone, as a leash on female behavior. And the pill means fewer babies come into the world. That change itself means we restrain female sexuality less….babies are a natural restraint on women….and we have thrown away that pattern of women getting pregnant when young, which in the past has restrained women. This is destroying us. Now we can see that we are destroying ourselves, because the leashes have been removed from women….now what to do?

We need a plan for our society to survive, without religion. What would that be?

Part of any evolutionary workable society, are things which constrain female sexuality, which tends to run amok, if not restrained. Religion understood this intuitively. Religion, done well, is not an imposition on human nature. Instead it’s a response to the worst and best part of human nature….including female nature. That is to say, religions are largely a response to female hyper-gamy…..Google engineers have figured out, using computer programs, that in online dating sites…..80% of women now pursue only 20% of men. How long do you think our society will last, with that pattern? Why is this happening? Hyper-gamy is nothing new. What is new is, the leashes have been taken off females. That’s no good.

Now that religion is gone, it can’t save us. Religions, strange as it is to say, were based to a large degree of intuitively understanding certain biological truths, of human behavior. In that sense, they were scientific, if only at the intuitive level. It’s time for us to understand the same basic human drives, their causes, dangers and strengths, and how they work, we need to understand this at a new level, a conscious level….a scientific level instead of a religious level. We need science and words, to bring this truth, into a form we can understand and apply, for our new post-religious age. We better understand this scientifically, or we will not last long. All this biological truth requires understanding the science, so we can agree on the new non-religious leashes, which must come into play, in the place of the old religious leashes, which may be a thing of the past. For this, we need to understand the evolutionary and scientific reasons, why we are doing this, so it is not a series of pointless impositions on people. It can’t be. It’s for their own good. To do this: Women should understand evolution, so should men, because it affects how they act in the world, what choices they make.

Understand the basic rules of evolution:

1-Women: evolution gives you great power, when you are young. Beauty is power, it’s there to attract a man, so you can pair-bond with him, for life. The harsh biological reality is that women have to use that power in your 20s, because as you get older, your beauty fades, so the power women have over men fades as well. Wise women use their beauty power in their 20s, to form a family.

2-Men: you are worth more and more over time, because women value resources in men, women are physically attracted to resources, as TFM points out…..as bizarre as that sounds, to a man like me, it’s true….women are physically attracted to resources….and male income and status rises till a man is in his mid-50s, then levels off and eventually declines.

The root of all this power in both sexes, is evolution: females have eggs that go bad quickly. As Stefan Molyneux pointed out in his famous tweet, by age 30, about 90% of a woman’s eggs are dead. That’s a sign from nature that women are long past their prime by age 30 and should have had children already. Sperm had a different evolutionary path. Male sperm works quite well till a man is gasping his last breathe on earth.

Stefan Molyneux✔@StefanMolyneux

“Ladies, by the time you are 30, 90 percent of your eggs are dead. Get married young, have your babies, THEN have your career. You have 40 years to work if you want to, you only have a short time to have children. Listen to Mother Nature – she loves you and wants you to be happy,” his tweet read.

How this evolutionary conflict is best resolved: Women are the ones who say yes or no to sex. That’s basic to all mammals and certainly basic to civilized society. Nature wired men to be hornier than women. That’s also a biological fact. Smart women should be realizing all this and should have good morals and form families in their 20s. Why? The effect of family formation is it bonds men to the woman, so that as the woman gets old and her beauty fades, the man stays with her because he has deep emotional bonds tying him to the woman.

Family formation of course, puts a leash on a woman. If she has three kids, her time when she is young and pretty, her time is occupied looking after her children. Children are a lot of work. Anyone who has been foolish enough to have children, past age 30, can tell you that. Encouraging early family formation, whatever way we do that, means women have children when it’s proper by the time and the logic of evolution, which is when women are quite young, in their early 20s…..the complete opposite of feminism. This should occupy most women till their mid-30s, so her hyper-gamy gets restrained by the practicalities of Motherhood and family. This is certainly not the answer for all women, but for most women it likely is. And it’s exactly what women evolved for, so it will work, for most women.

What is old….is new again. Nature, is conservative.

Part of the solution to all this may mean treating women as equals. Such as men saying to feminists: “The things you believe are destroying Western Civilization. Do you care?”

Women have bought into “My body, my choice”. Fine, let’s agree to that. With that claim of ownership comes the moral responsibility, if this crashes civilization. If it does, it’s on women. No unnecessary guilt. Just the natural guilt that flows from the consequences of biological reality. 

The simplest leash on female hyper-gamy is simple: follow the pattern of nature, which compels women to become Mothers, when they are quite young. Feminism has it all wrong. Riding the C Carasol when they are young? What a waste of life….. The stupidest thing a woman can do is listen to feminists, who imply that beauty doesn’t matter, time doesn’t matter, that gender roles are a social construct, that endless sexual freedom is good for women. Being a whore is never a good option for a women. Religion has that right. It works directly against a woman’s biological interest, which is to become a respectable Mother in her early 20s…..That’s the very time she should be pursuing finding a mate: when she is at her Peak Fertility, and thus Peak Market Value, as a woman. Feminism ruins women by turning them into unhappy perpetual whores, who end up in Bali….. The best strategy for a woman is to date in her early 20s enough to know what she wants, then settle down by her mid-20s at latest and have children. If you are a woman and are childless and single and not married by 30, you are far far too late.

Women need to be told the truth: You are old at 30.

We have turned evolution upside down, in feminism:

Feminists are so dumb. They don’t play the game of evolution well. Look at the idea of “sin” from an evolutionary point of view: Nature gives women several advantages: when women are young: they are generally beautiful, most women. At that time, women are at “Peak Sexual Market Value”. This means their value in the sexual marketplace is at it’s highest. Their value to men….the buyer…is at it’s highest. When women “sell” after their value has declined, they get less in the offer, from men….because their value has declined.

The religious idea of “sin” was a social attempt at restraining women’s out of control libido….so that women “sell” their sexual wares in marriage, when they have maximum value, sexually….This is done through promoting the idea of “sin”…. Sexual restraint actually increases a woman’s value. Modern promiscuous feminist women give it away for free. Charging nothing, for what you have to sell, is very poor economics. By putting in place sexual rules of what is proper, women are enhanced in status.

This is necessary because in evolution, women are at their Peak Sexual Market Value during their early 20s, but this Peak Sexual Value in women, it declines tremendously quickly, because by age 30… 90% of a woman’s eggs are dead. To make sure women get a fair market price for their eggs, morally responsible people who wish to protect women, put in sexual rules to protect women:

These rules might include marrying young, and being sexually modest till marriage. When these rules are in place, women’s value goes up, because women are at their most desirable, when they are young….thus under the old rules…as in the Victorian era…women sell at “Peak Sexual Market Value:…attaining the highest value, they can get.

By restraining female sexuality, society can place limits on male access to a female’s body. That’s what the idea of “sin” is about…it’s about driving up the value of women’s bodies, so men don’t just toy with her, don’t just be a “player” …..but instead be seriously interested in her and committed to her. This is a giant boost in the value of females, when sex is restrained, because it restrains the worst of male impulses, to take advantage of women, use them and dump them for someone newer and fresher.

….Feminism is opposed to sexual restraint, the very thing that pushes up the value of women and ensures men stick around

Do I really have to say it? Isn’t it obvious? It is the biological responsibility of women, to produce offspring, to sustain a culture. This is where female leadership comes in. They set the agenda, biologically, for a culture. They decide if a culture lives or dies. They decide if a culture has babies, or not. All these things are not the male role in nature, which is to compete for women, then when the woman has decided about family and offspring, the male role is to cater to those feminine demands….for what kind of family she wants, what kind of culture she wants, what the physical shape of her community should be…housing etc.

Men are there to give the woman what she wants, provide for her needs and the needs of her children, once those needs are articulated.

Feminists have abandoned their primary role, to guide the female half of the human equation in creating new life to sustain a civilization. Instead, they try to turn women into men. Second rate men, at that. The roots of this is jealousy. This insane female jealousy of men has to cease and desist. Feminists have abandoned leadership for the primary role for which nature evolved females in the first place: family and children. Feminists have abandoned leadership for the central role of females, in human life.

Instead of following nature, feminists teach young women at university to “Smash the Patriarchy”….and of course, as Jordan Peterson has pointed out, “The Patriarchy” is just code for Western Civilization. They mean to end it. To which I respond: Smash the Patriarchy? Is that what women really want?….just think about that for a moment, as to it’s implications for women. To me, that attitude is almost incomprehensibly stupid, for “Smashing the Patriarchy” really means ending the social structure that makes life viable for modern women. However, if feminists really want that, I say: Go ahead. If that’s the kind of pain you want to bring on women, please proceed. Learn now, or learn later.

Feminism says that it is the female who must control her own body. I have no argument with that. As part of feminist dogma, they omitted the conjoined obligation, that with the control over her own body, the women collective must assume responsibility to have enough babies, to keep a culture sustainable. It is a comment on the insanity of feminist theory that the sustainability of Western Civilization….which produced the culture where women have more rights and comfort than any other, is not a concern of theirs. It’s as if they simply float along like leaves blown about in an autumn wind, as if they play no role in that story, despite the fact that women are the central character in that human drama.

Despite the fact that in mammals, it is the female who has the offspring, and in modern life it is the female who has full and complete control of that birthing process….this pattern of not sustaining the biology of a population in advanced countries continues. This trend can continue, but only if we are willing to concede that Western Civilization must die.

Creating a feminist ideology for women, which neglects the consequence of that ideology demographically destroying the society around them, is what we now have. This social pattern won’t work, if survival is your aim. Let’s be clear about that obvious fact. Our culture is at odds with evolution….unless cultural suicide is your aim.

Of course, when it comes to this entire narrative, Black Pigeon Speaks has pointed out in this brilliant video of his below, just out of whack with nature we in The West really are. We are so out of whack with survival patterns in nature, we may very well go extinct as a civilization. We have too many Left Over Women:

Backup Bitchute Video:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/IBnwH6o_ew8/