White Shooter in El Paso Save for later Reblogpost

TimBucks
@TimBucks

Send Private MessageSubscribe50

Here’s a safe bet: the shooters were Incels. Where do we get Incels from? Our screwed up social order, which is out of whack with natural gender roles and evolution. Here’s how that works:

Men like to be dominant. Trouble is, they actually are not. That’s an illusion. Dominance is a natural trait in men. It’s also a trait in women, it’s just expressed differently in women. In men, dominance is is just really men competing with other men, for access to women for sex and reproduction. However, this so-called Male Dominance is an illusion. Why? Because: Women control sex. That’s dominance, real power….female dominance in sex. It’s part of nature. Not overt, but very real.

We need to understand how this works and how feminism is screwing up the natural order, which is based on men competing for women, men controlling society, as a balance to women controlling sex:

The pattern in nature in all primitive human societies is this: Men control the political/economic sphere. Men do this and compete with other men, for women. Men that impress women, get sex. Men that don’t impress women, don’t get sex. Why do men  compete with other men, for sex with women? It’s simple: because women control sex. That’s the cardinal rule in nature, when it comes to sex. Lots of things follow from this basic axiom. Control of sex is as big a source of power for females, just as big a source of power for males is controlling and dominating the political/economic sphere….in primitive human societies, all human societies….till now in history. Feminists pretend the only source of power in the world, is male power in economics and political power. That’s a feminist fairy tale. Controlling sex is every bit as powerful as controlling economics and politics. Control of sex is primarily a female thing, because that’s the way it is in all female mammals. That’s why I fully support abortion and a woman’s sexual choice in reproduction.That’s why rape is bad, because it takes away from a woman’s dominance over sex, which is essential to all mammals in nature. Female control over sex is fundamental to nature and evolution in mammals. The rules of nature and evolution are written in a way that is very clear: sex in mammals must be controlled by the female. No one disputes this. Nor do I.

As a natural counter-balance to this female power, I see the political and economic spheres as areas that men must dominate, in order to naturally balance out the domination women have, at sexual selection. When that happens, we have a balanced, functioning society. When that doesn’t happen, we have an unbalanced non-functioning society.

Because of the creation of the modern world, technology and feminism and giving women the vote, this basic balanced equal equation in nature of women controlling sex and men controlling economic and political power has been destroyed. Women are the majority of voters in a democracy. What they say, goes. Women now dominate the political and are starting to dominate the economic. Women are more educated as a group now, than are men. This eventually means women will often out-compete, a lot of men, in economics. For instance for our breeding population in America, for under 35s, women now out-earn our men under 35. But the trouble with this female economic domination at a young age is that women are hyper-gamous….they evolved to only “mate up” the Dominance Pyramid…and women did not evolve to breed with men who are lower in the Dominance Hierarchy. This means breeding does not happen in a modern society where women economically out-compete men, often. Economics that does not take into account human biology, is a fool’s version of economics. That’s what we have now: A fool’s version of economic assumptions. This female economic dominance over young males is screwing up family formation, screwing up our birth rate, because women won’t mate with men who are lower than them in the social/economic Dominance Hierarchy. So by giving women the vote, by educating women and having them economically compete with men, give women every break in the world so they out-compete many men, then we get what we ask for: often the women out-compete men, economically. And then women won’t breed with the men they out-compete. Congratulations. By buying into false feminist concepts, we have structured our economics to buck up against evolution itself. We will not win in this, long term. Women already control sex, now they are out-competing men in political and economic power. This means the basic male-female power balance is broken. All power is now tilted too much towards the female. That’s why our feminist way of life is broken, to the core.

The Wal-Mart shooting happened because many men are being left behind, because our new gender roles are not working out. Having a feminist society where women control the political and economic doesn’t work out, for men that women out-compete. There is no place for these men in our new feminist society. Of course, not all men lose. Many win. Men who win in this new feminist world, these dominant men, will always have a place, because they are winners and women want them. That’s just hyper-gamy 101. But with 80% of women on Tinder chasing the top 20% of men, what do we do with the bottom 80% of men? That’s where the trouble is. And especially what do we do with the men at the very bottom 20% of men? They have no hope. Women don’t want them. Women are selecting them out for genetic death because they are losers, in the women’s eyes. They know this. It’s as obvious as the noses on their faces. They feel this rejection every day. Their resentment grows daily in a society where young women economically dominate a large number of young men, who are the genetic losers and left overs that no women want. What to do with these men? Many realize their plight and have taken the Black Pill. They know they have nothing left to lose. 

Here’s a curious fact: Women leading the political and economic order has never been the pattern of the past. Why is that? Part of it was the modern world did not exist yet, technology and feminism weren’t around then. But I think it’s even something more fundamental than that: The likely reason is, it won’t work, of women leading and dominating the economic and political spaces, the reason it has not appeared in past societies, was basically for biological reason. Men lead because in evolution, men protected women, males competed for females. Females were the social source of life, and for new life of the tribe…and women were dependent on males, but didn’t dominate them in terms of running the political and economic leadership. That seems to be the natural pattern that kept working in the past. Our feminist pattern was not the pattern that worked. Perhaps it’s unworkable? In the past: Men ran the political and economic leadership to balance the female power of control over sexual reproduction. Men ran the political and economic leadership as a social balance to women controlling sexual reproduction.

Female control of sex is vital. But let’s understand how powerful and significant female control of sex is, for the structure of human life: It means females selecting out certain males, for biological continuation through sex. This is a tremendous power granted to females, by nature. Part of this sexual selection power in nature, is female rejecting many males, letting them biologically die off. This is the female power to say to one man, “you live” and to another man “you die”. As a natural social balance to this tremendous female power, society evolved the balancing force of male political and economic power….in all human cultures.

This was a fair balance I think, set up by nature and human choice, for very good reasons. And from the male point of view, since males don’t get pregnant and males often go extinct, far far more often than females, the only way the male survives evolution is by controlling territory, limiting competition from outside males coming in from outside and competing against him for females. Feminism ends all that. Feminism pushed for open borders, women competing with men, economically. So feminism pushed for women to control all three: sex and politics and economics. 

The old political and economic order…of women controlling sex, but men controlling economics and politics…was common to every culture, every race and religion, for all time….Since it kept working, the likely lesson for modern people is that political and economic control belongs for evolutionary reasons, to the male, since females control the sexual. That’s what works, naturally. All this sexual balance and fairness is done away with, in the new feminist order, because in a feminist political order, women seize the political and economic power in society, via democracy and education…

Women prefer more men around, to compete for her. So women welcome outsiders, more than men do, because it helps women, genetically. Female DNA wanders. Male DNA stays put. And women now vote and are the majority of voters….putting women effectively in control, politically. That’s what democracy and women voting changes in male-female power dynamics. 

The male in general has been politically neutered by the female in modern life, by extending the vote to women. WalMart shooters are the men being economically out-competed by women in our new feminist rules for life. Feminism for many men that are out-competed means means a very large reduction in male power. The male has had one foot cut off of him, in the dance of life. That’s what this is all about.

Those white loser males shooting up Wal-Marts? That’s what this is all about. Modern life and gender roles are broken, to the core. There is no place for large numbers of young white men. We don’t need them. Women don’t want them. The young men have no hope, no future. Often they turn to White Nationalism. That makes sense, for them. Why? Because they are not stupid: They realize women are voting in their replacements, women are out-competing them and don’t want them. The lower class white male Wal-Mart shooter knows he stands no chance in life. For an attractive young woman from the lower class, her lower economic status is not necessarily a barrier to her success in life. A man higher up will find her attractive, feminism will offer her help, she will win in life. For a lower class white man, he has none of these options…..so he turns to violence. These young men know they stand no chance in life. ….and no one cares. Men generally don’t care about them. And women care even less…..because all women are hyper-gamous. If a man is a loser, he may as well be dead as far as most women are concern. These men know this….perfectly well. 

Jordan Peterson explained the power of women, in sexual selection, this way:

“Nature fundamentally is that which selects…from a genetic perspective. That’s nature. That’s the fundamental definition of nature.

And it is the case that human females are sexually selective. And it’s a major component of human behavior. So the evolutionary theory, roughly speaking, is that the reason that we diverged from chimpanzees eight million years ago, seven million years ago, is at least in part because of the differences between sexual selectivity between female humans and female chimpanzees. Female chimpanzees are more likely to have offspring from dominant males. But it’s not because of their sexual selectivity. So a female chimpanzee has periods of fertility that are marked by physical, by observable physiological changes. Not the case with human females. Human female ovulation is concealed. So that’s a very profound biological difference between human females and chimpanzees.

And the female chimpanzee will mate with any male. But the dominant males chase the subordinate males away. But human females are sexually selective. And so…it’s not a trivial fact. And so you have twice as many female ancestors as male ancestors. You think….well how can that be? Well, imagine that on average every single human female has had one child throughout the entire course of history….which is approximately correct, by the way. Then imagine that half of the men had zero, the other half had two. OK….and that’s roughly the case.

So half of males, historically speaking, have been reproductive disasters. And the reason for that is female sexual selectivity.

So it is actually the case that female humans are nature. It’s not only that they’re associated with nature symbolically. As far as reproduction is concerned, they are the force of nature that does the selection. And so they are nature, in the most fundamental way.”….end quote

Feminism is a leading cause of the growth of White Nationalism. So what should we expect based on a continuation of our feminist society? That’s easy:

Expect more shootings…..

However, to be clear: Feminism and the assumptions of our gyno-centric society are not actually enforced by women. They are enforced by men, as TFM makes clear in the above video. I agree with TFM. The rules of society are set up by dominant men, in the end. Men who cater to women. These men have screwed up society. They have listened and catered to women, too much…..and to young poor white men, too little.  Yes, women are the majority of voters and are running things in a sense, but that is only because dominant men cater to them, too much. These men have become weak. They listen to women too much. So the empowering of women at the expense of some men is getting out of hand. It leads to what we have now: legions of young men with no hope in life. This can’t be blamed on feminism, in the end. It can and should be blamed on the top male leaders in our society…..who ignore the needs of young men, while pandering endlessly to feminists….disregarding the underpinning natural order with regards to control of sex vs. control of economics and politics.

And as TFM correctly points out, generally most men are not wired to care much about other men, because men are wired to see other men as competition for them. That’s why there is so little sympathy for these poor white men. Where do we go from here? The top men either change their mind and start bending social norms to give lower class white men a chance in life, or this sort of thing will continue. The role women and feminism can play is that top men listen to women on emotional issues. Most women don’t care about these men, because they are “losers” and women are hyper-gamous. However, there are a few good and a few sympathetic people in all groups….even among feminists, even among dominant men.. If feminists start realizing that the nature of feminism has become so biased in favor of women that it is bending poor men to the point they start shooting up Wal Marts…..hurting women.

Perhaps that fact will motivate a few feminists to start re-considering the pampered assumptions of feminism endlessly catering to women over men, and bending all of society to cater to young women…..without a thought to young men. That sort of gyno-centric female selfishness hurts young women, in the end, when the cosmic wheel of gender karma comes around…… Blaming false villains like “White Nationalism” is weak and stupid and has no real insight as to why this is happening.