- Illiterate wrote:
- Especially I want to ask, can females make good judgments in mate-choices when violence is not apparent?
Females are impressionable and adaptable. Environment is crucial in developing their filtering agency - perfect for natural and social filtering of undesirable traits. They can be trained/edumacated to filter anything in and filtering anything out of a population - though they might protest instinctively, repulsed, feeling unhappy, violated, wronged, used....but not really understanding why.
Women tend to know things, not understand them; feel not comprehend.
Power is central to how they respond sexually. Power through association is feminine power.
Whatever exhibits power, or a potential for increasing power, is attractive to them.
Their judgements are malleable.
This is why they easily fall in and out of love - their love/lust has a shelf life, and too much honesty is like too much oxygen to fire - it burns hot and fast.
- Illiterate wrote:
- I have heard theories that females are in fact very good lie detectors and judges of characters, because males have always been pretending to be more than they are to females. Females developed this trait of seeing through males who's sales pitches promised much more than were backed up in the real world.
They've evolved intuitive bullshyte detectors, so as to not invest in inferior males.
They don't know how or why but they feel another's pretences.
This is also why they require erotic intoxication to submit to the "penetrating intrusions' of a male.
Genes factor in...and when the intoxication subsides they see the truth and are disenchanted....reading themselves for the next charming male to 'sweep them off their feet.' No male is perfect....so no male can ever be final.
Mental and physical signals placing them in this state of readiness to be hypnotized - facilitating penetration and gestation.
Again...attraction is determined by multiple factors, one of which is Weininger's formula...the others are a female's IQ - determining her perception of details and her self-awarness (
know thyself); the other being her self-esteem - determining what she considers superior and inferior, relative to herself.
Females are usually subjective...and only in higher IQs can they develop some objectivity. Their sexual role makes them subjective agencies of judging and evaluating others, relative to a given fluctuating environment.
So, manmade environments indoctrinate them and adjust their judgements to specific cultural ideals.
This is the root of their confusion since they've evolved to judge using natural markers; then their minds are easily indoctrinated and trained to judge in accordance with human ideals, i.e., socioeconomic, cultural, markers.
This creates mind/body dissonance... confusing them and the males who are then expected to deal with them.
So, female midlife crisis consist in them trying to 'find themselves' or discover which part of their impulses is genuine and which is fabricated.
It is best - if you are alpha - to get to females in their youth before socioeconomic, cultural indoctrination fuckes-up their judgements - one side compelled to settle for the socioeconomic, cultural, ideal, and their bodies, their nature, compelling them to go for the usual alpha-male.
Alpha designating not only a muscle bound Neandertal but one with comparable mental/spiritual attributes...they call charm.
- Illiterate wrote:
- But are females such great lie detectors after all?
Definitely...but this doesn't mean that they are immune to being charmed.
Hypnosis and charm is self-induced. It is why I say you must inspire a female to place herself in the state of arousal or erotic lust/love.
With males it is easier since it is mostly physical, but for females it must begin with her mind.
- Illiterate wrote:
- Or has the situation changed in a few previous generations due to brainwashing and nihilism?
Having evolved to be genetic filters makes them easily adaptable to being memetic filters.
Nihilism is like any world view, another kind of filter - in this case a filter that inverts and adjusts her naturally evolved filtering impulses - a manmade filter over a naturally evolved filter.
Gene/Meme dynamics.
- Illiterate wrote:
- Have women lost their natural abilities to detect a lie and a fraud?
Sheltering atrophies everything, including a woman's natural intuitions and motherly instincts.
They haven't completely lost it but it has atrophied to the point of being insignificant....for the majority of dimwit, midwit females...and high IQ females with a poor psychosomatic constitution.
- Illiterate wrote:
- Now I know that a woman might "go along" with a male's lie (in order to estimate a male's creativity constructing the lie) but being a romance fraud victim and losing thousands of euros or dollars to the "American soldier who's stuck in the Middle-East, needing desperately 10 000 euros" is not quite that.
Monogamy is still a memetic factor (
technology) - a remnant of Paternalism....but it is deteriorating....so many females are forced to settle for whatever they can get.
Now things are slowly changing - depending on a female's self-esteem, her ego. They are now able to have children with males that already have children with other females.
This means incels are multiplying...and can only serve as
nice guy alternatives when the desired male fails to remain committed to them.
Feminism destroyed the traditional family and forced females to return to primal sexual dynamics, multiplied by technologies and institutional effects.
The exhilaration of power soon became a realization of what this means - power has privileged but also duties.
Cost/Benefit.
Fortunately, for females there are plenty of males willing to settle for leftovers.
- Illiterate wrote:
- If women are great lie detectors and judges of characters, then can women estimate the value of any given male just by his looks?
Not only by "looks" but appearances, including the entire gamut of sensory input: scent, movement, humour, genstures...no detail is left unused.
Physical symmetry and proportionality is but the beginning....not the end.
- Illiterate wrote:
- I mean of course this cannot be done completely by anyone, since in the natural environment we see each other performing physical tasks all the time; we are not statues.
There are no certainties in nature - no absolutes - all is an approximation; an estimation of probabilities.
- Illiterate wrote:
- But just for a mind game, could an average female pick the winner of a boxing match beforehand more likely than an average male? Could a female tell, intuitively, based on male's looks alone, something about this male's ability to survive and endure physical strain?
Don't know about that...but there have been experiments where females were given t-shirts worn by random males and they all managed to pick the most attractive male from the scent alone.
Unattractive male sweat stinks; attractive male sweat smells divine.
Attractive male attentions are charming; unattractive male attentions are creepy.
- Illiterate wrote:
- Would women be better evaluating such things than males, in nature?
Yes, but males also have some intuitive abilities, though more masculine males rely exclusively on reasoning.
But, for males, sex is less risky and costly, so they don't have to overthink it.
[quote="Illiterate"]What about today? A quote from
Impulso Oscuro:
- Impulso Oscuro wrote:
- Women having been detached from nature and violence for so long, mistake the physical and behavioral aggressiveness of alpha and nonwhite males as being superior because they have not had to deal with the consequences of their stupidity leading them to starvation or too much attention upon her in a time where being the center of attention was dangerous.
Sheltering means humans are placed in manmade environments, governed by controlled, regimented intentional factors...shaping their world-views.
Yet, their body's still remain rooted in natural selection.
Gene/Meme dynamics.
Other than the factors already mentioned, time is another factor.
So, older females are more indoctrinated and so more prone to adopt social norms and morals and ideals; even if some high IQ ones know it and experience this as being insufferable.
IQ in males determines how low they will be able to go to expunge their libidinal energies - purge their sperm sack.
Blacks will, usually, fuck anything that moves.
- Illiterate wrote:
- I have posited that i think the way Christianity/Abrahamism destroyed monogamy, is not so much by pairing fit/unfit males/females with eachother, but the social peace it established, which set the precedent by which men would compete with each other.
All forms of paternalism - whether Aryan or nihilistic, e.g., Abrahamic - impose a limit on male and female promiscuity.
Christianity also promotes Utopian peace and brotherhood, making males particularly feeble (
emasculated), necessitating more female settling.
Even an inferior male among Aryan tribes was powerful when compared with Christians and their peace and altruistic world-views....emasculated spirits. God is, among Abrahamics, the ideal male....no biological males can ever compare.
- Illiterate wrote:
- I think Impulso Oscuro might be right here. I see women make a lot of mistakes in their judgments today and they seem to confuse one attribute for another. So women really do suffer from nihilism, would you all agree? Women have no coping mechanisms whatsoever in this environment. They can't "play the game" in such a way that they win anything in the end. Their instincts are of little use in modern society. Or am I wrong?
Females easily adapt to environments - even manmade environments based on nihilistic ideals.
They adapt consciously, but their bodies have evolved in different more challenging, more threatening, more uncertain environments.
- Illiterate wrote:
- Today it is unwise to fight over a woman, or challenge a male to a duel where it is decided who gets the female. Also a male can not be violent, protecting what is his (the female) because this male would be constantly in prison for assaults and violent offences. So violence is eliminated. In the past a male could perhaps keep his female and make sure that this female is not available for any other male, by being aggressive towards other males and possessive towards his female. Today this is not possible so even on a theoretical level the responsibility to refuse all the proposals and keeping up the companionship and monogamy is of female's. But if women are sperm samplers and they go strategically for diversity, any responsibility excepted from females about moral matters is very stupid indeed.
Feminization implies that males are forces to adopt feminine methods of attracting and seducing mates.
Metrosexuality, Dandyism...
Even bodybuilding is an exaggeration of masculine proportions. I heard that Schwarzenegger had to lose muscle mass to play Conan, because he could not swing the words, due to his size.
This means that muscles are so out of proportion to what is necessary....an overinflating, compensating for a degree of socially imposed emasculation.
- Illiterate wrote:
- That is widely true. Yet, many if not most of the females seem to feel attraction to the loudest and cockiest male; hypermasculated male. The one who doesn't have any substance to his words. One could ask, is this a mistake, a bad judgement on a female's part or not?
Hypobole - self-handicapping - was always a male method of standing apart, and being noticed.
Males lie, so do females, in the erotic game....females evolved a lie radar, but this does not make them immune to male natural signals of health and virility. Hypobole simply accentuates them so that they can be easily noticed among the cultivated uniformity of manmade systems.
- Illiterate wrote:
- I guess I would like to ask, do women (even the average and low IQ females) feel and sense intuitively that this (nihilism) is a bad deal to them?
No...women rely on their gut feeling, their intuition, and need not understand what it is, nor why it is.
This need to know is a male thing.
This makes females more easily indoctrinated. They don't question their desire to submit to power, they surrender to the feeling - give themselves to it.
This is why male love is trustworthy and long lasting -
agape - whereas female love/lust is ephemeral and untrustworthy -
eros.
Agape is based on reasoning; eros on hormones and emotions and impulses...lust, experienced as surrender, submission, total and complete identification.
- Illiterate wrote:
- Do they feel this depression in their bones?
This is another issue.
Depression has to do with declining virility, power, hope....the estimation of diminishing probabilities.
- Illiterate wrote:
- In a nihilistic era, they can't feel sexually satisfied and many times they feel depressed because they bear inferior children, and all in all they never get to be part of anything that would be appreciated through ages? Or did I just describe a woman with a high IQ? Are the average and low IQ women quite literally happily oblivious?
Females are subjective...their doubts precede copulating; their indecisions precede impregnation.
Once they've committed and invested, they are all-in, and when the hormonal lust/love erotic effect subsides they seek another investment.
0% - to 100%
- Illiterate wrote:
- I asked in this thread, has the lack of violence affected any of this. I would like to ask, do high IQ women have so much more sophisticated and refined judgement, that they really see the actual potential behind any given male, even when some of the information is not available? So they do not make the decision based on who at the first sight seems most able (by being the loudest, the most visible, most aggressive, most hyper masculated...)?
Sheltering atrophies....body and mind; spirit and judgement.
When there's no big cost to having inferior children why be stringent and exact about who the father is?
Cost/Benefit.
When the severity of the consequences is reduced - due to collective, institutional interventions, there is no need to develop whatever you've inherited....neither physical and mental.
Especially in Americanism, denying race and now sex/gender...all consequences concerning a child's mental and physical potentials become accusations against systemic racism or sexism. All is reduces to language - exchange codes...money.
There's no natural cost to female promiscuity - not only because of modern policing and medical interventions, but because of institutional interventions imposing equality...and more recently imposing equity.
A females filtering mesh becomes wider or more socially/culturally, determined. She need not worry about any consequences.
Her promiscuity impulses are liberated from naturally limiting risks/costs.
Why do you think they so vehemently deny free-will?
They do not want to acknowledge any human, any personal, factor in determining anything...including the quality of their own offspring.
Their sexual choices are not the issue, for their degenerate minds...it's all fate....or the consequence of some evil agency, like systemic racism/sexism.
Their judgements and choices have nothing to do with it, you see?
They did not participate, in the slightest, in what followed.
Even their judgements and choices were inevitable - determined. They never made any error in judgement....never made a single mistake.
Understand now?
It's all tied together.