Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

1.3K

Examine the hysterical responses to things like the run on massive quantities of toilet paper. Men do not use that much TP, this is a female response to being unable to wipe their front holes. Albeit, a determined response to a loss of manufacturing capacity to create more toilet paper.

Examine the following article that would have you believe that women care more for their well-being than men do. http://archive.today/jACSq A brainwashing tactic (on men) at the least. According to the latter drivel;

men worldwide have been far more likely to die from COVID-19 — because of a mix of biological and behavioral factors — but also less likely to have been vaccinated against the disease.

Not only is it a push to destroy men, it is a refusal to acknowledge the inherently hysterical nature of the female. A choice of the female to accept a policy with gene altering affects--without questioning the narrative they have been given.

Clearly, this is to push men into accepting bullshit that they know is a manufactured lie. Men are not easily persuaded into things until they see them with their own two eyes. Hard evidence is a reality for men. They do not; "go with the trends." Female nature is to accept things at face value based on group think. Go with what the leader of the tribe tells you, or be banished (and condemned to death). It is a hard wired evolutionary response to their authority figure; "Big Daddy Government." Men are no longer women's authority figures, it is those who guarantee them they will fix all their problems--no matter how fucked up they are.

Examine the hysterical responses to things like the run on massive quantities of toilet paper. Men do not use that much TP, this is a female response to being unable to wipe their front holes. Albeit, a determined response to a loss of manufacturing capacity to create more toilet paper. Examine the following article that would have you believe that women care more for their well-being than men do. http://archive.today/jACSq A brainwashing tactic (on men) at the least. According to the latter drivel; ``men worldwide have been far more likely to die from COVID-19 — because of a mix of biological and behavioral factors — but also less likely to have been vaccinated against the disease.`` Not only is it a push to destroy men, it is a refusal to acknowledge the inherently hysterical nature of the female. A choice of the female to accept a policy with gene altering affects--without questioning the narrative they have been given. Clearly, this is to push men into accepting bullshit that they know is a manufactured lie. Men are not easily persuaded into things until they see them with their own two eyes. Hard evidence is a reality for men. They do not; "go with the trends." Female nature is to accept things at face value based on group think. Go with what the leader of the tribe tells you, or be banished (and condemned to death). It is a hard wired evolutionary response to their authority figure; "Big Daddy Government." Men are no longer women's authority figures, it is those who guarantee them they will fix all their problems--no matter how fucked up they are.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (86).
[–] • 1 pt

What an exceptional write up. Agreed.

I did not know the stats on average age of white marriage, that is interesting. Note: my reference to having children at a young age I was referring to the pressure to find a husband and have children before the end of their 20s.

Perhaps we have infantalized our society to such a degree that people in their 20s still seem child like to me.

[–] • 0 pt

Well I had a few trad guys assert to me that white women were really meant to be getting married in their mid teens historically, and that we were “too jewed” to want women to wait until their 20s.

So that compelled me to do some research. Were white men really historically that perved? Were we just a couple centuries away from basically kiddie fucking muzzies? I wondered.

Of course we tend to be aware of the marriage habits of european elites like the Borgias or the Tudors. But it turns out that arranged marriages between young teenagers or a young teenage girl to an older man was practiced mostly by elites. The commoners tended to self select mates and church records show staggeringly late (IMO) marriage age since the middle ages with women at around 23 and men being close in age to their brides at around 25 or 26. In britain, on the continent and in colonial america.

This is in direct contrast to what you see in muslim societies where the brides are very young and there is a large disparity between husband and wife. These traits seem consistent for other monogamist/polygamist societies.

We have gotten used to putting off kids until very late but we are in a real population crisis so I think we need to go back to an older strategy and bring the numbers back up.

[–] • 0 pt

That is incredibly useful to know. It speaks the beautiful nature of our ancient peoples and our ancient cultures. I appreciate you sharing that.

When we sweep away the bullshit deepities "hey heres a list of nonsense i read about" and are honest about the male / female roles in our society you kind of start to see that white men and white women want the same path forward.

That is a truly beautiful thing.

Which is what ALL OF THIS is all about. It's about keeping our focus away from each other, away from our culture, our communities, our history. Some of it is absolutely architected and planned, some of it is the outcome of network effects (or the ratchet principle as someone in another thread taught me about) getting us to this point.

The suggestions you keep on making just make incredible practical sense.

I think everyone here is kind of dancing around the obvious: we all KIND OF understand or predicament on a whole bunch of levels INCLUDING from an evolutionary perspective. We get details wrong, but because we are white, we fight it out and hash out the truth.

While I really enjoy the conversations here and in other places, we all kind of sense that the time is now to start building something more substantial. I have some ideas on this, mostly captain obvious stuff at this point in time:

  • There won't be one magic strategy. We will need to define many strategies (as a community and as a people) and see what works.

  • The key problem is actually going to center around access to the financial system. Just look at what the lovely couple over at Red Ice have endured. In fact, that is really the majority of the issue.

  • I think we are going to have to drive a huge portion of this through our religious institutions. Religions have special protections under the law and we will need those protections to help us on the legal front. Besides, christianity has embedded within it a bastardized set of some of our ancient religious and spiritual practices, it may be time to disembowel the jew from the bible and grow some new spiritual roots from our people based on the seeds that were nearly lost to time.

I'm writing this mostly because you are the first I have met here to have a grasp of the practical. Your post about enforced monogamy is one of those insights that cuts very close to the bone. You can read all throughout history where a simple tiny change in cultural norms results in huuuuuuge problems and disasters for cultures. This feels like one of those insights. I had the priviledge to visit family in far eastern Europe where people still live in small ancient villages and it did not take long to kind of figure out that the social rules in a small village exist for a reason, one of which is precisely as you put it: enforce monogamy.