The solipsism insanity

[sazc]

@Spaz lol, no, lol I don't have the time to read all the posts and I don't know what solopholism means without looking it up. Did I even spell that correctly?

I'm not worthy. I'll just move along.

 

[Spaz]

You’re not interested in our perspective, you’re just interested in getting off on tearing it apart and throwing insults, so no thanks mister. Not intetested. Tag someone else to troll.

You could grab a man's ass and expect 2 get away with it. But God Forbid if a man grabs ur ass. It's straight 2 jail for him.

Many woman expects 2 get away with murder just because she has a vagina.

Since u r claiming ur vaginal privileges, as a man, I have little choice but 2 walk away.

 

[Spaz]

@Spaz lol, no, lol I don't have the time to read all the posts and I don't know what solopholism means without looking it up. Did I even spell that correctly?

I'm not worthy. I'll just move along.

Haha okay fair enuf.

But answer the other one, the Cosby thread, that's more important then this one.

 

[BeExcellent]

@purple haze I agree. Genetics are a blessing. I am grateful, very grateful for my good fortune there. I look at it this way:

What God gives us are his gifts. What we do with his blessings are our gifts or at least our respect of his gifts, back to God. He gives us gifts to work with; what we do with our gifts ought to honor them and express gratitude for them.

For that reason I have zero tattoos, had no piercings whatsoever until I got my ears pierced to wear normal earrings as a college student at age 18, and I appreciate the gift of beauty so I take care of myself. I also want my clothes to fit. I'm not going to gain weight because my wardrobe would be very expensive to replace, lol

Beauty carries with it (in my mind) responsibility. People expect haughtiness and vanity out of beautiful people...I see a responsibility to treat others kindly (not when I am attacked, obviously) as a rule. I am teaching my very pretty daughters to be thankful for their beauty and kind to others.

As to my son, he attends an all boys school. When I attend things there I dress modestly and even then the teenage heads still turn. My son gets told by his peers that I'm attractive. He's used to hearing that.

He's of dating age, smooth with girls and both well liked & self confident. He makes straight As, is a talented musician and an award winning athlete. My job as I see it (in partnership with his father) is to love & encourage him, discipline him & guide him, and be transparent about how life REALLY is.

He is dating a very pretty green eyed long haired blonde who is the daughter of a local businessman. She has an early curfew (her parents are strict) and seems to be a sweet girl.

I always tell him: "Listen son. Concentrate first on your studies & goals...never let a girl manipulate you, because they WILL try...be a man and a leader, don't make mistakes from which you cannot recover."

He has seen how my relationship with his father has evolved. He sees how I respect my BF.

His dad and I provide framework and boundaries but also give enough autonomy so he can learn for himself and see for himself how the world is. He knows some girls are going to want to attach to him because he attends where "rich boys" go. He knows some girls see where he lives and think the same thing...so he naturally seems to gravitate to girls from families like ours, for whom some level of accomplishment is normal and expected. He has good manners, self confidence & is socially adroit beyond his years.

I've nothing more to say in this thread. I wish each of you well in your own endeavors.

 

[rber]

A summary;

Looking in from ur lenses based on ur red pill worldview - she's harmless and even might shed some light on some basic female traits that you've missed or never experienced - the female frame. From a red piller such as urself, what is the female frame ? I'm curious 2 hear ur red pill version of it.

And from mine - The female frame is inconsequential to me or to my frame.

And those broken blue piller who seeks guidance in SS r basically young men brought up, trained as one, lived as one in perfect harmony for many years, decades even in the female frame/worldview/narrative not knowing any better until they ended up here broken - then in swoops "advice from an old lady" - who regurgitates some red pill wisdom interspersed with...? (Use ur red pill imagination).

Now this would be a good discussion.

An intellectual red piller and i do like ur postings.

An interesting thread, very interesting.

I do believe she's harmless and has good intentions, she went through great lengths to prove that.
The worst she could do is point us in a direction that's not in our best interest, regardless of those good intentions.
That goes not just for her of course, it goes for anyone - man or woman. Although since we're discussing red pill subjects we are more wary of what women have to say, I get that.

What's the female frame? The answer for that would be way too long.
Frame however is just one concept referring to a reality of a person - it's crucial of course to understand this concept in any social dynamics.
I'm more interested in the actual psychology and social dynamics that are behind a woman trying to assert a certain frame.

In the context of dating, I can see why you'd say the female frame is inconsequential to you - basically she has to defer to your frame and live within your reality, or she's gotta go.
However even when deferring to your frame (consciously or not), the same psychology that created that frame is still there, and you're still surrounded by the same social dynamics.
So while at the current moment a woman's frame might defer to yours, its roots are still alive and shouldn't be ignored. Does that make sense?

People with different frames will always have their frames clashing under the surface, regardless of genders.
I think it's inevitable that your woman's frame under different circumstances will become the dominant one, even if for short periods of time - as much as it's not pleasant to accept that your strong masculine frame will not be dominant at absolutely all times.

Another thing is, while you can next women that don't defer to your frame - you're not going to next all women in your life - mother, sisters, etc. Not everybody is going to defer to your frame, strong as it may be, especially when not in the context of man-to-woman or parenting where there's no real incentive for that.

With that said, I can't say the female frame is entirely inconsequential to me.

I'm not sure if that's the answer you were looking for or if I'm even answering the right question, but at any rate - these are a bit of my thoughts on frames.

Frames aside -

I'm going to say some controversial stuff from a red pilled point of view, but I hope you'll keep an open mind. Feel free of course to let me know if and why you think I'm wrong. I'm more than happy when people burst my bubble.

Many women are more than capable of handling abstract thinking and can think soundly and logically just as men can. The rest of course are having a hard time even spelling their name, but that goes for men too.
Truthfully I see far more intelligent men than intelligent women, it can definitely be due to our current social dynamics, the burden of performance that only men have, etc, but either way I wouldn't be quick to dismiss the abilities of women as poor genetics - I believe it could be rather circumstantial.
At the very least, I wouldn't be quick to dismiss the opinions of women who obviously show signs of intelligence and critical thinking.

Red pill is really about opening your eyes to reality, but the actual content is a theory - and we shouldn't forget that. That theory is very solid and has many based points, but as any theory it should always be questioned and modified according to new insights. Outright rejecting contradicting insights without giving it a second thought is not much better than being blue pill in my opinion. At the end of the day it's about critical thinking and adaptation.

In particular, I'm very careful of AWALT. There are obviously many things that are observably common in the majority of women, but the more something is generalized, the more room for mistakes there is, and the more I think twice before blindly internalizing it.

I do think it's theoretically possible to reach an accurate AWALT and AMALT, at the very least as far as it should theoretically be possible to accurately simulate the human brain and body given the right computation power, but I don't believe we're quite there yet.

 

[Ranger]

Many women are more than capable of handling abstract thinking and can think soundly and logically just as men can.
.

Absolutely. My sister could kick my butt with math. Math is abstract. When it comes to their breeding and mating drives....I disagree. These override and default to biology. Otherwise only tall dark and handsome men would be breeding.

In a mixed office where men are present, that idea of thinking in the abstract decays quite rapidly. It becomes a potential breeding ground as far as her programming is concerned. Like you said, her frame can change.
Status and hierarchy now become the dynamic. It’s about breeding.
Remove the men? Good business takes place. Their inter squabbles are their business.

 

[rber]

Absolutely. My sister could kick my butt with math. Math is abstract. When it comes to their breeding and mating drives....I disagree. These override and default to biology. Otherwise only tall dark and handsome men would be breeding.

In a mixed office where men are present, that idea of thinking in the abstract decays quite rapidly. It becomes a potential breeding ground as far as her programming is concerned. Like you said, her frame can change.

I do see what you're saying, it's observably true, at the very list in almost all cases.
When it comes to breeding and mating drives, suddenly all that abstract critical thinking goes down the drain.

I think it's a matter of awareness though - you can't fight what you can't see.
Very few are the women who are aware of their own psychology (to my observation), much fewer than men - I think it's again due to the burden of performance of men which women simply do not share, which pushes them to improve their status in our society - mostly in the form of gathering information, especially in this day and age .

Once a woman becomes aware of her own psychology and is properly incentivised to utilize it, I personally do not believe she's truly incapable of looking at it the same way you and I do.
Naturally, her interests will be different than ours and more often than not will collide with ours, she won't necessarily utilize it in the way that would be ideal for men.

 

[Ranger]

Another good read is about the nurses during the civil war. After much folly and disorganization Clara Barton & Dix set up the criteria for hiring nurses.
They couldn’t be single or attractive. Preferably, old maids and widows. This then straightened out the nursing corps and allowed it to function smoothly.

 

[rber]

Another good read is about the nurses during the civil war. After much folly and disorganization Clara Barton & Dix set up the criteria for hiring nurses.
They couldn’t be single or attractive. Preferably, old maids and widows. This then straightened out the nursing corps and allowed it to function smoothly.

Interesting

 

[rber]

You wouldn't let them run your set either, though. Unless you were 12 years old or something.

I just think the average man should have outgrown that by the age of 20.

Of course not, but them not running your set doesn't mean you run their set either.

You can definitely assert dominance in a family situation, but there are certain people who's frame is always going to have a lot of friction with yours.
Imagine being with a woman who's just as strong minded as you but has a completely different belief system.
If you're dating her - then of course - next, if it's family - I'm afraid that option doesn't exist (or at least not recommended).

 

[Spaz]

I do believe she's harmless and has good intentions, she went through great lengths to prove that.
The worst she could do is point us in a direction that's not in our best interest, regardless of those good intentions.
That goes not just for her of course, it goes for anyone - man or woman. Although since we're discussing red pill subjects we are more wary of what women have to say, I get that.

What's the female frame? The answer for that would be way too long.
Frame however is just one concept referring to a reality of a person - it's crucial of course to understand this concept in any social dynamics.
I'm more interested in the actual psychology and social dynamics that are behind a woman trying to assert a certain frame.

In the context of dating, I can see why you'd say the female frame is inconsequential to you - basically she has to defer to your frame and live within your reality, or she's gotta go.
However even when deferring to your frame (consciously or not), the same psychology that created that frame is still there, and you're still surrounded by the same social dynamics.
So while at the current moment a woman's frame might defer to yours, its roots are still alive and shouldn't be ignored. Does that make sense?

People with different frames will always have their frames clashing under the surface, regardless of genders.
I think it's inevitable that your woman's frame under different circumstances will become the dominant one, even if for short periods of time - as much as it's not pleasant to accept that your strong masculine frame will not be dominant at absolutely all times.

Another thing is, while you can next women that don't defer to your frame - you're not going to next all women in your life - mother, sisters, etc. Not everybody is going to defer to your frame, strong as it may be, especially when not in the context of man-to-woman or parenting where there's no real incentive for that.

With that said, I can't say the female frame is entirely inconsequential to me.

I'm not sure if that's the answer you were looking for or if I'm even answering the right question, but at any rate - these are a bit of my thoughts on frames.

Frames aside -

I'm going to say some controversial stuff from a red pilled point of view, but I hope you'll keep an open mind. Feel free of course to let me know if and why you think I'm wrong. I'm more than happy when people burst my bubble.

Many women are more than capable of handling abstract thinking and can think soundly and logically just as men can. The rest of course are having a hard time even spelling their name, but that goes for men too.
Truthfully I see far more intelligent men than intelligent women, it can definitely be due to our current social dynamics, the burden of performance that only men have, etc, but either way I wouldn't be quick to dismiss the abilities of women as poor genetics - I believe it could be rather circumstantial.
At the very least, I wouldn't be quick to dismiss the opinions of women who obviously show signs of intelligence and critical thinking.

Red pill is really about opening your eyes to reality, but the actual content is a theory - and we shouldn't forget that. That theory is very solid and has many based points, but as any theory it should always be questioned and modified according to new insights. Outright rejecting contradicting insights without giving it a second thought is not much better than being blue pill in my opinion. At the end of the day it's about critical thinking and adaptation.

In particular, I'm very careful of AWALT. There are obviously many things that are observably common in the majority of women, but the more something is generalized, the more room for mistakes there is, and the more I think twice before blindly internalizing it.

I do think it's theoretically possible to reach an accurate AWALT and AMALT, at the very least as far as it should theoretically be possible to accurately simulate the human brain and body given the right computation power, but I don't believe we're quite there yet.

Good post, you've raised issues that's very intellectual.

Mine will be short, and I strongly suggest you ponder over it.

A woman's frame = power over men

This is a woman's true frame when it's collapsed. It's basically there to ensure woman's survival (and that of humanity) and it's not evil per se, just biology.

As for AWALT, your observations are correct from your experiences but there's a simpler explanation.

Human personality when it's broken down into 4 quadrants; Intellectual, Doer, Motivator and Socialists.

The intellectual and Socially inclined personality are passive, while the motivator and the doer are dominants.

We could go into this and how it fits into a man but for now let's focus these traits on women.

Women have all these inherent traits when they were born, the difference that you notice among women is that while they have all these traits, one of it will be more dominant then the rest hence the difference which you have attributed as abstract thinking.

But be reminded, that whilst they do have all those inherent traits, it's in lower quantity as opposed to a man.

A man is basically born into just 1 of those inherent traits, and towards the end of that particular quadrant they'll be considered geniuses.

This is why men has the ability to seemingly create amazing science, music, poetry and inspiring idea's much like the red pill.

Jesus/Buddha/Hitler/Martin Luther King - examples of motivators, geniuses.

Micheal Jackson, other great singers and poets, etc - examples of socialist who are geniuses.

By now I'm sure you'd be able to fit in other personalities into the other quadrants.

I'll got to run off to the office but this is an interesting topic.

If I've miss any point you've raised, let me know I'll address it.

 

[Spaz]

In the context of dating, I can see why you'd say the female frame is inconsequential to you - basically she has to defer to your frame and live within your reality, or she's gotta go.
However even when deferring to your frame (consciously or not), the same psychology that created that frame is still there, and you're still surrounded by the same social dynamics.
So while at the current moment a woman's frame might defer to yours, its roots are still alive and shouldn't be ignored. Does that make sense?

I'm a bit freer now, I'll address some of the issues you've raised.

Mind you, I don't subscribe to red pill or even hypergamy. I've not given it a lot of thought and even while reading some of Rollo's post, i find i cant finish it, it doesnt appeal to me and to be honest i find it extremely boring as I'm instinct driven and a rather dismissive person in real life.

My life is result driven by instinct of what I desire, both short term and long term.

To get my desired results I continously adapt certain principles, enhance existing ones or even dropping some, in other words it's highly fluid to suit the RESULTS I ultimately desire.

The Red Pill is adherence towards some other men's ideas and experiences.

The Hypergamy theory fits into what vast numbers of red piller men to be true. But it doesn't for me and for many others in reality. As such hypergamy doesn't exist.

To someone like me, looking from outside in, a believer in hypergamy is someone still very much within a feminine sphere of influence and trying out new tricks to manipulate and control women.

Make no mistake that when men says society - it actually is a feminine construct.

You see, I create my own reality, my own rules, my own laws - my sphere of influence.

 

[Roober]

This thread is a clear illustration of a complete lack of knowledge about the psychological reasoning to mens and womens actions in relationships. What I'm not sure about is if it caused by ignorance or a lack of intelligence.

I suggest the victims of female solipsism continue studying sources outside the manosphere to help identify their role in their own problems.

 

[rber]

This thread is a clear illustration of a complete lack of knowledge about the psychological reasoning to mens and womens actions in relationships. What I'm not sure about is if it caused by ignorance or a lack of intelligence.

I suggest the victims of female solipsism continue studying sources outside the manosphere to help identify their role in their own problems.

Can you please elaborate and point out our wrong arguments?

 

[meldiamond]

That b#tch is completely batsh#t crazy. Not only is her character flawless and impeccable, her skin angelic and luminescent, her beauty breathtaking and awe-inspiring but she now lures not only middle aged doctors at the height of their profession and 27 year old chads into her web, but also 14 year old boys.

Plus she is the perfect trad mother who teaches her sons about hypergamy and women's lying ways. But of course she doesnt lie herself nor is she concerned about the status of her dates, after all, she is an angel and only concerns herself with character. As far as that devious, lying husband of hers, her children were borne of immaculate conception passing along her perfect christ-like genes forward into the aeons.

Exalted ageless one who only ages in the sense that fine wine becomes more delicious and ethereal, it is impossible to comprehend her beauty, intelligence and character.

Like Lady Galadriel, bedelusionalasf#ck commands the power of the skies and the seas:

“And now at last it comes. You will give me the Ring freely! In place of the Dark Lord you will set up a Queen. And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the earth. All shall love me and despair!”

But seriously, you can see now the traits that delusional skanks like Chrstine Ford, Ramirez and that jewess Swetnick and bedelusionalasf#ck have in common path: sociopath ability to lie and extreme narcissism and borderline personality.

This is the norm for women. Once you free them from the reins of their normal, biological roles as mothers and caretakers they become insane and delusional and destructive without end. All they need is a good smack in the face to bring them back into line. They'll love you for it. Of course I speak metaphorically. But they love and need discipline. This is now completely forbidden and illegal of course.

The legal system forbids it, the media villifies it, which must mean that it is the only sane and effective course of action.

Too bad we will need muslim terrorists to bring women back in line. By then most of christendom will be completely destroyed.

 

[Roober]

Can you please elaborate and point out our wrong arguments?

Sure. Now I dont disagree with everything, but a lot of the victim mentality I do.

Go ahead and state your first objective argument and we can start there. Just one please.

 

[meldiamond]

Great post! Women have fought for their rights and certainly got to a place of near equality, which is actually a sign of progress. And when you consider the amount of abuse women have encountered, it was long overdue. The issue is that the pendulum has swung too far, and men have not yet corrected it.

Sure. Now I dont disagree with everything, but a lot of the victim mentality I do.

Go ahead and state your first objective argument and we can start there. Just one please.

Don't even bother to try, it's just a waste of time. Men are superior to women in every way in ability. Women are beautiful. I love and adore women. But somewhere along the way we've all lost touch with reality. Like this bedelusionalasf#ck character. As I said in another thread, women are completely incapable of functioning at a high level in governance, the economy, the military or any other meaningful position or occupation where the interests of the society as a whole are concerned.

I said at a high level. Yes, they can function at a mediocre level or a slightly above average level. But not at a high level. The highest levels of innovation, creativity, productivity, warfare, negotiation, diplomacy, construction, technology, science, math, are all the realm of men. They always have been, always will be.

The physiological differences between men and women are overwhelming. The differences in strength, endurance, energy, aggressivity, and of course in intelligence and creativity are profound. Every great creation of humanity was at the hands and minds of men. This is an indisputable fact. Yes, women are great at baking cookies and writing a few pretty poems here and there, but everything else of note and value and worth in any society was produced by a man.

The great works of philosophy, literature, chemistry, biology, physics, astronomy, math the social sciences, economics, medicine are all produced by men. The great architectural designs and buildings are the product of male minds, hands and bodies. The innovations of government and law, of military strategy and technology, again, male design and creation.

The technology producing ships, automobiles, trains, planes and their refinement again are male designs and innovations.

Every last piece of evidence clearly points to male superiority in all important matters in society in every detail. Except one. Men cannot produce eggs. Now, this may eventually be taken care of with stem cell technology. But for the next few years at least, women hold a monopoly over egg production.

And this is their rightful, natural place in the social and biological order. Their job is to produce heirs. their job is to reproduce and nurture children until they can survive on their own, which is typically until say 12 years of age, or a bit longer than that, now officially 18 in western societies. At that point, many men move on to find a new younger wife or some remain in love and live out their lives with their first wife.

But nowhere in any society at any time have women AS A CLASS produced anything of note. Baked goods and poems do not count.

And everywhere we look now, women have sown destruction as "leaders" of societies. Angela Merkel admits millions upon millions of degenerate muslims who stab, rape, kill and maim with acid, knives and mow them down with vans and cars. These muslims could never build a car on their own. They can't even spell automobile in their own language.

The same is happening throughout europe where women are leading the ongoing destruction of the continent bringing turmoil, rape, drugs and murder with these so-called "refugees."

There is no such thing as a female leader. Teresa May, Angela Merkel, Hillary Clinton along with their millions of feminist supporters, can only bring destruction of their societies, starting with hatred based on envy of the greatness of men.

Give your fingers a break. You have nothing to offer. You are of no more value than a woman with your worthless white knighting and feminist shilling and cucking.[/QUOTE]

 

[rber]

Don't even bother to try, it's just a waste of time. Men are superior to women in every way in ability. Women are beautiful. I love and adore women. But somewhere along the way we've all lost touch with reality. Like this bedelusionalasf#ck character. As I said in another thread, women are completely incapable of functioning at a high level in governance, the economy, the military or any other meaningful position or occupation where the interests of the society as a whole are concerned.

I said at a high level. Yes, they can function at a mediocre level or a slightly above average level. But not at a high level. The highest levels of innovation, creativity, productivity, warfare, negotiation, diplomacy, construction, technology, science, math, are all the realm of men. They always have been, always will be.

The physiological differences between men and women are overwhelming. The differences in strength, endurance, energy, aggressivity, and of course in intelligence and creativity are profound. Every great creation of humanity was at the hands and minds of men. This is an indisputable fact. Yes, women are great at baking cookies and writing a few pretty poems here and there, but everything else of note and value and worth in any society was produced by a man.

The great works of philosophy, literature, chemistry, biology, physics, astronomy, math the social sciences, economics, medicine are all produced by men. The great architectural designs and buildings are the product of male minds, hands and bodies. The innovations of government and law, of military strategy and technology, again, male design and creation.

The technology producing ships, automobiles, trains, planes and their refinement again are male designs and innovations.

Every last piece of evidence clearly points to male superiority in all important matters in society in every detail. Except one. Men cannot produce eggs. Now, this may eventually be taken care of with stem cell technology. But for the next few years at least, women hold a monopoly over egg production.

And this is their rightful, natural place in the social and biological order. Their job is to produce heirs. their job is to reproduce and nurture children until they can survive on their own, which is typically until say 12 years of age, or a bit longer than that, now officially 18 in western societies. At that point, many men move on to find a new younger wife or some remain in love and live out their lives with their first wife.

But nowhere in any society at any time have women AS A CLASS produced anything of note. Baked goods and poems do not count.

And everywhere we look now, women have sown destruction as "leaders" of societies. Angela Merkel admits millions upon millions of degenerate muslims who stab, rape, kill and maim with acid, knives and mow them down with vans and cars. These muslims could never build a car on their own. They can't even spell automobile in their own language.

The same is happening throughout europe where women are leading the ongoing destruction of the continent bringing turmoil, rape, drugs and murder with these so-called "refugees."

There is no such thing as a female leader. Teresa May, Angela Merkel, Hillary Clinton along with their millions of feminist supporters, can only bring destruction of their societies, starting with hatred based on envy of the greatness of men.

Give your fingers a break. You have nothing to offer. You are of no more value than a woman with your worthless white knighting and feminist shilling and cucking.

It's a classic case of confusing cause and effect.

Men are clearly behind almost all great creations in human history, but that's not because they are better or more intelligent, it's because unlike women they had the proper incentive to do so as a way of climbing the social ladder or making their mark in the world.

No alpha man has ever stopped fvcking all the pvssy he had in order to build a spaceship. It's the men with lower status who create stuff to raise their own status, the ones who aren't naturally surrounded by pvssy.

 

[rber]

Sure. Now I dont disagree with everything, but a lot of the victim mentality I do.

Go ahead and state your first objective argument and we can start there. Just one please.

I don't believe I talked specifically about solipsism anywhere in this thread, but here's one of my last arguments:

"When it comes to breeding and mating drives, suddenly all that abstract critical thinking goes down the drain.

I think it's a matter of awareness though - you can't fight what you can't see.
Very few are the women who are aware of their own psychology (to my observation), much fewer than men - I think it's again due to the burden of performance of men which women simply do not share, which pushes them to improve their status in our society - mostly in the form of gathering information, especially in this day and age .

Once a woman becomes aware of her own psychology and is properly incentivised to utilize it, I personally do not believe she's truly incapable of looking at it the same way you and I do.
Naturally, her interests will be different than ours and more often than not will collide with ours, she won't necessarily utilize it in the way that would be ideal for men. "

Feel free to read my previous posts as well, I didn't write that much in this thread so you won't have a headache trying to follow my arguments - everything is concentrated in 2-3 posts.

 

[meldiamond]

It's a classic case of confusing cause and effect.

Men are clearly behind almost all great creations in human history, but that's not because they are better or more intelligent, it's because unlike women they had the proper incentive to do so as a way of climbing the social ladder or making their mark in the world.

Men are objectively more intelligent, stronger, more energetic and disciplined than women. Men for example are superior at math. There is a 30 point gap between men and women, a consistent pattern over half a century. The gender difference holds more or less within the races as well, although the gap is tiny between black men and women, only 8 points (although it's still lower for women). Note also the large gaps between races.

http://www.aei.org/publication/2016...gh-school-boys-are-better-at-math-than-girls/

We are the big brained species for sure, but men have bigger brains than women. And some races have bigger brains than others.

No alpha man has ever stopped fvcking all the pvssy he had in order to build a spaceship. It's the men with lower status who create stuff to raise their own status, the ones who aren't naturally surrounded by pvssy.

Europeans have been christians for two thousand years. This is the basis of European civilizations. Christianity teaches monogamy and the sanctity of marriage. Christianity and it's strictures against polygamy or infidelity allowed for social order and stability.

Every man could be king of his manor, and be sexually satisfied in monogamous marriage.

Men could therefore turn their attention to other pursuits: academics, literature, science, architecture, the arts, etc. They didn't waste all of their time chasing and f#cking fatties and UG's like PUA's do.

Ultimately, it is this combination of intelligence, and controlled sexuality within monogamous marriage, among other factors, which allowed civilizations to flourish and flower for centuries, even with the parasitic influence of jews who are now close to bringing european civilizations to their knees with immigration, sexual degeneracy, and of course, with usury.