Daily Archives: July 29, 2012

Anatoly Karlin on Female Hypergamy, Game, Betas and Alphas, Etc.

Anatoly Karlin writes:

Betas are the builders of civilization. You just can’t do without them. If their interests aren’t catered for society devolves into a tribalistic jungle.

Due to various factors, betas are now taken for granted by women. Omegas need not apply. This is what happens when traditional mores, i.e. the masculine rules that underpin civilization, collapse, and female hypergamy is unleashed, leading to soft polygamy.

Becoming a player, or PUA, is a natural adaptation of the rational beta to his environment. To remain in the sexual market he is going to mimic alpha traits, which is really what “game” is all about. The reason self-proclaimed alpha women (not that they actually exist LOL) like Beatrix consider players to be “creeps” is because game is a form of reproductive cheating.

This is completely natural and to be expected. Of course one should not blame or resent women for following their misplaced instincts. It’s not something they have any control over and doing so would just be omega. The alpha response would be to just learn game and go a-banging.

Arguably, the very survival of civilization depends on more betas doing that, to avoid the dystopian outcomes that a surfeit of alphas and “independent women” inevitably leads to.

Everything he says here is correct.

AK: This is what happens when traditional mores, i.e. the masculine rules that underpin civilization, collapse, and female hypergamy is unleashed, leading to soft polygamy.

This is precisely what has occurred. We can argue about why this has happened and who is to blame. Many blame feminism, but this is uncertain. At any rate, what we see now is not occurring in traditional patriarchal societies. When traditional patriarchal society breaks down, you end up with this jungle like scenario that Karlin refers to.

I refer to modern women as “cavewomen” and I say that feminism created a nation full of cavewomen. This was not what I signed up for when I enlisted in the Women’s Liberation movement. There’s nothing liberating about a nation full of cavewomen living in a concrete jungle. It’s a Darwinian, Hobbesian Hell any way you cut it.

AK: Becoming a player, or PUA, is a natural adaptation of the rational beta to his environment. To remain in the sexual market he is going to mimic alpha traits, which is really what “game” is all about.

Exactly. Game is simply a male adaptation to a nation of cavewomen living in a concrete and glass jungle. What else is a guy to do? Life gives you lemons, you make lemonade.

AK: This is completely natural and to be expected. Of course one should not blame or resent women for following their misplaced instincts.

Precisely. We have simply unleashed women to follow their genetic and evolutionary instincts, which is to act like a cavewoman. On the other hand, I’m not sure that blindly following their cavewoman nature is best for either women or society.

AK: Arguably, the very survival of civilization depends on more betas doing that, to avoid the dystopian outcomes that a surfeit of alphas and “independent women” inevitably leads to.

The Alphas and independent women scenario is precisely what the folks in the Manosphere are either discussing or complaining about. And it really is a dystopia for anyone who cares about living in an advanced modern civilization.

Betas are the civilization builders, as Karlin argues. And society shuns them at its peril.

Another commenter pointed to the Black Ghetto as an example of what happens when all of the civilizational controls go off of a sector of society. Whether or not this is a good example is uncertain, but possibly it is.

86 Comments

Filed under Feminism, Gender Studies, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Social Problems, Sociology, Women

South Indians Are Basically Caucasians

A commenter writes:

It seems you are trying to force a connection between “South Indians” and Caucasians because many people especially from Kerala have very European features.

Kerala has witnessed a lot of migration from Syria and other places, because of the ancient civilization of peaceful people there who welcomed migrants that were probably ostracized from their previous communities because they adopted certain beliefs and practices that were exported by Dravidian spiritualists.

Whatever the reason for their migration, it is known that the western part of South India has seen a lot of migration of Caucasians since antiquity. But purebred Dravidians have no Caucasian connection except that they are a most ancient race closely linked with Negrito/Aboriginal peoples, therefore many of the races that were birthed later naturally carry that connection.

The branch gives birth to the fruit but the fruit doesn’t have much of the branch in it, if you know what I mean.

Tamils, who are often considered to be synonymous with the term “South Indians” have little or no Caucasian in them (in terms of later mixing through Caucasian/Aryan migration), likewise most Keralites have little or no Caucasian in them, except for those families who at some point mixed with Caucasian merchants or explorers that journeyed to South India for its spices and various other specialties.

The pictures you see of South Indian women with European-looking features are usually of models or actresses – those who are in professions where fair skin and European features are preferred whether due to bias or its more global appeal. But if you actually visit South India you will see how little resemblance there is to Caucasians and how much greater is their similarity to Negrito/Aboriginal people.

Yet, you resist the strongly evidenced connection between South Indians and Negroid peoples, while trying to force a connection between South Indians (Dravidians) and Caucasians. I smell a fish. 🙂

There is overwhelming evidence that out of Africa came the father of all the races, and so you can’t get too far by excluding any race from the African link. Anyway, I believe there is only one race…the human race. At least that we can be certain is not based on speculation but truth. Peace!

The truth is that even South Indians are part of the Caucasian race. This is clear on any genetic chart. Cavalli-Sforza’s charts make it clear that South Indians are Caucasians.

Other charts show Indians are partway between Asians and Caucasians, but closer to Caucasians. This is probably about right.

No genetic chart shows the South Indians as closer to Australoids. The only Australoids on genetic charts are Melanesians, Papuans and Aborigines, and South Indians are nowhere near any of those. Negritos do not appear on genetic charts in general as they tend to group with whomever they live with. Filipino Negritos group with Filipinos; Thai Negritos group with Thais, etc.

It is true that on skulls, Tamils do group with Australoids, but on genes, they are just typical South Indians, more or less Caucasoids. But most South Indians have Caucasoid skulls.

This commenter, an Afrocentrist, makes the typical mistake of conflating Caucasian with White or European. But there are many non-White or non-European Caucasoids out there.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

127 Comments

Filed under Anthropology, Asians, East Indians, Negritos, Physical, Race/Ethnicity, SE Asians, South Asians

Female Rule: An Example

A male feminist commenter, who has now been banned, writes:

Wait a minute…there are actual people who don’t realize that asking co-workers for sex at work is incredibly inappropriate and grounds for sexual harassment?

This site his HILARIOUS!!!

What happened was that a man asked out a woman at work. He did so privately, but the woman was such an insane cunt that she told all of the women in the office. The women all pretty much hated the guy, but the guys couldn’t really care less about him. The women considered him undesirable – a creep. There was a huge uproar because this guy asked a chick out. Big deal!

The supervisor suggested that it was sexual harassment for any employee to ask out any other employee. There had already been several high profile relationships among the workforce.

First of all, sexual harassment has to do with higher ups demanding sex from those under their employ as a condition of further work. You either sleep with me or a fire you. It was recently expanded to the point where a man is persistently bothering a woman and won’t knock it off. Well, that is maybe sexual harassment, but I doubt it. The woman has to make it clear to the guy that he needs to knock it off. then if he continues, there’s a problem. What sort of a problem, I am not sure. Perhaps he will be fired.

For all intents and purposes, sexual harassment does not exist among co-workers at the same work level.

It is certainly not sexual harassment for a male coworker to ask out a female coworker. It never has been. It’s not even sexual harassment to flirt with coworker.

People are spending more and more time at work, and many coworkers start dating each other. It happens all the time. No one is going to stop it or do anything about it.

This is a clear example of Female Rule. The commenter, who supports Female Rule, feels that all relationships among coworkers should be banned. It should be sexual harassment for any man to ask out any female coworker. If women ran the world according to female rules, this is exactly the sort of law or rule that would be put into place.

136 Comments

Filed under Feminism, Gender Studies, Man World, Mass Hysterias

Woman As Guerrilla Fighter: Why Men Make Rules and Women Break Them

Steve writes:

You are accusing woman in general of being immoral or amoral in certain ways. You are portraying them as vindictive and opportunistic, using rules to get their own way. You are questioning the moral integrity of woman in general.

This is exactly what I am doing. By the way, Alpha agrees with me on this. And you know who told me, “Man make rules. Women break them.”? My own mother! She knows her own gender very, very well. Now, neither my mother nor Alpha are inclined to use rules as tools like that, but they understand that the basically conniving nature of women means that many will.

There is a good reason why women do this. Men are strong. We are stronger. Rules favor the strong and disfavor the weak. The weaker people will use rules as tools to be used to their advantage however. The stronger will demand that everyone play by the rules.

An example is the rules of war. Strong states like the US and the Zionist entity demand that their opponents play by the rules of war. However, those fighting the US, Israel and any other huge state would get completely creamed if they played by the rules of war.

So guerrillas and any weaker force fighting any stronger force will always bend the rules and break the rules and use guerrilla warfare, deception, sneak attacks, suicide bombings, spies, no uniforms, hiding behind civilians, waving surrender and then dropping their flags and shooting and other pussy bullshit when fighting the stronger force. It’s the only way they have a chance.

Women don’t really stand a chance going one on one against men. That’s why they use subterfuge, spying, conniving, rule-breaking, deception and other “guerrilla war” tactics when fighting men and others in general .

Guerrilla war and deceptive, non-rules based war are essentially feminine warfare tactics. The US and Israel demanding that everyone fight fair and square is a masculine mode of warfare. The way women see it, demanding that they fight fair and square is bullshit. Men are stronger, so men will always win.

24 Comments

Filed under Gender Studies, Man World, War, Women