Home > Critical Thinking, Current Affairs, Dystopia, Musings, Philosophy sans Sophistry, Reason, Secular Religions, Skepticism > What I Really Think About Human Beings as a Species: 4

What I Really Think About Human Beings as a Species: 4

In the previous post of this series, I made an observation about the fundamental precondition necessary for most humans to take abuse from another human.

Person B will willingly take abuse from person A if they get to abuse person C a bit more.

Many readers might not like the idea that most (if not all) supposedly complex and ‘rational’ human behaviors arise from such an odd thought process. Moreover, the very suggestion that a lot of human behavior and social mores are driven by such ‘un-noble’ considerations will offend many more. But the unintuitiveness or offensiveness of an idea or concept does not make it untrue. No amount of wishful thinking and sophistry can alter the reality of the earth not being the center of the universe. Similarly quantum mechanics is not particularly intuitive or satisfying to us, but is extremely relevant to understanding semiconductivity. My point is that an idea or concept must be judged by its ability to explain a phenomena, make verifiable predictions AND stand up to scrutiny. Does the concept proposed at the beginning of this post fulfill those criteria? Well, let us see..

As you might recall, one of the questions posed in my previous post concerned the relative lack of sexual activity in the lives of most chronically single women in developed countries. While there are many popular sophistic and plausible sounding explanations (or even repudiations) for this phenomena, it is clear that chronically single women are not having anywhere near the amount of the sex they want to have and, more importantly, could be having. Now there are those of you who might say that this validates some bullshit “evo-pysch” mumbo-jumbo about women desiring only “alpha” guys. But desiring is not the same as having it and a lot of men fantasize about young attractive women when they are having sex with their old wrinkly wives. Clearly the converse is feasible as demonstrated by female prostitution.

So why would an average looking woman make herself sexually unavailable when a much better looking woman would have quality sex with almost any man for a reasonable hourly rate.

Some of you might attribute this behavior to their need of maintaining personal ego, social image etc- and there is something to be said about that. But such factors can account for only a minority of rejections as most men are not very ugly, very short or very poor. Clearly there is much more to this behavior than maintaining their own social status and here is a clue- most woman are a bit too enthusiastic about criminalizing paid sex. The rather strong urge among women to criminalize paid sex has been traditionally interpreted as a response to competition. To put it another way, the conventional narrative suggests that women see sex workers as competition for the overpriced services they themselves offer- like “established” cab companies protesting about non-traditional rideshare services such as Uber. But is that really the case?

The argument that paid sex is real competition only holds true if the vast majority of women in that society are in long-term marriages or similar long-term relationships. But that has not been the case in most developed countries for the last three to four decades. To rephrase it- paid sex is not especially competitive with short-term or casual sexual relationships, if they are readily available. But it is clear that such short-term relationships are not available to most men- and this poses an interesting question.

Why would a person want to disrupt an event they do not want to participate in, especially if it does not affect their material interests- one way or the other.

A better understanding of this irrational behavior can be obtained by looking at the issue of religious fundamentalism- especially as it applies to zealots who try to enforce their own standards on those who might not share the former’s bizarre beliefs. Take the issue or religious taboos against certain kinds of food (pork, beef etc) or drink (alcohol, coffee, tea etc). Have you ever wondered why most muslims are so offended by others eating pork, or most hindus offended by those who enjoy eating beef, or muslims condemning those who drink alcohol or observant mormons doing the same for coffee and tea? What is going on? While sophists will try to make up “facts” to justify such arbitrary beliefs, it is clear that eating pork or beef is not associated with any measurable negative effects. The same holds for the moderate consumption of alcohol or caffeinated drinks. But why are religious zealots so resistant to reason? Here is an idea..

They just want an excuse to screw over somebody else while simultaneously feeling righteous about doing it.

It comes down to making oneself feel powerful by abusing those you can without stressing your cognitive dissonance. In the upcoming part of this series, I shall write more about the very strong connection between the need to believe in organised religion and desire to abuse or hurt other people- even if doing so results in no material gain.

What do you think? Comments?

  1. August 2, 2014 at 6:51 pm

    If marriage was so superior to prostitution, you wouldn’t have so many old hags and race-conscious women trying to boycott it. Just like that guy in Sweden I’ve been reading about, their favorite excuse is that female sex workers are subjected to abuse from pimps or violent clients or they were all abused as kids. What they idiotically do not realize is that husbands beat their wives everyday and most successful, established women also had histories of abuse, but that does not stop them from having normal sexual relationships with men or women. So, where’s the logic?

    If it were to be decriminalized, the average mediocre chick would not have a leg to stand on. I could go on, but I have written topics about this that I’ll be posting soon. Long story short, the reason why mediocre hags hate paid sex is the same reason why they hate their husbands’ mistresses… because they have things their aging butterball asses do not and they know that the men in their lives could leave them at the drop of a dime.

    On another hand, in regards to average single women, some of them have a good amount of sick supply, yet they are so insatiable that they still parade themselves on social networks, posting ads on hookup sites for guys who dig cougars. They do this in hopes of upgrading and finding guys who were/are superior to the ones they are currently screwing. Some, however, are so sexually frustrated and it’s obvious based on the amount of time spent on social networks. Either that, or they try hard too hard to maintain their youth.

    • EvilOne
      August 2, 2014 at 8:36 pm

      “If it were to be decriminalized, the average mediocre chick would not have a leg to stand on.”

      It is decrimanalized in Australia, and (currently at least) in Canada – I dont think attitudes are that different there – of men or women.

      • August 2, 2014 at 8:40 pm

        I meant nationwide. Also, Australia and Canada are both part of The Anglosphere. But the truth is, even with it being a legal issue in certain areas, people will still find a way to engage…

      • EvilOne
        August 2, 2014 at 9:10 pm

        Your reply makes no sense. Your statement was:

        “If it were to be decriminalized, the average mediocre chick would not have a leg to stand on.”

        This implies that decriminalization would be a ‘game-changer’. But its clearly not, as Australia and Canada would show.

        Then you say:

        “But the truth is, even with it being a legal issue in certain areas, people will still find a way to engage…”

        So if people are already engaging, why aren’t we in a game-change revolution?

      • P Ray
        August 2, 2014 at 10:19 pm

        So if people are already engaging, why aren’t we in a game-change revolution?
        Social shaming of male desires, social approval for female desires. That’s why.
        In short,
        Women against prostitution, are against prostitution of women towards guys who are considered either losers, ATMs or emotional tampons.
        As evidenced time and time again, women are NOT against prostitution when the person engaging in it is famous or powerful.
        Many women would love the 10% men to be the only guys they engage with, while the remaining 90% dry up and blow away, leaving behind their money and assets.
        Of course, mentioning this purposefully cloaked agenda, will win you no friends among women.

      • August 3, 2014 at 8:33 am

        P Ray just said it rightfully. Evil One said my statement made no sense because he may lack COMMON sense. And another reason why we aren’t in a game-change revolution is because there is still so much scrutiny for men who pay for it, even though you ALWAYS pay for it, via dating, marriage, divorce, child support, learning game, etc.

        There are, however, instances of famous and powerful men being scrutinized by women and their mangina gatekeepers for patronizing sex workers simply because they either cheated on their wives (Elliot Spitzer and Tiger Woods) and their dirty laundry was aired out publicly. When Tiger Woods got caught up, the media spent literally an entire year scrutinizing his ass, which includes female daytime talk divas, Fox News pundits and Nancy Grace.

        But then, there’s also this flawed concept that all female sex workers are victims of abuse and they assume that ending it will put an end to violence against women when somewhere on the planet, a husband beats his wife every single day. Again, illogical feminist and white knighting garbage.

      • P Ray
        August 3, 2014 at 10:59 am

        Tiger Woods and Spitzer got targeted because they work in an environment where “everybody is trying to show they are family-friendly”.
        Footballers in the UK and France for example, regularly hire sex workers (and even underaged ones), and their cases are quickly forgotten – because “it’s a lad’s sport” and “boys will be boys”.
        In short, if you intend to monger, don’t get married; if you are married, be in a “boy’s club” type of employment.
        “Women against prostitution” are trying to buy good of STEM graduates by telling them the lies that “women love nice guys” but not completing the sentence “after the bad boys no longer wanted them, and those women gave them their youth and beauty at no cost, and you will pay for her afterwards”.

      • EvilOne
        August 3, 2014 at 11:23 am

        I wouldn’t say they give it away for free in their youth. They force the men to be overly masculine risk takers – riding motorcycles, taking risks with their lives etc – even if on a subconscious level.

      • P Ray
        August 3, 2014 at 7:13 pm

        I wouldn’t say they give it away for free in their youth. They force the men to be overly masculine risk takers – riding motorcycles, taking risks with their lives etc – even if on a subconscious level.
        I’ve seen dropouts from university get girls wet by picking up a guitar – it helped that he had that “nirvana hippy” look (LMS in action … where L is the most important).
        So, no risk taking involved. Guitar game is legit, so is skater, bouncer, bartender and handyman game.
        A man who is in possession of the ability to entertain or serve a utility (that women are loathe to pay for), may find it possible to get his dick wet.

      • joesantus
        August 4, 2014 at 8:23 am

        “So, no risk taking involved. Guitar game is legit, so is skater, bouncer, bartender and handyman game.
        A man who is in possession of the ability to entertain or serve a utility (that women are loathe to pay for), may find it possible to get his dick wet.”

        In my 58 years, I’ve concluded that at least a major part of why has to do with such activities giving women the adequate opportunity to observe those guys “from afar”.

        Women seem wired to respond to a guy more upon dynamic than upon static characteristics. That is, while they do respond to a guy’s physical attractiveness (for example, a photo of a guy in a magazine), women respond much more strongly to his behavior (as when a guy is engaged in activity) .

        All the guys listed – guitarists, bouncers, handymen, skaters, bartenders — engage in activities which provide women with a easy and ample opportunity to remain detached while observing and evaluating those guys. The fact of seeing a guy in action has as much to do with getting her wet as does the entertainment or service aspect of the action itself.

        BTW #1 — all those activities typically require some combination, though in varied amounts, of risk and, probably more important, investment of time and effort; same as does, say, motorcycle riding, firefighting, and jet piloting.
        For instance, as a guitarist, I know that even the most naturally-gifted player who’s become accomplished enough to perform outside his bedroom has put in at least a couple consistent years of daily effort to be able to play well enough to catch a woman’s attention.
        Point being, no matter what “bait” a guy wields,”‘there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”. Whether bouncer, bartender, footballer, drummer, or carpenter, he’s directly and/or indirectly invested his time and usually taken some kind of risks to acquire his skill and ability.

        BTW #2 — the “girls-respond-most to-dynamics” is why guys using dating sites who upload photos of themselves DOING activities draws more interest from women than even a mere face photo does. (NOT suggesting dating sites — just stating what seems to be fact).

      • P Ray
        August 4, 2014 at 11:22 am

        For instance, as a guitarist, I know that even the most naturally-gifted player who’s become accomplished enough to perform outside his bedroom has put in at least a couple consistent years of daily effort to be able to play well enough to catch a woman’s attention.
        Point being, no matter what “bait” a guy wields,”‘there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”. Whether bouncer, bartender, footballer, drummer, or carpenter, he’s directly and/or indirectly invested his time and usually taken some kind of risks to acquire his skill and ability.

        This guy was not STRUMMING the guitar, he was PLUCKING it.
        In other words, very likely a newbie. And this went on for days, him visiting the hall of residence for a few hours at a time, just sitting in the open garden viewable from different buildings.
        Girls WOULD COME UP TO HIM, and engage him for hours in small talk and praise his (effectively beginner-ish, non-existent talent) mastery of guitar!
        He looked like Kurt Cobain and spouted the nonsense about “being one with the universe” and “just chill bro”.
        It’s amazing how men who get sex served to them on a platter happen to be so disengaged.

        If “only firefighters and risk-takers” are recognised, why aren’t they also modelling in sell-out catalogues for expensive clothing?
        LMS theory … because, with enough Looks, people will praise in- or non-competence as being on par with an expert!

      • joesantus
        August 4, 2014 at 3:22 pm

        “….very likely a newbie. And this went on for days, him visiting the hall of residence for a few hours at a time, just sitting in the open garden viewable from different buildings.
        Girls WOULD COME UP TO HIM….”

        I totally agree that a certain physical attractiveness which relatively few men possess trumps proficiency, money, “risk-taking”, and status. It’s also the reason why women, especially under-age-30 women, feel strongly sexually drawn to relatively few of us men.

        However, notice that he also was literally engaged in an activity that made him easily and lengthily, as you said, “viewable”, observable, even from afar to those under-age-30. women. They all had opportunity to stand back and size him up while he was “in motion”.

        If a guy with that rare physical look to which women strongly respond combines it with engaging in a easily observed activity such as guitar (even awfully played guitar), then his problem won’t be getting women: rather, it’ll be finding enough time for all the women that feel the urge to mount him.

  2. scorched earth
    August 3, 2014 at 5:57 am

    “To rephrase it- paid sex is not especially competitive with short-term or casual sexual relationships, if they are readily available. But it is clear that such short-term relationships are not available to most men”

    This is why scorched earth is the only solution:
    https://dissention.wordpress.com/2010/04/20/scorched-earth-1/

    However in my real life experiences, I see most men not going the scorched earth route, instead, settling for marriage, kids, and LTR (regardless of height, etc, I’m referring to the majority of men here), in fact many of them even consider themselves lucky to be in such relationships.

    However, it is still possible to replicate a lifestyle full of short-term relationships using money to some extent, but almost every man I know making over 70k is in an ltr or trying to get into one.

    • EvilOne
      August 3, 2014 at 7:54 am

      I think being in a LTR with a good looking woman – 7 or above – is worth it. Anything less is BS.

      Then again, I may be singing a different tune if, I was, yknow, actually in one.

      • scorched earth
        August 3, 2014 at 8:20 am

        No, it is not worth it. Women view all men with contempt and the majority of men won’t get a 7 either way.

        I think the casual relationship thing is very overstated. It is something that few men have access to, and probably doesn’t last their entire life. Never believe anyone on the internet talking about how much casual sex they get. The guys who actually get that in real life aren’t the types of people who socialize with others on the internet, they are too busy enjoying life.

        I have seen beta provider type of guys with 7+ marriages and they are nothing more than indentured laborers, who are so validation-starved that they take pleasure in slaving away for fake validation from their woman and peer group.

        If men didn’t care about social approval, they wouldn’t bother with LTR. I know a 28 year old investment banker (200k income) who just married a 35 yo woman (6/10), but he is unaware how much sex she must have had while he was working to death as a virgin in his 20s.

      • EvilOne
        August 3, 2014 at 8:59 am

        Funny… when I was 28 I had a hot 18 year old offer herself up for a LTR (chased me for 7 months basically). And Im as far from Alpha as can be.

      • EvilOne
        August 3, 2014 at 11:22 am

        You may also look up JoeSantus’s posts about his son.

  3. doclove
    August 3, 2014 at 8:22 pm

    Advocatus Diaboli,
    I have criticized some of your ideas in the past, but these 4 past articles entitled “What I Really Think about Human Beings as a Species” are wonderfully thought out and written. I agree with you that most people like to harm others for fun even if it doesn’t benefit them in any real way. I also agree that most people will accept abuse as long as they can abuse someone else more or at least have the prospect of doing so. Keep up the good work.

  4. Jack
    August 3, 2014 at 9:57 pm

    People in a situation of abuse tend to get something out of it such as the stability of being able to continue living there, or keeping a job. A politician could disagree with an issue, but not speak out on it because his voters, his church, and the community would bash him, so he puts up with them just so he can stay in his job to maintain his salary and also to continue to be able to boss around his subordinates. Most of the people I see are married or in a LTR. In the past when many laws were made and currently the majority of politicians, religious authority, lawyers, police, military, and probably banks and media CEOs, were and are males, so if these guys really cared about other guys getting laid as their objective then they as males and as the majority could decriminalize prostitution for instance. So, it does appear those guys would rather keep getting a paycheck, feel superior, and stay in power instead of making it legal for me to get laid without having to pay 5G bail, and instead of helping me get a better job.

    • joesantus
      August 10, 2014 at 2:02 pm

      “…so if these guys really cared about other guys getting laid as their objective then they as males and as the majority could decriminalize prostitution for instance. So, it does appear those guys would rather keep getting a paycheck, feel superior, and stay in power…”

      An additional reason may be that decriminalizing prostitution would mean that they’d have to be technically okay with their OWN wives, daughters, sisters, and even their aunts and mothers choosing prostitution as a means of income. Few men seem able to be okay with that.
      (For the record, but with no intention of going into the actual details, yes, I have been and am totally okay with it — both my wife and my adult-and-out-on-their-own daughters at times successfully use sex work as means of income. I believe that work at fast food restaurants and Wal-markets is far more exploitative and humiliating and far less profitable than most sex workers ever experience.)

      • August 10, 2014 at 8:46 pm

        I figured this out all along. Yes, it is much more degrading and time-consuming, unless they come across violent and/or low-grade clients. But even then, some folks like to take it, run with it and exaggerate.

      • P Ray
        August 11, 2014 at 2:54 pm

        Men going to see prostitutes expose themselves to robbery (carrying cash), social shaming (outed in the media or among friends) or blackmail (from the prostitute).
        So why are the women only portrayed as victims? Feminist AND Feminine imperative strikes again!

      • August 11, 2014 at 4:29 pm

        Right, P Ray. White Knight Captain Save-A-Hoes have invaded “law enforcement”, which worsens the issue. These retarded butt boys actually believe they can turn hoes into housewives, but they never realize it’s a losing and emasculating battle.

  5. Flex wheeler
    August 4, 2014 at 7:12 am

    “Lions in the jungle only kill for food, but humans kill for fun. Even your friends are out to get you: they want your job, they want your house, they want your money, they want your wife, and they even want your dog. Those are your friends; your enemies are even worse!”
    -Donald Trump

  6. August 4, 2014 at 7:32 am

    Right. This is another one of the reasons why there are so many Cougars and MILFs invading the dating scene in The Anglosphere (a subject I cannot wait to touch on).

    • P Ray
      August 4, 2014 at 11:23 am

      May they get the pumps and dumps they richly deserve, as they’re quite incapable of forming a lasting bond, and any men should be well wary of legal attachment to such a person.

      • August 7, 2014 at 9:40 am

        Exactly. I’ve written my topic about this and will post it sometime in October, 2014. What I will say is this… Since most men are too psychologically feminine to do what comes naturally, even if that means breaking the rules (and knock on wood, if paid sex becomes more criminalized than it is today), Cougars and MILFs will eventually be the ultimate choice for men who only want the Friends With Benefits package. They are becoming more sexually available than most younger females in their 20s.

  7. Jack
    August 6, 2014 at 10:25 am

    I agree that the so-called negative emotions are often reasons for a lot of human behavior and I see it quite a bit. Sometimes it can be for safety, or other times jealousy and revenge. Once I was asked to go to the beach, I said no I have to study, and years later I don’t remember the class but I wish I would have gone to the beach, so that was fear of failing a test. If someone I did not know walked up to me and asked if they could borrow my car I would say no out of safety. If someone I did not know asked if they could stay at my place that night I would say no out of fear and safety (unless it was a hot chick).
    There’s tons of guys who complain and whine that frequently is due to their own thinking or putting themselves in adverse situations. I know a Guy C who said to Guy B not to marry Girl A, and this Guy C spoke the truth and was correct. Guy B was controlled mentally by brainwashed religious beliefs about suffering and marriage and he couldn’t take the truth of Guy C and he married Girl A. Guy B knew Girl A was a 6, fat, domineering, and on medication for being crazy before they got married. In marriage Guy B is miserable and takes abuse from Girl A, then Guy B takes his frustration out on their counselor, and even calls Guy C and takes his anger out by hammering him again for years ago when he said not to marry Girl A. Guy B takes more of his hostility out on Guys D (playing poker) thinking he’s screwing them over taking their money, but in reality he’s lost thousands. Guy E (me) sees Guy B over drinks one day and I say I’ve decided that I’m never going to get married, and Guy B (out of jealousy and revenge) goes on a religious tirade and criticizes me for not going to church anymore and for not getting married, all while he is more miserable than ever and hates his job too. I’ve tried to figure out for years why Guy B would marry Girl A when he had an opportunity to marry Girl F (an 8, thin, younger, submissive, happy, who also really wanted to marry me and if I was going to even I would have married Girl F). So, I figured there has to be something in the psychology of Guy B that wants to be controlled, dominated, and not happy.

    • joesantus
      August 7, 2014 at 1:46 pm

      “So, I figured there has to be something in the psychology of Guy B that wants to be controlled, dominated, and not happy.”

      And that “something” is intricately entwined with his religious beliefs, especially if those are beliefs instilled in him during childhood.

      As a large part of seeing his way out, Guy B would need to rationally, objectively evaluate his religious beliefs and the guilt those beliefs have artificially imposed onto his conscience. That inevitably involves not only facing that probably many if not most of the people in his upbringing — his mom, his family, his “church” circles — were/are wrong and misguided, but also that a “foundation” of his perception of reality has been faulty — that, there is no “all-powerful, all-loving father/god” deity who provides ultimate purpose in life, establishes absolutes of “right and wrong”, is in ultimate control over everything, and will ensure Guy B a happy and eternal “afterlife”.

      Many people are either/both unwilling to rationally analyze their beliefs and/or unable to deal with the inner-core shake-up of realizing their belief system was totally false. They find it easier and simpler to continue believing, even though their beliefs have aggravated and even caused severe problems (such as Guy B’s marriage and his job)); they refuse to acknowledge that the beliefs caused their problems, and blame the problems on their own somehow lack of consistency and/or commitment toward their “god”/church.

      Part of that unwillingness/inability surfaces self-defensively as self-righteous tirades such as the one Guy B threw at you about your ideas of marriage and your not attending church.

      • P Ray
        August 8, 2014 at 11:11 pm

        Guy B should have pointed out the young, chaste virgins in church rather than talk about the bulls*it of hellfire (since the majority of people including him, are going there).
        But I guess Guy B didn’t know any young, chaste virgins in his church (it is called the “Sunday Morning Nightclub” for a reason).

  8. Webe
    August 7, 2014 at 10:16 am

    One dynamic that has not come up much in this discussion of side-lined single women is that as women age and become less attractive to men, the standards they maintain for men rises. Lot of 40+ divorced women wouldn’t dream of a relationship with anyone “below” the status she is used to or used to have. However, there is basically zero chance that a man with any status in her own age group will even think once about her in that way.
    But this process hits many young women in their twenties. After a couple of flings and heart pain, moving up the career ladder and moving to more expensive tastes, she finds there is no one who wants her who is nearly as exciting/charming as she dreamed of when she was 19, let alone men that are exciting and meet her social status requirements.
    This basically means she is out of the game, perhaps against her will, but largely because of her own “demands”. Combine this with the fact that no woman in modern society “needs a man” (a women needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle, as they say), and you can easily have a large portion of young women side-lined.
    That these women also begrudge men their pleasure is a different matter, but most women feel that upward of 60% of the men should not exist and dismiss them out of hand: Perhaps the drones are necessary for society, but all the same, they would prefer them to not exist.
    Although there is a lot of dismisiveness, there is perhaps more superiority and condescension than malevolence and intent in this behaviour.

    • August 7, 2014 at 11:30 am

      Those 60+% of men are the ones who women are just not sexually attracted to and that said, most of these guys ARE drones. A guy one said something like this as far as how women view men… They want a fool. They want a man who is on-point when it comes to being able to ‘provide and protect’. But as far as being kept in check or being called on their shit, they want someone who’s slow… someone who’s gullible. Once they run into the arms of a man who can call them out, who has a strong backbone or treat them like the hoes that they are, they either run from you, pitch a bitch or bend their asses over – They don’t win doing either three.

      As far as people banging below their level, both men and women do it all the time, until they upgrade their bodies, looks and finances. Then they realize they can afford better. But in some cases, great sex with 3s can override bad sex with 5s. That goes for both sexes alike.

      • P Ray
        August 7, 2014 at 5:39 pm

        Society loses cohesion when men realise they’ll be treated like drones: in other words, respected and appreciated (via gifts, tchotchkes or shallow words) but not desired.
        It’s funny watching world religions scrable to address the reality that they are now ponzi schemes designed to provide welfare for women and responsibility for men.

  1. August 10, 2014 at 11:24 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: