I might be talking BS here, but I remember that genes responsible for aggressiveness and impulse control correlated a bit.
Like I said before, I don’t have a solid idea about how it can be done. I’m ignorant on this stuff. Perhaps if I or anyone else interested would have to go over the ideas of the American eugenics movement of the early 1900’s, which not only wanted to root out bad genes (sociopaths and criminals), but also had some advocates who wanted the US to be a Nordic country (Nordic race, not just people from Scandinavia). So if it had its way, my (Jewish) family wouldn’t have wound up here, which I don’t think would be inhumane; it simply wouldn’t have been welcomed.
I think we could have a eugenic effect on a multi-racial society by simply
- executing violent and out-of-control criminals, and
- having limits on welfare and the fertility of those receiving it, as mentioned by Otay.
- Interference to halt the sexual selection of criminals and sociopaths, which could just be done by male family members.
- Exhorting women to select normal men like the ones on here.
inb4: “what’s normal?”
It would be far softer than deeming people with certain abnormalities unfit to breed, as suggested above.
This is a derail can of worms waiting to happen. 
3 Likes
Hahah. Sorry about that.
3 Likes
‘Twas me! Three years ago in the war on drugs thread right?
A lot has gone on since then, my world view has since been absolutely rattled!
This tends to happen to many young men from that gap between 18-25. I don’t hold a lot of power in anecdote… but I will say within my friend group there was an addict who was around me as he was a good friend of a friend
And I…. Hated him… genuinely. My friend was too naïve to see the guy for what he was… Trouble for the sake of trouble. Incapable of taking responsibility for his wrongdoings.
Led to me ditching certain events because I’d say “is this guy going to be there? He will be? I don’t want to take care of him… I’m out”
My entire life I always had sympathy for the outcast as to some degree I have always been one… I’m far from neurotypical
This man probably represented the first “underdog” who not only did I have ZERO sympathy for… but I actively just wanted him out of my life as he had a tendency to put others in compromising positions, he would lie, cheat and steal (before he became an addict). On a first glance interaction I thought to myself “this guy isn’t going to become an addict”
He became a heroin addict before “recovering”. Sober to him meant anything but heroin… so inviting himself over to my house before I can even say “no, don’t step foot in my house” and proceeding to take 7 klonopin then mixing thst with alcohol and a nauseating amount of pot in a scenario where none of us take drugs anymore and we hardly drink is sober to this individual… guess who had to clean up after him!
If you think that’s bad that’s the tip of a very large, destructive iceberg
And the nerve he had to just continually bring that kind of stuff into my house after I’d make it very clear “I don’t want it IN my parents house!”
The “you are an adult, make your own decisions” doesn’t even apply here because every time no matter how important the outing is to other people he will take a bunch of shit and transform himself into the centre of attention
I could go over how he stole thousands from one of my friends. I was ready to cut him loose from tne very beginning, I genuinely disliked him (thought he was genuinely as dumb as they come, but also had zeeo capacity to reflect on his behaviour and learn so he did the same stupid shit over and over again)
I believe he was neuro developmentally challenged… a little bit “simple” if you will. As I later explained to others, being simple doesn’t automatically make you a good natured. You can have Down syndrome and still be a dick for instance.
His father was an addict and there was clearly a genetic component but his entire life revolved around drugs/getting as fucked up as possible. Talking to him every convo went back to “oh and this drug and that drug is so great!”
It was really pathetic. He had a good upbringing, went to one of the best schools in the county… pushed all of his friends away with the common denominator being his drug / alcohol use and couldn’t for the life of him understand why his friends didn’t want to deal with his shit after he would lie, steal, cheat, manipulate stories and situations to spin narratives thst always conveniently made him the victim when he was usually the aggressor… not the victim
I could go on a whole tirade but I came to realize while many addicts and drug users have sympathetic back stories there is a portion of them who are like that because they revel in the chaos. This guy was genuinely pathological
Like he told us his upbringing was so abusive, his mother was the worst
We meet his mother quite a few times and find out the true story in that he was kicked out of home for being abusive towards his younger sister and trying to get her into drugs when she was like 13… big difference between I had an abusive mother
The mother to this day tries to help him, but realizes what her son is/that he never tells her (or his friends) the truth and you can see it does break her heart to an extent
If I think about “who is going to probably wind up in prison” it’s this guy… and I’d have no sympathy for him. My god I have stories
Just having him around made all of us look bad… by default you’d assume perhaps by having someone like him with us we must all behave in thst way (at least I’d assume that) as his behavior made interaction with him unpalatable for most
I’m so glad my friends finally cut him loose (absent of my involvement). I couldn’t say anything as think of it as me being a minority stakeholder. He was a childhood friend of my friends
As to my views on selective reproduction being harsh, I can discuss them further if you create a thread about it. You mention fertility status of those on welfare… in effect this eventuates the same outcome as the majority of those I don’t want reproducing when I talk about inheritable, incurable genetic disease are on disability support payouts anyway and usually cannot work
The women from what i see are exponentially more likely to reproduce than the men who women don’t want because they can’t provide in spite of the whole “I’m independent and don’t need no man to provide”
It works out like “I have a stem degree and can provide for myself therefore my man needs to provide even more… and be six foot two blablabla”
Effectively shelving dating for disabled men.
I find women who are disabled/have these genetic issues tend to be even more to the left relative to the liberal bias young women already have. I struck up a conversation with one recently… until she started going on about how the Australian government is fascist and far left political parties are the only way moving forward and I thought to myself “dammit, not again” as I genuinely can’t move past the insane woke stuff. Disability support communities have made the mistake in thinking woke/dei applies to them when it doesn’t… virtue signaling and victim hood points only apply if you check the right boxes and chronic illness doesn’t check the right boxes for use as a mascot.
My opinions have been dismissed to my face within these communities fkr being a “straight white cis man”. How can you expect support from the public when you behave like that? Already lost my support and I am one of them!
I don’t understand where they are finding husbands/partners with these insane views… perhaps their partners just ignore it? Who knows… but I’ve been given the idea “find a woman with the same condition”
I’d argue those women are even more hypergamous as they are acutely aware they have NO chance if they don’t find a man who can provide for EVERYTHING. You never see these women going out with men in similar predicaments. If you did make a rule on these peoole being unable to reproduce I’d argue you’d probably see women like this going out with more men who are similar.
As opposed to the “everyone is looking for Prince Charming” type thing you’d find a 1 to 1 match up ratio or something closer to it
In cases of women like this reproducing the child born (likely sick themselves depending on inheritance pattern) you wind up with a dynamic that is effectively a child raised in a single parent household which isn’t good epidemiologically speaking. If you have one parent mostly checked out because they are sick and deteriorate forever the onus is largely on the other parent to pretty much do everything
Almost every day women post about being wrecked with guilt because they can’t be emotionally or physically present to raise their children (many of whom are sick or will get sick)… but they’re trying to get pregnant again. You’ve already said you can’t raise the kids you do have… publicly… on the internet …
Free will and all but this effect trickles down to the next generation.
1 Like
Hey, I’ll read your post when I can. Thanks for the reply. But it was someone else.
I know a woman who shortly after the first birth of her first kid last summer would distastefully exclaim at get-togethers, “One and done!” She is now pregnant and expecting the second kid in December.
Hypergamy isn’t inherently bad. Unrestrained, or as one author called it, malignant hypergamy, is not good, and causes serious social problems. Serious societies kept it in check for very good reasons, through culture and law. Such an idea bothers what I think is a great deal of people.
This has had a devastating effect on society, and if anyone wants to go down the rabbit hole, he can read The Case for Father Custody, and the aptly titled Garbage Generation, both by Dr. Daniel Amneus, and Who Lost America? by Dr. Stephen Baskerville.
I have this one that you didn’t mention, but not the others.
I like him. He is an academic who says things other academics won’t
Being an academic doesn’t really account for shit with the social sciences given many institutions are ideologically compromised. It took me a long time to realize this
When it comes to studying genetic disease, cancer etc being an academic absolutely matters but the line blurs when it comes to the “social sciences”. It’s always good to know how to read and interpret data, and I like how Baskerville consistently uses sources to back up his claims (and some of those sources are very decent)
Some of what he says makes me uncomfortable, and I set out to test those uncomfortable viewpoints by asking around, getting rebuttals… then I go back and fourth
A what of what used to make me profoundly uncomfortable has now settled in as “likely an unfortunate truth”. I’ve seriously been at war with myself recently over some of the more controversial ideas that have entered my head
I don’t put a lot of weight in anecdote but when I see the same anecdotes being repeated through the experiences of not only myself, but other men my age (repeatedly) spanning over different friend groups, peoole living in different countries etc it’s very hard to ignore
Then I notice the way modern media treats men (in exactly the ways women used to complain objectified women, but when applied to guys it’s fine?)
No wonder young men have shifted conservative, myself included for better or worse!
If you look at feminism the second wave movement actually split off between two sub groups
There were the feminists who still prioritized modesty, reigning in impulse control… they said promiscuity damaging to one’s character, that you should respect yourself as well as others… but pushed for better employment prospects and whatnot
This sub group was vehemently anti-pornography as well
The second group is the type of feminism we often read about associated with the sexual revolution as slthough this was initially I believe a near 50/50 split… the pro hedonism crowd was far more exciting, not to mention more appealing to YOUNG people who were more likely to take on a “revolutionary” mindset
Imagine had the other side won… the world would be very different today I imagine as “hook up” culture would have never eventuated
You’ve mentioned democracy is a scam… hook up culture is a scam for the average bloke! I say this as someone who has hooked up myself…. It selectively benefits men who are very attractive as well as the women who are interested in it (many women aren’t)
It makes finding a real long term partner far more difficult for both men and women alike
Honestly
I don’t like child support
I live in a country where both men AND women have to pay child support depending on the circumstance (hardly limited to the men here)
In cases of “baby trapping” which absolutely does exist on both sides… I don’t believe a cent of child support should be rewarded to someone who has enticed another party to engage in sexual relations under misleading pretense… thst is sexual coercion and where I live you can face criminal or civil charges for this if it can be proven (say through text messages where you say you were on the pill but hair testing/whatever doesn’t even find a trace of thst drug)
The courts are biased towards punishing men no doubt but it doesn’t appear to be as bad as the current status quo in the USA
For instance “no fault” divorce here takes well over twelve months to put through, and you need to try couples therapy for a year, continue living with one another
You need to prove to the courts you’ve made every attempt to make things work… then you can clear the man out of half of his possessions
Infidelity etc isn’t no fault
Initiating a no fault divorce here as a woman can be quite costly, so generally getting divorced because you are bored is difficult to pursue secondary to the cost and effort required to do so.
In America I believe in most states you can just willy nilly file for divorce lol
I didn’t like people who don’t support their children
I think it should only be implemented in cases of neglect and abandonment, certainly not by men who did not one thing wrong.
No such thing. People have sex. Babies come from sex. That’s it. There’s no “trap”. I interpret trap as, “I wanted sex but not the responsibility that comes with it.”
Women don’t and can’t baby trap men. You play, you pay.
1 Like
If you think there’s somewhere academics that aren’t ”ideologically compromised”, I got some bad news for you.
Agree.
1 Like
Much talk about the link between criminality, social deviance, and fatherless households here.
I interpret trap as “you’ve done something illegal that could amount to criminal charges”
Let’s say you poke a hole in someone’s condoms. Men and women have been known to do this. This results in pregnancy. That isn’t “ya play, ya pay”
This analogy would be more contingent with “the condom broke… whoops”. Yes, that is a risk… but if someone is meddling with your contraception… Lets say I as a man switch my girlfriends birth controls out with identical looking placebo pills and she gets pregnant.
The intent is nefarious, that actually is baby trapping… it’s ILLEGAL… and if you were caught out doing this I don’t think there’s any justification for the other party being forced to pay child support.
Stealthing is another example, where the man silently removes the condom without the woman noticing
A baby trap is when one partner maliciously (and illegally) misleads the partner into having sex with the goal being conception without the other partners consent.
A woman keeping a pregnancy when contraception fails isn’t baby trapping, a man using a condom that fails isn’t baby trapping
Look at the above… I’m talking about malicious behaviour that if proven could be prosecuted in court where I live. THAT is baby trapping…
Agreed, women also pay child support in similar situations although the courts are generally far harsher on the men (in terms of how much men have to pay).
So from what I’ve outlined… if a woman is poking holes in condoms or switching out their birth control and lying to their partner because they want a baby and the male partner doesn’t… The sex is no longer consensual, and I can highlight cases where this has popped up in court to prove that point. Men sometimes do the same to women. I don’t think child support should be a thing in these cases… I’d even argue someone who pulls one of the above tricks is clearly a manipulative individual with questionable morals that is unlikely to be a good parent.
I have a good analogy here. My cousin dropped one of her female friends for raping a man at a party. The guy was passed out, blind drunk (granted better to not get yourself into such a compromising position to begin with). She got on top of him and had sex with him to completion. After all, an erection can be biological response to stimuli and not just associated with arousal. I find it hard to believe the passed out drunk guy wanted it
Let’s say she had gotten pregnant from this. Would you apply the same to the man “you play, you pay”
Baby trapping has strict criteria, but it absolutely exists. Some people appear sane, until they pull wack shit like poking holes in condoms. Are you telling me you’ve never met a ‘covert narcissist’ or a covert psychopath? Someone who appears friendly, normal until they show their true colours either in private and/or when they suddenly snap out of the blue and do something out of character but that ‘out of character’ moment represents their true colours.
You grew up in NYC… actually I KNOW you’ve seen a ton of weird, degenerate, deviant shit! WAY more than I saw growing up (and I also saw my fair share of weird shit, but arguably more controlled/less chaotic).
Studies show the 90s kids were easily the worst modern generation to exist when it came to drugs, promiscuity, aggression/violence. The movie “kids” comes to mind (which you have seen, it would make anyone who isn’t severely desensitized feel sick) but if you liked kids check out bully, gummo and thirteen. I think bully is the closest one where it’s aimless kids with no parental figures in the early 2000’s/late 90s. Very disturbing though, bad idea to watch around… well anyone really… I watched it with my father.
1 Like
I see what you mean. I thought baby trapping in a different way.
This is the movie I’m talking about at the end of last paragraph
Similar to KIDS this was also given an NC-17 and released unrated. There is an edited R rated version and the original version. The original is better as it pushes the envelope in portraying of youth crime/deviance to a far more extreme (and realistic) degree.
Saw that too, not the others.
Not surprised at all.
It was actually a true story and those who have reviewed the actual case + seen the move have mentioned the film was quite accurate in it’s portrayal of the entire case. The murder of bobby kent
The guy was an absolute psychopath and while none of the kids involved were saints, I actually don’t understand why the sentencing was so harsh (one got the death penalty, later overturned, others for between 7-40 years)
Testimonies (if accurate) painted bobby as a sadistic, psychopathic bully who subjected his peers to enormous amounts of physical, emotional and sexual abuse (including rape). Vigilante justice is ‘wrong’ because it can turn into a system of innocent people dying but in this case… nothing was being done to discipline the guy and look at the testimonies… he was so far gone
40 years to death penalty reminds me of “school bully harasses you for months/years and when you finally punch the bully YOU are the one who get’s in trouble”
This is super off topic but I believe had that Bobby Kent guy not been killed by his friends he would have gone on to kill someone himself. He was a total psychopath.
Woodstock '99 sums it up. The rage in your generation was unparalleled. Even the music that hit number 1 on the billboards… Korn, limp bizkit, slipknot and the likes. This kind of music makes my generation gag (most of the time) and the new resurgence of metal is far less aggressive and more emotional (think despair/sadness over rage and anger) which more accurately captures the way much of my generation feels.
A lot of the new metal stuff sounds like this
And it’s more metal crossed with post - hardcore. Compare this to the music of the 90’s… way less aggressive… and just sad. The song is about the drummers brother who took his own life. The last verse is the drummer screaming… very visceral.
A lot of the newer metal is sad like this. It’s crossed over from that punk/thrash energy and more into despair, grief and apathy. If you look at the issues facing gen Z at the moment (being forever alone, isolation/lack of friends, rising costs of living, suicide is a HUGE issue amongst men now) the switch in tone is understandable. Even mainstream music the tone is switching.
That was an odd post overall. It’s interesting to see your take on American teenagers of that era through media.
During that time, most non-Americans I met associated us with the American Pie movies.
I dunno, I had fun. Road tripping and sneaking into concerts was affordable entertainment. But thank god smartphones didn’t exist then.
Also, you better be careful with that statment. If you piss off the gen x kids you’re in trouble.
1 Like