Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Smart Introvert Men Fleeing From Stupid Extrovert Women

There are two mating strategies. One is low-to-moderate IQ, promiscuous, impulsive, "liberal," extroverted, narcissistic (self-centered), not altruistic, lots of kids, doesn't take very good care of them. This is generally called "r." The second is called "K" and it is high IQ, monogamous, not impulsive, "conservative," introverted, fewer kids, takes good care of them.

It isn't that one person (or group) is all either "r" or all "K". A person or group can show traits of both, but almost always they tilt far to one or the other.

I am an introvert. On the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) I am listed as an INTJ, which means Introverted Intuitive Thinking Judging. It's not as if I'm all introverted: I almost always score 60% introverted, 40% extroverted. But I understand what I am quite well.

I am high-IQ, ultimately monogamous, self-controlled (not impulsive except in certain circumstances), "conservative," imaginative, focused, altruistic, and both rational and intuitive.

I (and other introverts) are very sympathetic towards the Four Cardinal virtues: Prudence (able to judge between actions with regard to appropriate actions at a given time), Justice (the perpetual and constant will of rendering to each one his right), Temperance or Restraint (practicing self-control, abstention, and moderation; tempering the appetite), Fortitude or Courage.

For all practical purposes, the Four Cardinal Virtues are introvert virtues. This means the Seven Deadly Sins (wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony) are extrovert flaws.

Introvert values are also about excellence in life, what the Greeks called arete. That excellence is how introverts achieve well-being/flourishing, or eudamonia. Extroverts can achieve this, but only by following the values discovered by introverts.

Two examples of famous introverts are Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith, both of whom in many ways founded America. Smith used to go for long walks at night so he could think things through, and once got so absorbed in thought he fell into a ditch. Jefferson was the the same way, although he took long horse rides in the countryside. This is so they could think and imagine while alone, since introverts are recharged by solitude, while extroverts can't stand it because they can't bear to be alone, which essentially means they can't tolerate themselves...which is why they are the Herd/Sheep/Borg.

Examples of infamous extroverts were Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and both Bushes....moderate-IQ politicians and utter destroyers. Introverts saw straight through those extrovert destroyers (as they see through all of them) but low-IQ extroverts make excuses for their behavior and worship them as saviors, even though they were everything but.

Low-IQ extroverts are the types who end up in prison, because they are stupid, impulsive and narcissistic. They constitute the most murder-loving of soldiers. This is because they don't think, in addition to lacking empathy. As Frederick the Great said, "If my soldiers were to begin to think, not one would remain in the ranks."

Myself, I believe there is far more wrong with extroverts than introverts. This, from a review of The Introvert Advantage: "If the science behind the book is correct, it turns out that Introverts are people who are over-sensitive to Dopamine, so too much external stimulation overdoses and exhausts them. Conversely, Extroverts can’t get enough Dopamine, and they require Adrenaline for their brains to create it. Extroverts also have a shorter pathway and less blood-flow to the brain. The messages of an Extrovert’s nervous system mostly bypass the Broca’s area in the frontal lobe, which is where a large portion of contemplation takes place."

And this, too:

"A world without Introverts would be a world with few scientists, musicians, artists, poets, filmmakers, doctors, mathematicians, writers, and philosophers." It's not totally incorrect to say introverts are the producers and extroverts are the parasites.

Since Pareto's 80/20 Law holds here, with 80% of the world being extrovert and 20% introvert, this means democracy will not work and is inherently self-destructive. It also means anarcho-capitalism won't work, either, because the 80% of the population that is extroverts will in varying degrees cast off introvert virtues and ruin their lives. It's a lot easier to sink than fly, and when extroverts sink they try to take introverts with them.

I'll give two examples of extroverts I know. One, a man, is moderate-high IQ. He became a podiatrist, so he did have some discipline. He has no children because of birth control, and is extroverted, impulsive and promiscuous, with a count of about 100 women, which he achieved through lies and manipulation. He became a drug addict. He shows gluttony and lack of self-control. He's also a coward.

He told me he ruined his life and if he had to do it over again, he'd be a high-school coach.

To the more deluded in the Manosphere, this loser is an "Alpha." In reality the older description is more accurate: he's a cad.

Second, the woman. She got an M.S., so she has some intelligence and discipline. She never married and has no children. She's impulsive, promiscuous, liberal and narcissistic, with a count of probably 30 men. She blames all her problems on men and is envious and gluttonous. She is also a coward.

Now we come to feminism. Feminism is "r": promiscuous, impulsive, moderate IQ, "liberal," envious, gluttonous, greedy, hostile. Feminists (and liberals in general) show far more of the Seven Deadly Sins than the Four Cardinal Virtues. Feminism considers children low investment, e.g. abortion, birth-control, giving them to poorly-paid workers or child-care centers. It is inherently self-destructive.

There is a certain kind of introvert man who is fleeing these snarky butthurt feminists who blame all their problems on men. I've seen many of these men. They are introverted, high IQ, disciplined, with many intellectual interests. They are independent.

These men, through the years, have found women are no longer worth the trouble for long-term relationships, because many of them are extroverted, narcissistic, impulsive, promiscuous, "liberal" feminists who blame all their problems on men, and are hostile. They have nothing to offer a man, even though they don't know it, and wouldn't believe it if told it. After all, it's men with the problem, right?

These are the women who wonder where all the "good" men are, which only shows they can't tell a good one even if he's standing next to her. These women usually describe themselves as "successful, gorgeous, amazing, wonderful" without understanding no man believes a woman says about herself or her friends.

Does any of this sound familiar?

In other words, the introverted men who advance society through invention and discovery are barely marrying and reproducing (as far as I'm concerned, extroverts do little if nothing because they are destroyers incapable of thought or imagination). Many of these introverted men are no longer valued and receive little appreciation and gratitude from modern women. So why should these men get married and have children, when the minuses far outweigh the benefits?

These intelligent, monogamous, self-controlled ,conservative/libertarian, imaginative, focused, altruistic, rational, intuitive men have almost nothing in common with moderate IQ, promiscuous, impulsive, "liberal," extroverted, narcissistic (self-centered), non-altruistic women. In a sentence, women severely damaged by feminism.

I've pointed out both feminism and democracy are inherently self-destructive. This is because the are both "feminine." Socialism, a more extreme version of democracy, is strictly "female." It's based on the female belief we should all be forced to share (which works until we run out of other people's money, which has happened already).

Society is in the process of collapsing because it has enshrined "feminine" virtues, i.e. an "r" reproductive strategy. Once it collapses, the introverts and their values will take over again, unless we want another Dark Ages.

Unfortunately women in general are less intelligent than men (there are twice as many men with IQs above 120 than women). Women are also more relationship-oriented and more extroverted. This means they will be influenced more than men by the dominant ideology. That is, feminism. Which will destroy their lives, and they will wonder why.

So what will they do? Blame their problems on men. Jung made the comment that women's greatest flaw was thinking she was always right. The other side of that coin is blaming your problems on other people. In this case, men, because if you think you are always, then the other person must be always wrong, so logically, they are the cause of your problems. Ergo, to women, men are always the cause of their problems.

Let's put it this way: without introvert leadership, discoveries and inventions, extroverts are damned.

15 comments:

MK said...

Preach on brother Bob your doing good work I find myself thinking closer along your lines as time passes. Moving from more false conservative to a defender of personal liberties.

Anonymous said...

Hi Uncle Bob!

I left a reply to your comment. Copy and pasted here;


Bob Wallace March 19, 2013 at 00:14 #

“Why should any woman have to worry that she might get raped if she hangs out with guys or drinks too much?”

I’ll get you the shortest answer possible: stupid, drunken high-school/college dumbjock.
Reply


Reply
LJBiFed! March 22, 2013 at 21:14 #

I think you’re wrong about that Bob. Rape is not something that “stupid highschool/college jocks” do. I don’t know why jocks get such a bad rap but they are normal people too. Only rapists rape. Non-rapists do not rape. Rape is a pathology of the criminal sociopath/psychopath and they are fortunately small in number in any society. That is why on the rare occasion when rapes like The Steubenville case happen, they must be dealt with harshly. Its not normal humans we’re dealing with, its the socio and psychopaths of society. Can their pathology be reversed? I don’t know. They are so far beyond the normal spectrum of human behavior that it might be best to isolate them from the larger society for life.

Its a good thing these two were caught young and right after their first rape. Left unchecked we’d be dealing with a lot more crimes than just this one.

And no, they are absolutely not representative of jocks, atheletes and sportsmen.
Surely you don’t think atheletes suffer from the pathology of psychopathy, do you? On what evidence would you base this belief?


PS: is that you in the avatar pic with the hat on? What year?

Anonymous said...

Great post! I'm what women would consider marriage material (high income, high savings, own home and car), and I will have absolutely, positively, nothing whatsoever to do with marriage or children. I'll gratefully die alone. There is no way on earth I'd pair up with a modern woman and risk everything over the flip of a coin.

I'm a well-educated, high IQ, single, successful introvert that highly values intellectual pursuits and that's how I'm staying.

If I’m “no longer valued and receive little appreciation and gratitude from modern women”, that’s perfectly OK by me. I don’t need validation, appreciation or gratitude from women. In fact, I’d be a lot happier if they’d just leave me be.

Anonymous said...

"Great post! I'm what women would consider marriage material (high income, high savings, own home and car), and I will have absolutely, positively, nothing whatsoever to do with marriage or children. I'll gratefully die alone. There is no way on earth I'd pair up with a modern woman and risk everything over the flip of a coin.

I'm a well-educated, high IQ, single, successful introvert that highly values intellectual pursuits and that's how I'm staying. "

These qualities are great!

May I ask what you look like? Physicality is a major part of attraction, even or people who say "looks don't matter" or "I don't care about looks" have a baseline or threshold below which they won't go.

Also we tend to overrate or underrate our own selves on a scale of 1-10 so the best way to gauge your looks number is to ask someone you can trust to tell you the truth and not just say something to make you feel good.



Anonymous said...

What a load of horseshit. Since you don't cite any sources to support your conclusions, there is no reason to take you seriously.

Bob Wallace said...

It's called an opinion, dumbass.

Anonymous said...

What about introverted women? I don't see you talking about them very often.

Anonymous said...

You missed one more trait of introverts, empathy.

J1 said...

Brother Bob,

PREACH ON!!!

Thank You Thank You Thank You for posting this and connecting with as many men as you have. Just imagine how many more of our introverted / more quiet brothers out there could learn from such words.

Indeed if you are a competent, capable, independent man free of connections to anything or anyone, then why waste your time playing "the dating game" or trying to ply women with the kind of attention that could naturally come to you via handling your own and building the life that you desire via hard work?

Warmest respects to all other men out there who feel the same!

-J

Anonymous said...

As a young introvert female, I almost feel like I have to ratchet up a certain amount of aggressive energy just to interact with others at work. This has led to stress (hypertension) and sexually competitive behavior amongst women. My quiet confidence and social reticence really rubs extroverts the wrong way, especially since I know how to calculate and strategically get what I want, without making a scene or, having others be consciously aware of my invisible plans. (The ancient military strategist, Sun Tzu teaches in the principle of "winning without bloodshed"). While the virtues of men are judged by IQ, monogamy, intellectual ability and needing less validation due to having resources, etc, a woman's world is completely different:
Women seek validation, protection and resources from men, women and hierarchical structures based on sexuality, emotions and psychology. Our alpha qualities therefore center around who gets the most attention and sometimes, the most dick. How can an introvert who barely speaks and seems withdrawn capture this coveted resource? Seduction. (An art that is lost in modern culture.) We intelligently plot, knowing that our ability to observe will inform us of how women misuse talkative, pushy incessant, self centered flashy, extroverted traits and fuck up with men, and how to elicit responses from whom we desire. (Often getting responses other women want leading to jealousy ;) Our penchant for the written word, deep thinking and preference for one on one interactions can be as alluring as a Siren. While a man may love to see a woman dressed scantily (an extroverts favorite assault on the male) introverts can also cause a stir by our very manner since we know that predatory male instinct can ferret us out. We can turn it on without taking anything off. Although you will most likely be taking yours off first. We know we can offer you more than sex. We choose when to administer these charms when you seem like you want more than sexual thrills.
On the nature of professional orientation, we are highly selective with abilities to study the scene in order to play effectively. Knowledge of how our strengths (perceived as weaknesses) can disarm and surprise can help us get that promotion in ways so clever as to be unlikely to be undermined.
An introverted woman may be perceived as bitchy because she prefers the world of her own thoughts and company. She may struggle with loneliness. If she is attractive, and introverted, she will develop cunning because women will hate and men will test for sexual availability, weakness and pushover traits. May even learn to be innocently manipulative, as feminism and mysogony influence most of american culture....

Anonymous said...

'Anonymous said...
Great post! I'm what women would consider marriage material (high income, high savings, own home and car), and I will have absolutely, positively, nothing whatsoever to do with marriage or children. I'll gratefully die alone. There is no way on earth I'd pair up with a modern woman and risk everything over the flip of a coin.

I'm a well-educated, high IQ, single, successful introvert that highly values intellectual pursuits and that's how I'm staying.

If I’m “no longer valued and receive little appreciation and gratitude from modern women”, that’s perfectly OK by me. I don’t need validation, appreciation or gratitude from women. In fact, I’d be a lot happier if they’d just leave me be.'

And as selfish as they come.

-Makoto

Anonymous said...

Author of this blog post recognizes some key points about what Rush calls 'the chickification of America,' but it's also the fault of men for being weak enough to allow this sad turn of events to happen.

Anonymous said...

I wasted 5 minutes of my life reading this post.

Bob Wallace said...

Then you have very small brains, troll.

Anonymous said...

Hi,

I have to say that I agree with a lot of what was said here. For background, I'm in my late 20's, live in a major northeast metro area, and work in software / big data. I'm also quite shy/introverted, and associate myself as a "conservative-libertarian" (as in I support some socially liberal policies like marijuana legalization and gay marriage, but in general believe that some traditional values and God would benefit people greatly).

I also have to say that I completely agree with your assessment of so many women. In general, the people who fall in the middle of the bell curve are capable of being insufferable; smart enough to form a belief system but not smart enough to question it. Feminism is a perfect example; since more women fall into the middle of the bell curve then men (men tend to be more polarized), more women are in that perfect level to get sucked in. They'll yell about the wage gap, even when math says the wage gap is largely a myth. They'll yell about discrimqtion in health insurance costs, but not question why their life and car insurance costs are lower. They'll yell about injustice over the lack of women in engineering, while talking a break from their gender studies. In short, they are sheep.

But, they are sheep we have to live with. They elect into power the very people who can flex amazing control over people through taxation. Some may be well meaning, but misguided types (Liz Warren, Bernie Sanders), while others can be downright corrupt (Hillary Clinton), but the results are the same; the person trying to make a living through actions over words loses. And at the end of the day, what do I have in common with these women? When they go off and watch Girls and the Daily Show, I'm reading. When they demand more out of society, I demand more from myself.

Eventually I'll (hopefully) find a girl with good values and a real job (not some government job or organizational fluff job). Until then, I'll stay single.