Monday, October 17, 2016

It’s Homogamy Not Hypergamy

”Only when like marries like can there be any happiness” - Gerald O’Hara, Gone With the Wind

Now why is it the Manosphere knows made-up words such as “hypergamy” but does not know accepted scholarly words like “homogamy”? Aren’t they interested in the truth instead of false, clear and easy-to-understand fantasies? It doesn’t appear so.

Where are the hundreds of decades-long studies by qualified scholars about “hypergamy”? There aren’t any. But there about homogamy.

Homogamy means “like marries like.” It’s the only way to have a chance at any happiness in a relationship. And scholars have found homogamy applies to 100% of relationships (I have mentioned an Aesop’s fable, thousands of years old, about how “Equals make the best friends.” They also make the best marriages.).

Homogamy is another word for “associative mating.” Every study ever done has proven the truth of associative mating.

There is even a 25% chance of a couple having the same eye color, which is statistically significant.

One of the biggest predictors of associative mating is having similar IQs. People with similar IQs get married and have children.

Someone with an IQ of 125 is not going to marry someone with an IQ of 85 and have children with them (as I’ve mentioned before, the functionally-illiterate moron “Muhammad Ali” had an IQ of 78 – and your IQ is set by the time you’re 12).

Not only does smart marry smart but dumb marries dumb, so with the latter we end up with dysgenic pressures.

Even with regression to the mean a couple with IQs each of 125 are most probably not going children with the average IQ of 100. Their children’s IQs will be substantially higher.

This means we are going to have socioeconomic classes sorted by IQ, which is already happening. And people with higher IQs generally make more money. And people with lower IQs make a lot less.

As funny as the movie is we are not going to end up with Idiocracy. We’re going to end up with a famous science fiction story known as “The Marching Morons,” in which 90% of people were morons and ten percent of the people had all the brains and had to take care of everyone – until that ten percent killed all of the morons by shooting them into space.

This time they’ll die when it gets to the point the white man can no longer support their sorry asses.

Honestly, what would happen if we had ten percent smart productive people and 90% morons? Would we end up like the movie Elysium, with the smarter ones living in a space station and the earth swarming with morons? Art does imitate life.

The problems associated with low IQs are appalling. Crime, welfare, unemployment, illegitimate births – all are associated with below-average IQs. That’s what happens when dumb marries dumb and has children.

One of the problems associated with a high socioeconomic level is putting off having children until the late 20s or early 30s. So smarter people have fewer children or sometimes none at all.

And these days the divorce rate is close to astronomical, compared to what it was 50 years ago.

Another problem – and this is going to be a huge one – is that when women move into a field men move out of it. That’s why there are so few male grade school teachers – and when I was a kid most of my teachers were men, including a former Marine when I was 11 years old.

Now by law women have to be hired over men. I’ve seen that several times – women, of whatever race, hired over more qualified men. It’s even happened to friends of mine.

One of my friends lost out on a job teaching economics to a far-less-qualified woman. When he sat in on her class he found she making mathematical mistakes on the blackboard. He told me he’s seen that twice with unqualified women.

I know one man who had been an officer in the military and who had an M.S. When he looked at the promotion list at work he found every one of them was a woman – eight white women, once black, one “Latina” (whatever the hell that is).

Another wanted to teach law but was told by the dean he didn’t have a chance because he was a white man and only women were hired. Like anyone would listen to Hillary Clinton or Michelle Obama teaching law (by the way, when Michelle Obama became First Lady her $300,000 a year make-work job at a hospital was eliminated).

What this means is that schooled (not educated) high-IQ women are going to look around and find there aren’t enough men for them. There are more women with college degrees than men.

And importing Third Worlders with average IQs with 89 isn’t going to help at all and instead going to hurt, and badly. Such people cannot function in our advanced society and will only bring crime and degradation.

People are more concerned with breeding dogs than better people.

People aren’t blank slates (John Locke actually said “wax tablets”). About half of what we are is genetic. Even if it’s less that’s still a hell of a lot of genetic influence.

Leftists think everything is environmental even though they don’t live with crime-ridden lower-IQs types, which shows what hypocrites they are.

We’re going to end up with wealthier people with higher IQs living in gated communities, usually in the hills and all the crime-ridden, poverty-stricken people with lower IQs living in ghettos in the valleys.

My hometown, in a valley, is turning minority so crime is skyrocketing (it’s near E. St. Louis, Illinois, which at one time was an all-white party town and is now an all-black slum. In 30 years my hometown is going to be a slum. And one of my friends has moved to the crime-free neighborhood in the foothills of a small mountain in New Mexico.

That has been the history of the world.

We’re looking at the Orcs taking over unless we put a stop to it. That’s what happens dumb marries dumb and overwhelms us with their moronic offspring.


Anonymous said...

Check out this book:

March of the Titans by Arthur Kemp.

And blogs:

Philip Christensen said...

You do have to wonder why the Left is so hell-bent on destroying Western Civilization. But then, no Bolshevik ever thinks they're going to be shoved up against the wall by his friends... until they are.

Cecil Henry said...

The left wants to destroy because the basis of their theology is ENVY

Socialism as Envy, in 4 lines:

..'If a man knows that what he's done is good?'
'Then he ought to apologize for it'
'To whom?'
'To those who haven't done it'

Remember: 'You didn't build that!!'

Anonymous said...

"And these days the divorce rate is close to astronomical, compared to what it was 50 years ago."

And the penalty for men for a marriage failure and divorce can be catastrophic.

(And No, prenups don't protect the man.)

Earl Thomas said...

'Now why is it the Manosphere knows made-up words such as “hypergamy” but does not know accepted scholarly words like “homogamy”?'

The term hypergamy exists...but the guys in the sphere use it incorrectly. They think it's a woman having sex with superior men or alphas or whatever they think they are. The term is about a woman marrying a man who is in a higher class. Nothing about having sex with 'alphas'.

Robert What? said...

It is especially important for an intelligent a man to have children with an intelligent woman (and I don't mean "educated"). That is because boys inherit a lot of their intelligence from their mother's X chromosome. So an intelligent man and a stupid woman can still have intelligent daughters, but their sons will be stupid. And I have seen this play out in real life.

Joshua Sinistar said...

Bob, you're so busy criticizing US you're not paying attention to what you're saying. Your bringing up homogamy and saying like should marry like completely destroys your earlier claims that Love should be the basis for marriage. Actually you just inadvertently made my point you disagreed with that you shouldn't marry for Love. Love and like are not the same. When you fall in Love, you usually fall for someone you spend a great deal of quality time with, but the chances of actually having things in common are rare. The real reason the enemy pushed so damn hard for "integration" is the propensity for people to fall in love based on proximity instead of commonality. In an organic culture where people segregated themselves, you wouldn't really see much difference between like and Love, but miscegenation increasing due to integration shows clearly that Love is not a logical sorting process, but an organic mechanism of mating encouraged mostly by hormones and proximity, otherwise miscegenation would be virtually impossible. Its due to the irrational characteristics of Love and mating that actually makes segregation a necessary component of survival. However, your homogamy argument is exactly what I was saying when I said you shouldn't marry for Love and instead look for a compatible partner. Compatible partners have shared values, common interests but different strengths to complement each other. These are the basis for any long term successful relationship, whether its a mate, friend or even business partner.
I won't even get into hypergamy with you, because its a natural selection survival strategy for maximum offspring to ensure the survival of your genes. That kind of cold eugenic science would probably offend an old fashioned Christian Southron like yourself, even if it is a valid survival strategy in a hostile environment.