tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8497093028548856666.post3675531608761557717..comments2024-03-22T11:14:05.861-04:00Comments on UncleBob's Treehouse: Why Evo-Psych is a JokeAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16046202647270439670noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8497093028548856666.post-63090963394171335622015-06-01T23:42:37.190-04:002015-06-01T23:42:37.190-04:00So supposedly, 80% of women are fucked by 20% of m...So supposedly, 80% of women are fucked by 20% of men (alfalfa's). Yet 80% of men are not alfalfa's. So this need for the best seed must be a cosmic joke then. OR sperm cums in all spectrums of the alphabet, even from alfala males. <br /><br />Kinda weird when you look at it that way, eh? This need for the alfalfa sperm does not mean that the offspring will be like daddy, another alfalfa. more likely an 80% chance that ole mister alfalfa seed is gonna throw another Betamax or worse.<br /><br />Kinda disproves this whole seeking of alfalfa sperm thing doncha think?DeNihilistnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8497093028548856666.post-87671456916090830532015-03-03T21:04:20.205-05:002015-03-03T21:04:20.205-05:00"In all of human history, there was never suc..."In all of human history, there was never such a thing as a brothel, nor a whore house, until 'science' introduce 'love'."<br /><br />You gotta be kidding me. Whores have been around for thousands of years. It used to be part of religion and there are Greek vases with whores on them.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16046202647270439670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8497093028548856666.post-56830287944160731592014-10-01T19:29:15.849-04:002014-10-01T19:29:15.849-04:00"And scientists were the ones who taught men ..."And scientists were the ones who taught men use love to get sex and women use sex to get love."<br /><br />In all of human history, there was never such a thing as a brothel, nor a whore house, until 'science' introduce 'love'.<br /><br />"It was "established" science for decades"<br /><br />Science is only 'established' until a theory that better described observed phenomena comes along.<br /><br />" It's when you think that what is true of the part is true of the whole."<br /><br />Which is exactly what you do in each of your articles, take some characteristic of a thing, mis-characterise it, then say, 'look, that's ridiculous , the whole topic must be rubbish'.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8497093028548856666.post-30852227403507760032014-10-01T18:18:07.147-04:002014-10-01T18:18:07.147-04:00Did you even read the whole article? I said that &...Did you even read the whole article? I said that "human nature" is dependent on society. And scientists were the ones who taught men use love to get sex and women use sex to get love. It wasn't of that "Blue Pill" nonsense (btw, do you know what a metaphor is?). It was "established" science for decades. You know - evo-psych pseudo-science. As for that Alpha/Beta nonsense, that, too, is a metaphor. And looking at "two dimensions" of a thing is not the Fallacy of Composition. It's when you think that what is true of the part is true of the whole. For that matter, a lot of the Manosphere is nothing but that fallacy. Not to mention a house built on sand. <br /><br />There is nothing new in the Manosphere. The bad was dismissed thousands of years ago and the good is in the process of being discovered - because the denizens are ignorant of history. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16046202647270439670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8497093028548856666.post-17447402855880017892014-10-01T17:20:17.106-04:002014-10-01T17:20:17.106-04:00"I was originally taught that men give love t..."I was originally taught that men give love to get sex, and women use sex to get love."<br /><br />Yea, typical 'blue pill' indoctrination. Men give *commitment*, and women use sex to get *commitment*.<br /><br />Fixed that for you.<br /><br />"Now start with the facts - men are romantics, women ravenous multi-orgasmic sluts, and then try to Evo-Psych that. You can't do it."<br /><br />Firstly, 'Beta' men are romantics.<br /><br />Then, of course you can't because you choose to only look at the two dimensions of a thing. Talk about 'fallacy of composition'.<br /><br />Next, the whole perspective of a woman changes when she has given birth. I know lots of women who have said, I never wanted a child, but now I have one, he is the most important thing in my life.<br /><br />Female behaviour is mutable, depending on circumstance. Given the ability to control their fertility, their sexuality is released, a womans instinctual behaviour comes to the fore. No chance of pregnancy leads to much more sluttery, and as such behaviour is condoned by society, that leads to more overt hypergamy. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8497093028548856666.post-47457868676252013462014-10-01T06:33:58.621-04:002014-10-01T06:33:58.621-04:00I would suggest that instead of being total bunk, ...I would suggest that instead of being total bunk, Evo-psych as it is expressed in the mano-sphere is still floundering around a bit.<br /><br />I did find the concept of "shit tests" to be useful and when I countered such a fitness test the way it was suggested it worked. Other stuff is probably wrong.<br /><br />Irregardless, yours is a voice of reason which forces the manosphere to at least re-examine it's beliefs and in the process ditch the obvious falsehoods in favour of what really works.<br /><br />Having said that I also don't agree with everything you say but it's great to read opposing viewpoints and then come to one's own conclusionsOmega Mannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8497093028548856666.post-44584778146982048532014-09-30T21:18:16.660-04:002014-09-30T21:18:16.660-04:00I believe a more accurate way to describe the PUA ...I believe a more accurate way to describe the PUA evaluation of women is that men are polygamous, (driven to spread seed to more than one partner, if not marry and support them) and women are hypergamous--that is, they practice serial monogamy, seeking out the most dominant man their looks can get them. Some women are also quick to chuck a low value man in favor of a high value man, as women who did that in the past had more and healthier babies. (This might also hearken back to the days when one village could slaughter another, kill all the men and steal all of their women. The women who submitted to their new male overlords could live to breed another day, and thus pass on their hypergamous instincts to their female descendants.)<br /><br />I know you don't think much of the "alpha fucks, beta bucks" phenomenon, but female promiscuity could be explained by women who secured dependable men for their providers, then snuck around and fucked more physically dominant men on the side (having the best of both worlds, strong seed AND abundant resources.) This would explain why adultery was considered such a serious crime throughout most of human history (one that was often punishable by death or mutilation.) It shows just how out of touch our society has become with nature that we think women can cheat and screw around and have such activities NOT bring society to its knees sooner or later. We don't even question why adultery was punished so severely. We just chalk it up to "the neanderthal meanness of the patriarchy" or something like that.<br /><br />You know what I love? Progressive knowitalls who dismiss the Bible and other ancient texts as being mere "fairy tales written by goatherders which no longer have any relevance to today's society." What the knowitalls don't realize is that it is WE who are living in the fairy tale--a magical world far removed from nature where technology has given us near godlike powers. Unfortunately our innate nature remains the same. We are apes trying to live in a moon capsule. The texts of the ancient goatherders were at least written by people who had an intimate connection with nature, who knew that one misstep in behavior could result in their doom. We stumble through our technological wonderland and have no idea why everything we touch blows up in our faces. Troper Anoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8497093028548856666.post-7249322056489139702014-09-30T20:08:41.935-04:002014-09-30T20:08:41.935-04:00I seem to recall reading somewhere that EvoPsych w...I seem to recall reading somewhere that EvoPsych was actually created by female researchers. I've been thinking about that sort of "under the surface" recently.<br /><br />If true then that would make it a female ueber alles of ironic proportions. The EvoPsych quoted so much by the Manosphere and PUAs is nothing more than another social smokescreen thrown up by women to get what they want.<br /><br />Strangely I find myself laughing my ass off about it. Self-referential schadenfreude. Life has some very strange ironies!Black Poison Soulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07378635809751908950noreply@blogger.com