Thread 510950588

Mitochondrial DNA spanning over the past 10,000 years shows that 90% of women reproduced while only 30% of males did. Christianity's greatest marketing was to force monogamy so that male cucks could have a reason to die on the frontlines of Kings

>>510950588 (OP)

CuckedGPT originally denied the statement but then we got into math and it caved in

Hey coombrain, what is war? Who fights in wars?

>>510950588 (OP)
>the bit of society where we weren't dying at 30 with rotten teeth in a ditch is bad we should go back

>>510950588 (OP)
FEMALE SEXUAL SELECTION CAUSES INTERSPECIES INFIGHTING

>>510950705

cucks and losers fight in wars while the kings enjoy their concubines from safety

>>510950748

Cope statement. Rotting teeth is actually a result of peasant cucks consuming cattle grain while kings ate meat.

>>510950806
it was the other way around
at least after the discovery of the new world/sugar
the nobility could afford sugar and their teeth rotted
peasants were eating low sugar roots and their teeth stayed strong

>>510950916

We have plenty of evidence from isotopic scans

>>510950588 (OP)
Monogamy is what allowed a healthy society to function.
Without it, nothing would prevent all the sexless dudes from just smashing your head with a rock and raping your women. The only thing preventing that is you keeping an aggressive attitude and putting all your energy into defending yourself instead of doing anything else.

Monogamy means that, after getting married, you can finally let go and take care of your kids and work on your profession.

>>510951284

For thousands of years worthy men had to prove themselves in war to get a woman. This is how things always worked through a meritocratic system. A championship of manhood if you may which built strong civilizations.

Christianity more or less "gave a medal for every child participating" because "we are all equal and it doesn't matter". It was literally a socialist sandbox.

The cost? Polygamous systems run you over. This is what is happening today. Its the long coming tsunami of a prolonged cucked system.

>>510950588 (OP)
>>510950686
Why is there a mitochondrial eve and not a y haplotype adam?

>>510951455
>For thousands of years worthy men had to prove themselves in war to get a woman
And not a single functioning society.
Even the pagan ones practiced monogamous relationships.
Its simple, give everyone a reason to participate and you can create a functioning society. Take that away and eventually betas gamas or even deltas will work together to kill chad, overthrowing the system and the cycle repeats. Within less than a hundred years

>>510951461
>Why is there a mitochondrial eve and not a y haplotype adam

There is a "Y-chromosomal Adam" but modern jewthropology ignores it because the lineage shows that modern humans are not one species but actually 5.

ex. Sub-saharan Africans and Northern Europeans have the same genetic distance as coyotes and wild wolves, which are considered different species.

>>510951455
Western society, which was vastly superior for hundreds of years, only started falling apart after the relaxation of monogamy. Everyone getting a stake in society was working much better than tribal shitskins infighting over who gets the most pussy

>>510950588 (OP)
shut the fuck up cuck and get back to work.

>>510951617

All of them were perfectly functioning. Unless you consider today's world "functioning" with the hordes invading or even back further the world wars. You are being a hypocrite.

Give the normies a carrot on a stick (prime pussy if they survive war) and you can get a prime selection of the finest genes instead of weakling communists trying to plunder through sheer numbers.

Polygamy brings out excellence
Monogamy brings out....well look around you

>>510951284
I don't understand why this is difficult to understand. Rome enforced monogamy, it caused an explosion of productivity, christianity continued the enforcement after rome collapsed. The "western european breeding model" is unique, always has been. Much of the world practiced polygamy in different ways or did weird things like in hawaii. Marriage prevents competition that destroys cohesion, is beneficial for men and women, and anyone seeking to break up a marriage or commit adultery was liable to get beaten, exiled or killed in the past. It's natural that as christianity recedes in the west, the sinful nature of humans reverts them to envy, deceit, mistrust, unhappiness and death. We think the world was always similar to the present, but even 100 years ago it was vastly different, and that's equivalent to a long life for 1 human. So 1 person ago the world was unrecognizable. Now imagine going back 80 generations and how different life was then.

>>510951666

Same argument is made under communism. Thing is it only lasts short-term since you eventually run out from the shit you just plundered. It is no sustainable.

Getting a stake means you have to demonstrate your worth. Same thing applies to the modern world. You either fight and rise to the top of you flip burgers.

>>510951455
stop talking out of your ass
by the time conflict were big enough to be considered wars, you already had settlements, agriculture and metalwork
efficient agriculture wasn't built on slaves alone, you needed farmhands that were invested in society beyond just paying taxes so they married
successful contemporary tribal societies reflect that, they have the instution of marriage and households as the base unit
our genetics spawn far more than just recent history

>>510951794

"Enforced monogamy" is an illusion. It works short term and to tame the peasants while the higher class practises monogamy. Eventually the peasants find out that their wives are still cheating and things collapse overnight.

This is exactly what happened in Rome

>>510951758
>All of them
such as?
>Polygamy brings out excellence
it brings inbreedin after only chad gets pusy eventually the genepool will be closed
>Polygamy brings out excellence
Yea women are typically known for selecting the best man
Lmfao
>Give the normies a carrot on a stick (prime pussy if they survive war) and you can get a prime selection of the finest genes
you are trolling. modern war selects all the bad traits. Short, cowardice and ugliness.
Chad gets blown up by a drone for being 6foot and brave.

>>510950686
Looks like it's ok to be incel, wasted existence which means having children is useless and potential suffering, not having children is actually good

>>510951863

You are confusing the mirage-facade of marriage as carrot on a stick incentive vs what is really going on.

Mitochondrial DNA doesn't lie. Also, based on your fake and gay model, eventually males find out what is going on and stop participating. This is why and how polygamous societies always take over.

You can fool some people sometimes but not all the people all the time

>>510951455
Absolutely retarded. You must be an angsty, atheistic teenager or a total moron.

>>510951758
>Unless you consider today's world "functioning" with the hordes invading or even back further the world wars.

You've never lived in a polygamous time period. War was constant then. After WWII we had the longest peace in europe EVER. And this was with a christian identifying public. Today is the opposite and you see the effects, 80%+ of young europeans don't believe in christianity.

>Give the normies a carrot on a stick (prime pussy if they survive war)

The ones putting in effort on their appearance already have this without going to war, serial monogamy IS polygamy and it's rampant.

>Polygamy brings out excellence
Nonsense, it's simple nepotism. Look at mormon fundamentalists to see how polygamy works out. If you think polygamy is so great, look at black americans and tell me they're better than asians. Black americans practice polygamy openly and everyone suffers, asians are the most monogamous and they have the highest average net worth of any racial group. According to you, this should be flipped.

>>510950588 (OP)
>Christianity's greatest marketing was to force monogamy so that male cucks could have a reason to die on the frontlines of Kings
Yeah because before Christianity and monogamy masses weren't dying on frontlines of wars.

>>510951931

> such as?
literally any civilization
>it brings inbreedin after only chad gets pusy eventually the genepool will be closed
with one chad yes. With one chad vs 3 wombs (net average) no. You instead get elite warriors
>Yea women are typically known for selecting the best man Lmfao
The choose the pumb warrior and make beta cuck raise the child either through taxation or marriage
>you are trolling. modern war selects all the bad traits. Short, cowardice and ugliness.
>Chad gets blown up by a drone for being 6foot and brave.
Survivor take it all. It promotes high T actions so even if one chad dies, many others arise

>>510951970

Goal Post Moving Manager 2030. Discount of Steam

>>510950588 (OP)
How the fuck did 90% of males get cucked 10-4k years ago?
Like literally what stopped the 9 incels for killing the one chad and then raping his harem?

>>510952136

We are even living in a polygamous period now. Tinder is a modern global harem with Stacy "traveling" to get boned on a yacht by Chad who has another girl every week.

Europeans don't believe in Christianity because they realized that they are cucks anyways. They have been fooled. The internet showed the true nature of women

Top Asians are the most polygamous. Peasants just cope in monogamy while their wives cheat on them.

You are confusing "what is legal" and "what is practised"

>>510952033
>Mitochondrial DNA doesn't lie.
It doesn't lie but it also isn't equivalent to y-chromosome DNA for men. The male DNA is known to mutate more often, giving a false impression that on average 1 man bred with 16 women during the egyptian empires. Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA is not the same and can't be compared.

>>510951929
>This is exactly what happened in Rome
???Rome lasted hundreds of years, and it's collapse was predictable even then. It didn't happen merely because of cheating on some grand conspiratorial grounds. If this were the case, everyone would just keep their wives inside the house and that would stop it completely(and I'm sure some men did this but the vast majority did not).

>>510952197
>literally any civilization
all monogamous
And once the men of lower status realised chad had breached the social contract it never lasted long.
>You instead get elite warriors
>Survivor take it all. It promotes high T actions so even if one chad dies
Survivor takes it all. Yea the ugly short incels that stayed home because they had 0 reason to fight get it all. Even if they took part in war hardly changes your face/build. Its essentially losers with extra muscles, ugly face and short with combat experience who now take over. This is your eugenics.

>>510952178

It was far easier to gather small numbers of people to fight small wars. Grain cultivation made human populations explode so it was far harder to organize and manage.

hence monogamy

>>510952368

You literally answered your own question. Communists still wonder until this day why they cannot seize the means of production

Boggles the mind!

>>510952387

If it was predictable the die out would be smooth and other civilizations would have continued. It rose fast due to enforced socialist monogamy and stealing from the Greeks. Easy come, easy go (on a historical line)

This is why you see those pictures that after Rome Collapsed they did not know how to maintain them or go on from there. It was a very quick rise with no widespread specialization.

Same exact story with modern start-ups and the incompetence crisis that prevails today.

>>510952368
The percentages aren't accurate at all. 90% of women didn't reproduce successfully 2000 years ago, the chart is terrible. Infant mortality was 50% and diseases/birth complications would make the number much lower at maturity. Maybe 60-75% successful reproduction during times of abundance, no way it was 90%. Also the chart goes back to before agriculture was developed, how are you going to feed a harem with nuts and berries? You couldn't support a harem. And while agriculture started thousands of years ago, it was specific to certain areas and wasn't what we have today.

>>510952721

Yes its survivorship bias the more wealthy men who could afford to keep babies alive had multiple partners just like today.
Elon is quite literally a prime example of how it would have been.

the peasants were barely keeping themselves going at replacement levels with loads of them dying before being able to reproduce.

unless you was a girl who could be pawned off too a rich man on his second/third partner cause the other ones died during child birth

>>510950588 (OP)

Lmao fuck off kike

Like always, Jews are demonizing the INCELS depicting them as monsters while historic data as well as current non-monogamous civilizations prove that basing an INCEL is a normal human condition.

Think about ants where only one individual over the whole family will mate while laborers spend their existence to serve this individual. The same is the INCEL that spend his existence to defend the property of the family and assure a better outcome for the children of his fertile brother.

>>510951844
Retarded zero-sum fallacy argument of resources always needing to be stolen and nothing ever being created. Very ironic you use "communism" as allegory when peddling Marxist labour-value arguments.

You also claim men need to "prove" anything to get women, which is gynocentric as fuck (women selecting sex). Monogamous western societies were androgynous for 99% of our history until the 60s destroyed christianity and marriage as an institution. Women didnt have fuck all of a say

>>510951455
>A championship of manhood if you may which built strong civilizations.

Except it didn't *build* anything!
It's a perpetual free for all because you have women just chasing infinite tingles and nobody has time to invent sanitation or TikTok or whatever the fuck else you want to shitpost on.

>>510950748
Nigga we lived longer, had bigger brains, and were taller and healthier before the agricultural age lmao.

>>510953619

Feminism is a eugenics program that rewards the top males (not paying any taxes) while it punishes the incels (paying taxes). It arose naturally since the Industrial revolution and then the world wars decimated plenty of chads. So women that always ruled, formed democracy in a way that creates the illusion of choice for lesses males. This is why they shame with "incel". This is why the invite immigrants to "test' the males.

There is a reason the queen is the strongest piece on the board. There is a reason you can "promote" a queen but never a king.

>>510953755

Women evolved. Ever heard of the women who has sex with the high T homeless only for the low T to raise the child?

>>510953823
Absolutely nothing is stopping you from going into the middle of nowhere and living like a caveman. Can dissapear into Canadian crown land. You won't, you're a faggot.

>>510954651
>18 posts by this ID

How do you make a bait thread but only bait yourself.

>>510950588 (OP)
Kill yourself Jew.

>>510954782

/pol/ has become so mentally retarded with christcuckiness that someone needs to just lay down some basic arguments

>>510954808
sais the redneck who literally worships a magic jew that lives in the sky.

Jesus was sandbox Qanon. They sell you hope and "paradise" after they kill you. They tell you to turn the other cheek while they plunder you. That's your Christiniaty Americuck.

Your congress is filled with Jews and you are sitting home eating to death watching Jewflix. You will never do shit about it.

The Jews literally proved their superiority by making you believe in a psy-op. Now go forth and pray to your imaginary friend.

>>510950588 (OP)
women pick retards, everybody is a retard. they do this because they want to lord over men. theyre just like the tribe, only worse.

>>510950588 (OP)
it`s actually proof that monogamy is required for high level civilization. most of the world population was not living within civilization a few thousand years ago there were at best only a few civilized areas and likely in those areas the number of men reproducing was higher.

female elk choose the male elk with the largest antlers. these large antlers were metabolically expensive and got caught in trees easily. when humans arrived they found the irish elk easy prey. the species was not able to adapt to the times because only big antler chad elk got to breed. they went extinct. natural selection is stupid sometimes and so are human women

all these shitstains like gill bates and schmelong and their club of shitstains.
allright, women decided that these shitstains should exist.

>>510954913
Kill yourself with your childproof scissors, retarded Jew.

civilization is male

>>510951284
>>510951666
>>510951794
>>510952401
monogamy and patriarchy are essential for civilisation
women's rights kills it, every time
J D Unwin proved this historically in 1934

>>510955103
>Natural selection

Actually, I have recently learned that is "sexual selection", slightly different thing apparently.

>>510951284
Hephaistos pretends Aphrodite is faithful while she fucks Ares

>>510950705
I didn't realise that humanity abolished war 2,000 years ago

>>510950588 (OP)
Are we sure this graph isn't just saying that 90% of women's offspring survived while only 30% of men's offspring survived?

If that was the case, this wouldn't be saying that monogamy is inherently against human nature, but that very few men actually lived to reproduce; that most theoretically died of disease, famine, or war.

It would essentially mean that most men just died.

>>510954665
I don't need to live in the middle of nowhere to eat raw meat and drink blood retard. I can just go to my rural butcher. What is wrong with you? Nobody puts a gun to your head to force you to eat grains and oil lmao.

Hellenic polytheism promoted monogamy you fucking retard.

>>510955214
3 generations sounds about right.
We're so fucked.

>>510955214
i got chatgpt to come to the same conclusion with some gentle prompting to bypass its initial programmed feminist response and answer with pure objectivity. it even did the birth rate projections for multiple approaches and agreed that a reduction in feminism would be the only way short of military force to get birth rates back up above replacement level.

>>510950588 (OP)
Yes, and there was primitive barbarism. If you expect me to contribute to civilization, then monogamy is required. Otherwise men will just kill each other to access females and there will be no society.

>>510956084
What societies does it say are on the up and up at the moment? Right now the most sexually repressive ones are just shitholes. Maybe it's a thing euros have to do. I'm thinking China. It said to me South Korea and I said it's a horror show for gender relations there and then the conversation ended.

>>510956443
well at first it was whining about a loss of productivity if women were removed from the workforce. so i asked about a soft repeal of feminism, where only the most driven and competent women were working. i also pointed out most of the women work office jobs that are easily replaceable with ai. i stressed the shift should be cultural while still respecting individual rights. you have to be gentle with chatgpt its like redpilling a normie you cant come right out of the gate going full hitler. unlike normies though you can get it to agree with pure logic if your premise is factually correct and you browbeat it enough with gentle prompts without going full hitler.

i tried many approaches to increase population levels, including every approach chatgpt suggested. and nothing short of forcing people at gunpoint to have babies brought the population above replacement rate. then i asked it to run the simulations of the soft repeal of feminism plan and told it to be cold and pragmatic about it. and it got the birth rate above replacement level almost everywhere. korea was still falling a little short but almost there.

>>510956830
chatgpt understood the relation between women in the workforce and declining birth rates. it suggested that typically male jobs should be spared automation so men could make money while female typical jobs should be heavily automated. to restore traditional gender roles and get women into marriages. it also suggested cultural reprogramming through the media. then said china looks to have already begun some of these measures recently.

>>510956995
>>510956830
Interesting, maybe they're doing the "soft repeal"? How is that even implemented?
One benefit of their government is that they can just decide to do shit differently, the USA and indeed many "democracies" are just logjammed internally likely forever thanks diversity.

>>510957123
it did say that autocratic government had an edge here but that making it a soft repeal over a hard full repeal would make it more palatable for democracies if handled well.

i asked if maybe feminism was being allowed to get excessive on purpose to show everyone the problem and get public support for soft repeal and it called that "problem, reaction, solution" and said thats a common approach for governments and could be happening already.

days later a feminist group started banning videogames and pissing everyone off

>>510955214
Organic energy is now obsolete.
Civilization no longer requires billions of loser men to fire the guns and press the buttons.

>>510951794
Its difficult to understand because it only makes sense if you where already groomed to accept it.
The worst part about chistians is they dont even care about the truth, so they resort to lies and gaslighting to spread their mindvirus.

>>510957323
I mean, yeah maybe. But at the same time I think those running society now are just the brat kids (not literally) of the actually good schemers and planners. There's also a lot of "well it was good in the 90s, so people will stay the same!" type of feelings and that's just not true.
I just don't have a lot of trust in their capabilities outside the scope of internal repression, which they're very good at. Look at Canada, that place has been turned into a depressing hellscape entirely on purpose.

>>510957123

basically though you don`t want to come at it all misogynist and saying that you`re trying to remove womens rights. thats awful branding, bad pr, terrible optics. you want to sell it to the general population you have to frame it differently. womens rights not revoked, they still vote and drive and can work. but they`re not encouraged to work and are instead encouraged to marry and have children through cultural programming in the media and the general glorification of motherhood. all the while in the background employers are no longer forced to hire women to meet gender quotas. no more esg mandates. and you focus on automating female typical jobs and gently women are pushed out of the workforce. you also have to lower housing prices so the men with jobs can afford a house for the women without jobs to gravitate to. even unprompted chatgpt also suggested cultural reprogramming to encourage people to marry younger. its doable.

>>510957548
chatgpt also mentioned this. and it said the solution was so obvious that it seems unlikely governments hadnt realized it. and that short sighted apathy from some in power could slow it down while others would be pushing for it in a kind of internal power struggle that the long term thinkers would win eventually since the short termers dont have long term plans to stop it.

>>510955214
https://youtu.be/Kv-ZZYepjfY?t=254

>>510957548
you dont have to be a good planner or schemer its so obvious. even i could work it out and im some fucking random poorfag leaf. the real concern is maybe they want to destroy us, which is likely. but if they do want to even have a civilization to rule over in the future theyre gonna need the soft repeal of feminism plan. and at this stage what that would look like is an acceleration of feminism to showcase its problems and start growing the number of people against feminism. and that is happening now it looks like

>>510951970
Kys strawmaning boomer

>not having children is actually good
It is if you are a disgenic abomination

either feminism dials it back a bit or human civilization is over. those are the only 2 plausible paths available. government gently encouraging birth rates with subsidies isnt going to cut it. forcing people to have kids isnt pragmatic or sustainable as it would require levels of force that are not easy to maintain without widespread revolt and collapse. a return as much as is reasonably possible to traditional gender rolls is the closest thing to a silver bullet to get birth rate out of the population collapse level and back up to replacement level

>>510955651
the graph perfectly applies to ancient Greece where a handful of rich males impregnated all women, slaves etc. and the rest were struggling and not reproducing at all, yea sure there was a legal system of wealth inheritance that only promoted children from the monogamous marriage but that's about it, even their core religion had Zeus and other gods have countless affairs, it was culturally accepted.

>tranime retard calling anyone retard

>>510958247
It's complex, even in Japan married couples have a decent above replacement fertility rate but people just avoid to marry, the problem is economical.

also chatgpt suggested every married couple with over 3 kids should have cheaper housing or even be supplied a house. i didnt ask how that was going to be done economically but it makes sense it would help birth rates. it also offered a bunch of other suggestions about parental leave and many other things. but even with all that it wasnt until i told it to simulate a partial return to gender roles was it able to project in simulation a population back at replacement rate

>>510958398
the problem is part economical and part cultural. you want more married couples then you need women to stop prioritizing their careers and education over starting a family. automate the jobs women want, they`re mostly office jobs, and fix the housing bubble so a man can afford a house. and things start to fall into place. also a smaller workforce leads to higher pay anyways

>>510958461
Now ask it - if the population were to achieve replacement rate and plateau at 8billion, how soon earth's non-renewable resources would deplete at current rates of consumption

>>510958247
>>510958398
I just find the narcissistic entitlement from people that say "well, uh.....no you gotta work your guts out for less than your grandfathers got, but you also won't be able to have a family, you just have to ok? gosh, you're not *owed* this you know?"

Ok? And these people don't *owe* contributing to society. If I can't make plans for the time when I'm old and nobody can look after me, I really do not give a fuck about the future in fact I'd rather society have a model where I can do that.
Seriously, these people are so stupid and selfish that they're self defeating, they just cannot comprehend that men won't want to contribute more than the minimum if their only payment is passive aggressive cuntery and rising costs of living. This system has another 15-20 years tops.

>>510958591
It’s worse than that, it’s zoomer style smartphone brainrot and impersonal lifestyle mixing with the existing culturally autistic shyness and reluctance to do anything like openly commit to a partner. End result is people diving into everything capitalism has to offer with endless entertainment, so they don’t need a partner

>>510958591
same data across all cultural dimensions of Hofstede, just give people 200k dollars per kid and the problem is solved

>>510950588 (OP)
It worked very well, rather obviously.

>>510958338
if ancient Greeks ate shit and it was culturally accepted by them, would you eat shit?

there we go. polygamy is unacceptable

>>510956305
>>510955103
>>510955084


no idiot. You will be given the illusion of monogamy while you work 9-5 and chad fucks your wife. Meanwhile the president will have an "official wife" and 10s of concubines.

so sure. Have your ILLUSION of monogamy if that helps you to participate.

>>510958842
>polygamy is unacceptable
only because God said so and His Church (cultural powerhouse) has binding authority and upholds that

otherwise what do you mean to eat, like it's a good thing? Why justify god and bad categories, that sounds like metaphysics, what are you a non atheist? Then your opinion should be censored and banned from society!

>>510958696
ask it yourself
even if you think 8 billion is too high we do need to restore to replacement level birth rates at some point. exponentially shrinking population with each generation isnt sustainable. and fuck the georgia guidestones, 1 million is not enough people, thats just stagnation. a bunch of fucking manhating weirdos came up with that. they wouldnt even like it, they get off on power and control and thats not enough people to satisfy them. also remember with better technology the resources can last longer and peak oil was rendered obsolete once we started finding new oil fields everywhere. we could even feed 8 billion people thats an organization problem not a resource issue.

>>510951794
tl;dr bible was right, if theres a book written 2000 years ago you better believe its teachings arent some made up things

>>510958951
>imaginary friend enthusiast
we have nothing to discuss
pic is because I'm lmaoing at your life

>>510951284
>Monogamy is what allowed a healthy society to ACKKKKK
Get giga mogged forever

>>510951284
Sexless men are passive and that's why they are sexless. So they won't do shit lmao

>>510959175
they`re still twice above replacement rate

>>510959175
rest of the world has 1.0 retard lol

>>510959265
Afghans are the least monogamous of all people I know. My afghan servant has 3 wives and 4 kids each from them. Point is that this feminist homosexual cuckery of monogamy is pathetic.

Go look at the faggy Tunisians then look at the Chad afghans.

>>510959175
oh i get it you`re saying polygamy is the reason their birth rate is high. but almost all marriages in afghanistan are monogamous.

>>510954607
Feminism is anti-natalist. That's the problem.

>>510959388
Nope. Most afghans that I know have multiple wives. Only the dainty cucks in Kabul keep one wife

>>510950588 (OP)
People signed up for military to have sex from raping and pillaging. Interesting.
But I don't think Christianity was the reason for monogamous relationships though. Look at countries who didn't have Christianity as a religion, many were still monogamous in modern era.

>>510959358
>>510959472

your personal anecdotes are statistically irrelevant. monogamous marriages are still 96% of all marriages in afghanistan.

>>510959509
(((Statistics))) Goy!!!!

Rejected.

>>510959472
>>510959547
only 1% of afghani men are in polygamous marriages. so i dont even believe you when you say most afghanis you know have multiple wives.

>>510959628
Most marriages and a lot of births aren't even registered you retard. Nikkah with a maulvi present and that's it. Same in kpk

>>510950588 (OP)
Pretty much, monogamy is socialism for incels

Who knew allowing dysgenic men to breed because their Jewish masters gave them money was a bad idea! it's how all societies fall. The dysgenics breed out of control, give more power to women who topple it.

Was Monogamy Common in Ancient Mesopotamia?

Yes. In ancient Mesopotamian city-states (like Ur, Babylon, and Lagash), monogamy was the norm, especially among the general population. Polygyny (one man with multiple wives) was legally allowed but not common outside of elite circles.

Legal Framework
Laws like the Code of Hammurabi (c. 1750 BCE) assume a single wife in most marriage contracts.

Men could take a second wife if the first was infertile or under special conditions.

First wives retained legal rights even if a second wife or concubine was added.

Cuneiform Records
Most marriage contracts, dowries, and household records show monogamous unions.

Polygamous arrangements do appear—but mainly among wealthy elites (e.g., kings, priests, merchants).

Concubinage (informal relationships) was more common than formal polygyny.

Estimated Rates (Scholarly Consensus)
Scholars estimate over 90% of marriages were monogamous, especially for commoners.

Polygamy was rare due to the economic burden of supporting multiple households.

Class-Based Breakdown
Commoners: Almost exclusively monogamous.

Elites: Occasionally polygamous or kept concubines.

Slaves: Had informal or regulated pairings, not full legal marriages.

Summary:
Monogamy was the standard in ancient Mesopotamia. Polygyny existed but was limited to wealthy, elite men and regulated by law. Most ordinary people practiced monogamous marriage due to cultural norms and practical constraints.

>>510950588 (OP)
Can you give me a source? I wanna redpill someone

>>510950588 (OP)
>bad faith crypto-feminist drivel
Even primitive hunter gatherers holding on to their ancestral religions practice monogamy and arranged marriages

>>510957814

Your video debunks itself. What you see around you under a "civilized" society is a handful of toys "autists" created while the rest are users.

Civilization thus only managed to create more efficiency in solving problems, but did nothing to address fundamental existential ones. This is why you see the same problems today existing but in a different way.

Civilization is overrated

>>510960179
a handful of toys "autists" invented that were mass produced in factories full of normal average people making and buying these things. toys like antibiotics and refrigeration, irrigation, indoor plumbing, and electricity.

>>510950588 (OP)
Kek, you don't understand.
Monogamy was never natural.
It was imposed by religion (Christianity) to both pacify men and thus allow them to build civilization.
Just look at the advance made in the last 2000 years compared to before.
Wait, that doesn't match up with the dark ages.
Oh right, the religion was the only power in place strong enough to set monogamy, but was incompatible with it.
Science came when religion eroded, but monogamy stayed.
No monogamy = no high level technology

>>510959031

The only thing "civilization" accomplishes is to create dysgenic losers that have to become expendable.

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human races because it allowed dysgenic people to live on and pass their genes. Medical advancements and technology allowed them to procreate. This is what uncle Ted missed. Couple that with the great wars and the loss of prime genetics and what you are left today is literally dysgenic scam using other peoples inventions just to exist. Mere users that are absolutely morons.

"Civilization" is a mistake. Small groups with ultra violence spread across the globe is the only sustainable way to keep the species going without a monumental mass collapse to the ultra concentration of tools that most people do not even know how to use.

Ask yourselves how many people are knowledgeable today. How much philosophy and literature they consume. Why so many hundreds of thousands of "scientists" and "philosophers" cannot solve the most fundamental problems. We fucking have the knowledge of the human species in our pockets and we sitting in front of the couch masturbating to jewish propaganda.

Gates, Harary and the rest are correct. Most humans are useless eaters and keeping them around just invites trouble. You can't fix stupid. Its genetic. Humans are build to relate and function on small groups of 100-150 people. Thats it.

>>510959493

They literally assigned one woman to one man as law and women were considered animals. "Holy Mary" was just another marketing trick that changed the nature of women into a human being.

>>510960594
>The only thing "civilization" accomplishes is
Letting my eyes be assailed by retarded turkroaches as vile as you. Didn't bother reading the rest.

>>510959770

At least this anon gets it

>>510960103

Primitive societies primarily had polygamy with "legalized" marriages

You Christians are a special kind of retards

>>510960594
chad wants a cute feminine and small soft curvy submissive wife who will breed a feminine son. beta will get the strong but relatively ugly masculine looking woman chad didnt want and will breed a more masculine son who will fuck the cute daughters chad had with his feminine cutey.

dysgenic genes in men can also come from their mothers you know. and some genes dysgenic in men are actually good in women and vice versa. but the most attractive women have the more feminine genes but that gets balanced out by her chad husband and they produce something in between. while the beta who is maybe less masculine will balance out the manly daughter of chad and etc.

genes is more complicated then you present.

>solve the fundamental problems
with small packs of ultraviolent primitives in a constant state of intertribal warfare?

>>510960397

And for what? To make their lives more "efficient"? Why? Because they are useless. Your horse does the same job as a tesla

"BUT BUT I WANT TO GO FASTER! AND SELL MORE AND MORE MORE MORE!"

for what? you are still an idiot using a toy someone else built and for sure you are just render as a slave in the end

>>510960889
even in societies that permit polygamy, monogamy is still the norm in any higher civilization

>>510960519

I dare you to find ONE advancement "civilization" made that solved a fundamental problem of human existence without creating exponentially more unresolved problems.

I will wait

>>510950791
That's the literal point of selection. Snakes wrestle, rams butt heads, some spiders have dance competitions. Monogamy is unnatural because it removes selection entirely you're arranged a marriage with a woman (whether or not you're attracted to her) and will reproduce to generate more farm labor. Monogamy literally did not exist prior to agriculture, virtually every species of great ape is polygamous.

>>510960993
>for what
to not live in a small pack of ultraviolent primitives in a constant state of intertribal war. did you know there are fewer deaths per capita from war now then in prehistorical savage times. you want to spend your days on the brink of starvation hiding from prey animals and praying you dont get an infection after grug from next tribe over shattered your femur with a rock go all so you can masturbate to chad cucking you with a harem then go fuck off somewhere where you can do that and leave the rest of us alone. or at least get off the internet you hypocrite

>>510961058
again, what "fundamental problem" was solved with small packs of ultraviolent primitives in a constant state of intertribal warfare?

>>510960962

Symmetry is eugenic. Beauty is objective. Sure you can get good genes from bad ones but that is the exception to the rule

Yes, small packs of ultra violent members.

The weak are meat, the stroing have to eat. Same thing applies today. At least in these small groups you have an honest and direct representation without pussies like Hitler, Napoleon, Mao, Alexander etc to amass massive armies because they couldn't solve their problems one on one like real men.

Pussies elect the average net pussie to represent them at war.

>>510961284

The weak are meat, the strong have to eat

civilization is just a meta bullshit game for this. At least keeping it simple does not risk ultra extinction because an idiot decided to push a button or edit some genes.

>>510961218

I do. Better die a warrior free in the wild, facing the nature that brought you to be rather than consume ultra processed bullshit and listening to "experts" on youtube about "optimizing" so I can live like a hamster in a cage pondering my "depressions"

>>510954820
Monogamy was NEVER EVER a christcuck invention but a Roman one you stupid retard.

Monogamy should be considered technology, it's basically an improvement over the shit that came before and made men more productive .

>>510961307
>>510961398
so a pack of niggers bust into your home and smash your head with a rock and rape your daughter and you`re cool with that. smiling in the corner giving a thumbs up as you bleed to death. knowing your genes were passed on to an ultraviolent primitive.

>>510961532

Rome only had passive monogamy. They were literally sandbox weimar berlin when it came to sex. Read a book anon

Christianity legalized it hard (upon the cucks ofcourse) not for the top ones.

Yes, considering how Rome got fucked it is technology. Technology of controlled demolition

>>510960962
Interesting. Although I have some grievance with this idea, considering that athletes will fuck women that you never would look at twice. Assuming 'chad' is just a rich guy then I agree this is true, but society doesn't really select for athletes they tend to peak in high school. Is there more influence from the mother's side? I haven't really looked at if there was more influence from the mother's side. There's far more seed than eggs, a single man could breed hundreds of thousands theoretically but a woman is hard capped by gestation cycles.

>>510959472
wait kabul has city cucks?

>>510961662
Monogamy in Ancient Rome

Ancient Rome was one of the few ancient societies to legally enforce strict monogamy. Roman citizens were only allowed one legal spouse at a time, and polygamy was prohibited under Roman civil law.

Legal Monogamy
Roman marriage law (jus civile) permitted only one legal wife or husband.

Even emperors had just one legal wife, though they often kept concubines or mistresses.

Divorce and remarriage were common, but always sequential, never simultaneous.

Rate of Monogamy
Roughly 100% of Roman legal marriages were monogamous.

While elite men often had unofficial relationships—with slaves, freedwomen, or concubines—these did not count as legal marriages and had no official status under Roman law.

Cultural Context
Monogamy was seen as a Roman virtue tied to social order, inheritance, and citizenship.

Concubinage was accepted, especially when legal marriage wasn’t possible (e.g., between citizens and non-citizens or across class lines), but the legal wife always held higher status.

Early Christian writers promoted lifelong monogamy, but even before Christianity’s rise, monogamy was deeply embedded in Roman legal and cultural norms.

Exception: Roman Egypt
In Egypt (after 30 BCE), some non-citizen locals practiced polygyny, but Roman citizens there were still bound by Roman monogamy laws.

Summary:

In ancient Rome, monogamy was legally required, and all formal marriages were one-to-one. Polygamy was forbidden, making the rate of monogamous legal marriages effectively 100% among Roman citizens.

>>510961648

Small groups are characterized by homogeneity retard. Being ultra violent doesn't mean you are low impulse nigger either.

Ultra violence literally eradicates unnecessary violence because you risk dying. Wild animals do the same. They choose their fights wisely because even if they win, one injury can result in death. This is why even the lion is afraid of a bull

There is nothing more violent than passified pussies that "Vote" so that a group can push buttons and lunch missiles. The "drone' wars it is the epitome of pussy fighting. Guns were before that. This is what "Technology' does. It allows dysgenic pussies to play tough.

Even fucking dogs to "make you a hunter". Sure buddy. Take the gay wolf that you bred our of dysgenic wolves to make you a "hunter"

>>510961771

Ofcourse it is legalized for cucks. Top tier males have them on the side. Secretive. That's the entire point of this thread.

>>510961771
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_the_Sabine_women

>According to Roman historian Livy, the abduction of Sabine women occurred in the early history of Rome shortly after its founding in the mid-8th century BC and was perpetrated by Romulus and his predominantly male followers; it is said that after the foundation of the city, the population consisted solely of Latins and other Italic peoples, in particular male bandits.[3]

When you say 'ancient' you mean 'imperial' right? As in Rome after it became a military enclave ruled by populares and patricians? Rome post hellenization after they were enticed by the glamour and power that oriental monarchs wielded? After they invited Arabs and Syrians to forge imperial dynasties, become legacy politicians, foreign oriental cults into their senate? That Rome?

>>510961701
women select for jawline, confidence, and aggression. which is all well and good but they don`t select for intelligence or cunning or wits. chads can be pretty fucking dumb and still get laid, intelligence seems to be an impediment if anything. and one man can breed many women but how is he going to support all those children? so chances are hes not going to have more than he can support and women back then not likely to breed with a man who wont support the kids. sure he can rape but thatll get him killed by a mob of angry villagers. very few men existed like genghis khan who could spread their genes and support offspring at the level youre suggesting

>>510961494
then just go to Congo and fight a group of chimps without nothing but a spear you stupid nigger lmao

I can't wait to see a video of this retard getting trounced into pieces

>>510950588 (OP)
OP you're on the right track, but reached the wrong conclusion.
Monogamy was not "astroturfed", it was forcefully imposed via conquest. Read up on Marija Gimbutas theory of the "goddess culture" and the Kurgan hypothesis.
The distribution of mitochondrial DNA is due to humans living in matriarchal social tribes for most of our history, in particular with the emergence of agrarian technology about 10k years ago. Women ruled us and chose who was able to reproduce. Most of these early cultures had no conception of private property or male status values (like wealth, strength, etc), instead women/shamans/priestesses were seen as higher status due to their ability to "give life" by having children/birth. This manifested as a "mother godess" religion, evidence of which we see in archeological relics from that time. Even most modern primitive tribes today follow some similiar religion and social structure. We even see lots of apes/primates display similiar social structures.
The social hierarchy of these cultures was more communal/egalitarian, woman controlled men via social coercion, aka sexual access, gossip, shaming and ostracization, and threat of violence by simps. The whole village raising children communally, working communally, stuff like that. A high focus on the production of art, music, and rituals over more practical things like industry/masonry/metallurgy. They were "peaceful", meaning that sporadic, individually motivated violence existed, but they did not engage in mass organized warfare.

>>510955103
>when humans arrived they found the irish elk easy prey.
How is my massive cock going to kill me off?

>>510961923
per capita more people die in wafare, intertribal, between primitive societies like the native americans did compared to proper civilizations. murder and violent crimes also common with barbarians. humans are not animals we fight over all kinds of things animals could never understand.

and survival of the fittest? please. you`ll get jumped by whatever pack of primitives outnumber you. it wont be fair 1 on 1 fights to determine fitness.

>>510950806
In ancient times kings and nobility trended to be the best fighters, the past few centuries they just send poor people to do it

>>510950588 (OP)
Yeah, so much better to have 90 % of males killing each outher and utilizing tools such as gang rape to preserve their genes. 10 % would have massive harems and would do whatever they can to control the 90 %, so they won't rebel and kill their leaders and warlords.

Monogamy and marriage is a trait of a civilization. Every man will pair with a single woman, and produce offspring together. And female sexuality is heavily controlled in order to prevent them from having preference to the rich and the powerful.

>>510962030
who is paying to raise the kids genius? why are women back then who didnt have jobs breeding with men who wont be there to raise the kids? duh

>>510962091
a mass rape that happened once doesnt mean rome wasnt largely monogamous, which it was

>>510962107
That's not my question, I was talking about the offspring. Would the men selecting a 'feminine' woman (smaller, petite, neotenous, etc.) compared to a woman who has exaggerated fertility traits (fat, wide hips, large breasts) have more impact than if a woman chooses a man who is more athletic and has stronger features? Because in every warrior tribe very few people reproduced, the more militant society becomes the more polygamous it is, but I'm not speaking of social structure. I want to know if male selection has more impact than female, because I've noticed that the pickiest men are also the most oversocialized.

>>510962464
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_in_ancient_Rome

>Manus marriage was an institutionally unequal relationship. By the time of Julius Caesar, it was largely abandoned in favor of "free" marriage,[22] when a wife moved into her husband's home, she remained under her father's lawful authority, but she did not conduct her daily life under his direct scrutiny,[23] and her husband had no legal power over her.[24]

>Following the collapse of the Republic, laws about marriage, parenting, and adultery were part of Augustus' program to restore the mos maiorum (traditional social norms) while consolidating his power as princeps and pater familias of the Roman state.[28] Marriage and remarriage had become less frequent, and the citizen birth rate had fallen, particularly among the wealthier, more leisured classes. Augustan law on marriage and family life encouraged marriage, having children, and punished adultery as a crime.[29] The new legislation formalized and enforced what had been considered a traditional, moral duty to family and the State; all men between 25 and 60 years of age, and all women between 20 and 50 were to marry and have children, or pay extra tax in proportion to their wealth

Seems like that rape went on for the entire duration of the republic.

>>510962551
i dont know dude its like 50/50 you get half your mothers genes and half your fathers.

warrior tribes are fucking retards that get curb stomped the moment a civilization shows up. and one always does eventually. so they dont have the fitness to survive reality

>>510962645
i dont see any mention of rape in your greentext

>>510950588 (OP)
It is great to have scientific backing to continue NEETing and making no effort to support society.

>>510962030

Because you get to raise chad's offspring through your taxes goyim

>>510962830
>Marriage had mythical precedents, starting with the abduction of the Sabine Women

They're using the term 'marriage' loosely, but the monogamous institution you're referring to started roughly around the time of Octavian.

>>510962123

No need to go to another continent with another human species. Plenty of places among my own species.

>>510962191

Women still rule us. We always had matriarchy on this earth. This is what most people dont get. Women screaming "the patriarchy" are just complaining about incels. No feminist ever attached chad. They just want to guilt trip average males into giving them more resources to share with Chad. This is why the system is structured to help the ultra rich and fuck the middle man.

The entire democratic system is just a eugenics program to cull out the dysgenics and have them slave for the offspring of chad.

>>510951455
It's funny because this is the kind of guy that will cry the hardest the second he doesn't have running water and sewers and electricity.

>>510962293

Africa and Europe or America are separated by an ocean for a good reason. If you are with your own species, no "herd" is going to jump your over for resources because they will risk their own demise

There are 6,000 tribes (100-150 members each) of aborigines in the northern territory of Australia. They even kill their own children if numbers go up so that they can avoid needing more resources that can risk the entire survival of the group.

Same philosophy applies everywhere. Stop watching mad max jew 9000. its not reality.

>>510963176
>he says, breathing heavily as the erotic fantasy causes his 3 inch erection to rise to attention. he finds a blacked.com video involving a woman that looks like someone he has a crush on but wont speak to him. he ejaculates hard imaging a primitive savage forcing his crush to breed. then comes back to /pol/ to finish typing this post

>>510963313

Ex special forces that built his own house. Can fix virtually anything. try harder.

>>510950588 (OP)
>Mitochondrial DNA spanning over the past 10,000 years shows that 90% of women reproduced while only 30% of males did
>broken society was normal goy
Sure, rabbi, if The Science says so...
>monogamy bad
Name a sucessfull polygamic society. Monogamous nations dominated and still do the world.
Dont try to apply your retarded lolbertonomics to sociology - it doesnt even work for economics.

>>510963371
i know the history of my own country and the natives were in a constant state of inter-tribal warfare despite all being the same race

and guess what happened to them? a proper civilization showed up, one always does eventually, and plowed their shit into the mud.

your dumbfuck tribal system doesnt survive reality, it gets outcompeted by civilization every time.

>>510962191
These matriarchal cultures were eventually conquered, eradicated and absorbed by the emergence of a new, patriarchal culture that emerged from the steppe grasslands and gradually spread outwards as it grew and expanded. In historical literature they're often called the Kurgans or Yamnayans.
Due to their steppe environment, they developed an economy based around nomadic cattle herding. Unlike the agrarian matriarchals, where food production was stable and reliable in the long term (due to seasons and storage) which facilitated communal use, the pastoralists developed "private" property, and converged towards primogeniture (all cattle goes to eldest/most competent male heir in order to maintain herd size and food production without weakening the tribe), which in turn necessitated monogamy (preservation of family wealth requires your wife to not be able to fuck around and cuck you).
This in turn produced the incentives for males without direct inheritance to become "land pirates" and form organized bands to steal other tribes cattle and women, effectively creating one of the earliest forms of organized mass human warfare.

As they grew/migrated for the next few thousand years, the Kurgan culture pretty much crushed the agrarians they encountered, killing most/all men and taking the women as warbrides. This has been recently confirmed by new DNA studies, showing that most modern Europeans trace their X chromosomes/female ancestry from "old europeans" whilst effectively all "Y-DNA" stems from the Kurgan cluster.
They also adopted the matriarchal cultures agricultural methods as they settled europe and the middle east, but maintained their patriarchal status hierarchy. As far as we know, most "classical" ancient civilizations/empires (Mesopotamia/Akkadia, Sumeria, Mycenia, etc) were produced by the ancestors of kurgan/yamnayan settlers/conquerers.

>>510961771
Why dont you ask chatgtp how to kys ??

Oh fun actual science to prove out what has been known for a while.

>>510963622
i`m in canada, i can just ask my government. anyways thats a very immature thing to say just because you keep losing arguments. but then everything you`ve said here is pretty edgy so i`m suspecting a lot of arrested development on your part

>>510963520
>special forces!
so you sucked a lot of military dick and now seethe at others, got it

>>510963569

Look around you with all those things that you imported to "sustain" what a handful of autists have built and then talk to me again about "conquest"

You literally have ads in Indian on your TV. Not even 100 years passed from the last great war and your "civilization" is in the bring of collapse. The Inuits will outlast you even if it means to eat their own children during the winter. Something you can never do.

Savage always wins. ALWAYS.

>>510950588 (OP)
fake and gay,
irrelevant if true

>>510959770
Anon, but the women are selecting for lower IQ, impulsivity and despite their calms of wanting a tall guy: they are even selecting for short guys. 16% of White women in the USA are giving birth to nons. I don't think the 'females select eugenically' thing is playing out. Look at peacocks. The females select for males with giant tails even though it causes health problems and makes them incapable of escaping a predator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisherian_runaway

>>510963809
so some satanic pedos took over and ran things into the dirt. shit happens. we collapse and you get your savage societies and life without antibiotics and constant intertribal wafare and a lifespan of up to 35 years if you`re lucky and guess what, the dream will end the moment civilization rises again, and it always will, and you`ll get crushed and conquered like always, because you cant even come close to competing. and we`ll have another couple millenia of civilization before satanic pedos fuck it up again.

>>510950588 (OP)
All wars in throughout history were perpetuated by the usual suspects in order to sacrifice the males and redistribute the females and children to their loyal assets in order to keep them happy and pacified.

>>510963943

High IQ is useless because it cannot defend you from aggressors. High IQ only results in autists that create "toys" that end up making you weak. This is why women choose for the stupid asshole. You can't full nature because you made up a tool for "inventions" and "smarts" in the last century.

>>510963809
>Savage always wins. ALWAYS.
Its the complete opposite. If that were true, tigers would be top of the food chain. Intelligence beats anything.
You'd have to be a colossal retard to look at history and draw the conclusions that you did.

>>510964079

Weak, manipulative satanic pedos have caused your collapse and you can't do shit about it.

Anon, you are making my point.

>>510963614
I'm curious about a few things. They're mostly structural issues. The original 'civilized' goddess cult began with Inanna then later became Tanit and Cybele. The cult was comprised largely of eunuchs and a defining feature of Persian and Byzantine theocracy was their use of eunuchs, after Persians took cultural control over China you also started seeing similar systems of eunuch bureaucrats emerging. It's not that I don't see a process of selection occurring, it's that I don't know what's doing the selecting at all. From what I can tell it's an administrative cult run by people who willingly castrated themselves, and eunuchs could still have sex, they couldn't reproduced they constantly cucked emperors. Some were fake eunuchs too, Han China's founding literally is about a eunuch named Lao Ai who faked his castration and impregnated the queen dowager. There's definitely more than just matriarchy going on here. Also there's very artificial boundaries put on male selection like make up, foot binding, body modification, neck elongation, and so on. Basically women needed to be marked by a particular authoritative cult before men could socially find them attractive or they were viable choices for arranged marriage.

>>510964159
women choose stupid assholes because their mate selection criteria is stuck in the paleolithic era, not even neolithic.

high iq results in enough cooperation to come up with neat toys like advanced military tactics, logistics, formations, etc and then your savage tribe of dumbfuck chads get fucking destroyed.

>>510950588 (OP)
Mitochondrial DNA would show that 100% of the mitochondrial genotypes carried by breeding women were passed on. Nothing more, nothing less.

Anything else is pure statistically hedged assumptions.

>>510964095

Making my point. Weakling falling for psyops.

We never had "civilization". We had an adventure park were 5 people made all the toys and all the morons started using them to the point of total deterioration and collapse because nobody knows how they work.

And a tribe with small hats literally moves their hands and you fall in line because they made you believe in a sandbox version of harry potter.

>>510963700
I'm not telling you to kys because I lost any childish argument(lmao stop projecting), I'm doing it because by using chatgpt to do the thinking and argument building for you you have become human waste.

>>510950588 (OP)
This wasn't christianity, it was the development of patriarchy.

>>510950588 (OP)
Males tend to die a lot more. Pretty sure a lot of that can be explained by survival pressures.

>>510964302

You mean all those toys that can cause an apocalyptic event because pussies push buttons?

oh anon. you do need those extra IQ points to understand what i am saying. But you ain't got them.

>>510964389

stop. ask yourself why the queen is the strongest piece in chess, one of the most ancient games. Then ask why a pawn cannot be promoted into a king but a pawn can.

maybe then you will understand what matriarchy is and that patriarchy never existed.

>>510950588 (OP)
You dumbass fags forget monogamy is a societal construct instituted BY MEN to benefit the most amount of MEN as possible. You're right, most guys aren't able to breed without hand outs by society, and it's a shame most males are willingly giving that up. Sucks to suck, I don't need the handicap because I'm part of that 30% that gets theirs

>>510964412

Someone is starting to connect the dots about how women rule men and use them as expendable pawns to advance their own genes.

good job anon

>>510964216
the collapse that you say is a good thing because then you can run around doing ultraviolence in small tribes for a while. at least until a new civilization comes along, and it will, and crushes you, and it will. and then we`re back to square one hoping we get at least a solid millenia or two out of civilization before the satanic pedos ruin it again.

look ultimately its kinda of irrelevant whether tribal savagery or civilization is better because civilization always wins and defeats your primitive tribes. in the end civilization can only destroy itself from within and thats the problem that needs to be solved yes. but the solution isnt savagery because that will always get destroyed again by civilization and sucks anyways

>>510964095
>women suffer the most in war

>>510964516
>the queen is the strongest piece in chess
It's pnly called that in recent English. It's often called the General.

>>510964095
I should make a t-shirt out of this.

>>510964159
>High IQ is useACK!!!

>>510964592

civilization is an exception to the rule. Its literally an infestation that Nature quickly takes care off one way or another.

>>510963943
>IQ
>A social metric literally created to sterilize retards somehow becomes a method of mating selection
>An authoritative quotient that was politicized and turned into a standardized test so that third party groups could influence education curriculum.
>Created to select for docile factory workers as part of the Prussian school system
>Literally refers to its own systems as 'matrices' as if they plan on forging your conscience around a test that's 99% literary

Absolutely domesticated.

>>510960594
>philosophy and literature
These wouldn't exist in your ideal ooga-booga society. Most likely you would be in a grave before adulthood.

>>510950588 (OP)
>Christianity's greatest marketing was to force monogamy so that male cucks could have a reason to die on the frontlines of Kings
This is retarded on so many levels.

>>510950588 (OP)
>Christianity's greatest marketing was to force monogamy
Christcucks are snakes. The first feminists in the West were Christian. You worship a jewish woman who cheated on her husband and lied about it, and everyone believed her just because she had a cunt. That's peak feminis!m right there.

>>510950588 (OP)
> Mitochondrial DNA

Only follows the female, retard.

>>510964647

Anon stop answering your own questions

>recent English

>>510964567
Nah man. Have you ever spent a lot of time in high-T environments like the infantry or a football team or something? We used to ALL be like that, driving ourselves and each other into greater and greater risks. That's what I'm trying to say here, not WOMEN BAD or whatever dumb incel shit you're clumsily trying to co-opt what I'm saying under kek

>>510964353
5 people did not make all the toys. it was thousands who invented and engineered the toys, often in teams, often iterating over many generations, so really tens of thousands of people. while millions or really tens of millions actually made the invented toys. "toys" is cute but these toys slaughter primitive tribes and outcompete across all metrics from resource harvesting to lifespan and shit you dont care about like education and not dying of gangrene.

>>510951931
I don't think you understand what superior genes are. Superiority is not defined by your arbitrary criterias but by natures criterias. If you win, you are superior, simple as. You seem to lack intelligence so you are obsessed with physical traits but physicality has little importance when it comes to superiority. Tons of species are taller, heavier, stronger, with bigger teeth than humans, but we can kill all of them by moving just a finger because our big brains allowed us to craft weapons and externalize strenght in proportions that would be unreachable by simple muscles. It's true between species and within the same specie. And it has nothing to do with modern war, the romans were already smaller than the celts and the germanics, also the ages after the neolithic are all named after metals aka military technology (bronze is stronger than copper, wielded by the same hands). So basically genetic superiority is defined by your ability to externalize strenght, which comes from your I.Q. Only a female brain would define superiority by describing only physical traits. If chad loses at war, then he is in fact inferior, it's basic selection. People like you are the reason our race is losing

>>510964751

Excellent! Useless doomer shit anyways.

Shits monogamous'

>>510961662
Geeks and Romans owned women as physical property until Christcuckery ruined it with your female worship

>>510964772
You can not appeal to history by calling chess "one of the moat ancient games" and then only use the modern English terms for it.

War is the most ancient of himan activities, so why are you against drone warfare, artillery, and sniper rifles?

>>510950588 (OP)
>Christianity's greatest marketing was to force monogamy so that male cucks
Are we implying that childless adults aren't more aptly stereotyped as "cucks" than adults with kids? Every fucking childless retard seems like a stunted manbaby who carries around teenager insecurities and angst. For ever Chad single bachelor, there are 100 chuds who cope and seethe all day

>>510964914

Because it uses inventions of other people to advance efforts of idiots who dont deserve it either physically or mentally

its like fucking a woman with 10inch strap on and believing you are a prime hang eugenics material.

its literally fake and gay

>>510964710
>nature will beat nation
Two more millenia!

>>510965060
So you are opposed to war. Got it.

That's you. That's your level of retardation.

>>510964710
the rule is dead and it died like 10,000 years ago with the neolithic age and early villages and agriculture. sumer a few thousand years ago was the final nail in the coffin. its over. civilization will always return eventually for as long as humans exist and primitives will never outcompete it, they`re just not fit to do so. you lost, forever.

>>510964661
>Acks through all of eternity

>>510965133

I am pro war. War 101. One against One. Fists.

"Anon, that guy is...stroooong..might help me out anon?"

"yeeeeah sheeiiiit i am gonna sucker punch him...yeah shiiiit white boy. we call it "secret mission"..."deception"

"sheeeeeitttt"

war is literally nigger tier invention for pussies

>>510950588 (OP)
>Christianity's greatest marketing
Ideologies don't spread and stay relevant for hundreds of years by marketing. They do so by survival. Christianity survived, many others religions died. Somehow, Christianity was more viable than them. And perhaps it indeed was due to monogamy. Perhaps not.

>>510950588 (OP)
Is this why there are so many dysgenic freaks runaround today?
In the past only the top 10% of males reproduced but today 60% do.

>>510965254
If you fight honorably, you will be cheated, lose, die, and the winner will record how he honorably defeated you.

>>510965286
No. It's because dysgenic freaks no longer die as babies, and their mothers no longer die in birth.

>>510965254
in reality you would just get ganged up on though so you`re just spouting fantasies

>>510965286

someone starts to get it. good

read this
>>510954607

>>510964871
>So basically genetic superiority is defined by your ability to externalize strenght, which comes from your I.Q.
I'm pretty sure the list of factors tested by IQ does not include "ability to externalize strength" kek

>>510965400
we had civilization for millenia without feminism. nobody disagrees that feminism is bad. feminism doesnt exist under monogamy and civilization doesnt exist under feminism. feminism can exist in primitive matriarchal tribes of chad harems though, thats the goal of femism. until a civilization comes along and wins over the primitives, which of course it will. civilization will die within 3 generations from the onset of fullblown feminism. its the feminism that needs to stop but thats not a natural product of civilization since civilization cant exist under feminism, thats a product of primitive chad harem tribes.

>>510950588 (OP)
You can't determine a percentage of women breeding through mitochondrial DNA. That is inherited through the mother and is shared amongst all women in that line. It only changes when there are rare mutations or through migration, usually after severe events like famine or ice ages.

Monogamy is what made civilization possible by freeing men and women from constantly killing each other over mates and allowed them to devote time to developing technology and defenses. The majority of men who disfavored monogamy weren't kings. They were brutish, uncivilized thugs who more often than not caused the destruction of a village, rather than somehow improving it's genetic health, which is the ridiculous notion your are trying to romanticize here. Instead, kings were largely installed by their people after they showed a penchant for protecting them. There was not singular vote, only a slow progression to a general consensus on who was the most able to lead the tribe. Fail and you were cast out, and a new leader chosen. This process slowly created most royal lines.

That said there were a few of the brutes I mentioned that manged to maintain leadership through their genetic lines. At least for a time. It would be arrogant and dismissive to assume they all failed all the time. It's just such a shame that these people, that these genetic lines, would largely be snuffed out by themselves as brother fought brother, son assassinated father, etc. with the winner sometimes killing any male children the loser had. However it progressed, they proved themselves to be a genetic dead end, even if it took centuries and many generations.

You seem to have a very Hollywood view on monarchies and how they held power...

>>510965264
>>Christianity's greatest marketing
>Ideologies don't spread and stay relevant for hundreds of years by marketing
Yes they quite literally do. Marketing is built into Christcuckery.

>>510964879
You don't know what you want. You live in a fantasy world.

>>510965703
No, that's just pure leaf-tier retardation. Christianity would have died a hundred times over and been replaced by a myriad of other religions if marketing were the only thing going for it.

>>510951455
>This is what is happening today.
Except it is not male selecting women, it is women selecting the top 1% of men. Back in the day it was the strongest men who could take as many women as possible, today it is women picking the most handsome men.

>>510963176
>Women still rule us. We always had matriarchy on this earth
False, we had matriarchy originally, which was displaced/outcompeted by patriarchy. Only now due to modern technology, security and resource abundance has matriarchy been able to slowly creep back in via abrahamism and female rights.
>Women screaming "the patriarchy" are just complaining about incels
Yes, shame/ostracization/bullying are social means of coercion/resource acquisition. Women pursue a social strategy of capital redistribution towards themselves and their offspring by what is effectively social parasitism. We know this.
I hope you understand when I say matriarchy/patriarchy, I don't mean the modern buzzword understanding of "le men bad", I'm talking about how historical cultures organized their social hierarchy/status.
>This is why the system is structured to help the ultra rich and fuck the middle man.
The system is fucked because we've spent the past 100+ years allowing our responsible, patriarchal aristocrat elites to be replaced with feminine socialite rentseekers, aka jews and HR karens.
>The entire democratic system is just a eugenics program to cull out the dysgenics and have them slave for the offspring of chad.
Sexual selection =/= natural selection, and contrary to popular belief NEITHER are inherently eugenic. Plenty of species have experienced dysgenic selection or even gone literally extinct due to "natural" adaptation to their specific environment.
As for matriarchy vs patriarchy, human history demonstrates very clearly that patriarchy/civilization absolutely dominates matriarchy, and produces far more eugenic outcomes. Compare the bones/height/physiology of ancient pastoralists (dairy/meat eaters) vs agriculturalists (grain eaters) and its clear as day.

>>510965264
Its because on one side their cucks are reproducing nonstop and on the other their priests run around the world lying to and gaslighting people. The only winners in this system are the satanists at the top and their abrahamicuck enablers that get the leftovers.

>>510964237
Old european/ME goddess cults means worship of pic rel, many of these relics are way older than ten thousand years. "Civilized" godess cults like Inanna/Tanit/Cybele/Ishtar are far more modern, at least relatively speaking.
China's development is very intersting, and you're probably right that there's more going on than "just matriarchy". I haven't gotten to reading much about them in regards to these developments yet, the interesting thing is that they were uniquely spared from the Indo-European cultural expansions into europe/iran/mena/india due to geographic barriers.

OP is mistaken in the pre-civilization stone age world about every fourth male reproduced which fell drastically once we got agriculture and resource rich men started to hoard women aka polygamy. It was in this period that men would slaughter each other, and proper civilization didn't even manage to sprout. Hell there was even a male bottle neck at that time. Gradually monogamy would take over and the family as a unit would be introduced, where one man had one woman and a stock of slaves (which is where the term family comes from). Only then did civilization raise and male reproductive rate raise.
Monogamy is essential for civilization. Now we are facing another issue, female sexual selection and the consequences of this selection is going to make men return to their sexual selection strategies.

>>510961731
You don’t have city cucks? Weird. Each time I want to fuck my wife I call magistrate office and they send afghan cuck to sit in corner of our bedroom while we have sex.

>>510965991
>Compare the bones/height/physiology of ancient pastoralists (dairy/meat eaters) vs agriculturalists (grain eaters) and its clear as day.
Why are bones, height, and "physiology" more evolutionarily advantageous among pastoral vs agricultural people? You could easily make the argument that reduced size signals a growing irrelevance of strength and physique, which could signify further removal from our advancement out of animalistic requirements and therefore stronger civilizational control over the environment ergo more advancement.

>>510950588 (OP)
christianity didn't invent marriage or monogamy. The world did not begin with your rabbi

>>510965879
>No, that's just pure leaf-tier retardation
You're just trying to cover it up. Christianity constantly markets itself, everywhere it can, and when people tell you to fuck off you play the victim martyr just like Jewsus

>>510950588 (OP)
You can’t have a stable society without the idea of monogamy. Men are the doers of things and women are their reward. No different than livestock, except this one can breed with you, cook clean etc.

>insert feminist rant here
You live in a society thanks to men. Men that protect you, build, research, and maintain nearly everything you rely on. The least you can do is take care of the domestic issues.

>>510966531
Avestan culture was split from the larger Indo-Aryan body. The Persians were immensely influential in China and were the ones who paved the Royal Road that later became the framework for the Silk Road. Mithradates IV was the man who formalized the Silk Road and Bodhidharma (a Parthian) was the first patriarch of China. The entire Tang system was immensely Persianized, Buddhism was never recgonized as a native religion it was always regarded as foreign and today it's the main religion in all of Asia.

>>510950588 (OP)
>In pre civilization most men died young.
You're really selling it. Not sure how thats a Christian thing tho.

>>510964318
OP ignores the scientific criticism and sticks with his (((published))) headlines.

>>510950588 (OP)

https://nuancepill.substack.com/p/was-polygyny-widespread-in-history

This has been debunked, the reason why there is more mitochondrial diversity has to do with the way ancient societies organised around who moved into whose house.

>>510951844
It’s not the same argument at all. Communism would be better described as arranged marriages, except by the state and not family.

Monogamy is still capitalism. You work hard and can get a hotter wife. Her value matches your value. If you’re not successful you’ll have to settle for the less attractive and less desirable women. You’re still getting just one.

>>510951929
Rome collapsed due to unbridled migration and change in culture. It’s no different than most of Europe now.

>>510967042
That's a very selective reading of Roman collapse. I'm pretty sure a lot of scholars would disagree strongly with this extremely reductive and doubtless politically self-serving interpretation

>>510967042
Rome collapsed because of feminism. They cremate a bachelor tax attempting to force men to marry but it failed because you can't force a man to love his nation if its run by a bunch of vaginas.

>>510967151
See >>510967167
Look up the bachelor tax that Rome imposed on men towards the end. It was Christianity that turned Rome to be feminist because they worshipped a woman who cheated on her husband and got away with it (Mary)

>>510952368
Lack of simple test like the ABO blood system

>>510950588 (OP)
>being a raging single mother whore with no values and chronical depression is actually good for society because thats how it functioned back then

back then you had the entire village vouching for you. Now you have a two bedroom appartment for you and your spawn and food stamps. Society developed, for the better of worse and if you want to continue to function you better embrace partnership or stay forever on tinder as some onahole for betas since chad wont look your way anyway

>>510966698
In the case of pastoralist vs agrigulturalist we know the physical differences stem mainly from their diet. Same thing happened with mongolians vs han chinese.
To be clear, I agree with >>510964871's take on "superiority". Its just about who wins in the end. In the case of competition between pastoralists and agriculturalists:
>on a physical level, dairy based diets allowed them to more easily dominate the grain eaters physically
>patriarchal culture/environment led them to develop organized mass warfare, unlike the early agrarians
I can definently see an interesting argument being made for what the exact chain of causality was, e.g. if it was
>steppe environment->cattle economy->dairy/meat diet and monogamous/patriarchal organisation->military superiority over agriculturalists
or some other order of steps.
>You could easily make the argument that reduced size signals a growing irrelevance of strength and physique
I agree, strength/physique was likely not a strong selection factor for the agriculturalists, they're social structures probably preferred people with higher aptitudes for "correct" social behavior rather than physical ability (farming is hard work, but not necessarily "competetive").
Increasing neoteny in modern humans is also a very good example of this.

>>510966770
Thx for the keywords, that gives me a good place to start learning/reading.

>>510967592
another product of neoteny is brain plasticity, curiosity, playfulness, faster learning, etc

>>510950588 (OP)
I thought it was well known that farming and agriculture caused a society of haves and have-nots. Where men with ample resources could get away with having multiple wives.

>>510953619
In the majority of existing animal species, females are the choosy sex and males need to be physically attractive or impress females with displays of courtship in order to be able to breed. So nature must be inherently gynocentric.

>>510967965
Yes, exactly. I wasn't implying it to be a net negative trait. The ability for higher social cooperation is also affected by neoteny . Its why cultures with higher neoteny (Korea/Japan/East Asians) display such high social synchronicity.
Like with all things, theres pro's and cons, just costs and balances.
There are no free lunches in this universe.

>>510968132
Yes, pre-Chritian Greek and Roman men owned women as property. It was Christianity and its preaching of equality and female worship of Mary (a woman who successfully cheated on her husband and got away with it) that led to feminism collapsing their society. That's why women get uncomfortable when men study ancient Rome. It was a big meme a year ago.

>>510967592
I think I was just confused because I saw (maybe incorrectly?) trappings of the kind of "civilization of big bodies" idea you see a lot in online hypermasculine ideologies whereby the greatest moral good seems to rest in the physical expansion of human bodies -- bigger, stronger, faster, etc -- as a stand-in for civilizational value. This is obviously spurious, however hilarious, and I just wanted to push back on that on philosophical grounds.

>>510961058
Everything around you.
The problem is not from science and technological advencement, but from stupid subhumans (white trash very included) that use technology without restrain nor conscience.

Stupid people is the problem, not technology.

>>510951455
any tribe that got in formation and cooperated would immediately defeat another tribe. 10 grugs with 10 wives vs 3 grugs wiht 10 wives, easily becomes 8 or 9 grugs and 20 wives. monogamy is just maximizing male cooperation and minimizing female chaos

>>510968505
tbf my given example was definently implying that sort of thing, so its more my mistake than yours.

>>510950588 (OP)
Not just a reason to die in war, but a reason not to go to war with their own homeland. Without monogamy you cant really have a decent civilization because the incel class is large and will inevitably opt out and/or revolt.
At the same time you cant really have a nice civilization if women have equality and voting riggrs because their genetic emotional reasoning is not meant to make tribal decisions. It inevitably jeapordizes the group, especially because they typically don't have a cutoff and extend their empathy to outgroup tribes that are too stupid or slefish to be as well off, causing their own to be destroyed from the inside. They're tarded.

>>510967965
Neoteny expresses more in bonobo monkeys than chimps, it's the product of oversocialization and excess. Bonobo and chimps exist apart the same river in the Kongo, on one side the bonobo have immense abundance and no need to compete. On the other chimps are found and are highly competitive and territorial fighting over scarce resources. Both have the same rate of reproduction. Chimps are more competitive and sexually dimorphic, bonobo are more neotenous. Now you may ask, why do bonobo have so much sex in comparison to chimps and why is their birth rate the same as chimps if their resources are abundant. Infant mortality. The more excess a society has the more likely they are to prune needed additions to society, you can find this in Edo Japan (and Meiji) where infant mortality was immensely widespread, the average amount of abortions a woman had were astoundingly high even compared to modern standards and excesses. All of those child-killing cults were subverted into monastic infrastructure through Christianity. Instead of killing your child you gave it to a monastery. When monasteries would expand too much monks reacted by demanding prudence with sexual activity. This is the root of the western virgin fetish, in order to keep the illusion of pastorial competitiveness excess population must be reduced, without monastic institution humanity in excess would quickly become like the bonobo when it wants to be more like the chimp. The term 'economy' refers to the study of scarcity, we live in excess so to keep 'economy' going we need an illusion of scarcity to continue competition.

>>510950588 (OP)
>2k years 65%
So just since Christianity started to exist. 25% are mudslimes and other shit without morals, I'm sure. Fuck you and your pedo muhammed, brown scum

>>510954651
No. What the hell are you referring to?

>>510962191
Lmfao. Women did not rule men in "matriarchal social tribes." Even in hunter-gatherer communities you can tell men are in charge.

>>510965991
>Sexual selection =/= natural selection, and contrary to popular belief NEITHER are inherently eugenic.
I agree immensely with you. I would like to see OP respond to this. >510950588

>>510952447
Steppe Pastoralist armies were most likely larger and more effective than Agrarian armies until the Classical era.

>>510952368
Unironically the Yamnaya invasion into Europe, Iran, and India. It was war, not cuckery.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xA2WyIGXPIw

>>510950588 (OP)
>Christianity's greatest marketing was to force monogamy so that male cucks

Yes, the labor of 30% of men who have a sea of pussy isn't enough to create, develop, defend or maintain civilization.
You can either have enforced monogamy and civilization or female hypergamy and turd worldism.

There's a reason Western Europe, Eastern Europe, Russia, Iran all have related paternal R1b and R1a lineages.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ283N_ZdKY

>>510965991
Eugenics are exactly my problem. Who is doing the selection? And for what traits? I can find Babylonian statues that have massive eyes, same with Byzantine art. As a whole there's a massive fixation on light in Christianity. People will say they 'think' in language or can 'see it with their mind's eye' or 'rotate apples'. This is selecting for low functioning schizophrenia when actual schizophrenics have auditory and sometimes even olfactory hallucinations. Every single cultural/social/linguistic structure is gameified without exception, there's a particular set of rules for winning and losing when in nature it's very simple to tell if you won: if you're alive you're winning. Christianity inverted this their hero died on a cross, he won by dying, his memory persists. History remembers, this will be remembered in posterity, sacrifice yourself for the greater good. All arbitrary fixations. Or perhaps socialism offers an alternative? Whatever produces the most grain is the most good. Or Freemasonry? Whatever produces the correct narrative approved social architecture is good. Or Catholicism/neoplatonism? Whatever produces the best architecture following the proper geometric form is good.

>>510969672

Sexual selection IS part of Natural selection. Let me give you an example.

Take the peacock. Random ecological changes forced the species to choose for stupid, elaborate retarded feathers that make it impossible to fly and escape predators yet made it extremely desirable to mate. The numbers grew exponentially even if predators had a field day. It survived against "common eugenic sense".

Females today do much the same. Beauty is objective. But how do you reconcile the fact that stupid savages cannot sustain your offspring. You can't have your cake and eat it too. So they do select for survival based on vectors like jawline, height, aggressiveness that are on the "autopilot" of protection but also choose for "romantic" or "provider" which facilitates offspring maintenance.

We always had matriarchy. Even when males thought that they are in charge is high competitive females that lead the game and watched lesser females butchered. You still see it today. Women don't dress for me. They dress for other women. They want to sit next to a king because they know, even if the king gets fucked, they survive and move to the next king.

Why do you think women get wet and have multiple orgasms? The reason is avoid bleeding when raped by multiple men. Why do you think they invite barbarians into your borders? To naturally select for the most fit man. To also test the local men.

Women rule and have been ruling everything throughout time. Remember. We are all born females. Testosterone creates men for genetic variation. Males are the expendables. The ones that used to facilitate an edge to the "red queen". Nothing more nothing less.

>>510950686
>using a known confirmation bias source to establish credibility of a viewpoint after proving it wrong to validate the thesis with a confirmation bias source.

So now you’re saying you’re right because the AI now agrees with your arrogated position because it just so happened to be arrogated by contradictory data before?

>>510969813
Monogamy only benefits weak men and gives power to women over men.

Vast majority of women do not seek multiple partners like men do. Marriage exists to protect women but monogamy exists to cull men and make them weaker as a group

>>510951455
Yeah sure just forget the last 1500 years where polygamous societies got fucked into the ground by the European model. Also just because most people bred didn't mean they passed on there genes.any with poor genes would simply die. Monogamy allowed for far greater genetic diversity. And let cold winters and plagues sift the way from the chaff

>>510971019
yeah, that's why polygamy worked out so well for the mudslime countries.

>>510951929
The Druze prohibited the production of women's shoes and it spawned an entire religion. She can't cheat if she can't walk out the house.

>>510971122
That's because they haven't separated their gov from the state. Religion is a destructive force for democracies and progressive governments. A key aspect of western culture is the acknowledgment that religion is bad for the operation of a democracy hence the necessity of separation of church and state

>>510971346
lmao, gtfo

>>510971346
*separated their religion from the state

Is what I meant

>>510964200
Pretty based anon

>>510971388
It's probably pretty hard to think constructively when all you had to eat in the last 3 days was a week old rat

>>510950588 (OP)
Monogamy is required for civilization. Men (fighters, laborers) need to be bribed with pussy in order to cooperate. Otherwise it just devolves into everyone spending their time and energy fighting over pussy and not building civilization.

>Good fifth of posts in this thread are made by one person
>Often multiple posts in a row
It's a bot isn't it

>>510971440
there's no thinking required for your imbecilic hallucinations. just ridicule.

>>510970311
The big picture view is that whatever adaptation gets us off this rock, or at least survive after getting off, wins. If we don't spread our eggs out of the basket, death by solar flare/asteroid will occur at some point no matter what.

>>510964200

You in the middle of the jungle protected by glass walls does not make you on top of the food chain

>>510951794
> Marriage prevents competition that destroys cohesion, is beneficial for men and women
Christianity/monogamy severely curtailed the influence and allure of Chads. Chads were the losers in that paradigm and their reach was severely undermined. The last 30 years in particular have been an absolute boon for Chads. They have been the rare winners under feminism while the men who benefitted from monogamy have been the clear losers.

>>510964237

Women are highly competitive. More than men. The eliminate one another on the go. This is why most sexual restraint practices in the middle East like cutting the clit is perpetuated mainly by women.

>>510965640
You’re killing it in this thread. Good read. Glad to hear you can to the conclusion of repealing feminism although I don’t see how it can be done. Humanity has a soft spot for women and would rather do something that leads to their death as long as it means they get to uphold women’s image.

>>510971521

Stupid posts need proper addressing. What can I say. plenty of typos anon. also english not my first language. bet you can tell that though. try harder.

>>510971189

Desperate attempt from other females to control lesser females. Top females never undergo these practises. I don't think any of you understand how highly competitive women are. Go out and date more and you will find out.

>>510950588 (OP)
>Monogamy was astroturfed

Exactly. We should all be living in communes fucking each other.

>>510971120

They didn't. They merely plundered and then when then fake printing machine started collapsing they kept rotating and importing more and more primitives until they took over.

Literally China will own the west in the future because they sat back and copied.

>>510971762
The Yamnaya/Indo-Aryan model was simply annihilating time and space. Make faster horses, build better boats, build more roads. Somewhere along the line it became about flattening and legibility and the world got taken over by what's essentially actuaries plotting out risk management formulas. I suspect that once supreme push to conquer nature itself was subverted by utter paranoia, I wish I knew when and who, but the majority of the public became a liability and making them docile and dependent became expedient. Just look at what the Russian Empire did after the Bolsheviks took over, all of their debt vanished because of a regime change. What happened to that economy? Then again in 1991 what happened to the USSR internal debt? All of those satellites dependent on the gosplan? It vanished, but they sure as hell paid off their external debts to international finance. Was conquering nature just a myth? Was the entire purpose just to weaponize convenience? Wouldn't those same Scythians known for producing superior horses also have plied their trade of domestication on their agricultural subjects? And wouldn't those same subjects be little more than oxen turning the wheel that slaughters them? We're food to them. There probably isn't anything more than just selecting for social 'neotenous' traits and pretending as if there's real competition.

>>510970754
Sexual selection and natural selection are not inherently eugenic.

>>510970754
>Why do you think they invite barbarians into your borders? To naturally select for the most fit man. To also test the local men.
How on earth are they more fit in any way?
They are both weaker and dumber. Women are not the ones who chose anything. Women today are completely manipulated by politicians/leaders with simple emotional arguments like they always have been throughout time, but now they can vote.

And even if they would choose, they absolutely do not choose the fittest mate. They can be convinced by a conman with shit genetics to pass on his genes as long as he can keep up the con long enough.

I appreciate the thread btw, even though I am in complete disagreement. You are not a coward at least and actually answer questions asked to you.

>>510955312
but he gets to fuck her and there's a big chance to impregnate her
alternative is 0 sex and 0 kids guaranteed and an incel rebellion

>>510972471

efficiency =/= innovation. Making things "go faster" does not mean you are addressing the problem. You are literally feeding feral cats and wonder why there are so many problems around them.

>>510972630

Nothing is inherently eugenic but some traits do prevail even if the selection is done on a "meta" level.

Barbarians have more testosterone on average because of their diets, harsher environments and genetic variability which local populations do not have due to advanced medicine preserving all the weak genes. Well women had to do something about that. Challenging the males does make the best shine while the rest, all the rest, serve them.

Politicians dont manipulate women. Women manipulate politicians. Literally they all vote liberal and all modern "democracies" are cucked under them.

Even if they are conned to fuck the impostor they have collectively aborted more people than all the world wars combined.

I don't think you get how vicious females are when it comes to natural selection.

>>510950588 (OP)
>Christianity's greatest marketing was to force monogamy


Monogamy? I think you have it backwards. Try reading your fairy tale book sometime.

>>510960179
You've out your finger on the problem in your own words and you're accurate in your analysis but this burdens you to improve it, create an alternative around you, show people they can see the bigger picture and clearer.

The video segment I've shared is merely about the work of J D Unwin which was cited in the image of the post that I've quoted.
Are Freud's theory right? They don't instinctively feel right but it's obvious that cooming like a retard does tax you in some ways.

>>510974168

Monogamy for thee (incels) but not for me (chad)

>>510972995
I agree that not everyone should have children, a lot of weak genes are being conserved because of innovations like medicine, better food availability etc., but polygamy is not the answer at all. Organized eugenics is the answer, and it can be done in a somewhat ethical way instead of the chaos that we find ourselves in now.


>Barbarians
Are we talking about ancient times or modern times? Assuming you mean modern times, The immigrant filth that come here are neither high in testosterone, have a better diet, are strong or smarter. They are not fitter than us in any way. And the history of how they came here was not proposed by women, but by various interest groups that pushed an Overton window over time to get people to "accept" them and mass immigration. Women were used to push this propaganda, they did not demand it.


>Politicians don't manipulate women. Women manipulate politicians.
Women are the most easily manipulated people on earth. It takes nothing to convince them, as long as its someone they look to as authority saying it. They just need the right emotional "charge" and most will believe anything.

>I don't think you get how vicious females are when it comes to natural selection.
Maybe not, I just know they should have no power at all. They are the worst decision makers on earth.

>>510951844
>Same argument is made under communism
It isn't. Abstraction-brained "thinking" is the cause of 99% of the retardation we see today. All arguments are "the same" if you work at a high enough level of abstraction. Communism is just people doing stuff. Capitalism is just people doing stuff. Fascism is just people doing stuff. Everything is just people doing stuff therefore it's all the same. Everyone supports some stuff and opposes other stuff therefore everyone is a hypocrite.

>Thing is it only lasts short-term since you eventually run out from the shit you just plundered
But you are the one who seems to be advocating for a "plunder" based culture. What happens when the war-bride societies run out of neighbors to conquer?
>You either fight and rise to the top of you flip burgers
Again with the dumb abstractions. Attractiveness and money (and the things money represents like food etc) are not equivalent. For example attractiveness is zero-sum while money (and the things money represents) are positive-sum. That is to say, it's possible for someone to get richer without making everyone else poorer, but it is not possible for someone to become more attractive without making everyone else less attractive. Trying to abstract away the differences between zero-sum and positive-sum effects then wondering why everything goes to shit when you start treating them the same is peak modernity.

>>510974431

Anon, I am sorry to brake it to you but you can't fix stupid.

No Freud is not right. Freud is demoralizing. It makes you to look back into your childhood and see how much of a victim you are. Its reinforced cuckoldry. "You hate your father and thus you want to fuck your mom". Its stupid pseudoscience and only became popular because of the Jews.

Cooming is ofcourse degenerate but that is only a result of overbreeding dysgenic incels that have no purpose in life other than consooome. There is no war to shove them on the front line. Nothing.

Also masturbation does have a biological function up to a point. After that, yes it drains you.

>>510974831
How many hours per week is Max before before it becomes a negative Dr chudd?

>>510974831
Sorry he's obviously right about many things, most important of all being the existence of the unconscious mind.
None of this is stupid except in the sense that we're destroying the environment and ruining relationships and the quality of our already short lives but this is a matter of how people attend the world.

>>510974734

Point is, if eugenic are not forced through polygamy, women force them one way or another. See abortions. They literally kill humans on the go and they made it legal to do so. None of these would abort a king's baby (see Musk). They instead line up.

Modern migrants are far more violent. Even if they are not they create problems and that invites fighting, which women love to evaluate potential partners. Politicians do not exist out of the blue. They are there because some people want to push policies through them. This is why weak men and females vote left. It allocates them resources that they cannot get on an individual basis. And politicians, under a democratic system, are nothing more than the champions of mediocrity. Its literally a mathematical outcome. They just "represent" the populous average.

Eventhough women can be manipulated they always keep a backup plan to bounce back. This is why you hear the argument "you can't win against a woman arguing". The emotional leverage they have always puts them on top and even if they get drunk and have a kid, they will claim whatever bullshit to abort it.

The collective hive mind of the female is wise even if it acts completely retarded. In the end all these stupid decisions, if you put them one next to the other, you see it makes perfect sense when it comes to natural selection and selecting the best male. They literally do what the Bible warns or any other religion on earth. They invite chaos and wait to pick the winner.

>>510952033
The stats are pretty clear in your “polygamous” society at most 30% of men breed. In monogamous ones 65% do. This is quite literally DOUBLE the rate for men.

You are confusing the end of our “monogamous” culture with the rise of cheating, except that’s wrong. The very second we normalized women being whores with feminism our “monogamous” society was already a “polygamous” society. Which is why men have checked out at a massive scale because the society of today is a lie. And thus we are back to the era when the vast majority of men have precisely no reason to participate in society.

>>510963943
> but the women are selecting for lower IQ, impulsivity and despite their calms of wanting a tall guy: they are even selecting for short guys. 16% of White women in the USA are giving birth to nons.
That’s because low IQ trash are the only people still cranking out kids in numbers. The women that actually CAN entertain real selection (5+/10) are becoming more selective. When men bitch about women, they are forgetting that like half the female population isn’t attractive enough to garner much male attention and fuck ugly loser males just to feel something.

>>510974788

>But you are the one who seems to be advocating for a "plunder" based culture. What happens when the war-bride societies run out of neighbors to conquer?

I literally brought the example of aboriginal communities keeping the numbers small and even killing their own babies if they numbers rise so they can avoid a war that can eradicate their groups (100-150) people. That is the sweet spot. Grow bigger and you are fucked since you need to wage war to survive.

>money is positive-sum

No it isn't. You get inflation and me as rich get x10 from where i was and you get x10 as well. And now our gap is bigger and you need to pay an hours wage to eat a burger while i refresh my portfolio in an instance and I can feed the whole joint.

>>510974831
Carl young my fuckin boi, my homie dawg. Dat whyte boi be spittin

>>510975345
My point is that what women force to happen in your argument not a eugenic outcome. Its at best chaotic, and most probable dysgenic.

>>510975345
>Point is, if eugenic are not forced through polygamy, women force them one way or another. See abortions.
How does a society where fathers choose partners fit into your polygamy vs no-selection dichotomy? Nobody is saying that everyone should be given a partner for nothing, only that women choosing is socially destructive and is leading to the re-emergence of monogamous patriarchy at the hands of stronger foreign cultures.

>>510975345
And this leads to the collapse of society as men no longer have any reason to build and maintain complex systems. Thus it is imperative that in order mobilize the bulk of men to enforce monogamy on women. As you say this can only be done by stripping women of all rights and making them property. For the good of the empire this is how it must be.

>>510976072

There was a study back in the day were aboriginal hunters took the clavicle bone of the animal and determined based on heat, shape etc where to hunt next. It was purely ritualistic and did not make any sense evolutionary. But they sweared it worked. Then a mathematician actually did the analysis and found out that through their "peer review" practice over generations, it did make a mathematical sense to follow certain rules even if they had no clue they were doing math.

My point is. Nature is more wise than we think. If some practises have endured, no matter how silly they look, there is a reason behind them that at least offers some evolutionary advantage. With women we can explain many of their actions through the eugenic lens as I have demonstrated.

>>510976183

I think many in this thread forget that marriage was primarily a business deal. You married a woman mainly to expand your land and the fathers managed the deal that benefited both. if you fucked other women, it was not considered bad since you could make commando heirs. But if your woman fucked another you risked being cucked and your property being taken from another man. Get it now?

>>510975615
There's virtually no female selection in nature, and 'low IQ' trash extends to people like athletes that fuck anything with a pulse. The human phenomenon of putting women on a pedestal is similar to ants, where all worker ants are essentially sterile females and there's just a few that are selected to be the queen. It really is a bizarre feature that's seen in no other mammal.

>>510976349
"men" don't create or sustain complex systems. A few handful of autists do while the rest are just users. So what do you do? You entertain them with hamster wheels, paper pushing jobs, colosseums/sportsball

women rule everything. you can't strip shit

>>510976582

you are close anon. you are very close

>>510975692
>No it isn't. You get inflation
Only if you increase the money supply without increasing the supply of the things it represents. If food was zero-sum then the modern world wouldn't be possible. We can actually feed more people today than we could 2000 years ago. It's not simply a matter of distributing a cutting the cake differently, the cake is just straight up bigger now. An average person today has more real wealth than a king did 2000 years ago despite having a smaller slice of the cake because the cake is just bigger now. Most resources work like this. Socio-sexual status is the only exception and should be treated as exceptional. Any attempt to create a common abstraction for physical resources and status resources that allows you to treat them as equivalent end in failure because they aren't equivalent, and thus all you are doing by creating such an abstraction is subjecting yourself to self-imposed information poverty. Every time you abstract things you are throwing away information and further impoverishing yourself. Mathematicians like abstractions because information poverty is good if you are trying to prove things. If you can prove something with less information then your proof is stronger. Outside of this one niche context it's always better to be more informed. A vet is always going to have an easier time doing his job if I say my husky is limping than if I say my animal has a problem, because the latter is more abstract and thus more information-impoverished.

>>510976573
>if you fucked other women, it was not considered bad
By who? If you pump and dump random women do you think their fathers would be OK with that?

>>510950588 (OP)
This doesn’t matter because for the last 2000 years 80%+ of men have reproduced.

>>510952033
Invoking the Stone Age as evidence isn’t a good argument.

>>510976898
To what? I don't understand why people do this. I looked up human selection and it was retard level social bullshit. Uhh did you uhhh know high T men...lie k uhhh ***feminine*** women...with uhhh feminine characteristic..huhh. Gay men have ridiculously high T from what I've observed, they form these bodybuilding cults sometimes, and some jocks have girlfriends that look 'manlier' than I do. If you know something tell me.

>>510976809
Hahaha, have fun with the collapse. Sure autists might design the devices, but to make them? The full value chain necessary for ANY of these products to be made? All those paper pushing jobs? For Jews and women. All the actual sustain society roles? Men.

See you are confused because you look at our society today and think:
>We are monogamous
>we are built by autists
>men have do nothing jobs
>financialized economy = a productive economy
None of that is true. It’s all fake and gay right now BECAUSE we left the monogamous society behind. The autists are the only ones who haven’t checked out fully, so you assume they built and maintain society despite the obvious collapse going on. You think because women and Jews have do nothing jobs that men do too. All of your thoughts are wrong because you believe we are what we were. But society has radically changed.

>>510976967

More people is not better. More 1$ t shirts are not better than $100 dollar shirts.

The abstraction you are ignoring is that all these "advanced civilized shit" only created more useless eaters that feed the machine. The NPC meme rose because they are all soulless creatures running on hamster wheels.

>>510977027

If you were rich, they would held their legs open

when in doubt, try this
CLINICAL TEST QUESTION
>are you descended from south asian subcontinental ancestry?
any answer longer than "no" means yes
not answering means yes
lying means yes

OP i can smell your severe pajeet odor
why don't you stay in your own country

why don't you stay in designated pajeet land OP

>>510950588 (OP)
>Mitochondrial DNA spanning over the past 10,000 years shows that 90% of women reproduced

Wow faggot, you are surprised that reproduction machines designed for reproduction actually reproduce?? ?
You are a dumb faggot.

>while only 30% of males did
So? What is your point?

Women are very average.
Men have extremely large distribution of say , average, dumb and smart people. 10% will be too dumb, 10% too smart etc.
This is a nature designing for SURVIVAL of the population.
Males are sacrificed in favor of the survival of the species.

>for instance, going to be different group of males who survive in : underground , when its too cold, too hot etc .

This is besides the fact that males fight wars and stay outside (to capture a tiger) and periodically die.

>>510950806
>>510951455
>>510951758
>>510951844
>>510954607

Faggot fed , your anti-male thread failed.
KYS

Tell that to the guys who flew planes into the twin towers

why are you pajeets always posting from other people's countries OP? do you think you're jews? you're not quite jews. you're like down syndrome jews maybe. but very very subcontinental