Human Stupidity Part 2 – Ultimate and Proximate Explanations

Ultimate/Proximate Explanations and a Happy, Sexually Free Society

Whilst reading Human-Stupidity‘s blog last week, I came across something that he’s expressed quite brilliantly, and something that I happen to have recently been reflecting upon a great deal myself.  It’s something that really goes to the heart of the stupidity and irrationality of many of our current sexual mores :

In antiquity, When the Bible and the Koran were written, there were no birth control nor genetic paternity tests. Drakonian laws against adultery and pre-marital sex gave men sufficient trust that they were investing their life’s work and effort in their own offspring and not someone elses kid.
The Koran and the Bible were right, in their times: such laws could contribute to stability of family and society.  Religious dogma and zealotism, unfortunately, prevent any rational modern re-analysis of these topics in the face of birth control and DNA testing.

Before reading HS’s post, I had made a similar point to a Christian feminist, who was trying to rationalise her sexual self-interest in having men locked away to be raped for having consensual sex with younger females. I’ll quote her directly, and it’s a simple argument that I’ve seen popping up quite often recently (for example, Welmer of the Spearhead makes it too) :

The thing is, historically older men were able to have sex with attractive 15-year-olds because they married those 15-year-olds.

But the thing is, historically, attractive 15 year olds would likely have fallen pregnant if they had sex with older men. 

Whereas today :

  • 15 year old girls (can) have access to the contraceptive pill.
  • Contraceptives for men (condoms) are far more reliable than they were in times past.
  • 15 year old girls can have abortions if they do not wish to raise the child.
  • 15 year old girls will receive the support of the welfare state if they do decide to raise the child.

To say ‘sex with teens has never been legal outside of marriage’ is meaningless.  Almost as meaningless as saying that pre-marital sex has never been legal outside of marriage.  Both are largely as true as the other (at least outside of the USA – the average age of consent in Europe is still under 15, fifty years after the birth of the free sexual market).

Of course, a 15 year old girl getting pregnant in a high-tech society, which demands even working-class girls remain in education until their late teens and beyond, is still a very unwelcome thing and something that should be strongly deterred.  But what I am saying is that our instinctive abhorrence of men having casual sex with teenage girls is based largely upon presumed consequences that (should) no longer apply – that a teenage girl will likely be left pregnant and unsupported. What I believe, and what I’ve gone on record many times stating, is that we should largely replace ‘statutory rape laws’ with ‘impregnation of a minor’ laws.  To say the following might not win me approval in the men’s rights community, but the fact is, there is one essential moral difference between a man having sex with a girl, and a woman having sex with a boy.  The girl can fall pregnant.   This is the consequence that gives the act of sex its great moral weight.  And this, by and large, should be the only consequence that sexually aware teenagers should be legislatively protected against.

When the brave and great JayHammers recently questioned the feminist age of consent laws that lead to tens of thousands of men being beaten and raped in jail every day, he was denounced and ostracised by dozens of other MRAs.  Yet these laws make NO rational sense in a liberal society in which even sexual trade union feminists proudly proclaim that a woman can enjoy sex without any moral or emotional consequences.  There is no basis in evolutionary theory whatsoever to believe that a teenage girl will be harmed by casual sex (other than through being impregnated).  There is, however, obvious evolutionary reasons why a 30 year old woman will claim that a 14 year old will be emotionally destroyed by having sex, whilst she herself goes clubbing every night hunting for young black cock.

If you still maintain, as an MRA, that having sex with teenage girls is rape, then at least be consistent and equally side with the feminists who believe that pick up artists are rapists.

 Mummy’s Baby, Daddy’s Maybe

‘Sluts’ aren’t very popular in the anti-feminist community, to say the least.  I read one article only yesterday, and the tone of it, as well as the comments underneath, led me to  think I had slipped back to Biblical times, or modern Iran, watching a stoning in progress.  If this is men’s rights, then we may as well just convert to Islam, the largest ‘men’s rights movement’ in the world (and one that definately is growing).

I can understand the evolutionary rationale for men disliking sluts.  And I myself can be appalled at the ignorance of feminists when talking about ‘double standards’.  I can also share in the disgust at the arrogance of a 30 year old woman boasting that she has slept with over a thousand men and yet appearing to have no inkling as to why a man would not want to share the rest of his life with her, now that she wants to settle down and ‘find love’.  It’s a valid distaste at the deluded arrogance of the modern woman that the great Bernard Chapin often captures in his brilliant Inferno’s.

And yet, we now live in an age of paternity testing.  Why should ‘mummy’s baby, daddy’s maybe’ continue to have such a hold over us?  Surely, in today’s world, we ought to re-define a whore as a woman who sees her very essence and worth as consisting of her sexual asking price (i.e. a feminist) rather than a woman who simply gives pleasure to men cheaply.

Once more, it seems that our moral interpretations of sexual behaviour are largely proximate cultural explanations for ultimate evolutionary explanations that should no longer have any relevance in our present society.

And rationally uncovering the possibly irrational (now) evolutionary basis of our thinking should surely be the proper way we address moral questions relating to sex.   A society which increasingly becomes more distant and irrelevant to that in which our moral instincts evolved and which were later codified into religious law. Especially, in a society in which nearly a million men are sex offenders in America alone, and feminist judges have now won the right to lock them away indefinately.

This article kind of ties up the common thread of the last few posts I’ve made.  I make no apologies whatsoever, as an anti-feminist, for talking about issues regarding the age of consent and teenage sexuality.  The more I read of the history of feminism (and at the moment I’m reading up heavily on the first wave), the less absurd becomes my claim that the driving force of feminism has always been the attempt of older unattractive women to restrict the increasing availability to men of young attractive females. In this sense, if you believe that current feminist age of consent laws, together with contemporary feminist driven ‘paedohysteria’, are just and proper, then YOU TOO are a feminist.

I would, however, like to make the same disclaimer I have made before.  Any man who breaks an age of consent law has committed a great wrong, because (apart from moral issues of breaking any law) he has involved a younger, more vulnerable person in an act of criminality, and has exposed a teenage girl to inevitable damage at the hands of the feminist child abuse industry. 

Finally, another reason I have focused upon this subject recently, is because others have.  Not only the excellent Human Stupidity, but also in the following brilliant pieces from Roissy and FB at Inmalafide :

Roissy on Statutory Rape

InMalaFide : Sweet Sanity On Statutory

14 thoughts on “Human Stupidity Part 2 – Ultimate and Proximate Explanations”

  1. QUOTE: “What I believe, and what I’ve gone on record many times stating, is that we should largely replace ‘statutory rape laws’ with ‘impregnation of a minor’ laws. ”

    I understand where you are coming from in that impregnation of a minor laws might allow a compromise between allowing greater freedom for men and adolescent girls to form consensual sexual relationships (a good thing) while still giving teen girls some protection. My main issue with the idea of impregnation of a minor law is that the female has greater control over whether or not pregnancy occurs. I do however agree that any man who has a sexual relationship with a teenage girl should take all precautions on his part to avoid pregnancy because due to education requirements this can be quite devastating but…it would be even more devastating if the girl got pregnant by someone her own age who is not as likely to be able to support her. I am also concerned about what would happen if the girl chose to keep the baby…is having the father in jail a healthy situation? I would also be conserned about a possible domino effect where by the existence of these laws can then be used to justify the creation of laws jailing men for getting women below certain socio-economic brackets pregnant…and so on and so on.

    I might warm up to your idea if: 1) developments in male contraception gave men the equal ability to avoid a pregnancy situation and 2) The law would be structured so that the minor would have to consent to the charge being laid.

    QUOTE: ” There is no basis in evolutionary theory whatsoever to believe that a teenage girl will be harmed by casual sex (other than through being impregnated). There is, however, obvious evolutionary reasons why a 30 year old woman will claim that a 14 year old will be emotionally destroyed by having sex, whilst she herself goes clubbing every night hunting for young black cock.”


    QUOTE: “I can also share in the disgust at the arrogance of a 30 year old woman boasting that she has slept with over a thousand men and yet appearing to have no inkling as to why a man would not want to share the rest of his life with her, now that she wants to settle down and ‘find love’.”

    These types of women proclaim there freedom and ability to make choices (which are good things that I support) but then they go on to try and control men’s choice’s. It’s like okay I am in my 20s now and I want to have fun (ok it”s your life) but then when there biological clock starts ticking then they want men to be lining up to propose marraige to them and they can get incensed at men their own age who still want to have fun or who are not interested in marriage/settling down. Basically they want freedom to make choices but they also want men to cater to their choices.

    QUOTE: “I make no apologies whatsoever, as an anti-feminist, for talking about issues regarding the age of consent and teenage sexuality.”

    Please NEVER apologize! It takes balls of steel to talk about these things and I certainly give you my full support.

  2. Good points Highwayman. I should make clear that, like you I assume, I don’t believe that a 16 or 17 year old should be classified as a ‘minor’ (and what a degrading, but very revealing term that is!). There’s actually an interesting sounding book about to be published arguing that the constant extension of the boundaries of ‘childhood’ into late adolescence is turning our teenagers into immature little brats unable to cope with life as adults. You might be aware of it already but I’ll post a link when I re-discover it.

    And of course, in cases such as the girl lying over taking the pill, I don’t believe that the man should be punished if he then gets her pregnant.

    It’s all hypothetical of course and my suggestion is unlikely to come to pass anytime soon. All it serves is to pull the rug under the feet of the feminists and their shallow manipulative argument connecting teen sex with marriage. A law limited to punishing men for sex resulting in pregnancy should satisfy their concerns, but of course it doesn’t, because their real motivation is to limit younger sexual competition to themselves. All this argument is is an attempt to play on the outdated fears of men/fathers of 1/their own daughters being left with a baby and no husband to support her, and 2/ their daughter losing their ‘virginity’ value (how many brides are virgins on their wedding day anymore? Pre-marital sex as well as sex with minors would have to be criminilized for it to have any relevance again).

    Yep, it does require balls to write regularly upon this topic, but as a men’s rights activist, the screams of the thousands of ‘statutory rapists’ being beaten and raped would keep me awake at night if I didn’t.

  3. The Antifeminist wrote:
    ‘Sluts’ aren’t very popular in the anti-feminist community, to say the least. I read one article only yesterday, and the tone of it, as well as the comments underneath, led me to think I had slipped back to Biblical times, or modern Iran, watching a stoning in progress. If this is men’s rights, then we may as well just convert to Islam, the largest ‘men’s rights movement’ in the world”

    To tell the truth, I was shocked when you were shocked about woment talking about fucking the first black that crosses their path. Let them have their fun? are you becoming like the feminists, not liking them having fun? They would be the first to understand us male sluts.

    Of course, as you point out, women perfectly know how to create selective laws to have fun themselves but jail men who want to have fun. it is really bad for them that they cannot make an exception for women teachers fucking their male students
    female sex offenders: 5 hottest sex offenders any boy wishes to become a rape victim of

    Highwayman: very good, very right. do you have a blog too, or do you want to contribute comments on my blog?

    You have a social leftist knee jerk reaction against selectively punishing people for impregnating girls that cannot take financial care of their offspring. Well, but that is reality. Madonna getting a kid out of wedlock is no problem. A black ghetto girl getting her 7th kid is a problem. Also, getting punished for making a baby that is not being taken care of is better then punishing everyone for even fondling a teenager.

    Also, if you make a mistake and impregnate a girl, this is like making a mistake driving and getting into an accident. This is life. Learn how to use condoms, us the best condoms. Make sure you throw them into the toilet so the girl cannot get your sperm from your condom (or oral sex orgasm) into her vagina.

    Note that the view of 2000-years-ago scenario with no DNA test and no birth control can perfectly explain such absurdities as killing a girl for getting raped. Not her fault, but an evolutionary failure. She should have resisted till death!!

    Males should be excused for impregnating a girl if they can show a boa fide effort of having used condoms. Also I want to remember that I suggest that minors and dependens like students of a teacher could file an application for sex with mandatory 1 day cool off period plus 1 hour mandatory sex counselling. That would take care of girls getting conned into sex, or doing spur of the moment things they later regret. It is overkill but much better then 15 year jail sentences.

    I was never a fan of the taliban, but maybe they are the anti-feminist ally we need!?

    Of course, I would rather not get stoned for adultery, maybe their laws need some modification. At least, in Taliban country, robbers get their hands cut off. Contributes a lot to safety on the street.

  4. @HS Regarding women worshipping black cock : you could argue that white female negrophilia is far more selfish and ruthless than the male attraction towards youth. At least every female does have a few years when she is attractive (unless she is simply ugly, but as Schopenhauer pointed out, youth itself is generally attractive to a man). In inner city areas of the UK and Paris there are thousands of white guys who will simply never be able to attract a member of the opposite sex. And if you take a look at the lonely hearts coloumn of any newspaper in a multi-ethnic city you will find that 90% of the females listed are lonely black women.

    I’m all for women having their fun, so long as they let men have their fun. Of course, in a truly free sexual market, there are winners and losers. Unattractive older women are the biggest losers (but white males/black females any age in multi-ethnic cities run them close) and so have organised themselves into an brutally efficient sexual trade union – feminism. Men seem incapable of organising themselves in a similar fashion. Most men won’t even admit that women prefer black cock.

    It’s an interesting question whether or not society should try to remedy the ‘injustices’ of the free sexual market. Obviously it does do this already (via institutional feminism) in a totally one-sided way. Michel Houellebecq addresses this question in his novels, and I’ll be writing an essay upon it in the coming weeks.

    No, to be honest, I don’t share any of your respect for the Taliban, and the central point of my argument is that feminism is very similar to Islam (and that is why feminists don’t complain too much about Islam). It’s a complete mistake to think that Islam has anything to do with men’s rights, just as it is a complete mistake to think that supporting feminists laws that criminilize men are good for men’s rights. men get stoned to death under the Taliban for adultory. men can get their eyes cut out for looking at a woman in the street. Yep, cutting off peoples hands would cut down on the burglary rate. By that logic, the feminists are right to hold that criminilizing 99% of male population who surf for porn might cut down the supply of Japanese tentacle cartoon porn and so is justified. How long before men would have their hands cut off for clicking on a mouse to view a pic of a 25 year old without her burqa on, or any other way proscribed by feminists/taliban?

    But it is very true that 70% at least of the men who presently call themselves MRAs would be better off just converting to Islam. Maybe, like Bush, they feel that muslims worship the ‘wrong God’.

  5. QUOTE: ” I should make clear that, like you I assume, I don’t believe that a 16 or 17 year old should be classified as a ‘minor’ (and what a degrading, but very revealing term that is!)”

    Yes we are in complete agreement here and in fact I personally believe that 16 and 17 year old girls should be given complete sexual autonomy. I also believe in greater sexual freedom for 13 to 15 year old girls (including the freedom to be with older lovers) but I am still trying to figure out how the legal/moral framework for relationships between men and under-16s should be worked out.

    QUOTE: “There’s actually an interesting sounding book about to be published arguing that the constant extension of the boundaries of ‘childhood’ into late adolescence is turning our teenagers into immature little brats unable to cope with life as adults.”

    There is actually already a good book out there dealing with that subject. It is called THE CASE AGAINST ADOLESENCE by Robert Epstein. It basically argues that the cult of extended chilhood harms teenagers and that teenagers are actually better off if thet are given more responsibilities and autonomy.

    I definitely agree that the feminist sexual trade union is one of the driving forces behind high Age of Consent laws as well as the cultural patholization of relationships between men and young girls. I also agree that preganancy/abandonment fears may be ONE of the driving factors behind male conservative support for such things. You can see this in the way many Age of Consent laws are structured in many US states. In many US states marriage to the girl is a defence against statutory rape…so I guess the girl all of a sudden develops the ability to consent after she goes through a wedding ceremony…riiiiight. Another motivation for conservatives (and other non-feminists) could be that they still have trouble ackowledging young girls have sexual desires (a leftover from the victorian period where women were seen as innocent and asexual…perhaps this view is still applied somewhat to young girls) this could partly explain the double standard where a man having sex with a girl is seen as worse than a woman having sex with a boy (because the man “violated her innocence” whereas with the boy “you know he wanted it”).

    I have more to add but I am a little busy so I will post again in a day or two.

    To Human Stupidity:

    I don’t have a blog but I have been meaning to comment on your site as well as Jay Hammer’s site. I will try and find the time soon.

  6. I am just thinking aloud here but I wonder if the “Cheater Detection Mechanism” may have something to do with high Age of Consent laws. If people assume that young girls are “easy” then they may worry that a lower status male is enjoying access to females that his position in the dominance hierarchy normally would not allow. Jay Hammers sort of touched on this on his video regarding Age of Consent where he argued essentially that Age of Consent Laws exist to punish beta males. Of course in my opinion young girls are not at all easy and plenty of high status males would be interested in young girls if they were not brainwashed with pedohysteria…indeed many accomplished men have chosen young girls as partners through history (Ex: Errol Flynn, Charlie Chaplin, Jerry Seinfeld, Elvis…etc).

    Kendall Jenner is a very sexually attractive young woman and she has every right to be proud of her body and display it with confidence. Thanks for the pics.

  7. Definately Highwayman. I thought the same when you told me about Moxon’s book with regard to prostitution.

    To add to the alpha male names you mentioned, I know that many ultra-alpha male political leaders – such as Mao Tse Tung, were basically only interested in young girls (and used their position to bed hundreds or thousands of them). And of course a few African tribal societies still allow the chief to take his pick of the most beautiful young girls as soon as they reach puberty.

    I’m off out for the day, I might update this comment tonight or tommorrow.

    Btw, I thought Moxon’s book was great. It’s interesting how he places the cultural marxism explanation of 2nd wave feminism above those that point to the pill as the catalyst ( I don’t agree with him here), yet it doesn’t really affect the rest of the book – masterful dissections of feminist arguments and attitudes using evolutionary psychology (and chiefly his cheater detection principle).

    I agree with him about the cheater detection mechanism when it comes to men policing other men’s sexuality. I think with women it’s still more the case likely to be simple sexual jealousy regarding the threat of young and available female rivals.

    I’m going to read it again from the start, and I’ll write an article on each chapter.

  8. I run gangbang parties with a couple of female partners. We get so many women wanting to come nowdays that I can’t fit them all in. Lots of white women have this myth thing about black guys, but from what I’ve seen they soon get over it after having a few. There are a number of black guys that join in our gangbangs now and then……and in five years of operating…..I’ve had numerous women request that I not let them attend. I’ve banned a few of them when the was a reason……but usually it’s just that the women have found them….full of themselves…. or what they call…..hogging…….the women come to fuck lots of guys……these black guys seem to hog….and think that the women only want them……even the women who have this big fantasy about black guys are usually not that interested after having them a few times. We have had a number of black women too…..and one thing I can say in every case…….they are not interested in black guys……….I’d even go as far as to say that every single black woman we have had along……would rather if no black guys were there at all. So it’s a total myth at least as far as the “once you’ve had black you never go back” saying goes. The women who want black cock the most are the ones that have never had one. I liken this to the attraction a lot of men have to much younger women…….like 18 or 19 years old women……30 year old or older guy. I’m 48 now……and I occassionally used to have sex with much younger women years ago…..but realised that it’s all superficial visual stuff. Most women that age look good….but are shit in the sack…..if your happy with a vanilla passive women…….they are ok……but if you used to hardcore uninhibited women…….they are not much better then a wank. You hardly ever come across a young women that can satisfy the lusts of an older experienced man whos done it all……they are just frustrating…….their looks make you want them more……but they give less…….so I just pass on them now.

    When it comes to sluts….there a good sluts and bad sluts. A bad slut is more like a whore…with an unknown price tag and an unknown date of payment. This type of women has sex for the unstated benefits she expects to extract. This is bad slut. Then there is the women who has sex for sexes sake…..and loves giving pleasure as much as receiving. This is good slut. My wife is a good slut. She’ll jump into a gangbang on the nights we hold them and open all her holes for the guys. Doesn’t want anything but a good time and loves the guys getting off on her as well. I might have a couple of friends over at night, watching tv……whatever……and she might get flirty and we’ll all give her a working over. But she always has dinner for me when I get home……keeps house clean and tidy…..always asks me if there is anything in particular I want for dinner…..or at the shops when she goes……..leaves soppy love notes around for me all the time…….even in my lunch box……yeah she makes my lunch for work. She works part time……..and makes her money stretch….and when she runs low…….she almost sounds guilty when she asks me for some……I let her have full access to my bank accounts and credit card…..but she never uses them unless she runs out……and she always asks. I’d have to say she is the best partner I’ve ever had……better then my previous two monogamous wives…….who cheated and stole from me and dumped me. And of course……I get sex practically every time I ask……..and a lot of times I don’t ask…….any sex……oral, anal…..pussy…..and position. Even if she has her period she won’t knock me back. And she says sex cures headaches. Sometimes after a tiring day…..when I get to bed I feel like I need an unload……but I’m physiclally tired…..and I’ll say……”how about a blow job”……..she’ll give me a cock massage with lube…..then blows me…..then she’ll get up and go to bathroom and bring back a face towel with warm water and wash my cock and balls and dry them….then ask if I want a back rub while I go to sleep. Yes…….my wife is a very good slut. The best. In fact I feel that I’ve never had a good women before because she’s so much in front. She hates feminists too…..with a vengence. She thinks some of our male friends should bury their wives in the backyard. Anway……if any of you guys can find a women like mine…..marry…….if not…..never.

  9. “If you still maintain, as an MRA, that having sex with teenage girls is rape”
    No, it’s fucking not.
    “feminists who believe that pick up artists are rapists”
    Who the fuck says that?

    “Mummy’s Baby, Daddy’s Maybe”
    No… I don’t want to play that game.

Comments are closed.