Come on man, even Marx would not have approved of this cultural monster!

The culturally Marxist criminals of the 1960's lost control of their Frankenstein monster, it has become the raging Black Lives Matter movement, radical feminism, radical environmentalism, the destroyer of American flags, statues, and symbols, the #MeToo hate-men movement, the legitimizers of same-sex marriage, and finally they have established the fiend transgenderism. Everything healthy and normal in the world has been denatured. Come on man, even Marx would not have approved of this cultural monster!

Unchivalrous American men must now count on a gracious mother of seven to save them from the mess they have made of American culture

American men should be shamefaced about placing the burden of saving America on the slender shoulders of Trump's brilliant Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett. This all comes from having abandoned belief in real human nature and the rejection of the biological origin of social behavior, which allowed such abominations as cultural Marxism to control our culture. Unchivalrous American men must now count on a gracious mother of seven to save them from the mess they have made of American culture.

Camille Paglia's crooked strait-shooting (from the archive)

I tend to like Camille Paglia's straight-shooting kind of feminism which respects gender differences, although she is public lesbian.  Paglia believes, like Freud, that the pagan exists beneath our repressed Judeo-Christian culture and she champions art which celebrates the pagan, or her interpretation of paganism, as she praised Madonna a few decades ago. Our culture does repress many of the drives and instincts of basic human nature and one can almost see why white Eminem would choose black rap as a means of more open expression.

Although I don't really like to reach into the private sexual preferences of anyone, homosexuality actually represses real human nature.  Homosexuality is, in essence, the sexual preference for achieving orgasm with the same-gender, which is a sexual activity distant from the central survival and reproductive drives that monopolize real human nature; orgasm was evolved as an incentive for reproduction. When the same-gender sexual preference is elevated and promoted as a whole life style it blocks or subverts the larger basic elements of human nature, reducing their importance and corrupting human nature and human behavior.

Human nature developed many thousands of years ago and even the smallest change in human nature and our DNA structure, for example, in our immune system, takes hundreds of thousands of years. We remain genetically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other things,with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. Exclusively promoting sexuality or violence or androgyny or homosexuality actually represses much of real human nature, pagan or otherwise.  Let's have artists---and critics--- who express and don't repress more of real genetically derived human nature. This more real expression might actually exhume a more classic kind of evolutionary realism in art related to more traditional human nature and culture.

 

Are women unhappier since the rise of feminism?

Equal pay for equal work everyone agrees with, but feminism, and especially radical feminism, is contrary to the reality of real human nature. I haven't seen any empirical studies comparing the happiness level of women since the rise of feminism---it's probably politically incorrect to even try such a study---but my non-empirical observation is that women are unhappier since the rise of feminism.

I watched the first episode of new Netflix series “The Duchess” created by Katherine Ryan, about a single mother trying to raise her daughter in London while wondering if she should have another kid. Ryan plays a super-bitch hostile to everyone in her life except, supposedly, her daughter. Ryan creates what used to be called a slut who insists on sleeping with anyone she chooses on her own obscene bitchy terms, which might have been more believable and more charming with a younger woman, but Ryan looks like a woman near the age of menopause.

Sociobiology needs to be taught in our schools because feminism has no idea what real human nature actually is. Feminism demands biologically unnatural roles for women. Modern technology has not changed the basic biology of gender differences which remain as they have been for tens of thousands of years. There are obvious genetic and hormonal differences between men and women which certainly influence both gender and cultural behavior.

The founders of radical feminism were mostly cultural Marxists which biased them toward the genetically-derived differences between men and women. Real human nature contains not only big gender differences, but is kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Will we ever return to real human nature? I quote sociobiologist Edward O. Wilson "The genes hold culture on a leash. The leash is very long, but inevitably values will be constrained in accordance with their effects on the human gene pool...”

Taking away the traditional gender roles of women and men

The biological origin of social behavior has been overlooked, blocked really, in all fields, but especially in defining gender, by the cultural Marxism which has invaded all are schools as well as by the vile media.

Sane and rational people know that “men and women have different body structures, sexual systems and biological responses and processes”---only fools and demagogues deny it. There are obvious genetic and hormonal differences between men and women which certainly influence both gender and cultural behavior.

The challenge is to get the balance right between masculine and feminine traits, most of which are genetically determined. The overall attempt to denaturalize the genders does not work any better than the attempts to denaturalize politics, and a lot of damage can be done in the process.

Being a champion of evolution I am not against new technology but a-moral modern technology didn't predict how it would gradually take away the traditional gender roles of women and men, making it possible for either gender to push the button on missiles, or robot vacuum cleaners. Meanwhile modern technology has not changed the basic biology of gender differences which remain as they have been for tens of thousands of years.

Equal pay for equal work everyone agrees with, but things get serious when gender equality in the infantry units of the military is promoted, which becomes a real threat to protecting the lives of either gender. It has been made clear from the data gathered that the only way to have women in infantry units is to lower standards. Mixed sex-units were slower at accomplishing tasks than all male units, and musculature-skeletal differences created many more injuries in women than men.

We have allowed the scrambling of the brains of both men and women with cultural Marxism (demanding equality for the unequal), radical feminism (demanding biologically unnatural roles for women), homosexuality (demanding biologically unnatural sexual life styles) and postmodern relativism (demanding a biologically unnatural relativity of values).

The radical feminist slogans “Smash the patriarchy” and “nasty women make history” are completely contrary to the largely determined (yes determined ) path of human nature and too far away from the biological origin of our social behavior. Human nature has been affirmed throughout human history to this day as being genetically and universally gender defined as traditional, as well as being kin-centered and ethnocentric. This has been ignored by the radical feminists and by modern liberals.

The present trend of hypertrophied feminism will prevail as long as America and the West don't need territorial defending. When we do, our excellent Special Forces will not be nearly enough in number to defend the West against assertive and aggressive males who hate the West---the Islamic terrorists aren't much bemused by feminism and neither are the Chinese and Russians.

Exploiting and hypertrophying the biological traits of men and women

The biological origin of social behavior has been overlooked, blocked really, in all fields, but especially in defining gender, by the cultural Marxism which has invaded all are schools as well as the media.

Sane and rational people know that “men and women have different body structures, sexual systems and biological responses and processes”---only fools and demagogues deny it. There are obvious genetic and hormonal differences between men and women which certainly influence both gender and cultural behavior.

French nationalist Charles Maurras thought that individualism was feminine and part of the gushing political romanticism of women, whereas he thought men are supposedly more rational creators of social order. I would center on the nurturing qualities of woman genetically directed toward nurturing their individual families which have been exploited and hypertrophied by the cultural Marxists into nurturing the whole world with open borders etc. But the same exploiting and hypertrophying of the biological traits of men also is done, scrambling their brains with cultural Marxism (demanding equality for the unequal), radical feminism (demanding biologically unnatural roles for women), homosexuality (demanding biologically unnatural sexual life styles) and postmodern relativism (demanding a biologically unnatural relativity of values).

What is blocked by the cultural Marxists in the schools and in the media and missing in modern men and women is knowledge of the biological origin of social behavior. Real human nature is biologically kin-centered, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

A true natural rights or civil rights movement would promote an ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, with each ethnostate protected from marauding imperialists, global businesses, supremacists, Marxists, etc., and then protected by a defensive federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states. That is the most humane solution to our deepening identity crisis.

The cultural zoo

The cultural zoo we have today is mainly the result of the attempt to abandon the basic biological origin of social behavior.

Amoral modern technology didn't predict how it would gradually help take away the traditional gender roles of women and men making it possible for either gender to push the button on missiles or robot vacuum cleaners. But the overall attempt to denaturalize the genders does not work any better than the attempts to denaturalize politics, although a lot of damage can be done in the process. There are obvious genetic and hormonal differences between men and women, as well as between different ethnic groups, which certainly influence both gender, ethnic, and cultural behavior.

The rise of cultural Marxism (demanding equality for the unequal), radical feminism (demanding biologically unnatural roles for women), homosexuality (demanding biologically unnatural sexual life styles) and postmodern relativism (demanding a biologically unnatural relativity of values) has led to biologically and culturally diseased societies.

Real genetically-derived human nature contains not only big gender differences, human nature in general remains biologically kin-centered, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

The cultural zoo we live in today does not agree with the reality of the basic biological origin of social behavior.

Wallowing in the luxury of holding up signs saying “Smash the patriarchy”

Being a champion of evolution I am not against new technology but amoral modern technology didn't predict how it would gradually take away the traditional gender roles of women and men, making it possible for either gender to push the button on missiles, or robot vacuum cleaners. Meanwhile modern technology has not changed the basic biology of gender differences which remain as they have been for tens of thousands of years. Sane and rational people know that “men and women have different body structures, sexual systems and biological responses and processes”---only fools and demagogues deny it.

The radical feminist slogans “Smash the patriarchy” and “nasty women make history” are completely contrary to the largely determined (yes determined ) path of human nature and too far away from the biological origin of our social behavior. Human nature has been affirmed throughout human history to this day as being genetically and universally gender defined, as well as being kin-centered and ethnocentric. This has been ignored by the radical feminists and modern liberals.

Equal pay for equal work everyone agrees with, but things get serious when gender equality in the infantry units of the military is promoted, which becomes a real threat to protecting the lives of either gender. It has been made clear from the data gathered that the only way to have women in infantry units is to lower standards. Mixed sex-units were slower at accomplishing tasks than all male units, and musculature-skeletal differences created many more injuries in women than men. That is only a few of the problems that come from denying gender differences.

The present trend of hypertrophied feminism will prevail as long as America and the West don't need territorial defending. When we do, our excellent Special Forces will not be nearly enough in number to defend the West against assertive and aggressive males who hate the West---the Islamic terrorists aren't much bemused by feminism.

The ancient Spartans were wiser than we are in knowing that simplicity, frugality, or avoidance of constant comfort is better than wallowing in the luxury of holding up signs saying “Smash the patriarchy.” And Spartan women were well known to have far more freedom than elsewhere in the Greek world.

The charge of “racism” and “sexism” usually show a complete ignorance of human nature

The charge of “racism” and “sexism” usually show a complete ignorance of human nature. Stereotypes and gender roles and racial/ethic differences between peoples are said to be only social constructions, having nothing to do with biological differences between peoples. But the belief that one sex, gender, or race is intrinsically superior to another is also wrong, we are simply different from one another with different mainly biologically derived talents and abilities.

The biological origin of our social behavior as empirically explained by sociobiology actually ends the sham intellectual charge of racism and sexism. Across history and across the world human nature IS biologically and genetically kin and ethnic centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, territorial, and even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Real human nature can be blocked, subverted, or it can be unknown to us, but it can't legitimately be intellectually or instinctively denied. Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against the biological origin of our social behavior, with such social experiments as postmodernism, Marxism, feminism, and multiculturalism, but the cultures are eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature.

Reason and common sense suggest that real human nature leads naturally to regionalism, localism, and eventully to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected by a defensive federalism. Given who we are this appears to be the best way all of us can optimize the gene expression we inherited from our human ancestors.

Amoral technology and the rise of radical feminism

Futurist's Nick Bostrom worries about artificial super-intelligence and how it will probably be impossible for humans to predict what a 6,455 IQ might do, which is why we have to be on guard regarding artificial super-intelligence. Meanwhile amoral modern technology didn't predict how it would gradually take away the traditional gender roles of women and men, making it possible for either gender to push the button on missiles, or robot vacuum cleaners.

Meanwhile modern technology has not changed the basic biology of gender differences which remains as it has been for tens of thousands of years. There are obvious genetic and hormonal differences between men and women which certainly influence both gender and cultural behavior. The founders of radical feminism were mostly cultural Marxists which biased them toward objecting to the obvious genetically-derived differences between men and women.

Sweden has virtually dropped “He” and “She” (Han and Hon) for the pronoun “Hen”! Gender neutrality is now virtually the state religion. They have a “Minister for Gender Equality” and it is not a Monty Python sketch. Your career can be ruined if you openly object. The government and other institution are legally imposing the the destruction of gender itself. Sweden is not seeking equality it is seeking to erase the male gender!

Equal pay for equal work everyone agrees with, but things get serious when gender equality in the infantry units of the military is promoted, which becomes a real threat to protecting the lives of either gender. It has been made clear from the data gathered that the only way to have women in infantry units is to lower standards. Mixed sex-units were slower at accomplishing tasks than all male units, and musculature-skeletal differences created many more injuries in women than men. That is only a few of the problems that come from denying gender differences.

Real genetically-derived human nature contains not only big gender differences, human nature is biologically kin-centered, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. Feminism, like cultural Marxism, agrees with none of this reality.

I am not anti-technology but what we needed was a futurist like Bostrom to warn us about the damage that would come from technology aiding the rise of intellectually bogus radical feminism, which has been destroying our society. The cultural zoo we have today is mainly the result of the attempt to abandon the basic biological origin of social behavior.

It is not enough to speak only of reviving the spirit of the gentleman and religion

Edmund Burke's writings against the French revolution probably had much to do with saving England from the revolution. He said the spirit of the gentleman and the spirit of religion made the civilization of Europe, which the revolution wanted to tear down. It was also a class or caste thing in England of Burke's time with most gentleman existing in the upper classes.

But how much of that spirit of the gentleman and spirit of religion was genetic in origin, since biology is at the deeper origin of our social behavior? Yes, there is a co-evolution between genes and culture but biology is the hardware, culture is the software. As John Cacioppo said, “The genes are like the keyboard on which the song of life is played, but the pianist is the social environment.”

I see the spirit of the gentleman grounded in the warrior and softened or civilized by religion, almost the way women tend to civilize men. But the balance here is important, go too far taking the warrior out of man and the society is vulnerable to other marauding warriors.

Today what is left of the spirit of the gentleman and the spirit of religion are in the process of being destroyed, again. It is not only an attack similar to the attacks of the French revolution, this time self-immolation or suicide is involved, we are not even breeding faster than we are dying. Europe and America are opening their borders (and thighs) to anyone from anywhere. It's even against the law now in many places to speak of saving the white race.

With the help of radical feminism, minorities, and the cheering leftist Media we have gone too far in taking the man out of man, not realizing or not caring that taking the gentleman warrior out of man leaves us and our societies virtually undefended against men who do not behave like European or American gentleman.

Conservatism should be concerned with conserving the genes of Europe and America which in the deepest sense were responsible for the spirit of the gentleman and the spirit of religion that made the civilization of Europe and America...It is not enough to speak only of reviving the spirit of the gentleman and religion.

Why Marxism, radical feminism, homosexuality, and postmodern relativism eventually lead to biologically and culturally diseased societies

We have to admit that survival success in advanced modern societies is so much easier now than the environments that developed traditional human nature, which evolved because traditional human nature was most successful in survival and reproduction. And so such nontraditional things as Marxism, radical feminism, the promotion of homosexuality, and postmodern relativism can rise with less immediate danger to our survival, at least in the short term.

Human nature as empirically explained by sociobiology remains basically kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection. Even the smallest change in human nature and our DNA structure, for example, in our immune system, took hundreds of thousands of years---although genetic engineering may speed that up.

Even in advanced modern societies where survival is easier, the dangers of Marxism (demanding equality for the unequal), radical feminism (demanding biologically unnatural roles for women), homosexuality (demanding unnatural sexual life styles) and postmodern relativism (demanding an unnatural relativity of values) will eventually lead to biologically and culturally diseased societies.

Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against human nature with such experiments as these but the cultures are eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature, and humans then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living, and very slowly change.

Developing a healthier world compatible with what we actually are as human beings

I don't know exactly where I would create the dividing line between what I call the Age of Warriors and the Age of Nurturing in the West, because the "warrior" remains biologically and genetically the central feature of men, and "nurturing " remains the central feature of women, no matter how much communism, feminism and postmodernism deny this biologically-derived definition of gender differences. Of course men can be nurturing and women can be warriors but that is not the specialty of the genders.

If we begin the Age of Warriors in hunter/gatherer times when deep human nature was evolved, say, a million years ago, give or take, and follow it up to, say, the fall of the Roman Empire around 476, or the end of the Viking age in 1066 AD, that could be called the long orthodox or formal Age of Warriors in the West occupying at least 90 percent of human history. But as I said, since the warrior and the nurturer remain biologically and genetically the central feature of men and women even today, the Age of Warriors never really ended, it was just buried or sublimated by modern culture, especially in the West---with the exception of the voluntary military men who defend the West, in spite of women being inserted into the military.

So does this mean we should go back to an age of tooth and claw and demand ancient wide differences between men and women, or declare one supreme noble or chosen people over all others? In our increasingly crowded world it would bring survival and reproductive disaster to a people who declared such intentions as the rest of the world would gang up on them and destroy them.

What we do need to do is affirm real human nature and the biological origin of our social behavior. The science of sociobiology recently affirmed biologically-derived human nature as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

This suggests that we should reject (I wanted to say shitcan) the communists/socialists/liberals, feminists, and postmodernists for being against real human nature and therefore harmful to life itself. Then we can get on with developing a healthier world compatible with what we actually are as human beings, for example, developing the ethnopluralism of ethnostates often written about in this blog, which is about as equitable as human beings can be given human nature.

On the Golden Globe Awards: Hollywood producers and writers have turned our culture into obscene garbage

While surfing last night I paused at the Golden Globe Awards and I was painfully reminded of how much I loathe Hollywood and the producers of television and film who have turned our culture into obscene garbage. And they have done it not only because the producers and writers are vulgar and talentless but because they purposely wanted to tear down American culture. The one thing these conspirators and betrayers of America are good at is creating cultural destruction and then grabbing what remains of the leftover power.

I especially hate Hollywood and the producers for what they have done to the actresses who we see parading across the stage dressed and acting like street hustlers while chasing fame and fortune controlled by those very same vulgar, talentless, obscene, producers.

Virtually not one healthy thing is promoted by these showbiz rats unless it is a lie, not one thing in politics, art, and not in our corrupted schools; they push only Marxist cultural values while living themselves like organized crime families peddling cultural devastation. Will they, can they, ever be stopped, or do we have to wait until nothing is left of America?

These despicable award shows gleefully poke their dirty fingers in the eyes of the MEGA red hat wearing Trumpians who hate them back with equal passion, but what both may not realize is that those of us who firmly believe in changing things legally and peacefully may not be able to stop the hard rain of fascism on the right or the left from falling.

Let merit rule and have the balls to affirm the social results

Men and women have undeniable different body structures, sexual systems, and biological responses and processes which for many thousand of years naturally separated the functions and roles of men and women---even modern technology which made the independence of women easier has not changed those biological differences.

The main problem with the neo-feminists is their call (really demand) for gender equality when the call should be for MERIT no matter what the gender. The feminist tend to disguise what amounts to a call for female supremacy perhaps so they won't be accused of bigotry against the male gender, which feminism often displays (someone called them feminazis do to their methods of censorship and propaganda). This behavior helps no one.

The same thing applies to Affirmative Action which chooses by race rather then merit. Let merit rule and have the balls to affirm the social results. That is how we make healthy creative societies.

Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against real human nature, with such experiments as feminism and Marxism, but cultures are eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature (eg. an ethnopluralism of ethnostates), and humans then work within and adapt to the environments they find themselves living in.