Interpersonal deprivation from single fathers

If you’re going to call out something dysfunctional, nobody gets off scot-free.

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/019251394015001006

Snape is underrated as an inspiration

If modern fathers were so great, their kids wouldn’t be whining on blogs about their bitch of a Mom, there wouldn’t be a criminal element or out-of-wedlock birth rates. Emotionally disturbed children are low fitness. A child is not like a talking dog or a car you can throw in the garage while you continue a Peter Pan bachelor deathstyle.

There aren’t many studies on single fathers because most men are too cowardly to stick around and do the hard work of raising a child they produced, a slight bias in the sample. Naturally, this scorn I heap on doesn’t apply to the widowed or those abandoned without a choice. Indeed, those men are truly courageous and society should support them. Real Patriarchs, great men. Doubly so if they don’t harm the child by re-marriage and commit to the greatest responsibility a person can have, re-marriage is selfish and purely for the parent’s sex life and social status. Look up the Cinderella effect for starters. Gen X onward gave us plenty to study, fake parents fuck you up. The abusive step-father is a cliche.

Single mothers are actually, as implied by studies like these, better-equipped to raise alone (but not ideal and not to be encouraged). Their struggles are largely external and economic, rather than inner psychiatric like the fathers who get easily overwhelmed and murder the children in all the newspaper stories to spite the mother. Scientifically, you would expect this difference from evolution, women have childcare, men have warfare. Questioning either one is pure idiocy. There are dimorphic reasons for this advantage like female empathy, EI, neural responsiveness to a baby’s cries, lower chance of infanticide by far compared to easily frustrated men but socially, women were often widowed after wars. Brothers, uncles and cousins would step in and help past the tender years. Single parents with a ‘support network’ of extended family are completely fine, considering. When compared, it is worse to have a single parent father than a single parent mother. Yet nobody dare say anything.

Accurate gif, terrifyingly accurate

You people make me sick, claiming to care about the children. Stefan is shit-scared of this topic and he discusses almost everything.

But about the ones who choose to neglect their spawn, a form of abuse…

How could you be so selfish to deliberately harm your future children like that, especially after criticizing women for doing the same thing?
I know someone in child psych (academia-famous name) who calls people who deliberately become single parents “monsters” because all the life outcomes and even the kid’s physical health suffer. “How could someone do that on purpose? There are some evil people, they aren’t just little Mini-Mes.”
And it is always about the narcissistic parent. Spend fifteen minutes researching the damage of being raised by one, it’s the template for dysfunction.
They swear off having kids themselves, from spite and we can’t really blame them. If you don’t learn healthy parenting in a dual-unit healthy household united by a strong marriage with no cheating (distrust is the killer), it’s difficult to come back from. It’s like bargain-basement child-rearing, also, why are people trying to make this one thing so cheap? This is the one thing you don’t want to cheap out on. Nothing else in your life matters. If you wouldn’t die for your child, don’t have one.
They, that neglectful type, have the nerve to then complain about women fobbing off kids to daycare and nannies, oh, so they won’t do any less than 100% of the childcare, all by themselves? Right?

No room to move on that standard?

The narcissism of small differences is aptly named.

Having children is bigger than marriage. If you won’t get married, you can’t handle kids. If you want to inflict the cold world of rootless parenting into a child’s life, please get sterilized, it’s for the best. Those parents end up hating the child once they realize the hard way what it’s about. You can’t return them to the store or dump them like a girlfriend.

The mental issues are caused by being taken care of by strangers and an absentee or inferior parent. These guys are never dedicated. They love their drinking buddies more. Seriously.

Children take up all your time, even bathroom time. They couldn’t babysit for a week, I’d bet money. Solo, no help, for a week, none of them wanna do it. So much for being alpha and taking responsibility, lol. If it’s so easy, if it isn’t hard work, get paid for it?

They’re little children themselves, they cannot handle it. Most deny what it takes.

That means only part-time work max, no nights out, no business conventions and no holidays. Like, ever. No holidays. Considering how many of these guys complain about freedom, it’s a little like they’re locking themselves into a Houdini straitjacket. Plus chunky padlocks.

The good parents aren’t online saying how easy it is. No good parent says it’s easy. Those are outside observers or the shit ones.

This is with two parents and a marital support. Everything comes second to kids, especially companies: you are no longer an individual when you have dependents.

https://www.inc.com/jeremy-bodenhamer/5-lessons-that-saved-my-marriage-after-my-startup-almost-killed-it.html

Not to mention, surrogates have pitiful quality genes. National IQ India: 82.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-surrogate-mothers-india/surrogate-mothers-in-india-unaware-of-risks-idUSKBN0LY1J720150302

“Babies from multiple pregnancies are more likely to be premature or have cerebral palsy or learning disabilities”

When Tanderup asked doctors if they told surrogate mothers how many embryos they transfer, one answered: “No, we never ask them and they are not even informed how many are going to be transferred. They are illiterate, uneducated girls.”

Clinics typically reduce the number of fetuses according to commissioning parents’ wishes. A lethal solution is injected into unwanted fetuses around week 10 of pregnancy.

Then there’s your children you murdered for being inconvenient. Turns out, men can get abortions too!

Nobody says a fucking thing.

Last month Thailand outlawed surrogacy services for foreigners following several scandals, including an Australian couple that allegedly abandoned a baby with Down syndrome with his Thai mother but took his healthy twin home with them.

thatsjustsickewwtfgrossno

When you mix chocolate with shit, it all becomes shit. Don’t be shocked if it’s retarded, and I wonder if you’d indulge in the 24/7 round the clock care required?

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tog.12010/full

I don’t think so.

[And yes, the risk of birth defects and disabilities skyrockets with artificial methods. The fact they didn’t look this up, first page Google-tier, doesn’t surprise me. They’re low IQ.]

Parents must cooperate, Trivers researched why and even proved it mathematically. Children need a balance of their influences. And if you think girls or boys are innately inferior, you don’t deserve to breed. I ask the men planning on using a surrogate, what happens if you have a little girl? You understand nothing about little girls. Great way to make a lesbian, though. Look up role model theory.

Unless you’re going to cross-dress and roleplay the feminine influence too?

Male beauty = good genes

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1690211/

Please, stop denying this. It isn’t very red pill of you.

There’s sufficient text there to see it’s a concrete connection – not limited to symmetry, not vanishing upon single-side presentation, please stop denying this. It’s getting difficult to watch.

Full paper because there’s always that one guy where you can tell what he looks like through the screen, like a fat acceptance activist.

https://scheib.faculty.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/89/2015/05/1999_scheibetal.pdf

Just because they’re scared to use the word beauty in connection to men doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist, insecure men are worse than SJWs sometimes.

These studies ain’t hard to find.

You manosphere types are just lyin’.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11487409

Symmetry is actually a misnomer, since symmetry is a feature of feminine beauty.

It was recently proposed that symmetry is not a primary cue to facial attractiveness, as symmetrical faces remain attractive even when presented as half faces (with no cues to symmetry).

This is the issue with treating the sexes as the same, especially in evo studies?!?!???

Here, we use real and computer graphic male faces in order to demonstrate that (i) symmetric faces are more attractive, but not reliably more masculine than less symmetric faces and (ii) that symmetric faces possess characteristics that are attractive independent of symmetry, but that these characteristics remain at present undefined.

I don’t see men arguing we must study this for equality’s sake. [but we should]

They seem to prefer ignorance.

Harder to lie about your alpha genes when it’s literally written on your face.*
Deep down, they know. That’s why so many ‘players’ get plastic surgery.

But women are fake, right, guys?

*again, alpha is a pair and a breeding couple, not an individual, it refers to a social rank

Female fertility doesn’t encourage cheating

Moving on to correct an old, old error. I’m sick of seeing it. I went out of my way to find the citation to do this.

There’s one study still going round, being cited, that is absolute bull.

No, women aren’t likelier to cheat when fertile. What sort of Lilith shit is this?

Quite the opposite.

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/haselton/webdocs/EHB.pdf
It’s been debunked, for many years.

If you can’t read/understand beyond the abstract.

“Women’s desire for their own partners did not differ significantly between high and low fertility sessions”.

This happened when they actually tested what was only suggested (to get published) in the previous study, that has never been replicated.

If anything high fertility makes her more interested in her mate, which matches literally all the evobio on the topic, including Trivers and the fact that overwhelmingly most fathers are the biological fathers of their children. The exception is a forced match (arranged marriage) to an inferior male, see last post on ugly men. Sexual selection will occur in women, before or after nuptials, get used to it. Naturally, men denying that looks have anything to do with sexual attraction (LOL) will continue to ignore the most important variable in Darwinian theories – your genes.

Where you can go back to Peterson’s bollocks and choke on all his little blue pills.

Divorce risk factors

http://emorywheel.com/professors-study-marriage-economics/

Diamonds aren’t the problem, it’s the premium pricing that’s the problem.
People are living longer than ever, we need harder rocks.

It’s easy to find cheap, good quality diamonds and arrange a setting for the stone.

Husband/wife is a status.

Status-obsessed materialists (who want to get married but not be married) tend to divorce more because of the narcissism, and overt narcs tend to pair up with covert ones.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/understanding-narcissism/201712/how-the-3-types-narcissists-act-first-date

Once the money is gone, the spark fizzles out.

The study also found a correlation between marriage age and duration, which Francis wrote are positively related, meaning the older the person was when he or she got married, the longer the marriage was likely to last.

Maturity, waiting for the hormones to settle and personality to crystallize, few societies in history married off someone younger than 21-25, outside times of war (Regency, American Independence) but then only for re-population purposes, knowing it was less than ideal.

Another notable finding was that the larger differences in age and education between husbands and wives were associated with a higher risk of divorce,

Assortative mating wins again.

College IQ men marrying high-school IQ women is dysgenic.

 as was reporting that looks were important in marriage.

Vain men, bad husbands. As soon as she gets a little wrinkle, his “love” dies.

Evil people confuse lust with love. When the lust is spent, they claim to fall “out” of love. There is no falling “out” of true love, you can only be betrayed and detach. The love doesn’t go anywhere.

Marriage will get less expensive when it becomes more common.
As it is, only rich people can afford to marry.

That’s right, classism again.

Social media would make it a little gimmicky.

Abolishing no-fault divorce and making it hard (or impossible) to re-marry after a set N times would make people respect the institution again, nothing less will work.

Really, our era has the term “starter marriage” – nothing else will work.

If society didn’t get rid of rites of passage for both sexes, the social value of over-spending on a wedding would plummet. For women, debutante balls were important. Now the expense is carried over into bridal models.

Great man or great force?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/augustturak/2013/04/10/8-lessons-from-the-great-man-or-woman-school-of-leadership/#6c9d9a762b4b

The latter completely ignores all of psychology’s findings.
Talk about anti-science, might as well call it Satan’s influence.
And since when has the ambition lauded in the Bible become empty vanity? Surely they are opposites? The first looks like something little but has a lot going on, the second the reverse.

Ambition isn’t a dirty word. I think the bulk of virtue signalling is just misspent ambition by people who find it too explicitly self-interested and capitalist.

Sociology is considered inferior for a reason, it hardly proves anything. It’s mostly fairytales of Will O’ Wisps, haunting looming forces that insidiously infect us while we sleep.

I can understand you’d think there’s no such thing as genius since some pen-pusher has replaced it with pieces of paper that are basically IOUs of Trust us, this guy is good! but the fact remains there are rare humans who can do things the others cannot.

And Einstein was more creative plagiarist than genius. Before he worked in the patent office (at the lowest level, clerk) he had fuck-all ideas. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch.

He’s the Kim Kardashian of the genius world, famous for his hair.
And that one controversial photo.
Tesla discussed Einstein’s theories before he could hold a pencil.