Once a cheater, always a cheater says Science

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-017-1018-1

And biology.

And common sense.

Like it isn’t a personal defect or a compulsion?

A list of the common ‘Devil made me do it‘s would be funnier.

..I had to? I was drunk? I didn’t know what I was doing? It was one time? It was your fault? If you loved me ___? This is normal? I did nothing?

never trust an r-type

weak pair bonds are literally a defining attribute

Sex and the Narcissist – 2 flavours

The porn addict

https://blogs.psychcentral.com/narcissism/2016/08/sex-the-narcissist-sadism-pt-1/

The manwhore

https://blogs.psychcentral.com/narcissism/2016/08/sex-the-narcissist-sex-addict-pt-2/

I have nothing to add, really.
The former is more likely a male borderline, in my opinion.

It’s about controlling the other person, hurting them, whether it’s setting one-sided ‘rules’ (that make no sense) or defiling them (usually more religious, actually, Madonna/Whore idealization/devaluation at play).

It’s popular to say rape is about power. It isn’t, it’s about pleasure. Sadistic pleasure.

Consensual sex is a power exchange.

Update: The second category isn’t purely a sociopathic thing.
For the second category that isn’t a predator but instead compulsive and lacking in fulfillment, self-control etc…

“Earlier research revealed that 87% of sex addicts were raised in emotionally neglectful families (Carnes, 1998).”
“Generally, sex addiction is an attachment disorder, meaning that the addict is unable to connect with themselves or others, and these patterns were learned in childhood from emotionally neglectful or abusive caregivers.”
from https://blogs.psychcentral.com/childhood-neglect/2017/07/what-no-one-ever-told-you-about-sex-addiction/

I seemed harsh because I was referring to the sexual predators that plague both sexes.
People with real issues need help, professional help.

Asian Immigrants and What No One Mentions Aloud

“often fail to embody the sterling academic credentials they include with their applications, and do not live up to the expectations these universities have for top tier students.
Less delicately put: They cheat.”

We know. We all know. They can’t speak full English, FFS. They can’t reason and inspire the way their personal statement does.

you, an intellectual, might ask: how is this fair to non-Asians?

It isn’t.

educationrealist

To continue my thoughts on college admissions and Asians:

Many people, reading of the clear discrimination against Asians, become all righteous, thinking of those poor, hardworking Asians. Come to America, work hard, and look how the system screws them.

But that reaction ignores the stereotype.

The stereotype, delicately put: first and second generation Chinese, Korean, and Indian Americans, as well as nationals from these countries, often fail to embody the sterling academic credentials they include with their applications, and do not live up to the expectations these universities have for top tier students.

Less delicately put: They cheat. And when they don’t cheat, they game tests in a way utterly incomprehensible to the Western mind, leading to test scores with absolutely zero link to underlying ability. Or both. Or maybe it’s all cheating, and we just don’t know it. Either way, the resumes are functional fraud.

Is it true for…

View original post 3,568 more words

Jolie and genophobia

(hatred of one’s own)

Credit: GSOGM

Credit: GSOGM

Oh, it’s real.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-501284/Angelina-Jolie-My-blonde-haired-natural-daughter-Shiloh-outcast-family.html

Don’t marry a slut and wonder why she fucks you.

Technically she isn’t white, but as you can tell from that article, she despises the blond-haired, blue-eyed white genes she married and used for children.

I’m not saying that’s why the refugees, the divorce and her screwed up daughter who got the trendy idea from someone that she was, in fact, a boy…. but that would explain it, wouldn’t it?

oh damn wow ah

It’s always the people doing Shame on You in public that can’t even keep their own lives in order.

I heard Brad’s been depressed for most of their marriage, or he never would’ve allowed all those exotic drains on his salary, but they’re both cheating slimeballs so who cares?

I don’t think he cheated first, however much I dislike both of them.
I heard they had an open marriage and that was his term for marrying the bitch.
Apparently she’s worse than Leigh in the crazy stakes. All allegedly, of course.

Openly —

Brad Pitt: ‘She’s crazy, but I still love her’
Angelina Jolie: ‘Brad and I drive each other mad’

lara croft woke up this morning hated everything anger rage

relevant gif is relevant

Now she asks for privacy as she drives the knife in because she refused to let him parent her eldest foreign purchase.
http://www.tmz.com/2016/09/22/brad-pitt-child-abuse-investigation/
Never trust an r-type.
http://nypost.com/2016/09/22/brangelina-proves-you-should-never-trust-a-cheater/
“A 2013 survey from the book “The Normal Bar” found that 33 percent of men and 19 percent of women have admitted to being unfaithful at some point in their lives.”

Marion’s French, they don’t think much of monogamy. I find it funny cheats expect their monogamy to be respected.

“A lot of times, cheating has nothing to do with your partner and everything to do with who you are as a person,” Strauss says.

Honestly, both of them are terrible, and I take neither side.
Both cheats, both at least had substance problems, both insufferably vain, it’s karma in action.

As far as child abuse allegations go, read how she calls the blonde one The Blob.

http://gawker.com/227014/angelina-jolie-prefers-hand-picked-refugees-to-blob-of-her-loins

I know it’s Gawker, but once you read it, you’ll see why it’s astounding they, of all people, published this.

R-selected blame genes

Cheating is the opposite of pair bonding. If you can do it, there’s something wrong with you and the honest thing (they can’t be trusted in social relations either) would be to split up before straying.

If you’re a cheat, you aren’t monogamous. Monogamy is a bond. If the bond is broken, there is no relationship.

One minor correction: there is no evolutionary benefit for men cheating.
That is a myth. Based purely on pregnancy odds (actually rape leads to more conception, so that’s a dark path of naturalistic fallacies to argue), not the birth of a child or its own reproductive success (true success).

See Trivers.

In fact, if you look at the evidence?

It reduces reproductive success.

Look at the children of deadbeat fathers for the social proof too.

Family finances and male cheating risk

So maybe the housewife cheating stereotype is based on taking back control?

youbeauty.com/aha/relationships-men-women-money/

When one party has too much power (in the marital dynamic), they take advantage. Financial abuse is rather common, because it controls by limiting the freedom of the other (you can’t leave, you’re so lucky I’m paying the bills, I’m good to you giving you an allowance like a child).
Creepy parental dynamics, people.

So no, we can’t go back to the imaginary model where the man is 100% provider, were that even possible.

R-types = polyandric and K-types = monoandric

Terms by a Russian called Blonsky during the Soviet Era.

We’d nowadays call it the tendency to monogamy and polygamy (andry being replaced perhaps incorrectly).

I’d read the terms before but this feature struck me online (since I can’t link to out-of-print sexology books).

http://samvak.tripod.com/narcissismmisogynism.html

Male narcissists despise the monogamous woman, roughly two-thirds of women, and seek the inferior polyandric, which has narcissistic tendencies too. The narcissist may be understood as a feature of the polyandric mating strategy allowing them to decouple quickly. Presumably, both the misogynist and the misandrist must be polyandric/polygamous.

OT

Repeat marriages were called “consecutive polygamy” by Ellis, an infamous sexologist, but nowadays we call them “serial monogamists” (an oxymoron of a term if ever there was one), as if that’s better. Case study: Trump.

Technically, polygamy refers not to sexual tendency (attraction) but ability. The distasteful fact a person can break their previous pair bond, agreed to be lifelong. It’s considered infidelity in many religions for good reason. Obviously this can’t be enforced in the deceased party, they filled their part, but the widower might be expected to show some fidelity unto death i.e. in celibacy and never remarrying. Divorce isn’t an excuse where death vows are sworn before God and it certainly has nothing to do with evolution of loyalty and innate nature. For example, it’s more likely a husband died in war but a woman died in childbirth. Those cannot be held similar with signing a piece of paper because they don’t put out as often or the neighbour looks better (I believe there’s a whole commandment about that).

In fact, what is perceived as a natural habit of humans to wander sexually makes more evolutionary sense if you think of the life-threatening need to move onto another partner after the death of the previous one. Species that are fully monogamous are genetic dead-ends if one party dies. This isn’t the same as wild, broad indulgence at the expense of provisioning and Trivers’ investment theory has proven men have an adaptive advantage with monogamy, not getting around.