Empathy in dating women

Higher EQ, maybe listen.

Guys, Here’s What It’s Actually Like To Be A Woman

Plenty of this is factually false like calling hook-ups “short term mating” to feel less like a manwhore, when that term refers to producing children, from a brief courtship, then abandonment and nothing else. Hence the mating part. It also assumes a man can understand women when you’d never see this article written the other way around, women are too sensitive to be that obnoxious. However, the physical risk is medical and true. Anyway, the fact it exists shows up a huge problem men used to understand: modern men lack empathy. They’re broken on it, defective in feeling and displaying it. They don’t even care for their country, family, one another or themselves. There’s a general callousness. It doesn’t come from women.

Minor note: Scientific misogyny is actually worse, because it deceives (everyone). Using big words and bluffing the findings won’t make you right. We still don’t live in that world. Anyone saying it’s easy doesn’t understand.

Women don’t really discuss their everyday problems because they are so common.

Either we expect to get disbelieved, told we should adopt male feelings (we’re not gay and that’s actually a good category argument for mansplaining) or the ever-present fear of harm. Not just physical harm but reputation damage (men gossip and it is vindictive), emotional harm from insults because broflake throws a mantrum and can’t handle rejection, those sort of things.

Confidence isn’t what they want, they want to act conceited and have everyone roll out the red carpet for their entitled ass. It doesn’t happen, narcissistic rage does. Do you want to be on the receiving end of that, for the crime of having a nice ass?

If it’s so scary to talk to the opposite sex (no), you wouldn’t do it. Nobody is forcing you. That’s your gender role and your personal expectations, nothing to do with women. Don’t blame us. We don’t want strangers coming up to us, and in my culture it used to be partially illegal and socially deeply frowned upon. Edwardian women used to be able to beat men with umbrellas for insulting our dignity, there was one newspaper clipping, and they’d frequently wear those gigantic hat pins to stab men on the Transport who got too fruity. Self-defence, legal as a gun should be.

The expectation women should think like men and men are objectively correct on the wholly subjective subject of feelings (not to mention another autonomous human being’s, the definition of possessive) is the reason a lot of those dating guru types are forever alone. Not just single but actively repellent. It’s gaslighting, like the friendzone fraud who keep trying to repeat until she gives in: you want me, I’m best for you, you’ll never do better. Well, that’s her decision and considering you only want her body, you’re averse to putting a ring on it and all you wanna do is bad things to it, you are totally wrong on all counts.

Women don’t work like that.

Again, I have to painstakingly explain this every time the subject of women comes up, you cannot ask a man how women think and assume he’s correct, you can’t even do that with a single woman, there’s a range of normal. Anecdotal fallacy, please stop.

Women don’t work like that.

They are not the same.

This is good, this is fine, this is biological.

Yet the idiots claim women are just as lustful as men, if not more (ignore the rarity of male hookers) and cannot be trusted (look at abuse and crime stats, just look).

With exceptional cognitive dissonance, they go on to say women are aliens and need to be treated in various subhuman ways because it isn’t abuse if they secretly like it, according to the abuser?

On a purely intellectual and logical basis, they are full of shit.
That’s the mindset and behaviour of a misogynist (and yes, the sexes reverse).
Simplest explanation? Occam’s Razor?
The men who are bad with women never consider the fact the entire sex is seeing them clearly and they are in fact bad. Bad prospects, bad at being men and bad suitors. We evolved for this, we evolved to spot this and swerve. All that shit you complain about, the coldness to a total stranger, lying about having a boyfriend, fake numbers and names, the flaking, it’s to get enough distance so by the time the rejection kicks in you can’t kick us. This is good and sensible and right, you’re a spoiled entitled brat if you expect random women to just trust you, randomly. Trust takes years to develop. Instead they say whatever’s convenient to their feelings (actually ego, they don’t really have feelings that aren’t self involved), because the probability of getting punched by a man you rejected (it happens) is totally the same as hearing a word you needed to hear a long time ago and will never take for an answer.

If you don’t respect no, you’ll never hear a real Yes.

This is your fault, as instigator and then disrespecting the etiquette involved in trying to chat someone up.

In an era of acid attacks for rejection and shootings for pathetic scum like Elliot, women are right to avoid men until further notice. Nobody is entitled to approval. Nobody is entitled to respect, but in public, there is a line, there is a wall everybody deserves to be respected, the perimeter of personal space.

Women approaching other women in public is weird and even that isn’t sexual. We made it illegal for charity workers to harass us in public so no, Nice Guy act won’t work.

Women are not like porn. Porn stars themselves need to be paid to act like that. Even they aren’t like that. You’d think this is obvious, but no.

They never treat men like dirt by the way, because they know they’d get hit if they talked all that shit.

If women catch onto this intellectually, there’s apparently something wrong with us.

Nope, you all look dumb, and it’s nothing to do with us. Stop acting black and pull your pants up.
They never mention all those workplace deaths are typically hubris.
Better known as vainglory.

Look at the long term mate choice studies.
What do women want? Empathy. (Search terms conscientiousness and agreeableness, yes, ALL women, huge studies).

What do you refuse to develop? Empathy. You have only yourselves to blame and no, a ‘condition’ doesn’t change the facts. You can develop coping mechanisms to be considerate, you just don’t want to, you don’t see the point. Aspergers for example, is about as bad as sociopathy. We don’t have to sign up for that. You are not a child to mind. You need the basics down.

What do people have in scant amounts for you? Empathy. They can sense you don’t give a shit about them so why bother? It’s the golden rule, not that you’re smart enough to see the flipside, making rape jokes and wondering why nobody trusts you don’t spike your drinks.

Update: See this guy?

https://www.indy100.com/article/woman-summed-up-why-men-never-understand-female-twitter-flowers-address-7987681

Don’t be this guy. The one pretending a creepy man is just being ‘nice’.
Why are the dumbest men so cocky? What are you feeding them America?

The one completely missing the point that stalkers can and do rape and kill. A gay man should’ve asked for comparison.

Which causes more damage in society, the errant pen or the stupid penis?

Male narcissism and misogyny

https://blogs.psychcentral.com/recovering-narcissist/2017/09/are-male-narcissists-also-misogynists/

So many studies, so little patience.

Yes, a core trait of inferiority.

https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2017/07/24/link-inferiority-the-opposite-of-genius/

It isn’t a complex, if it’s a fact.

Logically, you cannot feel threatened by an outgroup if you are secure. So either they are insecure or lying about who’s the superior sex. Bears don’t have to tell racoons they’re bigger.

Link: Is the Gender War driven by women or Jews?

https://www.darkmoon.me/2016/feminism-a-jewish-psyop-to-demonize-white-women/

And still, in the comments, men denying responsibility for their own actions, including omission, while women are to blame for things that happened decades or centuries ago.

Sure.

But men lead, right?

Stop with the false dichotomies, dammit.

Men vs Women IS the SJW paradigm of Gender Wars. To destroy both.

To destroy both by pitting either one against the other.

So women against men.

Equally bad as men against women.

Speak the truth and shame the Devil.

They now admit this goal with ‘gender is over’ and ‘gender is dead’ and everyone as androgynous propaganda. They admit it and supposed red-pill men cover their ears because… a white woman is talking.

Do you even want women to exist?

If your first impulse to “women are harassed” is to harass them, they’re right!

Yeah, we’re not aligned at all because you’re clearly not on our side and do actually hate us. Actions > Words. It’s a modicum of basic human decency, simple respect for libertarian humanity. At least the feminists pretend to listen and pretend to care.

Les Dame Blanches, at your service. If women were devils, we wouldn’t be having this conversation because your mother would’ve aborted you. How about you equally divide the expectations and standards between parents, rather than Blame Mommy (Figures) Forever, which is no more complex than the Sexual Revolution’s counterpart.

Independent people aren’t so bloody entitled. We aren’t mummy or whore. You aren’t daddy or bank account. Welcome to adulthood. All those layers of capital – social, intellectual, emotional, erotic, financial, are signs of success and maturity, not hypocritical.

Who are you going to reproduce with? And if you don’t want to reproduce, you don’t really get an opinion. You’re as anti-natal as the Pill-pushers but I guess it’s the narcissism of small differences.

Misogyny is very simple to describe in practice: blaming women for everything bad.

That’s pagan, that’s Pandora.

(This also works reversed, duh).

Simple question: are women easily led and can we be led astray?

That’s the question about whether it’s possible.

This is being logical.

Try swallowing – your pride. You are probably at least a little bit wrong on any huge subject.

The fake male co-founder

https://www.fastcompany.com/40456604/these-women-entrepreneurs-created-a-fake-male-cofounder-to-dodge-startup-sexism

That is one interesting social experiment.

To state the obvious.

Misogynistic men only trust other men with their money.

It’s wrong but they have every right, because it’s their money.

The Chinese rent white men for their privilege.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/06/29/china.rent.white.people/index.html

Studies have shown competence is assumed where it is undeserved.

Blame stock images IDK.

Such men consistently over-estimate their competence.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-28/confessions-of-a-confident-mediocre-man/8562708

Surely it’s the arrogance effect? In the modern world we call this vice a virtue.

“a natural tendency to overrate their past performance on maths tasks by 30 per cent”

It’s terrifying how many men rate themselves as good at maths and then I have to explain 12yo level shit.

This finding is old. There are also far more compulsive liars in the male group, which somewhat explains it. In their minimizing terms, this is bluffing, like lying on a CV (illegal).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

OLD.

These people are the reason we blind exams. These people.

Like Is she flirting? studies all over again. Men don’t really do meta-cognition, by comparison.

This is why we have all the psychometrics. Either you can do it or GTFO.

The masculine traits are the capitalist ones: taking risks, being rude or arrogant, stepping on others, ruthless ambition, Crusaderism, many that are probably antisocial if not tempered by other stuff.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12848221

“A meta-analysis of 45 studies of leadership styles showed that women tend to exhibit many of the character traits associated with effective leadership — such as effective communication, a tendency to empower subordinates, and creative problem solving — and are more likely to adopt effective leadership styles than men.”

They’re selecting the cocky guy who relies on underlings to do his work for him. No wonder so many companies are tanking. Everyone, male or female, hates them. They’re drains, they parasite off the productive. A minority in every group or company do the bulk of the work, remember.

The problem is seeing masculinity as successful without anything to back it up on the project.

We need to upgrade our primal brain that says this man is leading us into battle.

Another part of the problem is seeing everything as gendered.

So there’s no Scientists trying to make the world a better place. Yay!

There’s male scientists trying to make the world a better place.

….

OK, everyone else go home and fuck the cure for cancer?

Like, what do you hope to achieve here? Rah-rahing your pompoms for part of the group?

Why do they have to do that? Ruin everything?

Supposedly, accounting for this bias statistically (with mathematical models and quotas) makes companies more efficient and meritocratic.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/workplace-gender-quotas-incompetence-efficiency-business-organisations-london-school-economics-lse-a7797061.html
“Quotas can work to weed out incompetent men.”

Everyone should be overjoyed by that.

Less stupid people with power, who cares if they have a banana or fig down there?
You’d have to be really insecure to identify strongly with someone who shares a single pair of chromosomes.

HBR has noted incompetent men being promoted on the basis of bravado is an issue for companies.
https://hbr.org/2013/08/why-do-so-many-incompetent-men
Bravado and popularity over actual performance metrics.

http://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/men-and-women-biased-about-studies-stem-gender-bias-opposite-directions/
“The new study’s authors reasoned that men especially might devalue the evidence because it threatens the legitimacy of their status in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields. Men might also be critical because of prior beliefs that gender bias is not a problem in STEM.”
But they’re proving any bias by believing that female competence is a fairytale.
Those women take exactly the same exams.
Oh, it hurts their ego? Broflakes.

“Men rated the research quality of the abstract less favorably than did women in both samples. This gender gap was especially large for STEM faculty, potentially suggesting that evidence of bias might threaten men in STEM seeking to retain their status.”
“When reading these results, a male scientist might think, “oh my gosh…if we’re going to fix this equality issue, that almost necessarily means that there’s going to be fewer opportunities for men,” said Ian Handley, lead author of the new PNAS paper and associate professor of psychology at Montana State. Handley suggested that discounting evidence more likely reflects a subtle, unconscious process than overt sexism.”
Read Freud, there’s no subtle.
They just lie about it.
The depressing thing is that STEM helps everyone and there’s literally a shortage of talent.
We can’t afford to lose any talent.
People who took it for the money though, can fuck right off.

“This mixed literature tempers the paper’s claims about strong gender bias. But obviously, the paper’s central goal was not to systematically review literature on gender bias, but rather to present studies of reactions to evidence of bias.”
“Based on the best current data, remaining challenges include sexual harassment, bias in teaching evaluations and science mentoring, and gender stereotypes about innate genius and creativity.”
That last one is part of the Genius Famine.

Women can’t be the ‘crazy’ sex and also suddenly the less creative one when studies show they’re linked.

“The new PNAS study shows that men, on average, are less likely to believe this evidence of gender bias where it exists. And that’s a concern, considering men are the current majority of STEM professors. But it’s also a concern if the evidence of gender bias is overhyped. Overhyped claims could make these fields unattractive to women or even make people less likely to believe evidence of bias when it does exist.”

Be honest in science, the musical.

Link: Men explain things to me

https://www.guernicamag.com/rebecca-solnit-men-explain-things-to-me/

I did have a post explaining the real features of mansplaining but I need to find it to post it. At least I doubt I posted it. It’s hard to keep track. This will be blunt for the spergs.

You’re not holding court if the other party hates you and wants to leave.

I have never seen a woman do it. We keep out. It seems a male feature, especially a bitchy gamma male type. Internet bitch fights between guys. Think the atheist talking about sky fairies when nobody asked.

When men do it to other men, which is uncommon, they’re just called jerks.
There should really be a term for this behaviour though.

It’s toxic, it’s antisocial and it’s ignorant to think a conversation is an excuse to chop the other party down.
You can say someone’s wrong if you think, but there’s a respectful adult, mature way, and then the way where you make them never want to speak to you again and act like it’s their fault you’re an ass.

Also a favourite with the guys who complain of being friendzoned. They’re normally not friends but acquaintances.
I insult her! I demean her! I disrespect her! Why won’t she date me? I’m such a Nice Guy!

Really they’re passive aggressive and blow hot and cold while thinking they’re being smouldering and mysterious.

One of the assumptions is that a woman, despite credentials, has no idea what she’s talking about (even as she’s teaching you the thing, thereby proving it) or randomly invalidating their opinion purely because they’re a woman (that’s just sexist, like when SJWs dismiss men on that basis).

Opinions don’t need to be right.

 

So the bloviating moron just rattles off his opinion like a fact glibly and expects the presumably ditzy girl to be sexually impressed. And that’s the worst part, they think cocky is sexy.

No woman fancies House.

None.

Have you noticed that?

…Why do you do this?

It’s the shittiest flirting tactic known to man.

Look how smart I am! they think they’re signalling.

Look how obnoxious I can be! women see.

You are not at work and you’re not the boss there either, so you couldn’t bully people like that at work. If you did bully work inferiors, they’d leave. If you’re mean when you’re trying to be ‘nice’ on first meeting, imagine what an asshole they think you are once they get to know you, who wants to? Really it’s the bottom rungs of men who do this because negative attention is better than none, they’re already unattractive but this makes it hard to look past because there isn’t even inner beauty or some sympathy.

Woman thinks:

Why should I be nice and carry you in this conversation? Next!

It’s this alpha posturing BS going round. The old term for this? False bravado.

It’s fake as those thots’ nails. Pretending it’s about the intellect doesn’t make you less superficial than a guy in a tight tank top, you’re still being vain. It’s a false image of leadership. Who is inspired by catty comments?

There’s a sexual element where it’s like negging but instead of appearance or something superficial like a laugh or posture, they’re dehumanizing you. It’s the dehumanization part that rings true to regular, non-SJW women and made this such a Thing, thanks to EQ. I’ve had men on here try to deny women’s EQ when there are plenty of studies, since the idea of women being good/better at anything triggers them to their tiny fragile peanut balls, but then go on to say women are too sensitive. ….like -how? How does your brain keep you alive when it’s so dumb?

They’re patronizing but in doing so, demonstrating their stupidity. If the woman defends herself, let alone fighting fire with fire? He gets really offended and maybe calls her a sexist bitch.

ugh.

You don’t take the time (SQ) to explain something for free only for the ingrate to turn around and begin implying that, because they don’t like what you say, you have no right to say it.. also because you have tits. Ironically they talk about freedom of speech constantly…. yeah, they just mean their speech. So you can’t punch them for being jerks….

That was April 2008 and it struck a chord.  It still seems to get reposted more than just about anything I’ve written at TomDispatch.com, and prompted some very funny letters to this site. None was more astonishing than the one from the Indianapolis man who wrote in to tell me that he had “never personally or professionally shortchanged a woman” and went on to berate me for not hanging out with “more regular guys or at least do a little homework first,” gave me some advice about how to run my life, and then commented on my “feelings of inferiority.”

Don’t be this guy.

If it’s something a nosy old woman might say, don’t.
Hearing something you don’t like isn’t a personal insult.

Don’t make it personal.

He thought that being patronized was an experience a woman chooses to, or could choose not to have–and so the fault was all mine. Life is short; I didn’t write back.

the way someone else speaks to you is THEIR fault

they are the responsible one for their tongue

even being wrong isn’t a provocation

it’s a learning opportunity

a bonding opportunity

or maybe that’s my EQ talking

not a bitchy high horse shade-throwing competition

cause?

straight men are acting gay

to attract women

it puts off women

homosexual men do this

that’s why they do it

they always did this

look at Oscar Wilde!

Young women subsequently added the word “mansplaining” to the lexicon. Though I hasten to add that the essay makes it clear mansplaining is not a universal flaw of the gender, just the intersection between overconfidence and cluelessness where some portion of that gender gets stuck.

arrogance

empty arrogance

nothing between the ears

literally no self-awareness, like, autistic levels but no autism

It’s like being nagged but about something you don’t need to do, by someone who acts like they know you and has no idea what they’re talking about. They seek you out and maybe corner you and trap you with a question to make it look less like bullying.

to the sincere fools:

you can’t banter until there’s a bond

Busybodies is too archaic a term. The worst were crotchety old men. At least the women would feed you and it wasn’t about sex.

The funniest are when any woman who uses this word gets mansplained by a broflake guy who says he’s never seen or done it.

It’s a thing you do, that’s why the word is used.
It just isn’t always directed at women, but when it is, there’s a significantly patronizing power dynamic imbalancing tone, regardless of the actual status of individuals involved.

The other cause? Smartphones.

They can’t hold a conversation anymore, we blame the internet.

Then there’s the sociopathic nutjobs-

On two occasions around that time, I objected to the behavior of a man, only to be told that the incidents hadn’t happened at all as I said, that I was subjective, delusional, overwrought, dishonest–in a nutshell, female.

That’s misogyny and gaslighting.

You are woman, therefore must be <character insult>, it’s defamation.
Men used to hold their tongue in days of dueling.

The craziest ones you’ll ever see think they’re playing Freud and can sit judging all women as inferior because they imagine a fetish of theirs, daddy issues (plot twist: because they have the daddy issues) and begin seeing insanity or dishonesty everywhere… because they need a shrink themselves. Put down the schoolgirl/teacher porn!

Men explain things to me, still. And no man has ever apologized for explaining, wrongly, things that I know and they don’t.

that’s the virtue of humility

let me end with

Surely one of these men has died of embarrassment, but not nearly publicly enough.

Link: Gaslighting in marriage – why it’s wrong

It isn’t purely men that do this but in a marriage, I’ve never heard of a woman doing it.

https://blogs.psychcentral.com/relationships/2016/01/20-situations-in-which-men-gaslight-women/

Those ‘redpill husbands’ claiming this is prosocial domination are covering for their antisocial, divorce-causing behaviour.

In a 1998 study of 130 newlywed couples designed to explore predictors of divorce or marital stability, marriage researcher and author Dr. John Gottman and colleagues, labeled this observed behavior of husbands — as “bat-em-back” — due to the force with which husbands automatically acted to cut off any attempts of wives to influence. To the researchers, this intentional behavior was likened to that of a baseball player at the plate, ever ready to “bat” a home run.

This and subsequent studies found that a husband’s “refusal to accept influence from his wife” — in effect, gaslighting — is highly predictive of divorce. On the bright side, findings also showed that a husband’s “acceptance of influence from his wife” is even more predictive of a stable and happy marriage.

Essentially he’s depriving her of her role, refusing to allow her to support him.
Well, if you didn’t want support, why aren’t you single?
If you hate the feminine, why legally and spiritually bind yourself to it?

Are the abusers honest about this fact? No.
Never. They’d lose control. You cannot cooperate with someone who wants to destroy you.
They don’t care about the marriage bond and they certainly don’t care about the other spouse.
In Biblical terms, they are letting the team down on the cherish part of the vow.

Naturally, the problem here is not male partners, rather the social conditioning that trains men to anxiously feel they have to prove masculinity on the basis of how different they are from women — and in general that means avoiding the “soft” stuff their female partners want, such as romance, nonsexual touch, doing things she wants or likes (without feeling emasculated), etc.

Anyone who does that whipped sound, you can tell they’re bad with women.
Love is a verb. Do or do not do.

Culturally speaking, we don’t trust that a baby boy will grow to become a man in the same way that an acorn becomes an oak tree. We expect men to be on guard throughout their lives to prove they are the “real” thing, and not “sissies” or “gay” and the like. And men’s fears are real; everyone is “watching,” male and female, ready to shame them to get back on track. (This shaming has intensified in last two decades.)

As Ali notes, gaslighting is a result of social conditioning rooted in a set of beliefs regarding gender roles and masculinity, such as that:

  • Women’s opinions don’t hold as much weight.

  • Women’s wants should not be treated as legitimate.

  • Men should never express regret when their actions have caused pain.

aka psychopath

Who doesn’t want to live with a psycho?

Geez, no wonder they divorce the bastard.

If they really believed any of those false beliefs, they would never, ever marry.
They’d rather die on the end of a shotgun.

I don’t think the men who do this realize – if we brought back fault-divorce, men would lose because dissolution is normally their fault. It’s a failure of EQ on their part. That’s also why they refuse therapy, they don’t want to change, like a toddler. They’d rather hurt/weaken or lose the spouse.

“Hamstering” explained as bullshit;

Because women are conditioned to collaborate and empathize, this tactic can send a woman’s brain into an exhaustive wheel-spinning mode of explaining, complaining, crying, begging, pleading, etc. (and women’s socialization leaves them more susceptible …),  and deceive a man’s brain into making several false, misleading (and unfortunate) conclusions.

Victim blaming, hilarious. Note that they’re fine around normal people though. It’s mere proximity to the loser who feels the need to throw around diagnoses like a Munchausen by Proxy (Woe is me because of them) that’s the real issue.

For one, they interpret the effectiveness of this thought control tactic to silence their partner’s voice as “proof” of men’s superiority, rightful dominance, strength and intelligence compared women’s, etc., and thus get tricked into relying on a tactic that harms their relationship, and gradually pushes their partner away.

They crave attention, spew bullshit, get what they wanted – but it’s the woman’s fault?
Amazing magic trick.
The dumbass doesn’t know he’s conditioning women not to provide him affection.

That’s a level of retard I’ve never seen.

In truth, gaslighting is a major obstacle to forming a healthy, vibrant couple relationship — emotional intimacy. For most female partners, for example, a failure to build emotional intimacy often means a gradual loss of interest in sex.

Literally the manosphere.

Women don’t want me – how is this their fault?

But while discussing their relationships, you can never, ever talk about them.

Guess the common factor.

Guess the problem.

Link: Inferiority: the opposite of genius

http://paulcooijmans.com/genius/inferior.html

I don’t expect those who pretend to care about the IQ dearth to read around.
I post these things for the intellectually honest.

Hating women

It may seem strange to include this specific form of hatred with the list, but a fact is that many inferiors have a deep hatred of women, which makes it a characteristic of inferiority.

If we’re examining personality traits of inferiors, it is completely valid as a behavioural marker.

Just as with geniuses, most inferiors are men. The ultimate in this are feats like the burning of widows, or demanding women to spend their lives indoors or walk six metres behind their husband, covered from head to toe with their genitals cut up beyond all repair.

In addition, rape is standard behaviour of inferiors, typically resulting in the conception of multiple children with many different women. Relevant in this respect is that imprisoned males in Western countries conceive more children than do males on average, mirroring the phenomenon that in primitive hunter-gatherer societies the males with the most offspring – as confirmed by modern D.N.A. studies – are those who have made the greatest number of kills in tribal warfare.

Uncivilized breeders who can’t cooperate to literally save their lives, sound like any type of selection we know?

Don’t hate me cos you ain’t me.
https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2015/11/07/estrogen-boosts-brainpower-actually/
“We feel more stress, but we cope better. This explains how we put up with stupid men.”

It’s useful to define a thing by NOT, in computing as in people.

It’s logical that if they didn’t hate, they couldn’t rape. It’s selected for, but let’s not go naturalistic fallacy and pretend a First World society can stand for it.

Intelligent people are capable of working with those they dislike without wanting to brain them and drag them back to the cave. Something about not being a monster.

The ‘trick’ to redpill is to accept things you don’t like because reality won’t change.