HPV in the brain

Yes, in.

http://www.miriamgrossmanmd.com/say-its-not-so-hpv-in-the-brain/

“We know that HPV can cross the placenta and infect the fetus. In one study, this happened in over twelve per cent of women with HPV.”

As always it’s the innocent who suffer.
The sins of the father…

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+34%3A7&version=ESV

“keeping steadfast love for thousands,[a] forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.”

And before you think I’m man-hating, no.

It’s the data.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/half-adult-males-carry-hpv
“The virus notorious for causing cervical cancer in women also turns up frequently in men and can hang on unnoticed for months or even years, researchers report online March 1 in Lancet. The study solidifies earlier research indicating that human papillomavirus is highly prevalent in men and strengthens the case for vaccinating men and boys against it, the report’s authors say.”

Imagine my shock.

“The study, in the Annals of Internal Medicine, found that 11 million men and 3.2 million women in the United States had oral HPV infections. Among them, 7 million men and 1.4 million women had strains that can cause cancers of the throat, tongue and other areas of the head and neck.”
“The rate was higher among men who also had genital HPV. (Almost half of men aged 18 to 60 have a genital HPV infection, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.)”

TLDR?

It’s a male-carried disease.
By far (that was a 5:1 male to female ratio, deny it).

7/1.4=5 for the illiterates at home.

https://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv-and-men.htm
The penile cancer risk for men goes unmentioned. Some informed consent, right? Feel empowered yet?
No, there is currently no approved test for HPV in men.”
Routine testing (also called ‘screening’) to check for HPV or HPV-related disease before there are signs or symptom, is not recommended by the CDC”
They want the men to spread it.

Back to the original doctor.

This is major news, and I’m wondering – why no headlines about it? There were no press conferences with Dr Crino, and no statements from SIECUS or Planned Parenthood, our leaders in “comprehensive” sexuality education.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

There’s a double standard at work: if research suggested that sugary drinks cause fetal malformations, it surely would be announced with alarm by every media outlet.

Cover-up isn’t a double standard but okay.

With sexual health it’s always been different. The negative consequences of sexual license are often ignored or minimized. Young people are led to believe that with condoms and STI testing they’re safe, or safe enough. But it’s not so.

“Free lust” is anything but free of consequences. If only the Bible mentioned fornication and how sinning against oneself is different.

I believe that one day there will be congressional hearings about the persistent whitewashing of STIs, the exaggerated efficacy of condoms, and the endorsement by sex educators of high risk behaviors. Until then, the madness continues.”

One day there might be real science, we can all dream!

They make so much money off pelvic exams, which by the way, were pioneered in Nazi concentration camps!

And that’s just the tip of the hooker berg.
It was the same with syphilis and other diseases. Men would catch it, usually from hookers and infect their wife (or eventual wife) and their children would have medical issues (look up the syphilis skulls). Deliberate honeypots for this purpose would bring down an entire nation quickly via its leaders. Wouldn’t it, France?

We have DNA testing to trace precise strains of types but that’s small comfort.

If you can get it from a handshake or a peck on the cheek (children, Europeans) nobody is safe.

Modern men’s sexual dysfunction

https://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/unveiling-madonna-whore-complex

Ah, the projection is funny to watch. The woman who slept with two men including them is a “whore” but the speaker at 20+ is as morally, spiritually pure as virgin snow. Pull the other one.

The delusions….

Having a tendency to ruin themselves on cheap types and, once burned out, wonder why they hate decent people as boring and resent good women and marriage.

Orgastic impotence (bad sexuality) intrudes too. Plenty of fuckboy types write long articles online that just telegraph to anyone with a functioning upstairs brain that they’re sexually damaged and incapable of intimacy, physical or emotional (typical of narcissists).

As it applies in the context of relationships in modern times, Madonna-whore complex generally manifests itself after marriage or the birth of a child as Dr. Suraci explains:

“A man may think of his wife as a mother and not an appropriate sex partner.

Conditioning.

He is accustomed to having intercourse with a sexy woman and his wife does not fit the bill.

Rude.

She is now the mother – Madonna. Unconsciously, she may remind him of his mother who cannot be a sexual being,” he said.

Idiotic.

You should be able to divorce for that, the husband has duties. Sexual performance and sexual fidelity, physically and emotionally.

According to Dr. Joel Block, Ph.D., a psychologist who specializes in couples and sex therapy, some of these men have a difficult time committing:

They “stray” to keep their vulnerability in check.

emotional immaturity

Cannot have emotional intimacy.

They are usually unconsciously fearful of getting too attached.  Having a woman on the side gives them a better sense of control.  With all this effort, many guys do start seeing their women, especially in long term relationships, resembling their mom”, he told Alternet.

Then they complain when she files for divorce from the biggest baby.

Ask yourself why cheating is the most common reason for divorce.

Well, it’s better than stoning, isn’t it?

While Stefan is going on about the importance of marriage, special attention needs to go on the basic common sense DON’T CHEAT.

However, Dr. Kanaris says that the disorder is exacerbated in a variety of ways, not necessarily just through affairs, but essentially manifests through the male diverting sexual energy away from the primary relationship

That’s what adultery is.

That’s it.

– such as toward pornography or erotic massage.

Still cheating, seeking physical satisfaction elsewhere. How would they feel if the other spouse did it?

Normalised in this society is not normal.

To look with lust in your heart yada yada.

Peterson supports shekels

https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2018/06/02/peterson-cant-handle-the-truth/

You think he doesn’t know?

They pay him through the nose in private to tell them what they wanna hear.

He said the “best way to deceive someone is a (tiny) slice of the truth” (intellectually dishonest).

I’m starting to think I should autoplay Disney’s Let it Go on this blog.

This is apropos to 90% of my content, it’s commentary on the inevitable.

Bachelors are the most reliable source of income, think about it!

Yellow Fever goes first

https://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/health/three-tourists-confirmed-first-global-12545085

What if one plague were an STD? That would really be the ideal format.*

The cuckservatives really think virtue signalling and hypocrisy will save them?

Precious.

That includes Ebola.*

And good luck marrying decades too late when you’ve made yourself infertile.
I heard from someone who worked on a syphilis ward, it became such a hazard, historically, due to the men. They’d suspect it, not get tested, leave it untreated (DIY doesn’t work) for YEARS and in the mean time, spread it.

Pure r.

I’m pretty sure all STD epidemics can be traced back to about a dozen or so manwhores.

Eventually, they’ll be prosecuted. We can track it back now by genetics.
Sterilizing someone is worse than killing them, it’s killing all their children before they’re conceived.

The kind of people who think it “doesn’t count” as rape of a child if it’s legal in the area.

Sluts aren’t looking for better genes

People making things up from opinion on the internet

isn’t scientific.

Humans do dumb shit all the time. There isn’t a deep sciencey reason.

https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/16165

Evolved mate preferences define a central causal process in Darwin’s theory of sexual selection.

Their powerful influence has been documented in all well-studied sexually reproducing species, and is central to Sexual Strategies Theory (SST) as applied to humans.

Two sentences, totally different meanings.

This chapter takes stock of what is scientifically known about human mate preferences and their many behavioral manifestations. We discuss sex differences and sex similarities in the design features of human sexual psychology as they vary according to short-term and long-term mating temporal contexts. We review context-specific shifts in mating strategy depending on individual, social, and ecological qualities such as mate value, life history strategy, sex ratio, gender economic inequality, and cultural norms. For mate preferences to have evolved, they must be manifested in actual mating behavior in some individuals some of the time, such as those with high mate value in contexts where freedom of mate choice is permitted. We review the empirical evidence for the impact of mate preferences on actual mating decisions, as well as on tactics of mate attraction, tactics of mate retention, patterns of deception, causes of sexual regret, attraction to cues to sexual exploitability, attraction to cues to fertility, attraction to cues to resources and protection, derogation of competitors, causes of breakups, and patterns of remarriage.

The 60s was a mistake.

We conclude by articulating unresolved issues and offer a future agenda for the science of human mating. This agenda includes resolving key debates, such as competing evolutionary hypotheses about the functions of women’s short-term mating;

Why just women?
No wonder you don’t understand if you’re only studying half the equation.

The one time you can get away with that is if the topic is lesbians.

And it’s a cause/effect, chicken/egg issuue?

Are a group more likely to be r-types or can a group choose to act like r-types? Splitting it by sex rather than behaviour is a huge error.

how humans invent novel cultural technologies to better implement ancient sexual strategies;

There were never drug-resistant STDs before hookup apps.

and how cultural evolution may be dramatically influencing our evolved mating psychology.

Degeneration. The word you are looking for: degeneration.

Rolf Degen: “David Buss, pioneer of evolutionary psychology, acknowledges that women are probably not shopping for good genes when engaging in casual sex. He had been a co-founder of said hypothesis.”

Intellectual honesty, my stars.

The alpha genes thing is how male sluts try to rationalize superiority to female sluts.

“Somewhat mixed” no shit.

Small effect size in mating CHOICE = shit.

“no correlation” almost like women are loyal? Hormones don’t turn us into hookers?

The good study I saw was that women avoid strangers while ovulating aka the exact opposite of this BS.

“weak or mixed” with publication bias, non-existant

“questioned on theoretical grounds” it makes literally no sense, it’s an ego theory

“could be interpreted” should have been interpreted this entire time

Funnily, they’re hinting that women only behave badly when they think… like men.

But yes, women are the problem here.

also modern humans =/= ancient humans

“masculine and symmetrical features” those are opposites, symmetry is feminine

do a study on male beauty if you want to study …male beauty

Why would appearance = good genes? You’re so vain…. I bet you think these genes are about you. You’re so vain…

no evidence that slutty* women elevate the importance of intelligence at ovulation

Not the whole group. Words have meanings, what you mean is different than what you write. Assumptions make an ass.

I don’t get to say men are rapists…, it lacks clarity, I would begin the sentence, rapist men… that’s the smaller group I discuss.

“questionable theoretically” we know it’s shit but we need money and “not well supported empirically”

An appeal to please stop lying because it makes people link your studies on forums for confirmation bias.

A dudebro down the gym is not improving his genes. Basic biology.
They would value intelligence but they don’t have much.

Everybody’s Business is Nobody’s Business by Daniel Defoe

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2052/2052-h/2052-h.htm

This is amazing.

If she be tolerably handsome, and has any share of cunning, the apprentice or her master’s son is enticed away and ruined by her.  Thus many good families are impoverished and disgraced by these pert sluts, who, taking the advantage of a young man’s simplicity and unruly desires, draw many heedless youths, nay, some of good estates, into their snares; and of this we have but too many instances.

Yes, the poor young men.

Knowing that Defoe wrote the phrase “pert sluts” intentionally gives me life.

It’s like one gigantic rant, I’m serious.

Some more artful shall conceal their condition, and palm themselves off on young fellows for gentlewomen and great fortunes.  How many families have been ruined by these ladies?

That’s a good point, we have too many pert sluts passing themselves off as ladies, and the male equivalents.

when the father or master of the family, preferring the flirting airs of a young prinked up strumpet, to the artless sincerity of a plain, grave, and good wife, has given his desires aloose, and destroyed soul, body, family, and estate.  But they are very favourable if they wheedle nobody into matrimony, but only make a present of a small live creature, no bigger than a bastard, to some of the family, no matter who gets it; when a child is born it must be kept.

Men are dumb.

This is how the r-genes spread.

Adultery is a mortal sin because it reduces the fitness of your legitimate children, that you owe the duty to (and nobody else has to pick up after). The money that goes on the bastard should be invested in your real spawn. You owe no religious, moral duty to the children of a mother you never married (when the oath for the duty is sworn and signed). In purely religious terms, the marital union is the only place of obligation, above anything else.

This acceptance of bastards would explain how aristocracy becomes decadent – the genes come from adultery.

Notice: it’s a class thing, he is equally enraged by the follies of men behaving below their station.

The Romans had a law called Jus Trium Liberorum, by which every man who had been a father of three children, had particular honours and privileges.  This incited the youth to quit a dissolute single life and become fathers of families, to the support and glory of the empire.

Slutty men made the modern world

False reasoning, correct conclusions.

[shitposty]

All that shit on hypergamy (science definition, not internet) is missing one thing: modern evidence.
That isn’t what alpha means in evolutionary terms.
Stop trusting everything you read on families and women by middle-aged bachelor men. You didn’t even mention player burnout.

http://www.socialmatter.net/2018/03/27/sexual-dynamics-average-partner-numbers-are-gender-identical/

Read from “But this is where the adding up constraint comes in. Like the asymmetry between sperm and eggs, the adding up constraint is not a principle of ethics, but a principle of biology (and, in this case, mathematics).” and it’s pretty much solid.

Prior to that it’s bait.

“In other words, a lot of the thinking about “game” came from men who had an inherently ambivalent attitude towards modern sexual mores. ”

Degenerates.

While bemoaning the decline of modern women into widespread sluttiness, these men were contributing themselves quite considerably to exactly the same phenomenon they complained about.

I don’t mean this as a matter of ethical judgment, that they were ethically equivalent.”

They are literally.

They’re massive hypocrites.

Moral authority = 0.

That’s why even SJWs call them losers, they see that.

What sort of red pill is it when naturalistic fallacy of an extreme, unreal (Calhoun) primitive situation takes over and you can P=NP that slutting is bad, but only for half of society? Like you can only ruin half a society?

No, adults are responsible for antisocial behaviours and promiscuity is topping the list of self-destructive options. Men don’t get a “I made a mistake!” line. Years of something is not a mistake.

Look at this paragraph before where I said to read for a prime example of why not to pollute your brain with it.

“women will tend to have a mixed attitude to a man’s sexual past.”

They don’t know many women, do they?
I know plenty of men who’d dispute that too. Then why are the sluts always getting rejected (by almost all women they “approach”) and “flaked on” (polite ones who thought they’d take a hint).

No, they don’t. They care a whole lot but “men are scared women will laugh at them, women are scared men will kill them”. They won’t tell you unless it’s under lab conditions, with a lie detector. Where are the studies that male promiscuity is sexually selected or socially preferred, respected between other men?
They don’t exist, they’re making it up. Male promiscuity is a woefully under-studied trait. I’d love to see those studies. The loyal reject the disloyal of their own sex in women, this should also hold true for men since humans are a social species and rely on loyalty to survive. Adultery was shameful in both sexes as you breached your vow to the tribe and society. Can you trust someone who’d cheat on a spouse, in business?
False paternity is exceedingly rare and that’s another thing they lie about (and implies low to no sexual selection of manwhores). I’m sure they rank high in the aborted figures, though. Study those too!

Studies tend to survey teenagers, with immature brains. In long term mating (breeding, evolutionary) studies with adults, women prefer conscientious mates (the exact opposite). They reject Dark Triad (the psychopathy and narcissism mostly). Of what data already exists.

https://www.livescience.com/17003-conscientious-men-dancers.html

We can even see it in the way they move. That’s evolved.

We need more studies on male traits and their attraction or repulsion mechanisms. Oh, but it might hurt someone’s snowflake feelings so don’t hold your breath.

“Sleeping with a lot of women contemporaneously is an abandonment risk, but it is also a sign of higher mate quality,

desperation is not quality, evidence?
and social popularity is not sluttiness, a Sexual Revolution lie

having been pre-selected by lots of other women.

internet made yet another thing up again, citation?

Hence the female romantic ideal is the “reformed bad boy”. Ask them yourself. They’ll tell you.”

No, we don’t? Hollywood isn’t real. It’s a minority of either sex that sleep around at college. That is totally dead wrong. Only a coddled American could think this narrow view of some sections of privileged campuses applies to an entire sex through all cultures and times.
Citation? Not anecdotes you made up. Citations. I keep asking but there are never any good studies on these supposed “well-known facts”. And as we know from criminal studies, there is no such thing as reformation. Does like attract like? Yes. Bad women attract bad men by each’s insecurities but they are not the bulk of the population.

A study would refute this sexual propaganda but good luck getting a study like that published.

Men allowed the Sexual Revolution, take your lumps.

Back to article.

Because the adding up constraint, when reduced to its simplest and crudest form, presents a societal tradeoff that I suspect many in the manosphere would find rather discomforting. Namely:

A society that lets you sleep with lots of women will inevitably be one where the women you are sleeping with have themselves slept with lots of men.

That’s it. There’s no way around it.

Actions have consequences, really?

You make a bed and lie in it, really?

Entitlement is toxic, really?

Indeed, it shares a fair amount of the same wishful thinking of women sleeping around with lots of bad boys in their 20s, and then waiting until their 30s to wonder where all the good men have gone. The manosphere loves to laugh at this female delusion, and they’re right to do so.

When do the men of their age group want to marry them?
Did ya ask them that? No, of course not….

But how many of them apply the same iron logic to the similarly ridiculous situation of a man bedding dozens of women, while also complaining about the difficulty of finding a virgin to marry?

What is it with Americans and age 30 it’s like you’re obsessed.

Why would the good girls choose a burned-out STD-riddled husk of a man? You tell me. Using their peak years and being some loser’s last resort. Why.

I’ve said it for years, no, none of you. You cannot Have it All. It’s a myth to sell you things when you’re desperate. You are either a short term investment and attract other sluts or you’re a long term investment. They are mutually exclusive in trait, you can’t feign a different character. You can’t have your virgin cake and fuck it.

One group will be attracted for the same reason another is repulsed. e.g.

You know, the true sign of a desirable man is one who wants to prevent women from exercising the choice to reject him.

And this woman: “He was upset i wasnt a virgin because he met me at church. I was just like ‘dude, you dont deserve a virgin'”

Fucking LOL. Maybe he had a moodboard.

Double standards kill marriages. Stay in your lane, don’t expect better than your league. The manosphere tells you with a certain number of tricks (for a reasonable fee) you can play in every league. This has never been true in human history, look up assortative mating. They don’t tell you most evolution (the good stuff) and twist what little filters in.

They howl if you tell them things that make them feelbad e.g. women care about looks? Men hit the Wall around the same range as women, on average? Divorced men lose value compared to ones who didn’t fail to keep a marriage? Women don’t really like beards? Fat in a man is worse than a woman, since women need fat for pregnancy?

The manosphere has allowed the embittered divorced guys who stick around to ruin the young ones…. exactly what the SJWs do with women.

In most of those boxes, the couple should get divorced (ideally, never married). Bad people aren’t good enough for marriage and shouldn’t be allowed. They shouldn’t be selected, that’s a good system.

You can’t lecture women from a position of zero moral authority.

We’ll just laugh at you.

“There’s a set of men who don’t sleep around, by choice, and also want like minded partners. [k]

There’s a set of men who do sleep around, and don’t care if their partner does/doesn’t/may actively prefer girls who have. [r]

There’s a set of men who sleep around, but then will reject girls if they’ve behaved in a manner similar to them. [r]

There’s also a set of men who don’t sleep around, but not by choice, and who then shame people who do sleep around (despite the fact that, were they able to, they’d do the same). [r]

The latter two groups falls into the hypocrite category.”

Nailed it. But only the first has moral authority to do any lecturing.

“But it helps to be the Ottoman Sultan.” Yes, let’s model ourselves on men so attractive they had to trap women as slaves and rape them on pain of death.

“But it helps to be Cinderella.” Not the same. Never real, for one. And the K-selection of European royalty is earned, contrary to modern beliefs. [exception Harry]

They all think they’re the exception. Broflakes.

“For society as a whole, it simply cannot add up.” Maths frightens them.

“For traditionalists, the choice is clear. They would prefer both men and women to marry as virgins, and stay faithful to each other.” Pair bonding is real. It’s a feature of an undamaged brain. You prove to me male sluts don’t have equally damaged pair bonding to females ones (the positive claim, burden of proof) and I’ll eat my hat.

“But the world in which each woman sleeps with only one man is also the world in which each man sleeps with only one woman.” Not a bad thing if you love that person, it’s only torture to an r-type.

Okay, fuck goats, like the harem-lovers of the world.

“Out of all the pretty lies to abandon, the most important are the ones you yourself most want to believe are true.”

No remorse, no marriage potential. They’re so easy to spot.

I wonder if you studied the strident members of the Pussy Parade for ED…

http://drlwilson.com/Articles/SEXUAL%20PROBLEMS.htm

I think we could guess the result. Impotence, from psychiatric or physiological causes.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/more-sexual-partners-unhappy-marriage_n_5698440

According to researchers, the 23 percent of participants who only had sex with their spouse prior to getting hitched reported higher quality marriages versus those who had other past sexual partners as well.

Fuck around and your marriage, if you even get a spouse, will suck.

Puts all the bitter divorced dudes into perspective, dunnit?

Now study male satisfaction specifically. Until then, you cannot make positive claims about it. Don’t men deserve this information before they make plans on false assumptions?

“I would be very surprised if having multiple sexual partners before marriage, independent of any other factor, has a direct causal influence.” It’s hard to get these real studies published and impossible to find male studies. You cannot comment on something that hasn’t been properly studied.

It wouldn’t be surprising at all, it would be a biological change of some sort.

“McNulty also points out that though the authors are respected researchers, the study was not reported by an academic journal nor was it peer-reviewed.” Good luck getting it published.