OK, but that's not all. How much of man's political motivations (I use "man" here not to merely subvert PC but also as an implied observation that political movements are almost exclusively started by men) derive from seeking the attention of women like the one pictured. If one answers something like "most", then I think one takes a decidedly reductionist perspective on man. In that, even when he champions fairness, honor, and all that jazz, he really just wants to get laid. Maybe it's true because, after all, we live to reproduce and ancillary motivations would seem, from an evolutionary perspective, somewhat superfluous. But then such a reductionist conception leaves me feeling emotionally hollow. I guess we can lean towards biological determinism intellectually, but just try not to think about it a lot.
However, while this remains an intellectually interesting question, the supposition most commonly arises in instances of political shaming. The feminists offer insults about sexual insecurity, the anti-racists about purported inter-racial sexual paranoia, and pro-sex liberals about conservative sexual ignorance and uptightness. Are there those to which these usually baseless insults apply? Sure. But as noted above and in an ironic twist given the groups mentioned, reducing everything to sexual competition completely undermines the "nurture" argument. Once again, liberals are inconsistent hypocrites.
I personally don't know how to answer the question posed. Consciously, I don't think political movements are about sex. I think political movements are about power, wanting to connect to something larger than yourself, and often a sincere dedication to a cause (that goes both ways). For me personally, it's almost entirely the last two. Now one could then argue that if we go down far enough, it all comes down to the penis. But again, that just rubs me the wrong way.
37 comments:
I personally consider blondes, especially Ameriskanks, to be decidedly unattractive. I always remind myself of how quickly they devolve into fat, fuzzy-faced, dyed-at-the-roots harpies. Although I think of myself as a traditionalist conservative, somehow I have always been excited by seeing "the Other", i.e., Oriental (NOT Asian, that's a continent of disparate races) women. So much so, that I am seriously considering becoming a rabid leftist, and declaring myself to be an oriental lesbian. After all, both race and sex are simply social constructs, n'est–ce pas?
I have always been excited by seeing "the Other", i.e., Oriental
In that case, you should like this girl. She has "Jew" written all over her face.
...and yep, I was right.
One:
Even if you go for evolutionary reductionism, it's not all about sex. It's also about sheer survival.
it all comes down to the penis. But again, that just rubs me the wrong way.
Pun intended?
She has "Jew" written all over her face.
I'm curious- what about her face stands out as Jewish to you?
Her wikipedia says that she is of Jewish descent.
I don't think political movements are about sex. I think political movements are about power, wanting to connect to something larger than yourself, and often a sincere dedication to a cause...
Yes, that's it for me.
You could add to that the sincere yearning lust to crush and destroy the "other". But, that's probably just something that comes along with power, spoken in rough terms.
Overall, yes: the desire to connect to something larger than yourself. Something like the feeling one got from the crowd tonight at the royal wedding, whether one is pro royalty, England etc or not. How magnificent a thing that was! The bells peeled for three hours, the singing of Blake's "Jerusalem", the coming together of *a people* united in their self identification with this union. Yes, the desire to connect to something larger than yourself.
Yes its about sex.
You indicate that political movements are about power.
Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac. Power means women.
Belonging to a movement is just the primal need to belong to a tribe writ large in the modern landscape.
Belonging to the tribe (something "larger") enhances the opportunity for both resources and reproduction.
Obviously for the average citizen some movements provide greater opportunities for alloocation at greater risk (small radical groups over throwing the current system and taking over) while aother groups provide smaller opportunities with smaller risk (belonging to the democratic or republicain party provides connections and its resources dispersed, a luncheon from like minded individuals).
Also, some political movements, religions et al provide better overall opportunities, while some provide better opportunities for a few.
"Consciously, I don't think political movements are about sex."
Because they are not.
"Even if you go for evolutionary reductionism, it's not all about sex. It's also about sheer survival."
No! This is not reductionism of evolution; it is just wrong.
Evolution is about the survival and reproduction of genes, not minds. The two are not interchangeable.
When Dawkins talks about using the idea of a "selfish gene" to understand evolution, he is clearly using a metaphor because genes cannot have motives. He is saying that one can understand evolution better by imagining that the genes are selfish and are trying to get as many copies of themselves as possible. However, this does not specify much about the conscious minds which are the result of this process. It could be the case that a good way for genes to get themselves reproduced is to produce minds which are altruistic, especially towards others which share your genes.
When a mother takes care of her child, she is motivated by love, not a calculation of genetic benefit. When a guy has sex, he usually does it because it feels good and is more satisfying than masturbation, not because he wants kids. If guys were always subconsciously seeking to reproduce themselves, they would almost never use contraception, would never have oral or anal sex, and would be much more willing to donate to sperm banks.
You might respond that it would be even better, from a gene's "perspective", to made a mind which did constant genetic benefit calculation subconsciously, and you're right. However, genes are not so finely adapted that they can make any sort of mind. Evolution does not, and cannot, find the best possible solution. It can only find a half-assed rule of thumb which is nearby in genetic space that works better than what came before in the environment that the species has adapted to.
A better evolutionary explanation to your question is to say that the types of brains which are susceptible to political behavior would have been successful at producing descendants in the environment in which we adapted (and even this has several assumptions built into it).
"I think political movements are about power, wanting to connect to something larger than yourself, and often a sincere dedication to a cause (that goes both ways)."
This describes me as well, and is, I think, a much more accurate picture of people's motives.
She strikes me as the poor man's Scarlett Johansson.
Umm, what were we talking about again?
I think it was Jack Nicholson who said that if guys admit it, everything they do comes down to getting laid.
Why do you think I am getting into model photography on the side? To meet a lot of 9 and 10s, of course. Eventually I want to be like Richard Kern, except (and Kern does this to a large extent) avoid trashy nudes altogether. Kern, and even poor photographers who do similar work, get laid a lot but nubile babes.
Something that I've noticed: all or at least most women are prostitutes to a certain extent. What do you call a gold-digging wife? Answer: smart hooker.
Here's the exact quote: "If men are honest, everything they do and everywhere they go is for a chance to see women"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350653/Jack-Nicholson-I-used-feel-irresistible-women-Not-more.html
If you like the look of that sort of girl, Blonde and pretty, enjoy it while you can. For pretty White girls to exist, well they have to be born. Which means White guys and White gals as parents. Pretty White girls can't exist without White fathers. And generally, non-Alpha sort of pretty boy fathers. See the daughters of Bruce Willis -- they inherited his chin and forehead. They'd be fairly masculine boys. They're masculine girls.
Likely the next twenty years will have markedly fewer girls looking like that above.
Whiskery wrote:
"Likely the next twenty years will have markedly fewer girls looking like that above."
In the next 20 years, yes, in the next 100 years, probably not. People will be able to genetically engineer their children as they see fit. This means hot women and handsome guys.
I have always been excited by seeing "the Other", i.e., Oriental (NOT Asian, that's a continent of disparate races) women.
Anonymous internet nerd has yellow fever. How surprising. Thanks for sharing.
Liberals are like a negative side effect of civilization.
With their orientation, they would not survive in the wild. They have trouble reproducing even as sheltered as they are now.
She's pretty in a crass sort of way. She is not "classically" beautiful. Blonds have always been my forte, bu then I grew up in a very Nordic place and blonds are common here. I carry the genes for blond hair and blue eyes and my wife is a blue eyed blond--so was the first. But the first looked like Halley Mills and the second, just drop dead gorgeous. I'll send you a pic sometime.
Now, anyone who thinks the revolution of the 60's and 70's was not made possible by sex, then you just have been living in a hole with a large rock for a roof. The whole idea of "Free Love" started with the French revolution and was then co-opted by the Marxists. If you can get women to go your way, you will get substantial numbers of men (read this as weak minded proles) to come along for the ride.
There was a book titled something along the lines of "how the left became cool" but I cannot find it online. The premise of the book was that the modern Left used sex, drugs and rock and roll to capture the minds and loyalty of the young in the late 50's, 60's and 70's. Having lived through two of those decades, I had to agree with the author.
So, sex is used to gain power, is used to hold power over others (think of Roman rulers and their nude statues) and sex is a function of power--the more you have, the more you will get and the higher the quality of the sexee, so to speak. Sex is an expression of power. Women are drawn to it, as someone else pointed out--it's an aphrodisiac.
Sex as a tool for control pertains more to the lower classes than the upper. This is not new--it has always been thus. So too has the promiscuity of the lower classes. The only exception being Victorian times--which was a top down social movement designed to get the masses to stop their promiscuous behavior and thereby get the syphilis epidemic under control as well as the abandoned children problem.
Of course that goes to my whole point about "game" and so called alpha males--there is no alpha in chasing low end live stock. That has always been been beta and will always be so.
Incidentally, for those of you on the East Coast, real blond never get "dark roots". They also do not typically have dark eyebrows. Those are dyed blonds, not the real McCoy. They also do not have "ethnic" facial features.
Lots of things reduce to the penis.
It's nothing to be ashamed of. It's a long trip down the rabbit hole. Much scenery, like culture, arts and social order.
And BTW, your spiritual and personal angst - hollowness - is irrelevant. The demands of reality are what they are.
She's hot. I'd hit it.
Incidentally, for those of you on the East Coast, real blond never get "dark roots".
We already know that.
They also do not typically have dark eyebrows.
The eyebrows are still usually darker than the scalp hair even in people with their natural hair color.
They also do not have "ethnic" facial features.
Some Italian women combine Italian looking facial features with natural blonde hair.
It just is that Italian women are far more likely to be brunettes, but the nature of inheritance is that even if the number of blonde coding genes in the Italian population is very small, sometimes two will show up in the same person leading to expression.
"Lots of things reduce to the penis."
http://imagemacros.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/women_dicks.jpg
Shawn said...
"In the next 20 years, yes, in the next 100 years, probably not. People will be able to genetically engineer their children as they see fit. This means hot women and handsome guys."
You've been duped by Raymond Kurzweil and his false promise of singularity.
This will be the future
E
That is a seriously beautiful girl. Usually I'm unimpressed by postings of the supposedly beautiful, but not this time. On the other hand, in line with first Anon, compare Rosanna Arquette in 1985 and now.
I'm a Glee fan & would note she has a
great body too.
I'm a Glee fan
Whaaa?!?!?
I'll ask this with an open-mind: is it actually a decent show?
I'd be surprised if a straight male could like it, even with her and a few others good-looking girls on the show.
Anon said...
"It just is that Italian women are far more likely to be brunettes, but the nature of inheritance....."
I take it you have never seen Northern Italian women--they are very different from Southrons. Those in the South of Italy are mostly made up of slave stock--Syrian, actually. It's why the Northerners do not like the Southerners, they don't view them as Europeans, such as themselves.
The eyebrows may be slightly darker in color but necessarily. You are talking to a native (5 generations) from the state Steve Sailer refers to as the highest IQ state in the nation--Minnesota. Also the most Nordic place in America. I think I know what I see around me and I think I can attest to what they look like in nude--after all, thats the majority population here.
My daughter is at an Ivy League school (one of the Seven Sisters) and her golden hair, eyebrows and the brilliant blue of her eyes attract much attention. And before you all start in, forget it. She knows the score and is far and away too bright to be bothered with over grown adolescent boys. So bright she actually gets paid for her internships with female neuroscience profs. Totally alpha and wouldn't be caught dead in a bar.
Suggest you go look at pics of Icelanders for a better idea.
Politics are about fucking up. Making the worst possible decisions. Running the country into the ground. Political are professional fuckups. That's it.
She's got a big nose at the very least.
I actually prefer brunettes myself, though maybe it's just stereotyping.
RobertB,
According to Coon hair blondism is found in northern Italians at a rate of 15%, and in southern Italians as a rate of 6%.
So even northern Italian women are far more likely to be brunettes, you ignorant jackass.
Those in the South of Italy are mostly made up of slave stock--Syrian, actually.
Why am I not surprised that you'd slander southern Italians with a Nordicist lie?
In reality southern Italians are no more different in genetics from northern Italians than southern Germans are from northern Germans.
So if the southern Italians are of Syrian slave stock, which I doubt, so are the northern Italians.
You are talking to a native (5 generations) from the state Steve Sailer refers to as the highest IQ state in the nation--Minnesota. Also the most Nordic place in America. I think I know what I see around me and I think I can attest to what they look like in nude--after all, thats the majority population here.
What does this have to do with anything?
I thought we were talking about eyebrow color relative to scalp hair color, not pubic hair color relative to scalp hair color.
The eyebrows may be slightly darker in color but [not] necessarily.
So you agree with what I said, which was that: "The eyebrows are still usually darker than the scalp hair ven in people with their natural hair color."
The fact that northern Italians sometimes don't like southern Italians means nothing.
The English have often disliked and looked down on the Irish, even making disgusting cartoons with the Irish depicted as Apes, but this doesn't change the fact that the Irish and English are extremely similar in genetics and phenotype.
In the same way northern Italians sometimes disliking or looking down on southern Italians doesn't change the fact that northern and southern Italians are extremely similar to each other in both genetics and phenotype.
Reality is more important the moronic biases of supremicists eager to spit on their closest living relatives.
"Those in the South of Italy are mostly made up of slave stock--Syrian, actually.
Why am I not surprised that you'd slander southern Italians with a Nordicist lie?"
See, this is why WN never gets anywhere--fights over who's more racially pure. (I'd even go so far as to say that if Hitler had stuck to gassing commies, he'd have gotten the Bomb and won the war.) I kind of liked Derb's 'Arctic Alliance' idea of Whites and Asians against NAMs. Any civilized race is invited to the party.
The biggest "foreign" element in southern Italians is Greek, rather than Syrian.* In ancient and early medieval times the region received lots of settlement from the Greek city states and the Greek-speaking Byzantine Empire.
*I will admit that some of the Greeks who settled in the Mezzogiorno during Byzantine times were probably Hellenized Near Easterners rather than Greeks from Greece proper.
You always have to wonder just how attractive these TV and movie stars are in real life. I've seen a few of them in person. Some were just as fine as their images (Diane Lane, Salma Hayek), some were shockingly ugly (Alicia Silverstone, Calista Flockhart).
Post a Comment