The Backlash! - May 1996
Seven controversial concepts
by Aaron Mitchner
Copyright 1996 by Aaron Mitchner
Have you read the book "The New Victorians" by Rene
Denfeld? It describes well how feminism has cycled back and forth between being
pro-equality = pro-male and being simply anti-male. It tries to say that victorian
thinking is unnatural and regressive but the book only convinces me that
victorianism may be the "basic state" of mankind: that men and women will never
think alike and society may never have true equality. Also I recommend Naomi
Wolf's "Fire with Fire" as an excellent piece of work from a feminist writer you
will want to be familiar with.
Here is a summary of Concepts that would be great to have brought into the light
of day:
- "The theory of natural selection assumes that a reasonable number of
possible mating combinations get a chance to consider each other. This assumption
is not justified in the 1990's among humans." We are simply not encouraging or
allowing single people to mix. The media and parents suppress the idea that young
people should expose themselves to strangers and this generally carries through in
a person's behavior until well past the time when that person is married. Odds are
that someone who has not mixed with enough strangers will have mated
inoptimally. Exposure to the opposite sex increases evolutionary potential. But
singles events across America and Europe are generally attended only by what the
"cool" people would call "nerds" and others who happen to be way over the normal
marrying age and who have obviously been shunted aside by natural selection.
Sadly, the #1 reason why women ever reject men is because a man was a stranger
and strangers are those whom a woman may have been raised to ignore or at least
not encourage. Meanwhile, arguably the #1 reason why men reject women is
because they are too scared to try to approach female strangers so they reject out
of fear of being rejected themselves. Men with fear of rejection, however, are
constantly being weeded out of the gene pool. Women with fear of rejection are
not weeded out of the gene pool because of the male trait of aggressiveness. In
fact, there must be some reason why the female trait of fear of rejection is actually
dominant in the gene pool.
- Civilized men don't want sex more than women. Their genetic
programming just wants to know that they can get it with several of the best
members of the opposite sex if they wanted to. "Dry sex" and other forms of sex
without intercourse are probably perfectly acceptable for most men when they are
attracted to a woman especially if it would be that or nothing. Men are not as "all
or nothing" oriented sexually as women. They will accept going as far as a woman
wants to or they themselves feel comfortable with. This may fly in the face of the
assumption of many who complain about men being all potential date rapists, but I
stand behind it. A smart man really only wants to have actual intercourse with one
or a few of the very best women he can find and raise babies with her or them.
- Men can and will reject the most physically attractive women on Earth for
being unintellectual. Brains count more and more for women to have, especially in
a world where men are legally required to pay for their biological children. I have
refused to even play around with some women because I didn't want to be
financially strapped by an accident with someone I couldn't remain friends with
mentally.
- Men, in environments where there is plenty of competition, must
sometimes show extreme courage and forwardness in trying to meet and date
women even as they make it look like they are shy boys. The most optimal mates
are not necessarily going to be standing around smiling sweetly waiting for a real
shy boy to fall backwards over them. The idea that people generally find when
they are not looking is probably false. The idea that it is women who really do the
hunting and the reeling in of the prey is intriguing but I consider it to be false as
well. More studies need to be conducted about this.
- Men rarely reject a woman for having said or done something
"unforgivable". They look at the package as a whole (personality, intelligence,
humor, looks) and decide from there whether to "forgive" a woman for some
wrong doing. Women, however, will not forgive a man for a wrong doing unless
he *behaves* in a humble enough manner to "deserve" her forgiveness. Arrogance
on the part of the male here will earn him permanent rejection regardless of
whether he is intrinsically better for a particular woman than other men.
- Somehow at the end of the 1980's and early 1990's a new type of feminism
took root whereby young adult women were told by their parents not to seek out
rich older men for boyfriends, but rather men their own age. This is not really in
the interest of men over the median marrying age. It used to be said that a woman
not married by age 30 was to be considered an old maid and so now there is a
movement to make men over 30 considered in the same way. This trend makes the
human race more youth oriented than ever before and puts more evolutionary
power in the hands of younger males rather than the financially established older
males who once held the selection advantages. Witness MTV's policy of having no
male or female over the age of 25 participate in their show "Singled Out". One has
to wonder how this change in dating patterns will effect society. Will it be for
better or worse? Will these younger men chosen by the younger women be more
optimal or less optimal in the long run? How will older men react when they
realize that all the money in the world won't make them attractive.
- The 1986 AIDS scare caused a sexual counterrevolution the parameters of
which scientists and pundits have largely failed to study or discuss properly.
Sexual victorianism seems to be the basic state of mankind. Are people looking for
the best partner now or are they sticking to people they already know are "safe"?
Do they avoid people with "experience" and push them to the edges of the herd
making those who say they have no life experience evolutionary winners? I don't
want to but tend to think this way myself and know many others who think this
way also. What is the overall evolutionary effect of this fear factor which has been
present throughout history thanks to a number of microbes? The tendency toward
serial monogamy is certainly one effect which has been selected for in evolutionary
terms by this fear factor. It seems most of the people over the centuries who would
have favored polygamy have died out. There aren't too many babies born to
polygamous families in western civilization. More study on this is needed.
Evolution's Voyage is a spanking
brand new company....less than 45 days old....It was placed on the web in Nov. of
95 to place the theories and essays of W. Spriggs into the public domain. The
company will move into helping individuals understanding the mating game and
why we do the things we do in the game.
[ MAY ]
[ BACK ]
The Backlash! is a feature of Shameless Men Press
Email to the Editor