compiled by

YaReally Archive

Fertility, Intelligence And Religion

Original Link

via Heartiste

King A (Matthew King)
on June 22, 2012 at 4:44 pm
Original Link

Smart irreligious people, where sex is severed from reproduction, have fewer kids because they are better disciplined and artificially detached from the animal instincts that motivate the dumb. Religiosity dignifies and disciplines animal instincts by uniting them to a purpose greater than an individual’s self-interest.

Intelligence is correlated with wickedness because it’s hard for the relatively gifted to humble themselves. The smarter you are, the more challenging it is to keep perspective. Along the smart person’s progression, it is too tempting to stall out at the know-it-all stage, before reality forces the most intelligent perspective of all: that, all things considered, you are a finite, mortal worm with relatively small advantages over the typical man and severe limitations on your capacities, despite your immature dreams and self-esteem puffery courtesy of mom and the culture. Wisdom is hard-earned, so we retain the idea that there is no utility to naïveté. We spent so much youthful energy growing out of our innocence, what fool would want to return there! So humility seems like folly to the boastful “smart.” True wisdom begins in the childish Socratic dictum, “All I know is I know nothing.”


  • carolyn
    on June 22, 2012 at 8:56 pm
    Original Link

    matt king-

    you remind me of my husband, a smart guy who as a result perceives the general truth that everything sucks (a philosophical stance). in his case, that realization is only relieved by gallows humor. but i sense it’s not in yours.

    somewhere in your recent comments you give the impression of being a never married 30ish guy. i could be wrong. a word of advice, the same i gave to maya: find a decent woman, perhaps a nerdy bookish one (our numbers are legion) who will appreciate your intellect, and-this is important-is able to engage it. i don’t mean any disrespect. please know that i put your name in the ‘find’ function in order not to overlook any of your comments, even if i leave all the others unread.

    related to heartiste’s theory is that this awareness of how miserable life really is for many that the brighter have may depress their fecundity. how dare you bring a life into the world not knowing what the future holds for them! i doubt this thought occurs to those of sub-par smarts. didn’t apply to my husband but i guess he’s an outlier.

    • King A (Matthew King)
      on June 25, 2012 at 8:54 am
      Original Link

      I appreciate your criticism. You are reading too much of your husband into me, which is understandable.

      I do not “perceive … that everything sucks.” Quite the opposite. The astonishing fact that I wake up each morning and draw breath is enough to sustain the theological virtue of hope (spes) through anything, including mortality itself. And if that weren’t enough, I am conscious that I was born in the very best place with the best possible family and upbringing and education — albeit at perhaps in a difficult era (“The time is out of joint: O cursed spite…”). I am not morose or despairing or dyspeptic or spiteful, all qualities which, incidentally, this little subculture could stand less of.

      I have found all manner of “decent” women, plenty of “nerdy bookish one[s] who appreciate my intellect,” but none “able to engage it.” I know of no women with that capacity, have never heard a hint of a rumor of a woman with that capacity, and frankly cannot imagine her without hiding a dick under her skirt: true women are built for different strengths, and the attempt to become an equal intellectual partner to a man is an attempt at unsexing oneself. But don’t misunderstand, it’s not exclusively a woman thing: few men can engage either. As I mentioned elsewhere recently, those with the potential to “engage” almost always possess the concomitant handicap of debilitating arrogance — a lack of necessary humility that sours hope into despair (save a handful of priests and professors I’ve known).

      I have made peace with this lack of intellectual complementarity, as the smartest men and women do. Most in our culture regard it as my simple misogyny and/or delusional self-regard, but that’s not it at all. I will leave my record and my testimony to speak for the worthiness of my esteem, and frankly the attempt to prove it bores me by now. But the misogyny? I love women precisely for what they are, and what they are does not include equality at this level. When it comes down to it, the feminist propaganda notwithstanding, those women and I are fine with this arrangement: girls don’t try to pull intellectual rank between the sheets (boner killer). At first the ones with moxie — as you appear to have — struggle to prove themselves worthy and equal, but the honest ones eventually submit: As Ilsa climactically exclaimed to Rick, in the sexiest confession in all of cinema, “Oh, I don’t know what’s right any longer! You have to think for both of us. For all of us.” Can do. I do do. “Here’s looking at you, kid.”

      This world doesn’t need more smart women. In fact it would do quite well without them whatsoever, just as it does well without dogs walking on hind legs. What this world needs is devoted and faithful and trustworthy women — innocence, naïveté, even dumbness actually help encourage that fidelity. There is nothing so tranformatively beautiful as those faithful qualities, particularly when they are naturally occurring in a girl. Men on this board will fail to relate, but the most gorgeous women I’ve ever seen are those in solemn repose and submission, a phenomenon you see all the time in worship but almost never in the general culture.

      Finally, the idiocracy theory of fertility is a half-truth designed to make the marginally smarter believe they are elite. As the original post above professes, intelligence is not the controlling factor so much as religiosity. And as I say above, this error of relative worth is the arrogance that debilitates. The idiocracy theory caters to just those idiots who aren’t as smart as they dream they are — it gives them an excuse to “depress their fecundity” by declaring their contracepted drybox to be emblematic of their elite status. Yes, those who subscribe to the idiocracy creed may be smarter than some trailer court denizen, but they are not at the highest ranks.


      • carolyn
        on June 25, 2012 at 4:41 pm
        Original Link

        it’s a shame you haven’t had any luck finding a woman who can engage you. i’d offer my smart as a whip daughter (comes with her own wardrobe!), who just told me how exasperated she is with her boyfriend’s knuckle-dragger buddies who can only talk about the quality of the dope they’re smoking. she probably couldn’t keep up with you anyway, but at least she wouldn’t bore you. heh

        ‘This world doesn’t need more smart women. In fact it would do quite well without them whatsoever, just as it does well without dogs walking on hind legs’

        try to think of it from a woman’s perspective. when age sexually neutralizes her, other qualities assume a lot more importance to her. she can’t play the flirtation game anymore.

        ‘What this world needs is devoted and faithful and trustworthy women — innocence, naïveté, even dumbness actually help encourage that fidelity’

        i wonder how far those qualities will take her post-menopause. some of them will be irrelevant, if not grotesque. agree about devotion, fidelity and trustworthiness though, as those are timeless.

        remember- looks fade; dumb is forever.

        your meditation on arrogance made me think. as you may know i have a weight problem (improving though thru low carb diet) and have protested here about the disdain directed at fat people. the injustice of it, since so much of it can be blamed on genes. yet i have disdain for dumb folks. in school i could never understand why they struggled with stuff i found easy to pick up. i thought they just weren’t trying hard enough. but much of their condition is due their genes as well.

        so the moral is–we should expect the obese and the not-so-bright to _try_ harder to fight their weaknesses, even if the results only improve them marginally. if they’re at least trying to improve themseves, they don’t deserve the putdowns forever directed at them. just my meandering thoughts…

        • King A (Matthew King)
          on June 26, 2012 at 1:56 pm
          Original Link

          P.S. You have my word of honor as a gentleman, that I will only instruct your daughter from my knees, in the style of Emile and Sophie. I am not a cad, Lady Carolyn.

          Send her pix to my e-mail account (modest ones only, thank you). It would not make you a pimpess! It would make you a true mother, properly understood. A Mrs. Bennet without the post-menopausal schizophrenia brought on by the responsibility of marrying off five maidens in the 19th century. You only have to make the introduction, I will take it from there.

          • Ripp
            on June 27, 2012 at 5:18 am
            Original Link

            Email closed a low value fat chic’s daughter through an internet blog thread of qualifying your ideas about women and their intelligence relative to yours.

            Solid game, queen B.

            You always get upset when you’re called out about your game. Your humbled little deluded christian emotions should feel better admitting to yourself you are inexperienced with bedding beautiful women; as opposed to the facade that you imply.

            You really should have a web site: Christian singles PUA. You can describe how it’s possible to be skilled in seduction and also be a christian at the same time.

            Queen B ryhmes with Sandusky

on June 27, 2012 at 5:25 am
Original Link

Children are a major liability.

Very challenging to have children AND have the time and money to maintain a rotation.

It’s smarter not to have children if *executing* on the desire for consistent sex with high SMV women.

Caveats if you are famous/wealthy. However children would still remain a liability and hinder the above objective.

Automation And Redundant Humans

Original Link

via Heartiste

Southern Man
on June 13, 2012 at 2:56 pm
Original Link

Number two is easy to dismiss: your premise that the poor can only afford necessities is false; even the poor have disposable income. And pretty much all over the world every generation is better off then the one that came before (yes, even in sub-Saharan Africa). The USA is an extreme example, where a family of four on the “poverty line”lives in a constructed home with plumbing and bathrooms and a kitchen with refrigerator and cooktop and as often as not a private sleeping room for every member of the family. Not to mention cable TV and private automobiles and cell phones (my sister, a DHS case worker, once commented that every single person in her caseload of sixty or so had a smartphone). To be poor in the USA is equivalent to middle class in Europe and living like a king most everywhere else. That disposable income gets spent on stuff that the top ten percent provide: cigarettes, potato chips, 99-cent iPhone game upgrades, eBooks, whatever. The real beauty of the modern globally economy is that pretty much anyone with talent and willpower can become a direct provider (instead of just a consumer) by writing a game or an eBook and put it on the market. My CS students do it all the time; most of them have an app or two out that generates at least a little residual income. And residual income is a powerful tool for funding your lifestyle; just ask Roosh, who plugged away at it until Bang went viral. Sure, there will always be those who only consume. And there will always be a top ten percent that pays their way through government taxation and redistribution. But the future is bright for anyone with a marketable idea and the willpower to make it happen.

  • Ripp
    on June 14, 2012 at 11:31 am
    Original Link

    “But the future is bright for anyone with a marketable idea and the willpower to make it happen.”

    Agreed. And will always be so.

    [heartiste: yes, but creativity and willpower are likely largely heritable, and probably along population group levels as well. which brings us back to the original point of the post. still not satisfied with the answers i'm seeing in the comments.]

Beta Males In The Wild

Original Link

via Heartiste

on June 12, 2012 at 12:15 pm
Original Link

“The good news is that recognizing, and discarding, bad anti-game habits is easier than learning pro-game techniques, especially if you are a natural introvert for whom cold approaches and crutch-like helpful scripts give you the hives. You’re 50% of the way there once you’ve stopped acting in ways that make girls feel like they just stepped in dog shit.”

Introverts should have fewer of those bad habits by default. I’m 100% introvert and I could never act like that, especially in public. The guys with the worst habits are excitable, highly extroverted beta and omega males.

  • Ripp
    on June 12, 2012 at 10:20 pm
    Original Link

    “Introverts should have fewer of those bad habits by default. I’m 100% introvert and I could never act like that, especially in public. The guys with the worst habits are excitable, highly extroverted beta and omega males.”

    Assumption, mental masturbation.

    Anti game habits and beta non-verbal have more to do with lack of experience in the field and the unwillingness to recognize and work on correcting those habits. Extrovert/introvert is simply one underlying characterisitic of personality that should be addressed when understanding what cues to prioritize and work on.

    Because one is more introverted doesn’t indicate less anti-game behavior; or that extroverts have more.

on June 12, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Original Link

Humans are naturally repulsed by certain objects in the state of nature. Rotting carcasses. Fetid water. Leprosy victims. Feminists. Manboobs. A steaming pile of poop triggers our disgust reflex. This reflex likely evolved to protect us from ingesting poops and then dying from infection during a time when modern medicine was a schizophrenic witch doctor.

Like fresh turds, we are instinctively repulsed by the above photo.

LMFAO! Heartsiste you are crazy

Re photo: Oh dear God. Not even *I* can defend this.

Oh boy. he has it baaaaad. Whew!

  • Ripp
    on June 12, 2012 at 10:24 pm
    Original Link

    Nar Nar binks is back.

    still shaking your ass and delivering garbage meds to beta doctors? ;)

on June 12, 2012 at 3:01 pm
Original Link

The guy may be a beta but he has my admiration for getting a girl that hot; so, he must be doing something right.

  • Anon
    on June 12, 2012 at 3:09 pm
    Original Link

    90% she’s on the pill.
    And getting one hot girl once or twice in a lifetime is not uncommon for betas.
    Consistency, abundance and constantly having options is what differentiates alphas from lesser males.

    • Ripp
      on June 12, 2012 at 10:32 pm
      Original Link


      Fools mate happens to beta men from time to time.

on June 12, 2012 at 8:21 pm
Original Link

A little off-topic, but look at how these obese landwhales try to convince themselves that being disgustingly overweight does not equal ugly — which it most certainly does. Fat is ugly. Period.

Fatsronauts. Beyond fucking stupid. In fact seems to me that entire website is in defense of being a fat, lazy fuck. Well, keep on trying to justify that which you know is false. Keep lying to yourselves, whales. And here’s a clue: eat less calories in a day than you burn. Lose some weight you lazy fucks.

Now if only the United States would institute weight maximums for health insurance, us healthy people wouldn’t have to carry the freight for these chronically diseased mammoths, costing every American billions and billions of tax dollars each year.

  • Ripp
    on June 12, 2012 at 10:28 pm
    Original Link

    Another symptom of feminist doctrine: it’s ok to be fat, lazy and stupid and it’s still attractive.

    It’s time for Final Solution measures for the morbidly obese. Start in texas with black vans, abduct fat people and melt them down and convert the matter into energy. Time to turn this thing around into positive GDP.

on June 12, 2012 at 10:07 pm
Original Link

“The good news is that recognizing, and discarding, bad anti-game habits is easier than learning pro-game techniques…”

Critically important to successful game execution- especially in the presence of higher SMV subjects.

Next time you are observing couples sitting next to eachother: watch how most men (BETAs) are turned toward their girl with their torso facing her while she is sitting straight forward…

fucking weak. beta.