GloryofGreece wrote:I agree with the most of these statements and the basic premise that biology influences ideology/philosophy etc. but it isn't everything there are other important influences. We are human and its a bit more complicated than that. But when you say women want to maximize their breeding choices and that's why they want open borders I'd say actually it likely b/c on average women are higher in trait "agreeableness" and empathetic etc. than men. And women are usually quite worried about security and safety as well.Speaker to Animals wrote:All I am saying is.. there are biological reasons for politics. The ideologies are often just nonsense games people play to rationalize what in effect are biological choices.
Women want to maximize their breeding choices. So they oppose national borders and seek to let in millions of male refugees, while leaving women and children behind (that's a fact in the case of Europe).
Weak men want to side with women by calling themselves male feminists and trying to differentiate themselves from more masculine, stronger men by arguing "I am not like those guys!". Which is pathetic because most women are banging those guys anyway.
Stronger men tend to become nationalists because they want strong borders. They do so because they are care about security, but also because they want to limit women's reproductive choices.
Look at the kinds of males you see arrayed up on Team Antifa compared to the kinds of males you see formed up on Team Trump in the Berkeley Battles.
All this ideology stuff is irrelevant. Most of this is biological. Weak males want to criminalize or eradicate the stronger males because women want stronger males. Women want to maximize access to resources and mobility, hence open borders and a "refugee" policy that always seems to overwhelmingly favor males in nations that are run mostly by these far-left women (Looking at you Europe).
That's all this is. I guarantee the best way to destroy the left for a long time is to get men into the gym. Make steroids legal for a while. Start teaching martial arts in secondary school.
That's actually a good point.
But I don't think women by and large associate borders with security. Honestly, I don't think most women have any idea what makes them secure. This is why our having given them more choices over the past century has left them to self-destruct. It goes back the principle that what women say they want and what they think they are want are often different, and neither of those things has anything to do with what they really want.
Human females probably didn't give a shit about territorial borders of troops. If an alien troop invades and kills off the males, the women just go to a new male of the invading troop. It was only with the development of complex societies that women began to truly suffer when an invading group comes through. Even then.. War brides are a thing for a reason.. Women don't have a sense of loyalty like men do because they never needed to evolve such a thing.
The evidence shows that human females migrated across territorial boundaries. In the paleolithic, they probably weren't subject to borders. I think the idea that women must be constrained within borders is a relatively new concept that emerges maybe only the past ten thousand years or so.
Women and men are very different. This new order of things we see emerging is an expression of some form of female civilization. But I suspect men built civilization rather than women for good reason. I don't think this stuff can last.
