Invicta

I came across multiple articles referring to a CDC study concluding that black fathers have higher rates of parental involvement than white fathers. The media is using this study to frame criticisms of high black out of wedlock children as unsupported racial profiling. Considering these socieoeconomic metrics are a common theme in the podcast is anyone familair with this study or have more in depth analysis of these claims? Has Steph addressed this already?

Im a white person who used to be attracted to women regardless or race. After learning about race differences in IQ I am no longer attracted to other races, including asian women.

I think the Steph in the video below might have violated the NAP against our current Steph due to all the election coverage. Yay for Trump over Killary I suppose. Now we'll have 4 years of the Dems blocking Trump in Congress. Everything Trump has promised will require unprecedented money printing and more government beurocracy. Why do we care? Lets get back to fighting bad ideas with logic and empathy. The ruling class in the State has always needed intellectuals to apologize for their rule and to sucker the masses into subservience, i.e., into paying the taxes and going along with State rule. In the old days, in most societies, a form of priestcraft or State Church constituted the opinion-moulders who apologized for that rule. Now, in a more secular age, we have technocrats, "social scientists," and media intellectuals, who apologize for the State system and staff in the ranks of its bureaucracy.

As I see it, civilization is a result of increasing population density forcing alpha males to redistribute women to low value men in exchange for their blue collar labor and submission. Either government corruption or female promiscuity can easily disturb this balance. If the government is corrupt then the lower rungs of men become more impoverished and in a post women's rights world no women will breed with them. If female sexual morality degrades then human mating reverts to a more natural harem structure with the majority of women controlled by an alpha minority. In either case, the average men lose the drive to work hard and society is no longer maintained. Either scenario leads to rising societal frustration, increased criminality, and eventual invasion by a society with a more optimal distribution of women to the beta males. It is likely that higher societal IQ makes it harder for politicians to be corrupt and thus leads to a stronger civilization. However, increased affluence for too long tends to make people weak and the lack of danger causes men to submit to women's desires. This leads to women being allowed to revert to seeking alpha genetics and thus unrolls the fabric of society: The blue collar labor of inferior men.

I saw watched this video today and I'm curious if it's a common phenomenon in America. I know that in India there exists great preference for ligher skin to the point that there is daily widespread use of skin lightening cream. The way this man explains his thoughts without ego or resentment left me thinking about his video the rest of the day. Regardless that class division based on skin color is purely arbitrary, it becomes it's own reality when the surrounding community enforces a prejudice. "Black man wishes he was white-"Nothing beautiful about being black"" on YouTube

I find pornography to be an incredibly liberating tool in my life. I view my sex drive as a primitive relic of from before the human animal gained self awareness. I see porn as a necessary steping stone for humans to reach the ultimate goal of deliberate reproductive control. We will eventually need 100% comtrol of reproduction for interstellar travel and colonization. A more immediate concern that can be resolved with pornography is the necessity of frequent ejaculations for prostate health. The current consensus of frequency is a minimum of 20 per month. With regard to my own health, I much rather use pornography to maintain prostate health than expose myself to the risks of sex with corrupt women.

She asked for some source material on the claim. I was surprised to find no results on internet searches. There's hardly any information on tge benefits of male instruction. No one remembers the podcast about this?

I was debating a friend on the importance of male influence on children. I remember about a year ago Steph mentioned a theory that before the development of agriculture, tribal women only raised the babies and toddlers. Once children could were big enough they would send them to the men for instruction. Does anyone remember the title of the podcast or the study he was referencing?

Darkmaid, It seems to me that your primary focus in your posts is the fear of loneliness. My unqualified opinion is that your fear of loneliness is brought about by low self esteem, and the loneliness itself is not your hangup. You have given several examples to justify why relationships with others are not possible for you, and then alternate between positive self affirmation and self deprecation. I think you may have developed an attachment to your ego identity as an outsider and your need for this identity is directly fighting your opportunity to connect with others. I said: "....suddenly have more time and energy to spend time, be honest, and be supportive of your friends. You grow closer and these relationships eventually become much stronger and rewarding than the pair bond." You Responded: Yes. This will happen. Until they meet someone. And have kids. This is inevitable unless they are also going their own way. In an ideal world, newly coupled people would still maintain their degree of closeness in friendships that they had prior to their relationship. In the real world, this does not happen and it's the natural course of things. I have observed and experienced that the pair bond has the side effect of lowering the priority of more casual friendships. This statement is intuitively obvious and feels natural, but the implications have massive effects on your life. I turned my back, more or less, on some of my closest friends by prioritizing the relationship with my girlfriend. Society and human biology make this seem like a natural choice, but it does not change reality. It was only after the realtionship ended, and I more honestly engaged with my friends, that I even realized what I had been doing. Some of my friends have revealed the pain they experienced as a result of my choices, often choices I made a long time ago that left them behind because I prioritized the relationship with the girlfriend. We all accept that the closeness of a friendship will diminish when one party becomes committed to a partner. It is an intellectual transition that does little to diminish the emotional sadness of this reality. Once I became single, I reconnected more deeply with my friends and after a period of time, the pain of that betrayal was expressed to me. None of my friends said it directly, and it took a long time and the right moment, but the fundamental betrayal of a friendship at the alter of a pair bond is not erased by intellectual understanding that we humans will prioritize our reproductive drive over social bonding. The lesson I have taken from this experience is that we are genetically programmed to prioritize reproduction at all costs even if our friendships are fundamentally stronger than the pair bond. Very often it is the friendships that last a lifetime as sexual relationships fade away. I don't know if we are capable of maintaining both, but if we are, it will take a hell of a lot of self knowledge and cooperation between both members of the pair bond. The lessons I have learned is to not be so judgmental of others, and that it's ok for relationships to be temporary or be put on pause. I am honored that my friends still value our relationships despite my neglect. You must not confuse the fundamental virtue of your friends with their convenience to you. Yes, some of my friends are getting married and having children and they inevitably pull away. How selfish would it be for me to construct an egocentric condemnation of them for their failure to satisfy my needs? Here are some thoughts I was working on during my reply but I realized it was too much unsubstantiated conjecture. Curious if it resonates so I left it in: I think I became interested in your post because you are a closet elitist like myself. Internally you feel superior to others, but in your social life you will defer to the needs of others sometimes to your own detriment. Social interactions generally leave you with a feeling that your perspective was not allowed to be fully expressed. The emotional reaction to this is tempered by the degree of self righteousness you hold at the time, along with the closeness to the individuals you are socializing with. Casual acquaintances or people you deem beneath you intellectually get a free pass, but it's those you hold dear that become transgressors who failed to reciprocate.

I generally write my thoughts in jumbled order as they come to mind and rearrange them into something more pleasant to read afterwards. My cut off statement about Steph's problem was cut and pasted at the bottom of the message when I caught myself going off topic. If you're curious, it was referring to my theory that many of his most loyal listeners will never manage to heal themselves enough to maintain Steph's idealism. I don't think he is wrong to do this either because he speaks to a wide audience and he is engaging in a multi generations project. His attempted rebuttal of MGTOW though... is specifically targeting people who are trying really damn hard to improve themselves. I'm not saying all MGTOWs are damaged, but during this growth stage of the movement the majority of them are. Personally, applying MGTOW principles in my everyday life has been the best damn therapy I've ever had. Your reply was much more descriptive about your current perspectives and state of mind, but I am still curious as to why you seek a long term partner at all. What specifically caused you to feel so down after seeing the video and reading MGTOW comments? I ask because I am no stranger to the fear of being alone or the biological impulse to pair bond. I have found though that surrendering to these drives without understanding is the stuff of nightmares. I have found that living alone and embracing isolation reduced the experience of loneliness from that unbearable ache in the chest to the occasional annoyance of a buzzing fly. I also find that friendships and acquaintances are much satisfying. They are simple and honest without the muddling obligations of pair bonding. You can say exactly what you think and feel because you're free from the layers of self delusion and misdirection required to maintain relationships based on obligation. The carefree honesty has the side effect of driving away individuals with whom you are not compatible. Also, no more forced interactions with friends or family of your pair bond, and then navigating the draining process of figuring out how or whether or not to admit that you don't like their friends/family. My experience is that friendships are more rewarding than commited relationships. The concept that your relationships with your friends are less important than the one with your partner is an illusion generated by the pair bond. in reality, the obligation based pair bond is sabotaging the perfectly good friendships you already had. Once you separate yourself from the biology driven obligation mess you suddenly have more time and energy to spend time, be honest, and be supportive of your friends. You grow closer and these relationships eventually become much stronger and more rewarding than the pair bond.

Stephan's views in the video you reference are some of the few that I disagree with. There is a degree of denial of reality in much of his philosophy that alienates those that have already been damaged in their childhoods. He is a pure idealist in expectation and results; but fundamentally, most of his audience will not be capable of reaching his standards of virtue and decision making. I understand that this is a necessary sacrifice because he will do more overall good in the world by helping to promote peaceful parenting. The sad and ironic truth, my guess, is that most of his supporters fall into the same category as you and myself. We have made monumental progress from where we started, be we will likely always face that thin membrane of seemingly unbreakable resistance to feeling like we are whole. This is still progress for Steph because if you and I had children we would raise them peacefully, but likely remain feeling isolated even among the family we created. Steph is correct insofar as the collective progression of humanity, but he is dead wrong according to MGTOW philosophy. I think I can be categorically described as a MGTOW. I am not interested in long term relationships or children. I'm 31 and am doing the single guy fixing up an old house routine. There is a part of me that would really like to have children, but my personal membrane is a deep seeded terror of having to provide for a family. Even providing for myself I have tendency to work myself to the bone as my father did. I still have work to do on self knowledge, and as you described it is a process that can go on for many years. Combine that with my MGTOW standards for women and it seems likely that I will indeed end up alone in the end. Addressing your questions at the end: "Could I find a relationship with a man who did not want sex from me and I didn't want resources from him?" This is pretty much against human nature as I understand it. I have been successful at suppressing my sex drive in a college town but it's certainly against my male nature and I have to perform routine manual overrides. Similarly, I'm sure you can suppress your female nature to receive resource support from a man, but it will be an effort to grind away as an isolated woman just like a man struggles with his endless arousal. Would that work out? The quick answer is No. Men with no sex drive do exist but they are the equivalent of the MGTOW NAWALTs. You really do have 60 more years of this, but we all do. I think many of us will be better off living by our own standards as opposed to trying to force idealized relationships where we self sacrifice behind our membranes. We all die alone, all of us. I believe that a network of friendships is a better solution to Steph's old age problem as opposed to a lifetime of family obligation with unfinished work on self knowledge. Steph's problem is

Hello dmart127, I have a couple of thoughts for you based on my own experiences and judgments based on the little information you posted. I'll start with the judgements: I think you have already decided that this girl is not the right one for you. You are hiding behind a fabricated sense of obligation to her because she stayed with you while you where in a shitty state. You are actively avoiding confronting real personal issues, which you have not described, by cowardly distracting yourself with these fabricated relationship responsibilities. You are fully aware that your girlfriend is also desperately trying to avoid confronting her own insecurities through the mutual delusion and subjugation the two of you are acting out with the relationship. You know in your heart that the impetus is on you to make the hard decision of initiating perhaps the first honest discussion the two of you have ever had. Thoughts: You make a brief statement about how she has supported you through your troubles, but then the entire focus of your post is how she does not meet your needs. To me this reveals that there is a great divide in your relationship. If she is so supportive how is it possible that she is not interested in having deep discussions with you on topics that are important to you? Likewise, how can you seek out relationship advice on this forum, and post such a self involved question, if you are honestly concerned with well being your current partner? You cannot simultaneously ask weather or not you should stay with her and only be concerned about your needs. I'm not criticizing, I'm pointing out what I read in your post. Solution: Have an honest discussion with your girlfriend about your relationship. I recommend you read or listen to "Real Time Relationships" by Stephan, as recommended earlier by Matthew. If the material is meaningful to you then try to get your girl to read it as well. Unfortunately it's one of those books that only has an impact when the person is ready for it. If you owe her anything it's the chance to learn from this book. The discussions I had with my ex-girlfriend of 8 years using the real time method made the light bulbs go on over my head. My girl refused to read the book and bringing it up became a pejorative. Regardless, I followed the methodology and resisted the urge to storytime reality. I had previously been in a vicious cycle of escalating arguments that left me feeling drained and putting up emotional shields. The very first time I stayed in the moment during an argument I had a completely different experience. For the first time in 8 years, she was the one that backed away and tried to end the fight. It was shocking for both of us. She eventually revealed to me that she's really not interested in genuine resolution of our relationship issues. She even went as far as to suggest that we separate for a few months so I have some time to deal with my personal issues so it wont interfere with our relationship. She straight up told me she expected me to be her listener while she decompressed from her daily stress, but that she was not interested in reciprocating. I'm single now with my own place. Stephan's book is awesome.

Hi, I have some amateur thoughts on bitcoin that may be useful. I'm also interested in any counter views from experienced investors. I almost pulled the trigger and bought 200 bitcoins when they were at $5 because a friend much smarter than I was investing in them. I unfortunately backed out and bought mining stocks... so yeah, amateur thoughts. * I believe that bitcoin is the first in the future of the next worldwide currencies. It will face strong competition through the next decade, the most threatening form coming from manipulated state run systems. These state run systems will have a backdoor to manipulate supply, and over time a free market currency with a fixed supply will dominate world trade (current frontrunner bitcoin). * Bitcoin is still in the process of coming down off it's major hyper bubble. Despite massive, unexpected, and expanding worldwide acceptance of the currency, the downward grind continues. I believe this grind down is due to the low investor quality of individuals that inflated the bubble. Bitcoin investors on average are young and inexperienced with market dynamics. They are emotional, often first time, investors with a get rich quick attitude. They lack understanding of current fiat currency war dynamics, and are ignorant of the fact that most global wealth is in older traditional hands that trust the very system bitcoin is usurping. As a result, most bitcoin investors lack the patience and determination to weather the multi-year volatility bitcoin faces in the future. Additionally, we're in a recession so if the market volatility doesn't cause a panic sell then financial need will often force the situation. My sister wanted to buy bitcoins last year, I think at $800. I told her it was a great idea; just not right then. The fact that she even knew about bitcoin was personally a market saturation signal for me. I explained my logic and convinced her to wait for all the weak hands to drop out. Those hands are still dropping... despite unbelievably bullish acceptance of the currency by nations and retailers. * Bitcoin Hacking/Stealing: I really don't know what to think about this. I understand that most of the bitcoin hacks occur due to the need for exchanges to provide speed and liquidity to their marketplace. Buyers and sellers want to have instant transfers between parties, and the exchanges have to set up a pool of bitcoins available to be transferred. My question, and I'm ok sounding like a Luddite: Is bitcoin stuck forever with 2009 sofware? Is it's downfall guaranteed like an old operating system? ^ lol that MT.Gox was a magic the gathering trade site. One of my roomates in college paid for a year of school, his rent, and living expenses selling off his Magic collection (kept his 40 dual lands set, sold the black lotus). Yeah, he's still a boss today. He's opening up a Cigar and Brandy shop next week, and liquor stores pay him to travel to breweries across the country to sample barrels of liquor for purchase. * Bitcoin or the competitor that beats it will not last more than a decade as the primary currency. Eventually, a currency with a low level of inflation built in will replace the fixed rate currency. This currency will work for at time but the inflation rate will be too high or too low to match population levels and the smart money will lead the pack to a replacement currency. Over time investors will move away from a reserve currency since establishing a fixed rate of inflation is impossible. The end result will be a basket of competing currencies; many or all of which backed by commodities. TL:DR, Basically my view is that bitcoin still has a long way down ahead, perhaps as low as $30. One day, perhaps soon, will be a fantastic buying opportunity. Most likely, the bitcoin low will be a leading indicator for the big market crash ahead. Happy to be educated further, thanks