Single motherhood and criminality/effeminate men

[Hecatonchire]

I was thinking today and put two ideas together that I hadn't previously connected. Stef has said in previous podcasts that countries like Germany and Japan, which were previously very aggressive, had a reversal and became pacifists to a fault after the war left an impact on the women at home.

 

I was wondering if this is the case. Studies show that single mothers often raise aggressive and violent children. Is it possible that this is merely the case for low-IQ boys? Two generations of men died in Germany, and Japan lost just as many with America's nonstop bombing of the island. I don't have numbers, but it stands to observation that large numbers of children following these wars were raised by single mothers, setting up the precedent for effeminate men that is now common in the west and in Japan.

 

Low-IQ single-mothers tend to raise criminal children.

High-IQ single-mothers tend to raise effeminate and pacifist men.

 

Is this reasoning flawed? I haven't seen this particular framework put on the single-mother problem before, in any podcasts. It's a simple enough statement but one I hadn't thought of before.

 

It raises more questions on the differences.

 

Is IQ the differentiating factor in femininity vs. criminality? Is there something else at play here that I (we) might be overlooking?

 

What does FDR think?

[Mister Mister]

Hi, interesting question.

I think the differentiating factor is not the IQ of the mother, but the genetics of the child.  See the "Truth on Crime" presentation - criminality is associated with what is called the "Warrior Gene", but only when there is the environment in childhood, which signifies a dangerous, war-like, win-lose environment to the genes, to activate this behavior.  So in other words, based on the genetics of the child, there are different responses to the same parenting methods.  Neglect could produce insecurity and neediness in some, bitterness and resentment in others.  Abuse could produce paralysis and terror in some, or violence and paranoia in others.

 

  I think in general, abusive environments tend towards hierarchy, where a few alphas compete for dominance over everyone else, while the majority of betas cower and placate and follow and obey.  A more peaceful environment tends to produce a more egalitarian system, though some will rise to the top of their respective fields, most everyone can independently pursue their own ends without dominating or being dominated.  So you are right to point out that the breakdown in family leads to both increased violence in some, as well as increased passivity in many others.  But these are not opposite, rather they are complements.  It is the Warfare/Welfare State, they are two sides to the same evil coin.