What The World Would Look Like With No Men

Fat lesbians.

LESBIANS are twice as likely as heterosexual women to be overweight or obese, which puts them at greater risk for obesity-related health problems and death, US researchers said.

Men keep women in check. Freed from the biological need to be visually attractive to men, women regress quickly to a state of blubbery bliss.

“The results of these studies indicate that lesbian women have a better body image than do heterosexual women,” they wrote.

Lesbians don’t care very much about looks in their partners, so bloating up like a fat cow won’t cause them psychic distress. When feminists (AKA radicalized man-hating lesbians) complain about the harm society does to a woman’s body self-image, what they are really lamenting is a world where men have sexual preferences. A feminist fantasy land is one where men have no preferences and women can pick and choose from whatever man she wants, while suffering no consequences from getting fat, old, or ugly.

Makeup, fashion, and staying in shape are evidence that women compete for the attention of men. When they opt out of the competition for men altogether, like lesbians have done, they stop bothering with those things. Analogously, gay men rarely bother with long sex-delayed courtships and promises of commitment.

Moral of the story: Women and men are judged for their worth in the sexual market. “Judge not lest ye be judged” is a lie to protect the feelings of the losers in life. Taking the high road will not save you from the judgement of others.





Comments


  1. The world would be a peaceful place without men. I would miss men thought. Who would move all of my heavy stuff? I would miss looking at the most handsome of the species*

    The Outer Limits had an episode on this very topic. Maybe youtube has it. Men=War & Fighting

    Men keep women in check. Freed from the biological need to be visually attractive to men, women regress quickly to a state of blubbery bliss
    Don’t forget lipstick lesbians.

    Like


  2. For whatever its worth,I have a female friend who has a pleasant friendly face but is quite overweight. Lesbians love her! (She’s VERY straight!!) Young and pretty girls are also quite friendly with her,I guess its a “mother” thing. What if a lezzie somehow stumbles upon a young and pretty girl who accepts her affections? I think,esp if the girl goes back to a man,(aka Lindsey Lohan) the dyle will be MUCHO UPSETTO. So they sometimes are very into looks,but mostly happy with other fatties. Kind of like black guys! BOTH can be very violent if crossed!!!!!!

    Like


  3. Chic,
    The world would be less violent but far more catty. Like the Ricki Lake show.

    Like


  4. Lesbians don’t care very much about looks in their partners, so bloating up like a fat cow won’t cause them psychic distress.

    I have known more than a few lesbians whose love of sports has kept them in really good shape. But, yeah, a lot of them get really fat.

    Don’t forget lipstick lesbians.

    Are these a myth? I’ve never met any.

    Men keep women in check.

    There is a lot of truth to the assertion that women keep men in check and keep them from their worst excesses, but the opposite is true as well.

    The world would be less violent but far more catty. Like the Ricki Lake show.

    Actually, it would be a lot like the French court as depicted by (female) directore Sophia Coppola in the brilliant first half of Marie Antoinette. (The movie goes off the rails in towards the end.)

    Like


  5. on November 16, 2008 at 6:07 pm secret asian man

    This is also why gay men work out and diet obsessively.

    Like


  6. BTW do any other guys tend to prefer “hippy” models like, say, Alessandra Ambrosio or Morgane Dubled to girls with skinnier hips. Of course girls like that are all in fantastic shape, but wider hips seem to me much more attractive than the more boyish “athletic” look.

    Like


  7. “Don’t forget lipstick lesbians.

    Are these a myth? I’ve never met any.”

    Jackie Warner

    Like


  8. To answer honestly, a world without men would pretty fast return to prehistoric levels.

    Like


  9. Let’s take it to the next step: What would the world look like if there were no men, *and no lesbians*? Imagine the world of straight women only. Ignore the problem with propagation of the species. What would we look like?

    Women would continue to express themselves artistically in their appearances. We’d still dress in ceremonial, party, church, athletic, office, looks. We’d still play with feminine, slouchy, bohemian, pleated, high-waisted, low-waisted, florals, metallics, country, or rocker looks. We’d still inspire and compete with each other and we’d still value artistic complements from each other.

    Most would value fitness and would continue to workout. We’d still value toned arms, long legs, and firm abs. I think we’d still admire pretty faces, pretty eyes, and cute hair styles. We’d still use makeup, Botox, and Accutane.

    Only the specifically sexual body parts-breasts and maybe butts would diminish in display and importance . Straight women wouldn’t value large breasts for themselves or on others.

    Certainly straight men add incentive to look better, but other women notice the *details*.

    Like


  10. Roissy’s on to something psychologically, but I recall at least one study showing that lesbians had higher levels of polycystic ovarian syndrome…which is characterized by obesity and high testosterone. So there might be some extra thing in that ‘masculinization’ of women is linked to T somehow.

    Some of the behavioral observation PUAs are so good at it might be useful here: do fat women tend to be higher-T?

    Like


  11. Don’t forget lipstick lesbians.

    Are these a myth? I’ve never met any
    No, I’ve been hit on by a few. Portia de Rossi & the female terminator from Terminator 3 are two examples. The reason you don’t “see them” is because you assume they are st8 women when you come across them. Women who look like KD Lang scream butch unlike Portia de Rossi.

    Like


  12. Men keep women in check. Freed from the biological need to be visually attractive to men, women regress quickly to a state of blubbery bliss.

    So in other words, without men, women will be happy? You just proved the man-hating feminists right. 🙂

    Like


  13. I used to work in a weight-loss clinic. All the therapists there said that eventually, all the overweight women realized that for various reasons, they were trying to keep men away. Maybe because they were gay and thus didn’t want male attention, maybe because of father issues or because they’d had their hearts broken, but all of them wanted men to stay away from them. Even though some of them were also lonely and part of them wanted a man, most of them wanted those dangerous XY types to keep away.

    Homosexuals, of both kinds, usually have the same mating strategies as heterosexuals of their own sex, I’ve noticed. This means that lesbians are more interested in things like financial success and status (in their particular group) than in looks, and gay men are, of course, most interested in goodlooking men. So most lesbians don’t really have a motivation to make themselves look good; indeed, looking good could inspire unwanted attention from men.

    Like


  14. Thanks to Thursday for linking to my blogposting about how crazy gay sex got circa 1980. Check it out — things was nuts, let me tell you.

    I’ve certainly encountered bunches of lipstick lesbians, though god knows the kd langs and lumberjacks outnumber them hugely. Here’s one lesbian cutiepie. Good actress too.

    If I recall right, this John Boorman movie from 1974 (ancient me saw it during its opening run) is a daffy sci-fi fantasy about a world without men (except for Sean Connery, who’s man enough for legions of women).

    Left to their own devices, women would achieve whatever it is they’d manage achieve “by consensus,” always by consensus. Has anyone else had female bosses who always wanted everyone not to obey but to agree? Sheesh, what a nightmare that is.

    Like


  15. I don’ t know what the world would look like without men, but I would be busy researching how to get up out tha joint and follow them….

    As for lesbians, most of the ones I have known have been jock types. And don’t fool yourselves – it isn’t all sisterly love and happily-ever-afters in that group. There are sexually ruthless lesbians that regularly prey on the fresh meat “baby” lesbians.

    @SFG – I don’t understand how high testosterone =overweight in women? I thought high test would make you less fat? Maybe I’m confusing it with HGH. I mean this as a legitimate question, not a snarky comment.

    Like


  16. The Coolest Motherfucking Alpha on the Planet! Hell to the yeah!

    Like


  17. QT: with biology, things are always complicated, and don’t always make intuitive sense. PCOS has high T and high BMI. If I remember correctly, they’re both thought to arise separately from the same abnormality, but it’s really not well understood.

    Often you can see correlations but causation is hard to tease out because there’s so many damn genes.

    My question is more specifically one addressed to the socially adept folk here, yourself included: has anyone noticed a correlation between obesity and high-T behavior in women?

    Like


  18. “I don’ t know what the world would look like without men, but I would be busy researching how to get up out tha joint and follow them…”

    Amen.

    Like


  19. ^^^ No, you don’t want to be the only woman alone with 3 billion men. They will destroy your “walls”.

    Like


  20. Women can’t read maps. International travel would be over.

    Like


  21. chic noir,
    *dead faint*

    And think about how utterly desperately they’d all be gaming me!

    Like


  22. “My question is more specifically one addressed to the socially adept folk here, yourself included: has anyone noticed a correlation between obesity and high-T behavior in women?’

    Unknown…I stay away from fat women.

    Like


  23. ” has anyone noticed a correlation between obesity and high-T behavior in women?”

    Italian and Middle Eastern women have higher rates of PCOS than northern European women, and Asian women have the lowest rates of all.

    Like


  24. @SFG – most of the high test girls i went to school with and keep in touch with now were athletes. they played soccer, women’s water polo, basketball, volleyball and did martial arts. that high T athleticism usually translated into those girls being in great shape, though often more stocky than what a typical guy would go for.

    it’s actually really interesting now that i’m in my mid-twenties to catch up with old high school friends and see how many are gay. most of the girls who are now out as lesbians were major jocks back then. they were in great shape, though!

    oh, and if roissy’s world ever comes to pass, i’m forming the world’s largest strap-on company. bc even when they’re lezzies chicks can’t resist the peen.

    Like


  25. “oh, and if roissy’s world ever comes to pass, i’m forming the world’s largest strap-on company.”

    In said world this might dissuade me from suicide.

    Like


  26. I have a sister who’s very pretty – looks kind of like Naomi Watts – but is a ball busting trial lawyer who’s always been into soccer and martial arts. She loves flirting and has always had a lot of boyfriends but doesn’t like sex very much and is actually kind of a prude. I have no idea what hormone cocktail produces such a personality.

    Like


  27. Off topic
    then again
    <a http://www.dailymotion.com/video/k2eV5BmUoEJGLTQiGT
    Why the hell does Justine Timberlake move so well. He could easily fill in for one of Beyonce’s dancers.

    Hello saidAnd think about how utterly desperately they’d all be gaming me
    As out deer old cantankerous Uncle Whiskey would say, ” men would fight over you like in big man culture found West Africa and the Middle East from there we will have Armageddon rah rah…..”

    Like


  28. @dirty blonde- NO strap, I think they will hurt as much as the real thing. If you set up a licker’s colony, I will turn in my passport.

    Like


  29. A world without men would probably be ruled by big, fat high-T women, sort of like in a women’s prison. Since women would still have sex drives, the bulldykes would be grudge-“fucking” the younger girls.

    Other than that, Gannon’s comment that the world would fast return to prehistoric levels is probably right.

    A melange of meows and a cougar-roars coming from the grass huts would fill the hot savannah air.

    Like


  30. Chic,
    “As out deer old cantankerous Uncle Whiskey would say, men would fight over you like in big man culture found West Africa and the Middle East from there we will have Armageddon rah rah…..”

    Lisa Lampinelli has a line where she wants to date three men: a black guy for sex, a white guy to pay, and a Hispanic guy to clean up afterward.

    “dirty blonde- NO strap, I think they will hurt as much as the real thing. If you set up a licker’s colony, I will turn in my passport.”

    Did you used to date Mandingo? 😉

    Like


  31. Re Justin Timberlake,
    I’m surprised he hasn’t date a black girl yet.

    Like


  32. Yes they would. Jeez, it’s not as if men have not killed over women before. It’s probably the number one reason guys kill, that is women. Duh.

    A world without men would soon disintegrate — women are uninterested in most technical fields excluding medicine (where women are about 50%).

    All the nuts and bolts stuff of building and maintaining infrastructure is done by men, and requires a male mindset of get the job done, not talk about feelings and achieve consensus.

    As for athleticism and lesbianism, it depends. Most of the female volleyball players are married. Many of the female swimmers get married after the Olympics, as do most of the Ice skaters. Other sports likely have high amounts of lesbians, and some are clearly in transition, like tennis. Which used to have lots of lesbians but now has more straight women with the influx of Russian/Eastern European gals. Golf seems in transition too, with young Asian women like Wie getting into it.

    Softball, soccer, etc. seem to be home of the Lesbians in sports.

    Like


  33. Did you used to date Mandingo

    not in a million years.

    since you like light skinned blk guys check out Ceasar & Jake Steed(tp).

    Like


  34. “Lesbians don’t care very much about looks in their partners, so bloating up like a fat cow won’t cause them psychic distress.”

    What *do* lesbians care about in their partners? Gay males care about looks and youth, because they are men. But do lesbians care about status and leadership because they are women? I don’t know. There doesn’t seem to be much scientific interest in lesbians.

    An alternate theory is that they become lesbians *because* they are already fat and rejected by men.

    Like


  35. “An alternate theory is that they become lesbians *because* they are already fat and rejected by men.”

    That may be true for some, but I think many just have bad relationships with their fathers and were sexually abused at some point. And some are indeed mannish and don’t “fit together” psychologically with men.

    Like


  36. Nah, I’ll take Rick Fox. I used to like Shemar Moore but then that photo of him nude on a gay beach turned up 😦

    I’m attracted to all kinds of men but my preference is for Italian and Spanish looking men. The most gorgeous men in the world are produced in northern Italy, although southerners are quite nice as well. I would personally murder Melanie Griffith if I could take her grieving widower for my own.

    Like


  37. @Rain And

    You back on your meds, dude? You kinda went off in the weeds for a bit there. 🙂

    Like


  38. Nah, I’ll take Rick Fox.

    Screw him and his “good” hair…

    Like


  39. “Screw him and his “good” hair…”

    Sounds like you need to try Soul Glow my nappy negro friend!

    All the niggaz be usin’ it ‘n sheet! Sho’ fine!

    Like


  40. @whiskey: “A world without men would soon disintegrate — women are uninterested in most technical fields excluding medicine (where women are about 50%).”

    i find this statement interesting. have any stats to back this up? i seem to recall that when girls are in all-female schools growing up they’re just as adept at math and science. while i would agree that there’s something to the whole ‘men are more logical and women more emotional’ thing, this seems to be a gross exaggeration.

    btw- damn wordpress. apparently there’s already a dirty blonde out there (dirtyblonde.wordpress.com). german, apparently. wonder if she looks like the stereotype from the study roissy featured?

    Like


  41. “btw- damn wordpress. apparently there’s already a dirty blonde out there (dirtyblonde.wordpress.com). german, apparently. wonder if she looks like the stereotype from the study roissy featured?”

    Your name is edgier like this, sort of like Xtina Aguilera, although you’d have to go with “dirrty”

    Like


  42. SFG:

    My question is more specifically one addressed to the socially adept folk here, yourself included: has anyone noticed a correlation between obesity and high-T behavior in women?

    I think what you’re observing is fat women who long ago gave up trying to be attractive and who now just don’t give a shit about how they come across, i.e., bitchy, loud, aggressive, etc.

    Not high T.

    Like


  43. roissy–

    Could you please reinstate comment numbering to facilitate references??

    Like


  44. The removal of comment numbers wasn’t roissy’s doing; the underlying “Mistylook” theme seems to have been changed. I don’t know whether this was intentional or not, and I don’t know of any easy way to fix it other than switching to another theme (which is what I did).

    Like


  45. Whiskey:
    A world without men would soon disintegrate — women are uninterested in most technical fields excluding medicine (where women are about 50%).

    All the nuts and bolts stuff of building and maintaining infrastructure is done by men, and requires a male mindset of get the job done, not talk about feelings and achieve consensus.

    Grim:
    You forget that soon we have robots to do this shit work Women are unlikely to do. All women society could soon work. But I doubt it would progress much beyond it’s current level of tech.

    Like


  46. high BMI in PCOS patients is due to insulin resistance, has nothing to do with high T.

    also, testosterone does aromatize in vivo to estradiol, and estradiol will increase water retention, and body fat levels. many bodybuilders on bulking cycles look puffy because of that.

    Like


  47. Without men, women wouldn’t have made it to the iron age. If you assume that they could somehow reproduce without men, they would be dirt-poor farmers at the Malthusian limit, half-starved rather than fat, because they never would have invented the technology that allows us the kind of prosperity where being fat is an option.

    But I’m probably over-analyzing this.

    Like


  48. Dirty and Grim —

    You don’t see any women at all on most hard, demanding, and dangerous jobs like fishing boats in AK, Sarah Palin being the exception, nor say High Tension power line repair, or sewer repair, or any of the dangerous, physically exhausting, blue collar highly skilled jobs that keeps infrastructure going.

    It’s not just a bunch of “smart people” running around thinking smart thoughts, it’s arms and legs keeping things running, let alone building new stuff. Women probably are not capable of doing the work physically, and don’t find it interesting. Nor can robots do much of the work which still requires a human to do, robots really are limited in how they can handle things requiring a broad range of senses, including touch (i.e. how hard to torque a rusted bolt) and judgement (do I give up trying to force the bolt open or do I use lubricant, heating, etc.)

    Women face no discrimination and lots of incentives to work fields other than medicine, and few want to be, say, mechanical or electrical engineers. It is not considered glamorous or important enough, so women avoid it for higher-status jobs where they are respected.

    There have been no female Fields Medalists, ever, and the work is submitted anonymously with mere numbers, and the barrier to entry is zero, i.e. merely do something like solve Fermat’s Last Theorem. Women just are not interested, because Math is full of geeky, unsexy guys women don’t care about.

    Like


  49. > Men=War & Fighting

    Men = civilization and progress.

    Don’t forget the reason that civilization accomplishes great things — it’s the effort of men to impress women.

    Like


  50. the funny shit is, you KNOW fat lesbians still crave a good, strong, hard cock buried deep up in them guts.

    Like


  51. First off, the ‘moral’ at the end is one of those things that a lot of people need to learn and has applications for both genders, beyond the direct sexual market implications.

    And secondly, it’s funny, but I was thinking this weekend, I’ve NEVER known a lesbian that I considered socially pleasant or that I would hang out with, or was at a social function and wasn’t acting like they were surrounded by lepers. Not one. And they wonder why they get such a negative stereotype? The gay man’s affability has done much to assuage his image. Next time I see some gay marriage rights petition, I’m going to tell them I only support it for gay men, because lesbians eschew society.

    Like


  52. The removal of comment numbers wasn’t roissy’s doing; the underlying “Mistylook” theme seems to have been changed. I don’t know whether this was intentional or not, and I don’t know of any easy way to fix it other than switching to another theme (which is what I did).

    unless the underlying WordPress API has changed, I imagine it’s a very easy fix.

    Like


  53. All the niggaz be usin’ it ‘n sheet! Sho’ fine!

    That’s the worst attempt at written ebonics I think I’ve ever seen. “Sheet?’ “Sho’ fine?” Was that really bad on purpose?

    Like


  54. Despite all the political carrying on, gay guys and lesbians don’t have an awful lot in common. They often don’t even like each other as a group, and avoid each others’ company. I have one gay friend who shudders at the thought of the lesbians he knows, and tells me he finds them suuuuuch a joyless coven. When he talks about the two groups he doesn’t refer to them as “gays and lesbians,” he refers to “gays and glums.”

    Like


  55. Michael Blowhards piece was great. Man was it on the money. I was talking to some of my younger friends in their 20s who think Will and Grace is accurate portrayal of gay life, and I was trying to describe the 80s scene that Michael chronicled in his blog post and they just thought I was being homophobic. I don’t even understand when gay men even started WANTING gay marriage, they used to mock it as more evidence of how unenlightened and backwards breeders were. It’s like someone put it in their heads that they should want it and they’ve become recently obsessed with it. I can understand why lesbians want it, but not sure exactly why gay men are now obsessed.

    One thing about gay people, they are much better at covering up their dirty laundry than black people are. So many people don’t know about the rampant promiscuity, the “bug chasers,” the drugs, the meth habits, the intracommunity virulent racism on the gay scene, the widespread domestic abuse…they have actually succeeded in making Will and Grace their mainstream image to people who don’t know much about their culture.

    Like


  56. I agree that the “consensus” mode of management is one of women’s great barriers to success in the present world, and one of the reasons why many women (and men) ultimately prefer to work for male bosses: in a way, they demand less.

    However, I don’t think for a minute that this is women’s only mode of management. Has no one here ever met one of those bossy mother-types – this trait is more common among women who are mothers – who rules everyone and everything around her, from her husband and family to her church and its ministers to her PTA group and her workplace? In a world without men, people like this would probably rise to the top of the heap, and we’d find ourselves “bossed” by women who managed every aspect of our lives, from the largest issues to the tiniest details. The consensus girls would find themselves steam-rollered out of power.

    As for reverting to the Stone Age – no, I don’t think so. Women would force themselves to learn electrical engineering and other technical skills, and we’d probably be ruthless enough to make weaker women do the dirty work that has to be done, from fishing to farming. There are societies in the world in which women already do much of the dirty work – India and China, for example. BTW, In industrial England, women worked in the mines alongside men until the laws were changed to prevent this.

    What would likely happen, though, is that in this manless society, technical innovations and new discoveries, especially those that appeared to have no immediate practical application, would disappear. One of the great differences between women en masse and men en masse is that very few women are interested in “useless” pursuits like astronomy and the more theoretical forms of physics. They are not, in general, much interested in theory. The arts might continue to flourish – women appreciate that form of uselessness because the arts increase enjoyment and human understanding. But any form of knowledge or activity that looks as if it can’t supply some immediate need or enjoyment would gradually fade away. I don’t much like this fact, but I fear it’s true.

    Clio

    Like


  57. p.s. If women disappeared from the face of the earth, supposing men found some way to manage reproduction (well, they already have), human beings would soon die out altogether. Not because of men going to war, because if most wars are about women in some sense (as some men here insist), they wouldn’t have much reason to go to war if we vanished.

    No, it would be for entirely different reasons. One: men are rather less likely than women to see value in life itself, without career success and goals to pursue. The absence of women would take away much of men’s impetus to engage in these activities, and many would become couch potatoes, or the equivalent, sitting around shooting the breeze, arguing furiously about nonsensical non-issues (like this one!), talking in pure speculation and abstraction without doing anything about it. In the absence of motivation through their desire for women, some men would commit suicide, some engage in ruthless tormenting of weaker men, and most become pleasant but idle wastrels.

    Another reason why society would likely die out altogether in the absence of women is that men’s way of being good with children isn’t enough to keep children alive and healthy. Many men are excellent fathers but they tend in general not to be interested in the more boring parts of baby-rearing: keeping the kid clean, warm, and safe, ensuring that he doesn’t chew on electrical cords; that he doesn’t drink the Drano under the sink; that he gets coached in basics like “what colour are the peas, sweetums? the peas are GREEEEN!” The little boy-babies in this womanless society would die in large numbers, even assuming the best of intentions on the part of their fathers.

    Clio

    Like


  58. Kick a Bitch is not allowed to talk about mundane things like APIs, only about crass and funny things. Just like Pupu is not allowed to speak in first person, only in third.

    Some things are so perfect, they must never change.

    Like


  59. PA – Agreed on Pupu, never the 1st person for her. I don’t mind the occasional serious Kick a Bitch comment as it throws me off track and keeps him from getting as predictable as Peter, but I definitely don’t want him overdoing the serious mundane comments!

    Like


  60. I don’t know if you’ve noticed this, but women are a very practical, organized, and hard-working sex, not as romantic as men. It’s really hard for me to see them letting everything go to hell without men around. I mean, typically just in daily life the reverse is the case.

    I do think the pace of technological progress would slow considerably, but current technology and factories would be kept up. And women would organize some kind of research effort to find new stuff because the contribution of new technology to life improvement is now so obvious and women have such good organizational skills.

    It would be interesting to see if women would become more violent and opportunistic and less sentimental without men around. I think they would, just like men would learn to become more “maternal” without women around to take care of the kids. I mean, right now women don’t occupy a lot of niches because men are biologically more obsessive and competitive than they are, so there’s no point competing. But without men those niches would be open.

    Like


  61. and Clio’s 10:48 AM comment is hilarious and sort of accurate if you just project out extreme male tendencies, which is fair since other commenters are projecting out extreme female tendencies

    Like


  62. gay marriage is not about wanting to be seen the same as straight marriage couples, its about economic benefits.

    Like


  63. Clio:

    No, it would be for entirely different reasons. One: men are rather less likely than women to see value in life itself, without career success and goals to pursue. The absence of women would take away much of men’s impetus to engage in these activities, and many would become couch potatoes, or the equivalent, sitting around shooting the breeze, arguing furiously about nonsensical non-issues (like this one!), talking in pure speculation and abstraction without doing anything about it. In the absence of motivation through their desire for women, some men would commit suicide, some engage in ruthless tormenting of weaker men, and most become pleasant but idle wastrels.

    This is kind of funny, but I have to say the dystopian futures described in this thread have put a chill in my bones. Clio, in the interest of staving off such potentially disatrous scenarios, I strongly urge that you and I marshall our forces and make lots and lots of babies. But we must make haste — time is of the essence.

    *call me*

    Like


  64. “As for reverting to the Stone Age – no, I don’t think so. Women would force themselves to learn electrical engineering and other technical skills, and we’d probably be ruthless enough to make weaker women do the dirty work that has to be done, from fishing to farming”

    “And women would organize some kind of research effort to find new stuff because the contribution of new technology to life improvement is now so obvious and women have such good organizational skills.”

    Both of these predictions are doubtful. The problem is is that it isn’t the average man that advances civilization but the 1 in 100 million rare specimen at the tails of achievement. The variance between men and women in whatever traits it is that lead to this advancement [IQ, disagreeableness, abstract task-focus, and so on] is so skewed that it virtually excludes women.

    In Human Accomplishment Charles Murray found that women accounted for only 2% out of the top 4002 historical figures notable for creative achievement. And this was largely in literature. 0% of the top figures in technological achievement were women.

    There is no indication yet that political changes during the 20th century are having much effect on these ratios.

    Like


  65. Rain And, you misunderstood my point. I didn’t say that women would go on to make great innovations in technological and scientific fields. In fact, I said specifically that this was unlikely.

    What I was trying to suggest is that women are quite capable of maintaining the technology and the scientific knowledge that now exists – of organizing society so that it would continue to be preserved and passed on to future generations.

    MQ went a bit further than I did, but his comments too were devoted more to praise for women’s practicality, organizational ability, and hard work, than our scientific and technical expertise.

    Clio

    Like


  66. From that article/link: ““The results of these studies indicate that lesbian women have a better body image than do heterosexual women,” they wrote.”

    That’s fucking great.. now you’re more psychologically well-adjusted if you care so little about your appearance that you let yourself become a water-buffalo.

    The USA is on hot rails (or hot pockets) direct to hell.

    Like


  67. The R has done it again; my compliments, sir.

    And, it dovetails nicely w/recent comments by myself and to some extent Joe T, which have to do w/the urgent and pressing need of Men to have, maintain, foster and apply, ruthlessly, Standards, first for themselves, next for their Women, and/or any Women who wishes to have an association w/said Man. As I’ve said before here and elsewhere and bears repeating, there are certain things that are just alien to me. Slovenly, unkempt and grossly overweight Women who look like the Goodyear Blimp are among these.

    Keep posting about the Raw, Naked, Brutal, Truth, Roissy. Yours is the much-needed Antidote for an increasingly Feminized World.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  68. Clio:

    But any form of knowledge or activity that looks as if it can’t supply some immediate need or enjoyment would gradually fade away

    Uhmm………not really. The world would be less pleasant without women but the arts would still go on. Men thirst for beauty. That’s why hot women are avidly pursued.

    Like


  69. Er, Slumlord, you seem to have both misread and misunderstood my two comments, perhaps by mixing them together somehow.

    Point 1: In the comment you cite, I was talking about what would happen if men vanished from the world, and women were forced to manage society.

    Point 2: I specifically excluded the arts from that comment – I said that women are capable of appreciating those pursuits which provide either for our needs or for our immediate pleasures, and I said that the arts belong in this category.

    Clio

    Like


  70. Er, Slumlord, you seem to have both misread and misunderstood my two comments

    I stand corrected!

    Like


  71. As for the idea of men vanishing from the Earth, I’m largely in agreement with Whiskey; but for a different reason.

    Risk.

    All of the needed jobs men do to keep a society afloat need people who are willing to risk life and limb to make them come about, and women by and large, aren’t willing to risk it. In fact, females are largey risk averse. So doing those kinds of jobs just wouldn’t happen, or nowhere near to the degree that they need to.

    I’m the living proof. As some of you know, I’m a Blue Collar guy in industry, working in hazardous and unpleasant conditions. Men have died on the job. Others have limbs removed.

    We’ve had women come on the job; none, and I mean none, of em have made it a week on the line. We have roughly 5% women at the planet where I work, and they are off to themselves doing the “light duty” stuff. When it comes to the heavy lifting, its to a man, men doing it.

    I think its been mentioned before here in this forum and discussed/written about elsewhere, but the notion of a “Matriarchal” society is largely romatic to the point of foolishness; again, as Whiskey and a few others have noted, should such a state of affairs come about we’ll be going back in time to the Primitive Age, because that’s what virtually all Matri-focal societies are-primitive. Again, Roissy has already noted what happens when Women’s predilictions are unleashed.

    Holla back

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  72. A world without men…sounds like most major cities in the U.S. to me.

    Without male scientists and engineers, there would be fewer of them, but there would still be some, and life would go on. Their status may be elevated in proportion to their rarity though, so they’d get paid more.

    As to how women would look, why would you care if you’re not alive to see it?

    Like


  73. …and Mu, come to Israel with that “women are risk averse” tripe, okay?

    Like


  74. Nicole
    …and Mu, come to Israel with that “women are risk averse” tripe, okay

    Sorry Nicole, but it happens to be true. Now that doesn’t mean all women are risk averse. I hope you understand this concept…

    Like


  75. Nicole:

    A world without men…sounds like most major cities in the U.S. to me.

    Huh? http://www.xoxosoma.com/singles/

    Like


  76. All the niggaz be usin’ it ‘n sheet! Sho’ fine!

    That’s the worst attempt at written ebonics I think I’ve ever seen. “Sheet?’ “Sho’ fine?” Was that really bad on purpose?
    SMDH
    T, DA opened the door again. I really think he enjoys the racist BS.

    Like


  77. Nicole,
    I’m sure Ariel Sharon, or Bibi Netanyahu, or any one of Israel’s citizen warriors could regale us all w/accounts of the many, many IDF Female Commandos who fought by their side. Um-hmm.

    Save the quips for the Sci-Fi channel, please. It works well on the (now defunct, Thank God) “new” Battelstar Gallactica; it simply doesn’t wash in the Real.

    Holla back

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  78. T, DA opened the door again. I really think he enjoys the racist BS.

    Wasn’t the racism of the joke I cared about, I can enjoy a genuinely funny racist joke. We all need to be able to laugh at ourselves. I thought DA’s “good hair” crack was actually funny. But that other guy’s joke didn’t bother me because of racism…it was just really corny and outdated. It sounded like a bad mix of Amos n Andy and 70s jive talk. I’m surprised he didn’t throw in a “jive turkey” or a “sucka” while he was at it.

    Like


  79. whoops, sorry, didn’t close the brackets.

    Like


  80. Well T, you are better than I.

    Like


  81. Thanks for your unbracketed comments, MQ. I’m surprised, though, that you didn’t also point out that “heroic inventors”, whether they are incorporated or independent, are not enough in themselves to advance an entire civilisation.

    The inventions, the technical innovations, the new methods of farming or combing cotton or sailing a ship or smelting iron, the changes – they must be implemented, they must be put to use, before they can effect any mass social improvement. All this requires a populace that is also willing to experiment and innovate – buy and figure out how to use the mechanical ploughs, instruct children in the New Math, teach women to boil the wather they give to their families, persuade doctors to wash their hands before they deliver babies – all that sort of thing. If the ordinary people don’t go along, the heroic inventions and the new discoveries will lie idle and their potential for improving everyone’s lives will remain unrealised.

    I tried to make this point before, in another context, when speaking of women’s contribution to civilisation, but was pooh-poohed roundly…

    Clio

    Like


  82. MQ,
    Please spare me the history lessons, you’re boring everyone to tears. All’s I’m saying is that Whiskey has a powerful point: when given the choice, Women do NOT want to do the things that actually make a Civil Society work, and even Camille Paglia noted this. In fact, it was she who once said that if it fell to Women to advance civilization, we’d all still be living in grass huts. And don’t get it twisted, every single Fireman who gave their lives in WTC on Sep 11, were MEN. Every single one of em.

    Like I said MQ, this ain’t a history lesson or arid academic theory for me. I’ve seen it firsthand.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  83. chic, if you can read Steve Sailer’s website without throwing your laptop out the window you’re doing just fine

    Like


  84. chic, if you can read Steve Sailer’s website without throwing your laptop out the window you’re doing just fine

    Agreed.

    Like


  85. I used to love Steve back in the late 90s, and I still like his stuff despite the eccentric turn his thinking has taken in recent years but I wish to God he’d disable the comment section on his blog. If I wanted to bookmark stormfront I’d have done so. VDARE is even worse.

    Like


  86. chic, if you can read Steve Sailer’s website without throwing your laptop out the window you’re doing just fine

    When I first stumbled upon his work and his commenters, it made me cry, and I had difficulty sleeping. It put me into a deep depressive funk that admittedly destroyed what was once left of my sense of optimism. Now it’s a good way to destroy any latent feelings of sexual arousal.

    Like


  87. “Now it’s a good way to destroy any latent feelings of sexual arousal.”

    Honey, if those bigots had gotten laid in the past ten years they wouldn’t be so hateful. They aren’t worth wasting your own libido.

    Like


  88. Hello &T, what makes Steve’s comment section so bad is his usage of comment moderation but allowing flaming racists to post comments. I wrote a comment about Obama’s being mixed race makes him no less blk than the millions of light skinned blks in this country, many of whom are fairer in complexion.

    Some guy posted a comment along the lines of Obama looks Kenyan, I would not think he is African- American. I probably raped his mother or grandmother. Now who the hell would post something like that(bold) if you are using comment moderation.

    Recently he had a post about blks in Cali voting 70% against ballot #9(?). His post pretty much blamed blks for the ballot not passing and asked why aren’t gays attacking blks the way they are attacking Mormons. ln response, I wrote a comment about how blks were only 6.5% of those who voted in Cali although of that 6.5%,blks voted 70% against. Guess what, that comment never saw the light. In fact, he removed the post.

    Like


  89. Hello saidHoney, if those bigots had gotten laid in the past ten years they wouldn’t be so hateful

    Ha, I bet any piece would do. Men become cranky when they have to go without for a while. Women become nasty too when they are “backed up”, but it takes us longer to get there.

    @ DA- Please stop!!! I really hope you are not endearing yourself to whites with your constant belittling of yourself and droll banter of racial self hate.

    Like


  90. hello, the worst thing about the commenters to me is that they seem to have affected him somewhat, making him a little more eccentric and sounding a little more bitter as time passes. He still makes great insights, but that commenting crowd really seems to have affected him somewhat.

    Like


  91. Will all the blacks and women please leave? You are really not wanted and you add nothing to the conversation.

    Like


  92. chic,
    *shaking head* I loved the stuff he wrote when he was with NR. It was cutting edge and honest, but compassionate. Even his IQ series was (rhetorically) critical of high IQ whites and not blacks. But about two years ago something changed with him and he’s been bitter and testy toward blacks, immigrants etc. ever sense instead of reporting unfavorable news in a straightforward manner. Peter Brimelow at VDARE once wrote about how upset he was at the sight of his blond kids playing with Hispanic children. I like to think it was the influence of that crowd that turned Steve to the Dark Side but I’m probably just making excuses.

    Like


  93. Mark in Ark,
    Going in two by two, huh? So are you the male or female hippo?

    Like


  94. Will all the blacks and women please leave? You are really not wanted and you add nothing to the conversation.

    Lucky for us your opinion doesn’t matter.

    Like


  95. ln response, I wrote a comment about how blks were only 6.5% of those who voted in Cali although of that 6.5%,blks voted 70% against. Guess what, that comment never saw the light. In fact, he removed the post.

    He doesn’t remove posts often. When he does, it usually implies that he realized his observation was pointless… which, in this case, implies you very well could have gotten through to him?

    hello, the worst thing about the commenters to me is that they seem to have affected him somewhat, making him a little more eccentric and sounding a little more bitter as time passes. He still makes great insights, but that commenting crowd really seems to have affected him somewhat.

    Continuing my point, I think commenters can have a positive influence on him too; we just need to make the effort. I like to believe that I influenced Steve to analyze Obama in at least a slightly more objective manner with this comment 21 months ago.

    Like


  96. I was about to ask how whatisuglyass up there knew I was a woman but then I realized that my hello kitty avatar didn’t leave much room for doubt. Given the subject and tone of this blog I guess it is a little surreal.

    Chris,
    How many Sailerites are there here at Roissy’s? And out of curiosity what other blogs do you all follow?

    Like


  97. Also Chris, are Sailerites prevalent in the PUA community in general or do the two populations mostly intersect here at Roissy’s?

    Like


  98. Mark in Ark
    Will all the blacks and women please leave? You are really not wanted and you add nothing to the conversation

    Mark in Ark you should meet Mark in the hood. Cyber thugging is not where it’s at buddy. You will continue to have problems with women if your comments here are anything to go by. Hating on women and blks will not get you any Pussy

    hello said Peter Brimelow at VDARE once wrote about how upset he was at the sight of his blond kids playing with Hispanic children,/i>
    I really don’t understand why some whites become angry at something like this^^^. I’ve never heard of or know any blks who become angry at the sight of …

    But about two years ago something changed with him and he’s been bitter and testy toward blacks, immigrants etc. ever sense instead of reporting unfavorable news in a straightforward manner.
    Did he have a run in with a blk person? Did his wife cheat on him with a blk/hispanic person (no joke)? When people change overnight, most likely they recently had a very negative experience.
    SMH
    I worry that DA is headed down the same path. One day he will write a comment calling for the death and destruction of the white race after having a negative run in with a few white men on the trains.

    Like


  99. T, Roissy links to Sailer & I think Sailer links to Roissy.

    @hello- Mark is a long time lurker. Usually he makes an apperance when DA leaves the door open. Even without your gravie, he could probably guess that you are female.

    Like


  100. They aren’t worth wasting your own libido.

    Actually, it’s good for when I really want to jerk off, but for some reason or another, I can’t.

    Admittedly, avoiding that stuff has pretty much been the best way to improving my current mental health. Eventually, ghosts do go away. 🙂

    Will all the blacks and women please leave?

    Sucker. The racist just left the women with black men. Oops. 🙂

    OTOH, he may be one of those gay racists…

    I worry that DA is headed down the same path

    David’s Catholic sensibilities should serve as an excellent firewall against the evils of hating white people.

    Like


  101. David’s Catholic sensibilities should serve as an excellent firewall against the evils of hating white people.

    Don’t rely on that firewall because it has a virus. Your Catholic firewall let in the “hate blk people” worm.

    Like


  102. Sailer doesn’t link to Roissy

    Like


  103. Are there a lot of gay racists? I don’t have a lot of gay friends but my impression is that many (white) gay men are quite fond of blacks, Latinos and Asians. Rice kings, anyone?

    Like


  104. hello:

    Sailer doesn’t link to Roissy

    I’m swondering why Whiskey still doesn’t have a spot on Roissy’s blogroll…

    Like


  105. hello
    Sailer doesn’t link to Roissy
    Thanks

    hello- Plenty from what I’ve gay folks have told me. Much more than in the st8 world. Don’t forget that gay men are still men. Men can screw anything. There are klansmen have slept with non white women.

    Like


  106. Your Catholic firewall let in the “hate blk people” worm.

    The person who plays David in the real world may be an oreo, but he doesn’t hate black people.

    Like


  107. “There are klansmen have slept with non white women.”

    Like this guy? (vomiting)

    Like


  108. Steve has given shout-outs to roissy before. He said something along the lines that roissy is to the gender war what the War Nerd is to war war.

    by the way, Kay Hymowitz has a poorly written, tepidly sympathetic article on Game over at the City Journal.

    http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_4_darwinist_dating.html

    Like


  109. You’re the 3rd person to link to that article tonight Rain And (I was the 2nd). It wasn’t as great as it could have been, but considering how much worse her previous article was right before it, it’s quite an improvement.

    Like


  110. Steve has given shout-outs to roissy before. He said something along the lines that roissy is to the gender war what the War Nerd is to war war.

    *preen*

    Like


  111. “You’re the 3rd person to link to that article tonight Rain And”

    Sorry, didn’t catch that. :/

    They should have gotten Devlin to write the article. Or roissy. Or shit, you T.

    You guys should send in some writing samples to Maxim, Esquire, or some other lad mag. At least then you’d be getting paid to do what you’re doing anyway.

    Like


  112. I hang out with gays a lot. They make way more racist comments then straight people do.

    Like


  113. Mu, here’s the way that gender (or other) stereotyping thing works: You choose to see what you want to see, and nothing anyone else says to the contrary, regardless of how true it is, will matter to you.

    In the end, you don’t really “win” the conversation. People just assume you’re a nutbar, and do the internet equivalent of backing away slowly.

    …but the difference between the exiting, neo chauvanist (I say neo because at least chauvanist movements in the past consisted of men who didn’t run up under feminism’s skirt when it was convenient for them to avoid some kind of responsibility) buzzword believer, and the person who looks at history more objectively, is that one person’s perspective is more grounded in reality. Your parotting the armchair extremist PUA/reclaimed misogynist whoever, may win you brownie points in the way of cheers from the betas around you, but it does not make you look more Alpha.

    Yesman is a beta position.

    Now, if you can, I encourage you to use your brain a little more, and be less of a pussy.

    I mean, I don’t really care what your opinion is, but just have one.

    Now…MQ, I’m curious as to what you’d say to the argument that women only did these things because they were forced to. I don’t think this is true because of the women who were/are involved in the creation of revolutionary movements.

    Not to mention the obvious, pushing a baby out is a risky thing to do, as is even having sex these days. How can one really measure which gender is more or less willing to put their lives on the line? It seems like a silly argument to me…more a matter of perspective.

    Men are better physically suited for hard manual labor, but many women still do it. Sure, it may be because they’re forced to, but I don’t know many guys who do hard manual labor because they dreamed of doing so since childhood.

    Dangerous work…I think it’s a social thing. A woman can just as easily hang from a crane installing things as a man, and there are some who do, but the majority of women are instructed to avoid that kind of work. So that has an obvious social cause in my opinion.

    Something for which upbringing is obviously to blame can’t be shovelled over to one gender being faulty or inferior. It’s not the vagina. It’s the society or family that told that girl she couldn’t or shouldn’t.

    So on the one hand, I don’t think a few exceptions are relevent in a generalization, on the other, I think the cause is very important to mention.

    So Mu, are you going to encourage your daughters to follow in your career path? or are you just talking trash with no intention of doing anything to correct it?

    Like


  114. Lots of European gay men rant non-stop about Middle Eastern and African men in terms that make the so-called far right politicians look like flaming liberals. Of course, they will still happily fuck them.

    Liberals are a very unnatural political home for gay men and they’re only there because of their historical, disappearing commitment to gay rights. They’ll vote for libertarianish or nationalist right-wingers if they have some cover from gay hatred like an obviously gay frontman (like Pim Fortuyn or Jörg Haider). That realignment might be tough in the US, with the Christians too big of a part of the right to dump, but it’s happening all over Europe.

    Like


  115. “Mu, here’s the way that gender (or other) stereotyping thing works: You choose to see what you want to see, and nothing anyone else says to the contrary, regardless of how true it is, will matter to you.”

    What I see are women in the military who are basically unable to pick up a case or can of ammunition in each hand, much less run with it for any distance. Feminists like to whine and write articles, but as far as I know, none of them has joined the Marines to prove their theories. When I see any different, I’ll let everyone know.

    Like


  116. on November 18, 2008 at 9:33 am ironrailsironweights

    The absence of women would take away much of men’s impetus to engage in these activities, and many would become couch potatoes, or the equivalent, sitting around shooting the breeze, arguing furiously about nonsensical non-issues (like this one!), talking in pure speculation and abstraction without doing anything about it.

    And that differs from the present society, how?

    Peter

    Like


  117. I loved the stuff he wrote when he was with NR. It was cutting edge and honest, but compassionate. Even his IQ series was (rhetorically) critical of high IQ whites and not blacks. But about two years ago something changed with him and he’s been bitter and testy toward blacks, immigrants etc. ever sense instead of reporting unfavorable news in a straightforward manner.

    I agree with this — Steve had some really insightful things to say (still does occasionally), but his emotions eventually got the better of him and he got more clearly racist. I think Obama was a bit of a tipping point, at some level he can’t stand that guy. I think it’s going to be tough for Steve to watch a clearly very high IQ black guy running the country.

    Like


  118. MQ – maybe not. I believe I’ve read stuff from him in the past talking about how biracial people tend to have higher average IQ, so I don’t think seeing a high-IQ biracial person would cause him much cognitive dissonance. Plus he was raised primarily by whites and Indonesians, so he doesn’t have the social pathologies of black American culture that can sometimes champion anti-intellectualism. I don’t think his problems with Obama has to do with how he obsessively manipulates his race for maximum political effect, which Sailer connects with because he also is obsessed over race.

    No one knows anything about Obama outside of this narrative he created for himself in his book and the empty platitudes he used to ride to the top. Seriously, 4 years ago this man was a national unknown. On the strength an old autobiography, a convention speech and soaring but vague rhetoric, he became President 4 years later.

    Like


  119. “I think it’s going to be tough for Steve to watch a clearly very high IQ black guy running the country.”

    You’ve got to be joking. Obama is going to provide Sailer with 4 years of shit to write about. That’s a fucking gift.

    Like


  120. Roissy said:

    Men keep women in check.

    Yes, though also remember that queer women are wired differently from straight women, so this difference in weight might also be hormonal or otherwise biological.

    Like


  121. to HughRistik,
    re: “this difference in weight might also be hormonal or .. biological”

    I am aware of no known biological differences. Public health studies (I’m not going to hunt them down now) have shown differences in behavior hazardous to health. Lesbians smoke, drink alcohol, and suffer from depression more than straight women. I surmise the extra weight results from extra stress in their lives, rather than the absence of intimate men in their lives.

    Like


  122. Anony, in my observation, it’s just that we’re more relaxed about these things in the “freak” community. Because we’re more about the experience than the look, the variety of beauty is going to be wider.

    There’s also the matter of focus. Lesbians worry about their weight as much as men do.

    There’s also the different esthetic. Women who like women, often like sturdy women. I know I do.

    I haven’t known Lesbians to be especially fat though. There are some, but there’s a sort of limit to how fat someone can get who actually moves. Most of the sturdy women I know, self included, who are Lesbian or bi and in the community, are involved in some kind of sports…if not that, then some kind of dance.

    Alot of sloppy, sedentary straight women though…of varying weights.

    Like


  123. Nicole,
    The study referenced at the start of this post found lesbian women to be 2.5 times more likely than straight women to be overweight, and 2.5 times more likely to be obese.
    The study was done as a door-to-door interview by U Michigan researcher. It was self-reporting (weak, yes) but backed up by a live interviewer. I thought it seemed reliable, and accepted by the CDC.

    congrats on being athletic and “sturdy” . I smile at your term.

    Like


  124. Anony, bodybuilders are “overweight” and some are “obese”. It’s fairly normal for strength and amateur athletes to run thin. In the military, I encountered this all the time…people who were technically overweight or obese who really weren’t actually that fatty, or if they were, it was more thick buildedness than fatty-fatness.

    I’m positive Lesbians run bigger. What I’m telling you is that one of the reasons is because they like it that way, and that it doesn’t really take anything from most of them, since by virtue of being Lesbian, they’re not in the mainstream. So the mainstream “beauty” standard isn’t going to mean as much to them.

    The disturbing bit about this obsession with fatness to me, is that it should be as relevent to you as the average measurement in cenimeters of the cocks of Gay men is to me.

    …which is to say, not at all.

    Like


  125. nicole,
    If I understand, you suggest that I aught not be obsessed with Lesbian weight. If I am the taxpayer or the pooled-insurance premium payer, then everyone’s weight is my business. I pay for the complications of obesity and subsequent insulin-resistant diabetes, heart disease, etc. So , your weight is my business too.

    Like


  126. Anony, you also pay for the far greater complications associated with low intelligence.

    Add to that things like drug abuse, pollution, crime, poverty, and well…you get my point.

    I pay taxes too, so my weight is as much your business as your IQ, drug history, and income is mine.

    Like


  127. The way out of this morass is to not play by women’s rules.

    Per ususal roissy misses the point entirely. The way “out” is to not play by rules period.

    Like


  128. I think Steve began to lose it (not all the way, but disturbingly far) with the onset of the Iraq War…or rather its continuation. I remember at some point Steve writing with what was then uncharacteristic bitterness and even exhaustion the following sentence:

    God, I hate the Middle East.

    I think he does. And seeing America tied down there has made him angry and bitter…and eager to find someone to blame.

    It saddens me enormously to see him coming more and more to blame a certain group more for our involvement in the hated bunghole of the ME.

    No guesses for which group he points the finger at.

    Plus, he’s getting older. Hell, I’m a bitter old coot myself, so who am I to talk? Still, his worsening obsession with the power of the joo-know-hoos gives me a chill every time I read yet another of his posts on the topic.

    To say nothing of the fact that it makes me wonder about his health. Steve has been a kind of hero, a wild man wandering in where angels fear to tread and even fools won’t show their faces. His essay in NR on the differences between gays and lesbians is not only full of enough insight to render it a classic, it’s also very funny, and yes, even compassionate.

    Those were the halcyon days for fans of Steve S. Let’s hope they return.

    Like


  129. I’ve been reading Steve for many years, and haven’t really noticed any great change in him during the past two years. I really don’t know what you’re talking about.

    My reading of his earlier, 90s stuff has been more sporadic, but there’s probably a significant difference between what he wrote then and what he writes now. Back then he apparently had a lot more faith in the Republican party and neoconservatism than he does now.

    Like


  130. hello:

    *shaking head* I loved the stuff he [Steve Sailer] wrote when he was with NR. It was cutting edge and honest, but compassionate. Even his IQ series was (rhetorically) critical of high IQ whites and not blacks. But about two years ago something changed with him and he’s been bitter and testy toward blacks, immigrants etc. ever sense instead of reporting unfavorable news in a straightforward manner. Peter Brimelow at VDARE once wrote about how upset he was at the sight of his blond kids playing with Hispanic children. I like to think it was the influence of that crowd that turned Steve to the Dark Side but I’m probably just making excuses.

    If I was into conspiracy theories, I’d probably conclude that the surge in the “race-realist” business that started after the publication of The Bell Curve is an elaborate leftist entryist plot with the goal to discredit the honest conservative Right, especially its paleoconservative and libertarian currents. But even without any conspiracy theories, it’s clear that people like Sailer are doing immense damage to the causes that they supposedly champion. Sailer is obviously an extremely smart fellow and a great writer, and I’ve enjoyed much of his writing and agreed with many of his insights, but his obsession with “race-realist” pseudo-science and association with Brimelow’s gang of flaming white supremacists at VDARE has tainted his reputation beyond repair. The only thing Sailer and his ilk have achieved in practice is to make it impossible to state a case against a lot of leftist nonsense without drawing associations with their extremist ideas and inviting the deadly charges of racism. Even the valid and intelligent ideas and arguments he’s made have now ended up being a negative contribution, because using them will now just open you to guilt by association, thus supplying cheap and effective ammunition to your opponents. The political consequences of this are disastrous.

    And no, I’m not some squeamish PC type who shudders in horror at these “race-realist” theories, instinctively unable to react with anything but blind indignation. I have no problem with accepting ugly truths, including those about issues of race, but I’ve actually taken the effort to study what these theories have to say, and I’ve concluded that they are a load of bollocks based purely on their lack of intellectual merit. On one hand, they are based on traditional IQ research, much of which is antiquated pseudo-scientific rubbish developed around the same time when the elite of psychological “sciences” was also busy with psychoanalysis, inkblot tests, ESP, Skinnerism, and other complete nonsense. (It’s not like IQ tests don’t have some useful practical applications, but the entire cult built around the mythology of g is just ridiculous; it’s like Freudianism with some mathematical sugar-coating.) On the other hand, they are packed with just-so stories and strings of wishful thinking masquerading as logical inference (Sailer in particular tends to lose his usual relatively careful and reserved tone when writing about these topics). What I find the saddest in the whole sordid affair is that so many otherwise brilliant minds of the Right fall for this New Age nonsense.

    Like


  131. Vladimir, based on your post, I seriously doubt that you’ve actually read much on IQ aside from some smear jobs from Gould et co. IQ is empirically one of the most valid tools in human sciences, predicting many life outcomes pretty reliably. It’s idiotic to compare it to psychoanalysis, ESP or whatever.

    How do you explain, for example, interracial adoption studies that indicate that adoptees tend to have IQs similar to those of their co-racials, and unlike those of their adoptive parents?

    IQ research is not vilified because it’s faulty scientifically (it isn’t), but rather because its results are completely at odds with our culture’s current egalitarian, multicultural ethos. The empirical evidence for intelligence differences between races/ethnic groups is so strong that if similar evidence existed for some less contentious position, it would be considered a settled matter. Even the leading anti-hereditarian IQ researcher James Flynn admits in his most recent book that anyone who is certain that interracial IQ differences are entirely caused by non-genetic factors is either an ignoramus or a liar.

    What do you expect Sailer to do? To start spouting PC platitudes about race? To extol the fantastic benefits of mass immigration? Aren’t there enough pundits of that sort already? Human biodiversity is Sailer’s shtick, and he is interesting precisely because he is willing and able to talk about socio(bio)logical patterns that others pretend don’t exist. Career-wise, he’s paid dearly for his honesty, but I’m very grateful for what he’s done.

    Like


  132. J:

    Vladimir, based on your post, I seriously doubt that you’ve actually read much on IQ aside from some smear jobs from Gould et co. IQ is empirically one of the most valid tools in human sciences, predicting many life outcomes pretty reliably. It’s idiotic to compare it to psychoanalysis, ESP or whatever.

    Oh, I’ve read much more than that. I did read the “Mismeasure” by Gould, but I also read various popular articles and even original research papers by people like Jensen, Rushton, Gottfredson, etc., including Rushton’s rebuttals of Gould, as well as stuff written by relatively non-partisan people in the field such as Flynn and Turkheimer. It’s indisputable that Gould was indeed politically motivated and occasionally engaged in his own campaigns of denialism and smearing of inconvenient truths. But some of his criticisms of the g crowd are spot-on, simply because they are logically and mathematically accurate and coherent. I have to admit that, regardless of how much I dislike Gould’s ideology otherwise.

    For more details on my views on these issues, see (and feel free to address) my comments here. I don’t think it makes sense to continue this discussion here.

    IQ research is not vilified because it’s faulty scientifically (it isn’t), but rather because its results are completely at odds with our culture’s current egalitarian, multicultural ethos. The empirical evidence for intelligence differences between races/ethnic groups is so strong that if similar evidence existed for some less contentious position, it would be considered a settled matter.

    No, it wouldn’t, however much you wish that it were so. I agree that even if definitive evidence existed, the PC crowd would insist on denialism and silencing of opposing views. But I’ve looked for it, and it just doesn’t exist. I hate and oppose much of the prevailing PC nonsense probably as much as you, but if a theory is grossly un-PC, that doesn’t by itself make it true.

    Even the leading anti-hereditarian IQ researcher James Flynn admits in his most recent book that anyone who is certain that interracial IQ differences are entirely caused by non-genetic factors is either an ignoramus or a liar.

    Well, duh. Of course that nobody can be certain in either direction. But there is no conclusive evidence to the contrary either, despite many people’s wishful thinking. Even the basic concepts like IQ and g are by themselves methodologically problematic, so it’s questionable whether these basic questions even make sense. These concepts come from a time when psychology was for the most part a crackpot pseudo-science, and their baggage has never been satisfactorily cleared up.

    What do you expect Sailer to do? To start spouting PC platitudes about race? To extol the fantastic benefits of mass immigration? Aren’t there enough pundits of that sort already? Human biodiversity is Sailer’s shtick, and he is interesting precisely because he is willing and able to talk about socio(bio)logical patterns that others pretend don’t exist. Career-wise, he’s paid dearly for his honesty, but I’m very grateful for what he’s done.

    Oh, I definitely respect his integrity and honesty, and as I already said, he is definitely an extremely smart, fun, and clear-thinking writer (except when he gets carried away too far with his “race-realist” speculations). But political battles in the real world are not won by open and frank logical argument; they are won by propaganda. Sailer and the (far worse) rest of the VDARE crowd have done their contribution to cement the popular meme “anti-immigration=flaming racist” in the general public, and this definitely hasn’t done any good for the anti-immigration case. After all, how can you make any case popular if it’s tightly associated with a theory that shouts into the faces of more than 20% of U.S. citizens that they have been scientifically proven to be subhumans? You have to admit that this is true even if you totally buy the “race-realist” theories of Sailer & Co.

    Like