Upon thinking of attention whores such as Satyr and Chris Crocker and the associations with femininity and emo kids, i got to thinking…is attention whoring actually feminine? Lions with long manes and peacocks…i have decided that attention whoring is not actually a sexual function, masculinity and femininity are irrelevant…outdated and obsolete memes.
Paganism associates night with feminine…morning with the "male’ light…the scientific facts are that estrogen is emitted as a sleep hormone…that is the association.
I decided that masculinity and feminity are iirelevant…do we map the “ideal” model of behavoir on what? Apes, horses, pigs, cows…spiders…should women dominate and eat males/ I realize the past and evolution is not the perfect process, natural selection does not give us the perfect map…
so i have decided what the male and female functions “ought” to be using rational optimization for the basic ‘wasteland’ environment.
the primary function of the female, is to carry the baby. from this we can draw a map of what is optimum Female behavoir and Male behavoir, in a natural or ‘wasteland’ type environment.
Females, should have a tendency to stay at home.
Females, should be loyal.
Females, should be good at building and fixing things (such as building homes.)
Females, should be good at guarding.
Females, should derive entertainment from social things, games, and grooming by other females.
Females, should be good at rationing food and planning resource management.
Males, should have tendency to expand outward.
Males, should have a tendency to periodically check up.
Males, should be clever and creative spontaneously.
Males, should be good at hunting.
Males, should be physically strong (to carry their prey home)
Males, should be good at directions
These are the optimum primary sexual functions in a natural or ‘wasteland’ type environment.
The next attributes are secondary sexual functions. These attributes, however, are only secondary functions (perks), and so are not as important as the primary optimum attributes.
Males, would have a slight hunting advantage with smaller breasts (due to large breasts impeding agility).
Males, would have a slight disadvantage at being physically sensitive (due to being cut by branches)
Males, would have a slight advantage with bony ugly faces, but this would come at a cost (less aesthetically attraction from females, females who close their eyes during sex, thus the female dependence on all manner of fantasy.)
Females, would have a slight disadvantage with smaller breasts (less food storage capacity)
Females, would have a slight disadvantage at being physically sensitive (due to birth pain).
Female physical sensitivity, is a tertiary sexual function, or fetish function, aimed to increase sexual pleasure during the act, but it serves no role outside of that.Actually, it fulfills the primary function of social entertainment via grooming.
Homosexuality, is also a bit irrelevant, since true homosexuals are few and far inbetween.
We see an inversion of the male and female process…erroneous conclusions based on the outdated masculine and feminine dichotomy. People look to social norms, or perhaps even the past, to determine what ‘masculine and feminine’ is…but what do we choose? Apes, horses, spiders? Modern women, past women, etc? This is why one must not even look to the past to determine the optimum dichotomy, but to the roots of the equation, factoring in the Environment as the variable. If you ask a transsexual, who decides what masculine or feminine is by trendy social norms…she might say it is "masculine’ to stay at home…or feminine to be a busybody…since all of the women around her are busybodies who don’t stay at home…or, camo boots will be feminine because the fashion magazine says so…she cannot measure what actual masculine or feminine is at the core, the roots, because masculine and feminine are actually irrelevant constructs in her particular context. So we see an inversion…men who expand outward and chase after girls, are deemed feminine…men who stay at home, or men who socially manipulate others to get to the top of society…are deemed masculine…laziness becomes considered masculine…inversion of the optimized functions.
We see women all round us who are busybodies, men who are lazy…so we erroneously assume that being a busybody and avoiding home, is somehow feminine, and laziness, somehow masculine. We look at the moon, feel sleepy, and like some ancient tribe, unaware of the chemical hormone “estrogen”, label the moon “feminine”. ignoring the prime function of the hormone “estrogen”…evolved primary sexual functions, masculinity and femininity labels have become obsolete, deprecated, no longer a useful function. Even the top thinkers, such as Satyr, make also a bit of a mistake, confusing “natural selection” for "optimum selection’…Functions evolved in the species, characteristics derived from Estrogen, loosely coincide with the optimum functions, but are not the optimum functions, not the definitive "masculine/feminine’ traits…one must get to the roots, build and plot what the optimum functions are in terms of logical sense…not merely look back at the past for the random grabbag nature provided…which do we choose? Apes, pigs, cattle, horses…spiders, even? Which do we derive the best masculine/feminine patters? Male/female?
The Dna machine can be customized to fit any environment. in an inaustere environment, Males can become beautiful in appearance, like females, since the environment already has the food distribution infrastructure, males need not leave the home ever, thus, no need to have evolved breast reduction, they can essentially be lesbians. It can also be tweaked to fit hostile environments, males focusing more on bone density and breast reduction, in order to be able to sustain more damage from the environment.
