Thesis about sex, gender and power

The past few years have witnessed the emerging of a new underclass of our society. These are disenfranchised boys and age-wise full grown men, who are of bad genetical stock but havent been eliminated by nature because of societies weaknesses for weakness.

These masculinoid entities are due to their faltering genetics incapable of attaining sexual love and see with pain how freely women enjoy their powers these days. This results in a “philosophy” which is becoming wide spread among them and seeps out into places like this.

This “philosophy” holds that things are wrong. Specifically, sexual things are wrong. Specifically, sexual objects are wrong because they behave like actual creatures where they should be willess fuckdolls that appear by magic (or “justice”) in the bedrooms of these “philosophers”.

Of course this is a paraphrasing of the general theme; not a quote. But there is no exaggeration, I believe - and we should not be surprised that nature produces such halflife in a protected society. But it is becessary to be aware of its existence as no doubt it will produce rapists.

My thesis is that such boymen are a segment of our male population that nature has deselected and that we are hearing the gargling sounds of drowning. I suggest we help it keep its head underwater.

What are ‘boymen’ and ‘real men’ in your thesis? What specifically is your complaint?

I suggest that differences are a natural function of the randomisation of genes in each generation. That because nature destroys the weak, it doesn’t mean it has a game play nor any purpose et al. Differences, strengths and weaknesses, are relative things and all part of the rich tapestry of life which makes humans diverse and adaptable thus strong through that!

Gene-pools wherein reproduction is artificially controlled will always have anomalies, marginal populations, disenfranchised and unrecognized populations and genetically unviable but socially powerful elites that make irrational moral standards, unsustainable economies, non-representative organizations and unenforceable laws.
They tend to die out on their own, without intervention: don’t know cause and effect.

I’ll give you an example:

Natural selection is not natural, if you’re talking about humans; it hasn’t been natural for the past 4 million years. We see in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey, the precursors to homo sapiens (the man-apes) are on the verge of being eliminated from evolution. This is when the extraterrestrials come along and start playing god. They begin to manipulate the evolutionary process. They write their own program about what is fit and what is not fit, and the success of each individual is then contingent upon his or her conforming to this program.

The reason certain people feel disenfranchised is that they are just cogs in a wheel -slaves to a program worked out by “the gods” over four million years ago. The movie is highly allegorical. The AI that controls the ship bound for Jupiter tries to destroy the crew, but Bowman is able to overcome and shut the computer down. Bowman then accesses the giant monolith left there by the gods, and he becomes the Star Child.

The symbolic significance of this Star Child is that it represents the new program that humans will write for themselves, after they have disposed of the program given to them by the gods. So far, human attempts to manipulate the evolutionary process have only resulted in attempts to create specimens which conform more perfectly to the program given us by the gods. To fulfill our destiny, and produce this Star Child, humans need to re-invent the human being.

Science fiction aside, human genetic selection has not been entirely natural since the formation of hierarchies in human groups.

When the species was organized in clans and small tribes, there was some deliberate selection to avoid consanguinity: peoples would barter, form alliances or raid for nubile females, or formally exchange young people of both sexes. There were almost universal taboos against incest. In all other respects, nature was in charge of weeding out the weak, deformed and sickly at an early age; culling the clumsy and inattentive in youth; preserving the canny and hardy into a long reproductive life.

After agriculture became prevalent, settled societies tended to increase in population and regulation. Patriarchs and/or matriarchs took charge of reproductive arrangements. More ritual and taboo were introduced; marriages were arranged for land-ownership and the preservation of wealth in families. This practice became more arbitrarily selective as civilized societies split into classes and castes and specialized by trade and segregated neighbourhoods. The marriage partners available to young people were restricted by income, living conditions, religious edicts, social standards rules of conduct imposed by increasingly powerful religious elite, as well as the political, military and economic powers. The offspring of upper class families were protected and coddled, so that they tended to survive, even if badly flawed; the offspring of lower classes were often subject to hunger, cold and ill-treatment, so many viable (even superior) specimens died in infancy and childhood. As they are still doing today.
This kind of interference in human reproduction has been in effect for approximately 300 generations…
… interrupted periodically (about once each generation, but rarely in all places at the same time) by wars of succession, religion, revolution and conquest. The gene pool is always stirred up by the rapine and indiscriminate exterminations of armed conflict.

Human evolution is directed by no intelligence and toward no purposeful culmination. Human populations become healthier, hardier, smarter and more compact (not so excess birth rate) when they are materially prosperous; the infant mortality, longevity and general quality decline in conditions of high stress, disorder and privation.
There have always been rapists and immature males. There have always been misconduct. Stable societies learn how to curtail and contain these tendencies, while dysfunctional societies (notably, empires in decline) let individual dysfunction proliferate. Oddly, the legal systems of these societies in decline tends to become increasingly punitive, overbearing and discriminate, yet ineffective.