[ Rules ] [ ot / g / m ] [ pt / snow / w ] [ meta ] [ Server Status ]

/ot/ - off-topic

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File(20 MB max)
Video
Password
(For post deletion)

The site maintenance is completed but lingering issues are expected, please report any bugs here

File: 1566855922047.jpg (58.34 KB, 320x506, sh7954.jpg)

No. 454192

The Biology Pill

Red and Pink pill both are only half truths. In reality, humans are just as bound by biology as any animal. Both stereotypical female and stereotypical male behaviours have basis in biology. Both sexes also have a minority of members who defy those stereotypes.

After supporting radical feminism for years, I ultimately became frustrated and disillusioned by women’s stubborn clinging to sexism and patriarchal roles. I started to research about biological differences between the sexes, and realized that contrary to what feminism insists, there is quickly growing mountain of evidence that much of this behaviour stems from nature, not nurture.

The Biology Pill could be summed up as:

>1. Overwhelming majority of women are inherently submissive towards men. Overwhelming majority of men are inherently dominant towards women. Patriarchy is simply the result of this hard-wired dynamic.


>2. Female subservience towards males in private (read: sex and relationships) can not be separated from female subservience towards males in public sphere (politics, business, etc). Private dynamics shape how the sexes interract in the world. By rewarding dominant, high-status, strong etc men with sex, women encourage men to seek high status, to act dominant, to become succesful, to boast their power etc in every area of life. Men on the other hand find all those traits repulsive in women and they reward women with opposite traits such as submission, meekness, low status, unambitious, weak etc. Women are therefore motivated to dumb themselves down and not seek to become ”better” in anything but very narrow accepted traits (beauty, housework, child care). This is what keeps patriarchy alive.


>3. There exists small minority within both sexes that does not comform to the stereotypical models. This includes many homosexuals, whose brains have been proven to contain opposite-sex traits (i.e. left vs right hemisphere size). Females on autism spectrum also have masculine brains. But there is a masculine-feminine spectrum in not just our brains, but in other parts of out physiology (such as hormones) and therefore, there is a minority of inherently ”masculine females” and ”feminine males” among neurotypical heterosexuals (and no, this isn’t about transgenderism).


>4. Radical feminists and women who reject subservience towards males in general, have always been overwhelmingly either lesbian (and therefore not attracted to male dominance) or notably masculine straight females. Feminine straight women have historically only supported feminism when it has been watered down to a point where it does not threaten their enjoyment of male dominance (see: sex-positivity, choice feminism). Handmaidens are overwhelmingly born, not made. Therefore I believe that rather than seek to empower the submissive female majority (futile effort), the small minority of truly anti-patriarchal females should seek only to be recognised as essentially a true ”sex minority”, create a separate terminology and seek to build their own spaces in society and operate from within them, similar to how every organized minority operates.



Red Pill is correct that:
>most women are inherently submissive
>most women are inherently hypergamous
>most women are inherently child-like and naive and dependant on male authority
>most men are more ambitious and competitive, and achive more

Pink Pill is correct that:
>most men are biologically programmed to subjugate, abuse and rape women
>most men inherently lack empathy (especially towards women)
>most men are inherently egoistic
>most men are inherently superficial and unfaithful
>most women are inherently more pro-social, empathic and peaceful

All of these arguments can be proven both by observing the behaviours of our closest relatives – the great apes – as well as from countless studies collected over decades. Brainscans have proven without a doubt that female and male brains differ on average, and the differences align with stereotypes. For example, female brains have more advanced areas responsible for empathy, while male brain is hardwired for aggression. Male brains connect agression/violence with sex. Females overwhelmingly prefer to be sexually submissive regardless of level of gender equality in their country etc. These differnces in general population can not be erased through any amount of education or activism. Rather than forcing equality on the majority of women and men who hate it and will always reject it, the goal should be for the ”sex minority” to ignore the majority and focus on building interest groups and separate lifestyle.(lolcow does not pander to your ideology)

No. 454195

oooh boy

No. 454199

So, like, is this your theme song.

No. 454200

Is this where the tradthots assemble?

No. 454201

>>454200
all one of them?

No. 454202

>>454200
No. This is for those women who are sick of white knighting handmaidens and "educating" misogynist men.

No. 454207

The main problem with this is it underestimates how social environments can derange human biology and it's instincts. E.G. fucking killing yourself is not very good for your reproductive chances but humans do it a lot depending on their life circumstances and experiences.

No. 454208

>>454207
This tbh. The whole >most women are inherently submissive etc cannot be debated to be biological when there are not enough studies of women who do not live in male dominated societies to observe their behaviours.

No. 454210

>>454192
>All of these arguments can be proven both by observing the behaviours of our closest relatives – the great apes
Human biology, particularly sexual dimorphism most closely resembles bonobos who are matriarchal and aggressive males are punished so that doesn’t make any sense.

No. 454212

>>454207
Suicide is still rare and exceptional behaviour, while female subservience has been the norm in every single known society.

>>454208
The tabula rasa theory of human behaviour has been pretty much rejected by the scientific establishment for decades now. The only reason you see scientists parrot the "men and women are the same" bs is the same reason why they all publicly support troons - political pressure.

For women who enjoy submission (the vast, vast majority) living in patriarchy is not terrible. Why do you think almost all straight women hate radfems?

>>454210
Bonobos are exceptional case because they are simply subspecies of chimps that was separated by the Congo river. Their unusual behaviour is result of abudance of food in their habitat.

Anyway, humans obviously have never behaved like bonobos. Our behaviour follow same pattern as chimps and other great apes - aggressive, violent male dominance.

No. 454214

op is a man

No. 454215

>>454212
Bonobos are not a “subspecies of chimp”. They are their own species under the Pan genus but nice try.

No. 454216

Here's my point:

Feminism wastes women's emotional and material resources.

Feminism tells us that we can "save" men from misogyny if we just keep appealing to them and educating them.

Feminism tells us that every woman deep down inside hates male dominance, we just need to keep supporting and educating the handmaidens.

Both are waste of time. We have been doing this shit for decades and nothing has been achieved. Men still hate women. Handmaidens are still majority. Sexism persists, it just takes new forms.

No. 454217

>>454192
This is some next level scroteposting

No. 454218

>>454215
Whatever.

Please provide proof that humans display same behaviours as bonobos - matriarchal order and non-violent males. I would love to see a list of all these bonobo-like societies.

No. 454219

>>454216
>Feminism tells us that we can "save" men from misogyny if we just keep appealing to them and educating them.
imagine coming to a board with a large radfem userbase and trying to sell us this shit. this is not what we believe and it's how we can tell you aren't a regular here.

No. 454220

>this long-winded appeal to nature that's easily toppled by the fact that's what biologically innate or found in nature isn't always what's best

I mean if you really think this way then by all means go back to caveman tactics and leave your modern rights at the door to be a man's subservient.

No. 454221

>>454219
You still waste your time trying to "save" handmaidens who think radical feminims is a curse word and who would defends their husbands to death if they raped you.

Wasted resources.

>>454220
Maybe actually read my post. That's not what I said at all.

No. 454222

>>454212
>while female subservience has been the norm in every single known society.
That is untrue. Matriarchal societies, although comparatively small in number, have existed historically and some continue to exist. Absolute statements like this are easy to negate.

No. 454223

>>454221
>that's not what I said
Yes it is, you muppet.

No. 454224

File: 1566858404516.png (285.63 KB, 652x629, Use of male mice skews drug re…)

>>454212
>The tabula rasa theory of human behaviour has been pretty much rejected by the scientific establishment for decades now.
And? How does that disprove my point? If anything it further proves my point.

No. 454225

Is this a heterosexual thread?

No. 454227

File: 1566858554594.png (302.48 KB, 479x455, main-qimg-d5991d52642f35a000d9…)

>>454225
Its a m'lady thread

No. 454228

>>454208
none of these things can be debated and none of this research can be relied upon bc it's all under the framework of patriarchy. op is a male and a fag

/thread

No. 454230


No. 454231

>>454192
male leave

No. 454232

>>454222
There are no proven true matriarchal societies. The socities that get labeled as matriarchy are either closer to equal or obvious patriarchies where women have power in one specific field. The fact that the matrirachy label gets slapped to these societies just shows how deep the double standard is.

>>454223
I said that most men and women are not on board with equality and never will be. The best thing to do is to give up on them and try to build a separate culture and identity to the minority who are capable of true equality.

Think of it as elitistic feminism.

No. 454234

>>454192
lmao this smacks of the James Damore method of ignoring socialization in humans because it's inconvenient to your theories. You're either male, or a self-hating woman. Either way, no one gives a shit what you think. Least of all here.

No. 454235

File: 1566858949147.png (4.56 MB, 516x5725, download.png)

OP may be a dumb scrot but even so its nice to disprove some of the stupidity in OP's post.

No. 454236

File: 1566859053758.png (29.25 KB, 686x499, bBDI8Hg.png)

>>454221
>You still waste your time trying to "save" handmaidens who think radical feminims is a curse word and who would defends their husbands to death if they raped you.
We don't don't stick our necks out for women who are happy to be shackled to the patriarchy, we do it for our sisters who want to be free and so our daughters are born into a better world. If handmaidens want to handmaid, that's their business. There's no cure for stupid.
>>454225
i thought it might be a handmaiden, but now i think it's a male larp thread. gender guesser agrees.

No. 454237

>>454212
>The socities that get labeled as matriarchy are either closer to equal or obvious patriarchies where women have power in one specific field.
The former still disproves your original claim.

No. 454238

>>454235
i love this story.

No. 454239

Even if this 'biology' is true, which I doubt, I think this equating humans to biology in an animalistic sense is disingenuous. There are many biological instincts that we identify, recognize, and ignore in favor of logic, reason, and a functioning society.
Essentially saying
>But men can't help but murder and rape!
>Women can't help but be submissive ragdolls
is removing the thought and choice from the process. It's my biological instinct to consume a shit ton of carbs and fatty foods for survival but I don't because I don't want to die from heart disease at 35. I genuinely believe most humans are capable of a similar thought process.

No. 454240

>>454238
Indeed it teaches us the greatest lesson of all-if men are agressive, kill em. This "its my biology" nonsense is no excuse for being a shitty male".

No. 454241

We're human. Even if it is in our biology that women are subservient to men, we've obviously evolved beyond that as women have been asking very clearly for a long time to be part of the workforce, for rights etc.

Just because you're a dumb scrote that can't function beyond his hormones doesn't mean the rest of society is OP.

No. 454243

>>454241
If women were really subservient to men feminism wouldnt even exist.

No. 454244

>>454235
So the majority of inherently shitty males need to die to solve patriarchy.

Basically what I said, except as long as the majority of those female monkeys are hardwired to prefer dominance, they will continue to favor the more dominant among the remaining males and ultimately end up in the same place they started with. The male dominance has to come from SOMEWHERE and it is sexual selection.

>>454236
Majority of women are handmaidens by radfem standards. Most women hate radical feminism. Why do you think even average feminist loves shit like porn and troons?

And I'm a woman and masculine one (hence why I wrote this) but don't care what you believe anyway.

>>454237
Not really because those societies are only RELATIVELY equal (ie. still male dominated)and they are all small, hunterer-gatherer type socities that lack complex hierarchies. Where complex hierarchy emerges, patriarchy is default.

>>454239
I mean, most people get fat in wealthy countries for a reason. We know we shouldn't, but the instinct to overeat is evolutionary.

>>454243
True feminism (not meaningless "choice feminism") has always been supported only by small minority of women. That minority is the exception I speak of.

No. 454245

>>454241
exactly. this is crap. Most women i know do not want to be a doormat to men or be dominated by them. they also want to be the majority bread winners because who want to be dependant on a male who is controlled by his emotions. this thread is shit


>>454192
>Females overwhelmingly prefer to be sexually submissive regardless of level of gender equality in their country etc.

Wrong

No. 454247

>>454244
>True feminism (not meaningless "choice feminism") has always been supported only by small minority of women. That minority is the exception I speak of.
[citation needed]

No. 454249

>>454244
>>454235
>So the majority of inherently shitty males need to die to solve patriarchy.

Correct

>Basically what I said, except as long as the majority of those female monkeys are hardwired to prefer dominance, they will continue to favor the more dominant among the remaining males and ultimately end up in the same place they started with. The male dominance has to come from SOMEWHERE and it is sexual selection.


Translation: no matter how awful men are somehow blame women for it.

Also you didnt pay attention to what the guy was saying, nothing about that senario is about women being hardwired for dominant males so again mr fedora, think before you speak.

No. 454256

>>454247
Radfem is only feminism that truly challenges male dominance. It is hated even by most feminists.

>>454249
>Also you didnt pay attention to what the guy was saying, nothing about that senario is about women being hardwired for dominant males so again mr fedora, think before you speak.


So where does male dominance come from? Every single evolutionary trait is a result of sexual selection. The monkeys ended up with aggressive alpha male dominated pack structure because the females mated more freguently with those males, and the alpha male genes win out. If they continue to favor the most dominant/aggresive males left, they will ultimately end up restoring the status quo.

No. 454261

File: 1566860441991.jpg (127.46 KB, 982x814, euphoria_the_hedgehog_by_stolk…)

>>454256
So you have no evidence to back up your claims AND all your theories are pretty much the dunning kruger effect in action. Bravo, i would tip my fedora to you if i had one.

No. 454263

>>454232
It’s called female separatism and has been a concept in radical feminism for decades.

No. 454268

>>454212

Suicide is just one obvious example of how complex the human mind is and how it can deviate radically from something as simple as "what's this species reproductive behavior?" Literally everything you do all day every day is a derangement of your biology due to the environment you're in.

You evolved to run around naked outside all day but you don't because you'd get arrested and get skin cancer eventually in your current environment. You evolved to kill little furry animals you get your hands on for food but have probably had a pet in your environment. You're not evolved to talk to a stranger on the other side of the planet entirely through text that's entirely unrelated to your physical life to the extent that I could die after hitting enter and you'd never even know but we're both still doing it.

As for gender roles more than half of women in the U.S. are the primary resource gatherers for their family because that's the political, sociological and economic environment they're in. Just like how there's country's where women don't gather any resources at all because they'd get thrown in jail by the state. Even barely contacted remote tribes do not live entirely by muh nature's DNA programming because they have cultures with weird-ass unnatural shit.

No. 454272

>>454256
>The monkeys ended up with aggressive alpha male dominated pack structure because the females mated more freguently with those males, and the alpha male genes win out

That doesn't necessarily mean it was the females doing the selecting.

>>454244
>I mean, most people get fat in wealthy countries for a reason. We know we shouldn't, but the instinct to overeat is evolutionary.

sure they overeat but only a minority do it to morbid obesity, just another case to add to >>454268. several anons have already pointed this out but you're taking a very reductionist view by placing so much emphasis on biology, and your claims are easily disproved through simple observation.

No. 454273

>>454234
Marriage is culturally universal but only humans practise it and it is definitely not “biological”. OP is really underplaying just how much socialization plays into this.

No. 454275

>>454273
Also the invention of fatherhood. I always thought it was weird how women were expected to be chaste in so many societies and are tied down to one man whom her parents chose for her. Even though biologically speaking women require a lot of sex to become pregnant and she should be the one choosing the mate. In fact humans are one of the least fertile species in the world and women have unusually long postmenopausal lifespans.

No. 454278

>>454192
Nah
sounds like an excuse to defend men who do mistreat people
saying "human beings are animals and they can try, but often fail to, overcome their nature" doesn't mean that it's okay for any of those things to happen.

>Rather than forcing equality on the majority of women and men who hate it and will always reject it, the goal should be for the ”sex minority” to ignore the majority and focus on building interest groups and separate lifestyle.

nice try, but not really

No. 454280

>>454278
oh and i LOVE the attempt to reconcile the "pink pill" with "red pill" and blend the two together as if this isn't just more red pill bullshit

No. 454281

>>454275
Contrast this with men who continue producing sperm all their lives because male competition would have already caused a lot of men to kill each off other in their early years so a man who has lived that long must have advantageous genetics to pass on. Fewer males having the chance to reproduce is likely why the most recent common male ancestor for all humans is thought to predate the most common female ancestor by a couple hundred thousand years. Marriage changes all that because now most men will have a woman to reproduce with ensuring that his own shitty genetics are passed on and the woman is forced to be chaste to ensure the paternity.

No. 454284

>inb4 evopsych memes about men being biologically hardwired to be attracted to juvenile traits you can’t prevent pedophilia

No. 454285

>>454256
If women are attracted to aggressive and dominant men then why have Homo sapiens evolved to be less sexually dimorphic when compared to the previous Homo species that came before them?

No. 454290

I agree that women naturally like dominant men and enjoy themselves in the dominated role. I see no way an honest person would doubt that.

I don't know why women would be called "child-like" for that, it is what it is?
I also don't see why either sex would be more unfaithful than the other - seems like humans are unfaithful in general.

No. 454291

>>454285
I know some scientists thought it could have been because the males who were providing more resources to the females would have fit in better with the increasingly complex human social structure which gave these males more chances to mate. Females began to choose the more docile males over the aggressive ones (who probably lived shorter lifespans too) which caused reduced sexual dimorphism over millions of years.

No. 454292

>>454290
>enjoy themselves in the dominated role
I should add that the roles during sex is mostly a charade, a job or a game. There are roles and people having fun paying them

No. 454294

Why don't feral kids know how to act according to gender roles? If people can't learn to speak or behave like humans if they're not socialized into it, why would gender roles be based on our biology? Wouldn't it make more sense that humans are biologically wired to act like humans y instinct?

No. 454295

>>454290
>I agree that women naturally like dominant men
Speak for yourself

No. 454296

>>454294
I'm not actually expecting any replies because to this day no one has been able to explain this to me.

Why for example Genie didn't know how to act like girls by instinct, if gender roles are innate? Why did that Ukranian girl act like dogs since she was raised by them and not humans? Why isn't behaving like a human innate, but behaving by gender roles somehow is?

No. 454298

Why does this thread feels like a attempt from a scrote to infiltrate ot?

No. 454299

>>454298
Because is obviously is?

No. 454304

>>454299
>tfw obvious bait thread
>lolcow bites it full force anyway
Depressing

No. 454315

>>454290
Nah, a lot of women admit engaging in that behavior because it's expected of them and it's what they were taught. I wouldn't say this is evidence of women liking dominant men and being dominated, but they tend to be more empathetic and put others ahead of themselves. Of course there are some that like to be dominated in and in itself, but it's usually a bedroom only thing than a lifestyle one. The women who end up in abusive relationships, where their partner dictates everything they do, are not mentally healthy and should not account for all women

No. 454317

>>454304
There are some handmaidens who will parrot scrote logic to protect themselves.

No. 454318

>>454275
I find it strange how women are the ones expected to beautify ourselves and act in certain ways to attract a mate. In reality, men are the ones who have the most trouble attracting females so logically it would be more productive if men spent the most time becoming attractive. It would probably solve the incel problem if society taught men how to dress, groom, and act in order to attract a partner. A lot of men are completely clueless.

No. 454321

>>454318
I definitely agree. Even what is considered slightly below average for women can still be attractive. A lot of men have forests of hair throughout their whole body, ugly facial hair, bad skin, bad haircuts, poor posture, high body fat, horrible hygiene etc… They should be trying way harder than women. But it's bad to take care of yourself because that makes you gay. If you're a real man you smell like swamp ass and treat your body like shit

No. 454323

>>454192
>women are hypergamous
Then why do any evaluation of census marriages and wealth of partners actually show men and women to be equally hypergamous and geared toward marrying up?

The only part that was correct from the incel perspective was that in the US wealthy men tended to marry middling-but-pretty girls but now it's reverted back to men marrying among their own caste

No. 454324

>>454285
Yeah this, if aggression and strength played as big a factor in human sexual selection as OP claims then humans would be way more sexually dimorphic but they actually decreased in dimorphism through evolution indicating that females did not want to breed with males with high levels of masculinization. Females have low levels of fertility so the males who were more physically similar and co-operative with them would have been allowed to breed with them more.

No. 454332

>>454317
Stop being a retarded and bumping this shit up anon.
Write sage in the email field.

No. 454340

>>454304
Honestly, I appreciate the responses. I often see TRP logic getting thrown on the Internet and it's nice to see some level-headed responses and debate from actual women. You ladies word a lot of things better than I ever could and I will be taking notes for the next time I encounter this garbage.

No. 454342

>>454214
This. You can tell it's a man by the way he posts his shitty, unsourced opinions as "fact" in a bid to sound like the professor he never listened to, or the sterotypical "intellectual who's earned the right to be condescending" he imagines but is too stupid to ever actually become.
I mean, look at this shit:
>For women who enjoy submission (the vast, vast majority) living in patriarchy is not terrible. Why do you think almost all straight women hate radfems?
Men who use imageboards are NPCs. They all type the exact same way, and they have little to no original thoughts. It's pathetic how easy they are to spot, and hilarious how easy it is to impersonate them. Even the chosen OP image is an obvious choice, but he really thought he was doing something.
If you absolutely must reply to it, at least don't bump this shit thread. Wait for mods to do their job and do away with it.



Delete Post [ ]
[Return] [Catalog]
[ Rules ] [ ot / g / m ] [ pt / snow / w ] [ meta ] [ Server Status ]