I really hate my biology and nature.

[Anonymous 3]

^This is about as historically inaccurate as you can possibly get.

If you look at the Romans, Napoleon’s armies, even the WWII Americans, it’s mostly smaller men. And the idea that big brains are selected for, LOL. All the science and facts show the more intelligent a man is the less he reproduces. Every 1 IQ point above the average results in a 2% less chance of reproduction/higher rate of virginity.

I don’t think there is anything more Autistic I see on MGTOW forums than men randomly making up s~~~ on why a tall, goofy looking nerd is the height of human evolution and the most sexually desirable being out there. I see the same thing from pussy beggar PUAs, who are also tall, scrawny, nerdy goofs.

Human beings primarily evolved through agriculture and domesticating animals. Not running around hunting wooly mammoths with spears, as people want to imagine for some strange reason.

[Knights Templar RisingParticipant 5109]

Phoenix,

You’re third paragraph is something I never said, you may want to see a psychologist for your delusions.

I said that hunter was the first evolution, not the last. The latter evolutionary “modern man” archetype iterations would be the superior archetype for the society, teacher->farmer->diplomat, otherwise by natural selection they would die off. If you are as smart as you claim, you would already know that, as evolution is called evolution. If you were as perceptive as you erroneously think, you would actually know that LATER archetypes are by definition the “survival of the fittest”…and therefore would have had the presence of mind to know that I was NOT claiming archetype 1 was superior in any way, other than a higher likelyhood being smarter (as you just proved, it not your fault because DNA can be quite cruel like that). What I was getting at was the male instincts that have been crushed down, but for you to have seen that would have required a higher level of reading comprehension on your part (consider suing whatever schools you attended, they clearly failed you).

You fabricated my statements, and are an insulting douchebag who sounds incredibly low on the greater intellectual scale. I did nothing to offend you, or warrant your butthurt reaction, you should check you’re crotch because you sound as whiny as a c~~~. Only Libtards are supposed to have the childish kneejerk reaction you had, never go full Libtard.

Sovereignty above all else.

[narwhalParticipant]

I don’t have any issues with my nature. I did have a problem with how I use to see the world, and to some extent with how my brain was wired to get positive/negative feelings off of certain stimulus…but not so much anymore.

I am very much thankful that I have a brain that can process data and consider long term benefits over immediate gratification.

Give it time, you’ll get there.

That said though, I do feel like I am perhaps a bit too cynical these days. I am happy with my life, but perhaps not as happy as I could be with a different outlook on life.

Ok. Then do it.

[1MGTOWSpectator 301]

PatrickX wrote:

My dad doesn’t give a s~~~ on what I do with my life, and my sad and lonely life with struggles to make good friends (just guy friends to hang out, watch movies, play video games), will ultimately lead me to be suicidal in my 50s if I can’t get my head out of my ass to go make some quality friends. I say, if I failed at life, then why not off myself? 1. I didn’t ask to be born in this world, let alone suffer. 2. I’m disappointed in life. This world in a way has gone to s~~~. Idiocracy and all. 3. I get bored really easy with life and don’t see a purpose in living, so I could be ready to die, but I guess I’m just waiting for future stuff, like seeing the apocalypse, VR, futuristic gadgets and gizmos as they are the only things that stimulate my mind in a way.

You’re not bored with life, but with the current situation you’re in. You can overcome this by finding things and activities you like and find interesting. Change your routine.

Finding new friends can be tough (I know from experience), and the sad part is that it gets harder as we grow older to make friends. But no one said it is impossible.

PatrickX wrote:

Maybe I just need to just f~~~ some hookers in Vegas or something.

Then go for it dude.

[Knights Templar RisingParticipant 5109]

Since ability to extrapolate greater context is surprisingly challenging for some. And some dumb c~~~s think all tall thin intellectually gifted guys are autistic, yes Phoenix, I’m calling you out as prejudiced and bigoted…you sound as caustic and proletariat as a female…I guess I have to spoon feed the plebes:

1st evolution – as is says, FIRST evolution. Therefore not the last evolution. By definition 1st evolution is the bottom rung, on the evolutionary ladder. Therefore by definition, the LATER evolution are the SUPERIOR archetypes when considering the needs of modern society.

ALSO, as I stated many times during my writeup, I was specifically referring to EARLY MAN. I would hope that self appointed pedantic historians would not get early vs modern confused when attacking people, but hey ya know 150,000BC vs 27BC…same thing right…OMFG, the stupid, it burns!

I never said any one archetype was the ideal. What I was doing was encouraging men to embrace the roles from their earliest instincts, for which I guess is butthurt for some. Sounds like someone feels inferior, and is lashing out like a toddler.

Sovereignty above all else.

[GrumpyParticipant]

No offense brother, however your self loathing is something that YOU need to fix yourself.
See yourself through your own eyes and accomplishment, not with how you think others perceive you.
Weed out the social conditioning, the constant shaming language, and the need for validation from others. How one sees and projects themselves strongly influences others perceptions of them.
That is the key.
If you allow others to “work” on you, you become them and not you.

Contrary to popular belief, the “meek” shall not inherit the earth they will only perish in time. The problem is the meek (weak) believe they will and pursue it through trickery and deceit. There is a huge difference between being civil and being meek, the irony is that the supposed meek are the ones doing the most damage due to treachery because they cant stand in front of the people who are civil and strong.

There was a time in my life when I gave a fuck. Now you have to pay ME for it

[Knights Templar RisingParticipant 5109]

Grumpy,

Your closing statement seems to perfectly describe what we see going on now, with the socialist way society is heading. And specifically in regards to third wave feminism, and more specifically the Manginas and Betas that support them.

Sovereignty above all else.

[Anonymous 3]

Knights Templar Rising wrote:

Since ability to extrapolate greater context is surprisingly challenging for some. And some dumb c~~~s think all tall thin intellectually gifted guys are autistic, yes Phoenix, I’m calling you out as prejudiced and bigoted…you sound as caustic and proletariat as a female…I guess I have to spoon feed the plebes:

1st evolution – as is says, FIRST evolution. Therefore not the last evolution. By definition 1st evolution is the bottom rung, on the evolutionary ladder. Therefore by definition, the LATER evolution are the SUPERIOR archetypes when considering the needs of modern society.

ALSO, as I stated many times during my writeup, I was specifically referring to EARLY MAN. I would hope that self appointed pedantic historians would not get early vs modern confused when attacking people, but hey ya know 150,000BC vs 27BC…same thing right…OMFG, the stupid, it burns!

I never said any one archetype was the ideal. What I was doing was encouraging men to embrace the roles from their earliest instincts, for which I guess is butthurt for some. Sounds like someone feels inferior, and is lashing out like a toddler.

HUR DUR you sound exactly like a woman. Spout stupid s~~~, then butcher the English language as much as possible while being as condescending as only a self righteous woman can be.

What schools did you attend? I can tell you I attended elite institutions, starting from elementary school, all through graduate school. I had a high level white collar career, that I often see people on here complain about as being against “them”. I’ve had top 1% income years. I don’t talk about this stuff, because I don’t give a s~~~, but YOU want to make it about intelligence? Then f~~~ you, let’s see what you have. Ok, you called me out, go ahead.

You revel in being wrong and a poor communicator. You write Autistic rants that nobody on here wants to read, that basically boil down to “I, KnightsTemplarRising (Autistic right there) am tall and gifted and better than everyone else, all of human evolution leads to me! Yep yep! Look at me write in the most obtuse and stilted writing I possibly can! THIS SHOWS I R SMRT!!! Because brevity is the soul of MORONZ! HAR HAR! Did ya catch that I’m smarter than you? BECUZ I AM!”

You stupid f~~~.

[AttonParticipant]

Anonymous wrote:

Rejoice, for within 2-3 years your desires will fall off a cliff.

He had best hope because it may crush him.

A MGTOW is a man who is not a woman's bitch!

[Anonymous 3]

Knights Templar Rising wrote:

Phoenix,

You’re third paragraph is something I never said, you may want to see a psychologist for your delusions.

It’s your btw. You’re means “you are”.

Of course someone as smart as you can lecture the rest of us on proper grammar and word use.

[trader1913Participant 1577]

There is nothing inherent in Red-pill knowledge that forces you to be depressed or sad. It depends on the person receiving the knowledge.

I know many red-pill men including myself that embraced the knowledge and became happier as a result; all these men had their lives in order and lived happy lives before going red pill.

I think your life is not in the right place, so you cannot process the information through a positive filter.

[Anonymous 3]

Knights Templar Rising wrote:

Phoenix,

You’re third paragraph is something I never said, you may want to see a psychologist for your delusions.

I said that hunter was the first evolution, not the last. The latter evolutionary “modern man” archetype iterations would be the superior archetype for the society, teacher->farmer->diplomat, otherwise by natural selection they would die off. If you are as smart as you claim, you would already know that, as evolution is called evolution. If you were as perceptive as you erroneously think, you would actually know that LATER archetypes are by definition the “survival of the fittest”…and therefore would have had the presence of mind to know that I was NOT claiming archetype 1 was superior in any way, other than a higher likelyhood being smarter (as you just proved, it not your fault because DNA can be quite cruel like that). What I was getting at was the male instincts that have been crushed down, but for you to have seen that would have required a higher level of reading comprehension on your part (consider suing whatever schools you attended, they clearly failed you).

You fabricated my statements, and are an insulting douchebag who sounds incredibly low on the greater intellectual scale. I did nothing to offend you, or warrant your butthurt reaction, you should check you’re crotch because you sound as whiny as a c~~~. Only Libtards are supposed to have the childish kneejerk reaction you had, never go full Libtard.

You imbecilic, illogical simpleton.

You clearly do not understand the very first thing about evolution. Evolution does not occur in the span of human history, and it certainly doesn’t go one way, then backwards, and then forwards again randomly in your line of argument.

Natural selection is simply reproductive survival. Traits are manifested as a result of survival and mating selection. Over a very long time period, this CAN result in evolution in terms of new species better adapted to their environment. However in other cases, said creature is already fully adapted. Such as snakes, spiders and other creatures that have been unchanged.

However, natural selection for humans would clearly be the traits most shared/the most numerous peoples. In your illogical little world, a top 4% height or whatever somehow shows natural selection. Wrong. That actually shows the least desirable traits, as the least numbers of the population have that.

According to Darwin’s theory, the most successful genetic type for humans is an average height, average weight, brown person, since that’s pretty much the entire world.

You very clearly do not have an education in either science or argument. And you get into a hissy fit and then attack people personally immediately.

Height IS preferred at late stage civilization collapse. It happened to the Greeks as well, pretty much all their art and myths and everything idealize very tall gods and goddesses. But that has nothing to do with evolution.

Also I still don’t understand how you think it makes sense to argue height was selected at one point, then isn’t afterwards, then you claim should be again. Even outside your failure to grasp the doctrine of Natural Selection, I have no idea what you were going for in that.

I don’t even dislike you, I merely pointed out you were wrong about something, and then you took it personally and began your condescending nonsense. So I treated you the way you deserved.

[Author]

Posts