Trusted, Automoderated users
17,538
edits
Scientific Blackpill: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→It is normal for healthy men to find pubescent & prepubescent females sexually arousing
| Line 3,201: | Line 3,201: | ||
Many people in modern society will attempt to label any man who is sexually aroused by any female under 18 years old "a deviant." Scientifically, however, we can see there would be nothing deviant about any such arousal. It would in fact be completely normal. Whether any such arousal should be acted upon is a different subject altogether. Regardless, it can likely be agreed that vilifying men for simply possessing and acknowledging the natural, healthy sex drive they were born with is not helpful or productive. | Many people in modern society will attempt to label any man who is sexually aroused by any female under 18 years old "a deviant." Scientifically, however, we can see there would be nothing deviant about any such arousal. It would in fact be completely normal. Whether any such arousal should be acted upon is a different subject altogether. Regardless, it can likely be agreed that vilifying men for simply possessing and acknowledging the natural, healthy sex drive they were born with is not helpful or productive. | ||
The attraction of males to [[neoteny]] may have to do with men's [[Scientific Blackpill (Supplemental)#Women_were_historically_predominantly_involved_in_cooking_and_they_never_dominated_men|natural provider role]]. Men want to minimize the risk of investing in other men's offspring (cuckoldry). Hence, they prefer juvenile, submissive and easily controllable females, resulting in women being selected for these traits. In fact, contrary to feminist anti-patriarchal views, this is not only men's preference. Historically, marriages were predominantly arranged by the parents and the marriage concerned questions of inheritance (cf. Apostolou 2019). Hence, entire families have an interest in choosing easily controllable women as partners for their male offspring and relatives. Cross-culturally, one can observe that both men and their mothers [[female subordination and submissiveness|heavily limit women's reproductive freedom]]. Gowaty (1992 | The attraction of males to [[neoteny]] may have to do with men's [[Scientific Blackpill (Supplemental)#Women_were_historically_predominantly_involved_in_cooking_and_they_never_dominated_men|natural provider role]]. Men want to minimize the risk of investing in other men's offspring (cuckoldry). Hence, they prefer juvenile, submissive and easily controllable females, resulting in women being selected for these traits. In fact, contrary to feminist anti-patriarchal views, this is not only men's preference. Historically, marriages were predominantly arranged by the parents and the marriage concerned questions of inheritance (cf. Apostolou 2019). Hence, entire families have an interest in choosing easily controllable women as partners for their male offspring and relatives. Cross-culturally, one can observe that both men and their mothers [[female subordination and submissiveness|heavily limit women's reproductive freedom]]. Gowaty (1992, 231-40) writes: | ||
{{quote|There should be strong selection on males to control females' reproduction through direct coercive control of females […]. Evolutionary thinkers, whether informed by feminist ideas or not, are not surprised by one of the overwhelming facts of patriarchal cultures, namely that men […] seek to constrain and control the reproductive capacities of women […]. Juvenilization decreases the threat some men may feel when confronted with women; many men are comfortable around women whom they can clearly dominate and are profoundly uncomfortable around women whom they cannot so clearly dominate. | {{quote|There should be strong selection on males to control females' reproduction through direct coercive control of females […]. Evolutionary thinkers, whether informed by feminist ideas or not, are not surprised by one of the overwhelming facts of patriarchal cultures, namely that men […] seek to constrain and control the reproductive capacities of women […]. Juvenilization decreases the threat some men may feel when confronted with women; many men are comfortable around women whom they can clearly dominate and are profoundly uncomfortable around women whom they cannot so clearly dominate.}} | ||
Interestingly, according to a meta study by Rind et al. (1998), it seems the harm caused by child sexual abuse has been grossly overstated. Heather et al. (2005) reexamined these results and confirmed that, "child sexual abuse accounted for only 1% of the variance in later psychological adjustment, whereas family environment accounted for 5.9% of the variance", pointing to a substantial amount of resilience or even [[antifragility|steeling]]. | Interestingly, according to a meta study by Rind et al. (1998), it seems the harm caused by child sexual abuse has been grossly overstated. Heather et al. (2005) reexamined these results and confirmed that, "child sexual abuse accounted for only 1% of the variance in later psychological adjustment, whereas family environment accounted for 5.9% of the variance", pointing to a substantial amount of resilience or even [[antifragility|steeling]]. | ||
| Line 3,228: | Line 3,228: | ||
* Becker-Blease K, Friend D, Freyd JJ. 2006. ''Child Sex Abuse Perpetrators Among Male University Students.'' [[https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/4318 Abstract]] | * Becker-Blease K, Friend D, Freyd JJ. 2006. ''Child Sex Abuse Perpetrators Among Male University Students.'' [[https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/4318 Abstract]] | ||
* Hall NGC, Hirschman R, Oliver LL. 1995. ''Sexual arousal and arousability to pedophilic stimuli in a community sample of normal men.'' [[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0005789405800395 Abstract]] | * Hall NGC, Hirschman R, Oliver LL. 1995. ''Sexual arousal and arousability to pedophilic stimuli in a community sample of normal men.'' [[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0005789405800395 Abstract]] | ||
* Gowaty P. 1992. ''Feminism and Evolutionary Biology.'' p. 231-40. [[https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1601&context=fchd_facpub Context]] | |||
<references /> | <references /> | ||