If there is one thing I do, it’s write about fringe topics that no one is asking me to write about. I tend to think about and draw conclusions about things that no one else is pondering. This post is no different. Sorry if you were hoping for different!
From time-to-time I’ve been visiting the discussion on abstractions. I last wrote about it in “Hebrew Abstractions” last year. I also like to write about intelligence from time-to-time. Today these topics intersect.
It is well known that Ashkenazi Jews have one of the highest population intelligences. What is less well-known is that this high intelligence is distributed unevenly. The average Ashkenazi Jew has above average verbal intelligence and below average on the various non-verbal intelligences, although they tend to be good with mathematics. The consequence is that Jews are overrepresented in pure Wordcel professions involving leadership and management, but are also found in pure math-heavy professions (like finance). It’s also why you find a lot of Jewish lawyers. By contrast, they are underrepresented in pure Shape Rotator professions like engineering. You can read more about that here.
In my post, “Hebrew Abstraction,” I discussed Thorleif Boman’s (and Ed Hurst’s) portrayal of the ancient Hebrews as concrete thinkers who didn’t think in abstractions. At the time I said:
This illustration does not portray Israelites as some sort of superior spiritual mystic, but as intellectual idiots who are not intelligent enough to think in basic abstractions. Just because the Israelites had a preferred way of thinking and writing didn’t mean they were buffoons who couldn’t understand abstract categorization. Because that’s what Boman is literally saying: that the Israelites did not understand Greek categorization.
Originally I meant this to highlight the absurdity of Boman’s thesis. I, of course, didn’t think ancient Hebrews were intellectual idiots. But, it wasn’t until I was reading about the intelligence of Ashkenazi Jews recently that I realized that there is more to the story that I had originally assumed. The ancient Hebrews most certainly engaged in abstract thinking, as I argued, but they did so relatively, according to their intelligence. In particular, they strongly preferred verbal abstractions and strongly shunned certain non-verbal abstractions.
See, with respect to intelligence, most people do what they are best at and avoid areas where they are weak. For example, I have strong spike skills in visual-spatial and reasoning, decent verbal skills, and I’m relatively quite poor at processing speed and don’t have the greatest working memory. I’m a slow thinker and I need notes. It’s why I generally stick to well-composed, long-form writing and not live debates. It’s also why I’m into photography. I’m playing to my strengths and avoiding my weaknesses. Consequently, most people only see one side of me, likely leading people to have a false impression of my skills and abilities.
The Hebrews likely did the same thing. We don’t even have to guess: we can tell from their writings.
You must not have any other gods besides me. Do not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; do not bow down to them and do not serve them because I, Yahweh your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing covenant faithfulness to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.
For many centuries, there was a strong aversion among the Hebrews to making visual abstractions. Hebrews largely did not make visual art. They did not make paintings and they did not make statues. They understood the Second Commandment quite literally to refer to created things: things made by human hands. Wikipedia confirms:
In the Second Temple period, Jewish art was heavily influenced by the Biblical injunction against graven images, leading to a focus on geometric, floral, and architectural motifs rather than figurative or symbolic representations. This artistic restraint was a response to the Hellenistic cultural pressures that threatened Jewish religious practices, notably the imposition of idolatry. Symbolic elements like the menorah and the shewbread table were sparingly used, primarily reflecting their significance in priestly duties.
In particular, Jews largely did not embrace such abstractions until much later when Roman and Christian influence started to change them.
However, the rise of Christianity and its establishment as the dominant religion of the Roman Empire marked a turning point in Jewish artistic expression. This period, known as Late Antiquity, witnessed Jewish communities gradually incorporating symbolic motifs into their synagogal and funerary art.
It’s not that the Jews were incapable of making physical art, but that they chose not to for religious reasons.
Now, let’s consider the key to unlocking our understanding: the Jews did not, for example, consider fame or glory to be idolatry. This is common in Western Christian writings, but it’s absent from ancient Hebrew writings. In the Old Testament, all idols were physical abstractions of the God they represented. All were absolutely forbidden. Every instance of idolatry in the Old Testament refers to worship of physical things! Jesus changed all of that with his abstract emphasis on the heart. After all, fame and glory can be idols just as much as wood carvings. Both are abstractions, but the latter is a visual-spatial abstraction.
Jesus didn’t have a preference for one abstraction over another. He didn’t pit them against each other. Jesus didn’t overturn the Hebrew way of thought. Physical idols are still illicit manifestations. But, so is worshiping money, a concept that isn’t incompatible with Greek ways of thinking. Jesus also routinely used figures-of-speech that his Greek-influenced listeners understood too literally (just like with the 3rd and 4th generation vs. thousandth generation). Paul, a Roman citizen, used a number of non-Hebrew abstractions imported from the Greeks and Romans (e.g. the Armor of Faith; describing the body of Christ through the lens of Roman adoption).
Most people viscerally understand visual-spatial abstractions: that visible figures and signs in space can abstractly represent something else. This may be something as complicated as artistic expression or it might be something as simple as the shape of a stop sign. We have whole museums dedicated to this kind of abstraction. It is easier to appreciate an abstraction when you can see with your eyes. But, men like Boman have noticed that the ancient Hebrews tended to avoid these kinds of abstractions. It is even codified it in their law. So Boman concluded, quite incorrectly, that Hebrews didn’t think abstractly. But, as shown above, even in the law that banned idolatrous abstractions contains an important verbal abstraction.
Boman, a prolific writer, was almost certainly a Wordcel, someone gifted with high verbal ability. If he was like your typical Ashkenazi Jew, he would have had a natural preference for verbal abstractions and a natural avoidance of visual-spatial abstraction. This would lead him to write about the linguistics of an ancient people, and enjoy doing it. Furthermore, he was also an editor (like our friend Bruce Charlton, who is well-known to have a very strong verbal ability and preference). His own preferences—his bias—caused him to completely miss the types of abstractions that the Hebrews preferred. If you are one of those people that shun Greek philosophy, it’s easy to fall into this trap.
The fact is, it is laughable for anyone who has studied Hebrew or read the Old Testament to claim that the ancient Hebrews did not think using abstractions. Except Wordcels like Boman (and many others) make this claim, and often at that! What gives? Well, it’s a simple fact that they don’t recognize the greatest form of abstraction that exists: figures of speech. The Bible is riddled with figurative language. It’s in everything from the individual words to complex linguistic structures (like the chiastic structure). It is true that, unlike the Greeks, the Ancient Hebrews did not get on much with logical and philosophical abstractions. Rather, they much preferred verbal abstractions.
Speaking of verbal abstractions…
Do not bow down to them and do not serve them because I, Yahweh your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing covenant faithfulness to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.
…this is the perfect example. You might be tempted to try to figure out what happens if the 137th generation out of the thousand turns against God. Are they and their third and fourth generations cursed by God or are they still blessed as part of the thousand? Viewing this as an error—a logical contradiction—is, of course, incorrectly trying to quantify the verbal abstraction strictly literally.
It is obviously not the case that Greeks were abstract thinkers and Hebrews were concrete literalists. The Second Commandment proves this. They just preferred different kinds of abstractions. Hellenistic thought is, in general, a bit more focused on visual-spatial (and logical) type abstractions. This is one reason why Western man has so much difficult with taking the copious figurative language of scripture too literally. Thus, we can contrast Hebrew and Hellenistic thought as largely being a general population preference for one type of abstraction over another.
Over many centuries, the Jews cultivated a breeding environment that strongly favored and selected for verbal expression (and associated skills) over other abilities, by as much as a full standard deviation on average. Due, in part, to strong in-group preferences among ethnic Jews, this has continued for thousands of years into the present. Most of the memes about Jews running all the corporations, owning all the banks, or dominating the practice of law can be traced to their population preferences for a certain kind of intelligence going back thousands of years. People naturally prefer to do what they are best at doing, while avoiding whatever they are not as good at.
Jews have also cultivated a strong skill for mathematical abstraction. The funny thing is, like abstract verbal reasoning and figures of speech, people don’t readily think of math as an abstraction. A statue of a person is obviously an abstraction of a real person, but people don’t think of numbers, mathematical operations, and logical thinking as abstractions, even though that is exactly what they are. This has only further fed into the idea that Hebrews didn’t think abstractly. History records Jews being disproportionately impactful in the realm of abstract finances: interest, fractional reserve, contracts, credit, exchange, land ownership, banking mechanisms, stocks, etc. But who even thinks of a bank or a dollar bill as an abstraction?
Now, let’s turn back the clock and read this comment again:
The whole point is the purpose of the thing made, not some abstract idea regarding its form. Boman takes us back to the disagreement between Greek and Hebrew thinking on this issue. To the Greeks, a cooking pot is the basic idea, the material is a separate matter. To the Hebrew, the material defines how the cooking pot can be used, so that each pot of different materials is a different idea. There is no abstract concept of cooking pot; they need to know what the material was or it has no useful meaning.
Do you see that part about Hebrews avoiding abstractions “regarding its form.” It’s not that the Hebrews didn’t use abstract ideas, it is merely the fact that they had a preference for one type of abstraction over another. And it was just a preference, not a strict rule. Hebrews were absolutely capable of all types of abstraction. As I noted in my previous article, scripture itself contains a fantastic example of the abstract concept of a cooking pot in Hebrew. Hurst and Boman are simply wrong on this point. The Hebrews—in keeping with their strong verbal abilities—had many different words for pots carrying a wide array of forms and meanings, both concrete and abstract.
The Hebrews were strong abstract thinkers, but they drew cultural and religious lines regarding which types of abstractions were acceptable and which were not. This preference is absolutely in line with everything we know about their population intelligence. As a group, they selected for this! I find that very interesting.
This is where I just get lost and understand that my intelligence isnt enough to grasp concepts like this.
This is where I question if I am “saved” or “know enough” or am “good enough” to be a Christian. This is where indeed this faith is a “turn off” for many because they dont know the history of this or that Jewish group in the context of history, v figurative language v IQ v if Jews are good lawyers v engineering.
If its all “predestined” and “God chose this group to be smart” and “chose this group to dig ditches” and that group to “lord it over the rest of us with who cant reach / breach or understand concepts”
Well………it is indeed a faith for the “elect” or “racially superior” or those “God chose to give a high IQ to undesrtand his deeper concepts”
Which leaves just about everyone else out.
IDK. Not trying to flame or argue. Jesus said he would use the foolish to shame the wise. He used fisherman who were prayed up, believed and turned the world upside down. The pagans, the rich, the poor…the stifling intellectualism of Athens in its day were brought to Christ through very prayed up men who trusted, believed.
If God wanted this elite, schooled and educated class to bring the message, well, He would have just convinced the priestly class and kings and leaders to do it.
Maybe Im off here…..and if I am, would not surprise me. This is over my head.
But
If being a Christian entails all of this stuff and on top of the slop of “real masculinity / red pill” to be considered “worthy” of heaven.
Well…..I can understand why the church is dwindling.
If Gods plan for reconciliation to and through Him was indeed to be in this
Lastmod,
It doesn’t.
None of what I’m saying pertains to salvation. It is only, at best, peripheral to Christianity. If anything, it is a warning to avoid Radix Fidem’s approach: turning philosophy into a fundamental and essential spiritual matter. All I’ve done is refute that idea.
You are free to ignore these issues.
He does. The wise thought that the only idols were those made by human hands. But Jesus expanded this idea to focus on matters of the heart. And that, I know for a fact, is something you do understand. You may not know if statues of Mary or communion bread are idolatry, but you understand what constitutes idolatry of the heart. In that way, you are well ahead of the curve.
It seems to me that the church is dwindling because it does not truly want what Jesus came to offer. Being a Social Club is just not enough to hold it together.
Peace,
DR
Appreciate your reply Derek. Will elaborate more at a future date! 🙂
Boman, a prolific writer, was almost certainly a Wordcel, someone gifted with high verbal ability. If he was like your typical Ashkenazi Jew, he would have had a natural preference for verbal abstractions and a natural avoidance of visual-spatial abstraction. This would lead him to write about the linguistics of an ancient people, and enjoy doing it. Furthermore, he was also an editor (like our friend Bruce Charlton, who is well-known to have a very strong verbal ability and preference). His own preferences—his bias—caused him to completely miss the types of abstractions that the Hebrews preferred.
Speaking of Bruce Charlton,here’s a late ROISSY abstractions post discussing one of Charlton’s post’s on IQ.
https://heartiste.org/2017/02/21/the-stupidity-of-intelligence-signaling/
The Stupidity Of Intelligence Signaling
Feb 21st, 2017 by CH
This is great article by Bruce Charlton, a must-read, because it explains so much about post-America s#itlibbery. (For a complementary thread on the topic, try here.)
Executive Summary: what liberals have in IQ they lack in common sense. It’s an evolutionary trade-off.
In short, it has often been observed that high IQ types are lacking in ‘common sense’ – and especially when it comes to dealing with other human beings. General intelligence is not just a cognitive ability; it is also a cognitive disposition. So, the greater cognitive abilities of higher IQ tend also to be accompanied by a distinctive high IQ personality type including the trait of ‘Openness to experience’, ‘enlightened’ or progressive left-wing political values, and atheism. Drawing on the ideas of Kanazawa, my suggested explanation for this association between intelligence and personality is that an increasing relative level of IQ brings with it a tendency differentially to over-use general intelligence in problem-solving, and to over-ride those instinctive and spontaneous forms of evolved behaviour which could be termed common sense. Preferential use of abstract analysis is often useful when dealing with the many evolutionary novelties to be found in modernizing societies; but is not usually useful for dealing with social and psychological problems for which humans have evolved ‘domain-specific’ adaptive behaviours. And since evolved common sense usually produces the right answers in the social domain; this implies that, when it comes to solving social problems, the most intelligent people are more likely than those of average intelligence to have novel but silly ideas, and therefore to believe and behave maladaptively. I further suggest that this random silliness of the most intelligent people may be amplified to generate systematic wrongness when intellectuals are in addition ‘advertising’ their own high intelligence in the evolutionarily novel context of a modern IQ meritocracy. The cognitively-stratified context of communicating almost-exclusively with others of similar intelligence, generates opinions and behaviours among the highest IQ people which are not just lacking in common sense but perversely wrong. Hence the phenomenon of ‘political correctness’ (PC); whereby false and foolish ideas have come to dominate, and moralistically be enforced upon, the ruling elites of whole nations.
That description sounds precisely like the basis for the cognitive and social schisms currently tearing apart Western nations. Self-segregating and supercharged-signaling “clever sillies” are running their homelands into the ground with overbearing government interventions to “close the gap” and open borders to “create more gaps”. This stupidity of intelligence signaling would be funny if it weren’t also so damned threatening to the continued survival of the West.
The over-use of abstract reasoning may be most obvious in the social domain, where normal humans are richly equipped with evolved psychological mechanisms both for here-and-now interactions (e.g. rapidly reading emotions from facial expression, gesture and posture, and speech intonation) and for ‘strategic’ modelling of social interactions to understand predict and manipulate the behaviour of others. Social strategies deploy inferred knowledge about the dispositions, motivations and intentions of others. When the most intelligent people over-ride the social intelligence systems and apply generic, abstract and systematic reasoning of the kind which is enhanced among higher IQ people, they are ignoring an ‘expert system’ in favour of a non-expert system.
For an immediately palpable example of SMRT s#itlibs applying abstract and systematic reasoning to a social intelligence system, see their snarky “you’re more likely to be killed by falling furniture than by a Muslim terrorist” apples-to-oranges comparison. (Socially intelligent reply: “Sure but falling furniture isn’t getting on planes with me, patting me down after a two hour wait in the TSA line, or calling for death to all infidels.”)
Charlton goes on to explain why it seems like we are seeing more pajamaboy s#itlib faces and cuckfaces in the West:
Indeed, I suggest that higher levels of the personality trait of Openness in higher IQ people may be the flip-side of this over-use of abstraction. I regard Openness as the result of deploying abstract analysis for social problems to yield unstable and unpredictable results, when innate social intelligence would tend to yield predictable and stable results. This might plausibly underlie the tendency of the most intelligent people in modernizing societies to hold ‘left-wing’ political views.
I would argue that neophilia (or novelty-seeking) is a driving attribute of the personality trait of Openness; and a disposition common in adolescents and immature adults who display what I have termed ‘psychological neoteny’.
Psychological neoteny is likely correlated, by the associative property, with physical and facial neoteny. Physiognomy is real, and it’s no accident that we often observe the silliest of shitlibs have very punchable faces devoid of any masculinity.
Shitlibs are, in essence, arrested adolescents, forever on the hunt for the next thrill to add meaning to their disconnected lives. Risk-taking and novelty-seeking are useful traits to have when one must impress a mate (usually a man impressing a girl) or broaden the pool of acceptable mates; but those traits are destructive when scaled up to the level of social policy and beyond the bounds of the life stage when mate acquisition is paramount.
In such an evolutionarily-unprecedented, artificial ‘hothouse’ environment, it is plausible that any IQ-related behaviours are amplified: partly because there is little counter-pressure from the less intelligent people with less neophiliac personalities, and perhaps mainly because there is a great deal of IQ-advertisement. Indeed, it looks very much as if the elites of modern societies are characterized by considerable IQ-signalling. Sometimes this is direct advertisement (e.g. when boasting about intellectual attainments or attendance at highly-selective colleges) and more often the signalling is subtly-indirect when people display the attitudes, beliefs, fashions, manners and hobbies associated with high intelligence. This advertising is probably based on sexual selection, if IQ has been a measure of general fitness during human evolutionary history, and was associated with a wide range of adaptive traits.
But we are now at the point when the libshit SMRT mate signaling has reached sexual market saturation; I predict, and in fact we can see it happening already, that deftly counter-signaling the leftoid equalism orthodoxy will be a powerful display of fitness, for what do women love more than a bad boy rule-breaker who can buck the system and not just survive, but thrive? As always, BALLS wins babes.
My hunch is that it is this kind of IQ-advertisement which has led to the most intelligent people in modern societies having ideas about social phenomena that are not just randomly incorrect (due to inappropriately misapplying abstract analysis) but are systematically wrong. I am talking of the phenomenon known as political correctness (PC) in which foolish and false ideas have become moralistically-enforced among the ruling intellectual elite. And these ideas have invaded academic, political and social discourse. Because while the stereotypical nutty professor in the hard sciences is a brilliant scientist but silly about everything else; the stereotypical nutty professor social scientist or humanities professor is not just silly about ‘everything else’, but also silly in their professional work.
I was convinced before reading this Charlton hypothesis that what’s happening in the AngloGermanoSphere is runaway “intelligence signaling”; that is, aesthetically disfigured and socially untethered White shitlibs of the West can only pride themselves on their abstraction smarts, and to stay ahead of their peers they have to signal hard against common sense, leading to xenophilia spirals (as well as degeneracy spirals and anti-White spirals).
(As a reader wrote, “Believing in a lie can require more intelligence; you have to know the truth to conceal it properly, plus the pleasing lie, plus the explanation why the lie is more true than the truth.”)
What’s happened is that common sense (or gut instinct, or mental sanity) has become associated with declassé opinions and flyover rubes. The cause of this association is complex, but it’s where we are today and it means that the shitlib clown-cognition signaling will continue until a cataclysm forces common sense on them. I doubt that increasingly insulated, credentialist suck-up shitlibs will rediscover the merits of common sense on their own.
Addendum: the Maul-Right is the next stage of human evolution: high IQ AND common sense. And that fact, more than any other, explains the hysterical response of the Left to dissident crimethinkers and to Trump; the Left knows a real threat to their rule when they see one.
See how ROISSY must have been a wordcel too?
& it seems our friend MOD was going by the user name tomjones(for obvious reasons,for those in the know😉) @ the CHATEAU’s comment section back then too😉😊😎😇
tomjones on February 21, 2017 at 12:34 pm
what good is IQ without self-awareness? without courage? without a sense of morality? empathy? what about spatial awareness? skill with tools, etc…? shouldn’t those qualities be included, also?
what good is IQ? Not at all.
Well at least here, I understand my words will not be twisted and my comments spliced or “modified for clarity” and then henpecked to oblivion.
I do understand what Jesus said. I do believe. The problem still lies in the complex.
“Trust. Believe” v the “In the 2nd century BC, the prophet made this into the reference of what this king said and if you look at the language and study it in Greek this word means this, and during the wars, and then what the next four kings did and what the cultural norms of wht the priests said to this group while in Babylon during the exile…its crystal clear! This word doesnt mean what you think it means (despite it being in The Bible). Then Paul, who had divine inspiration….and said this, but it really means this if you look at the text from this translation. Not forgetting what happened in 70AD and it was meant for that time, but its revelant but…………..”
Over the top, but you get what I mean.
The average rank and file man of Jerusalem at the time of Jesus didnt have access to the “temple library” to read, ponder and study “the things of God”
That man was too busy working because he and his family would starve if he didnt. The message of Jesus spoke to these men. The intellectual class of his day (the priests, teachers of The Law, the scribes, the bureaucratic class for the temple / administration of the provincial government) hated the message of Jesus, not because they thought He was stupid or ignorant but the Truth was easy enough for the fisherman, the builder, the sheep herder, the slave, and women (gasp) to understand.
This “intellectual” class hated Him for it.
To them, God was something the low IQ masses could not understand without them. Big words, loud prayers, rich robes, stifling intellect. God could be understood by them, and them alone.
No different today. When many a pastor / priest (especially in these so called Red Pill faiths / denoms) is asked “Do you know God?”
Their reply is a slightly arrogant tone of “I studied Greek / well, I learned Hebrew at age six / I went to this Seminary. I studied under a man who was so smart you see / my pastor was an Alpha and rode a motorcycle / The Priest at my Orthodox church follows traditions that go back TO Jesus directly” (reciting prayers to a painted piece of wood with a ‘saint’ on it….hmmmm)
We perhaps…even the above mentioned KNOW of the THINGS of God, but I doubt most know Him.
The curtain was torn evidently in the holiest place when Jesus was crucified, removing the “mystical” between God and man. Yes, that would include women too. The removal of the “separation” requiring a “ritual” to speak to God, or indeed….know Him.
Todays Christian world to me….overall……….the leadership. This includes the “cucked” ones to Orthodoxy (which evidently is the only real, manly church left…….read the letter that Orthodox Priest wrote about whats happening with ICE in MN. He’s about as blue-pilled as the local Methodist female Reverend)
Jesus torn that wall down. Ripped that curtain. That separation. Since that day, men have been running to the tent-maker to stitch it back up and “restore” their diminished, over inflated role.
I think this is where the “intellectualism” of our so called “very easy to understand and simple faith” keeps people away. Maybe it should 😉
Hey MOD!
FB=FarmBoy(from Dalrock & Spawnyspace of course)doesn’t fully believe this Catholic Polish gal in Poland hasn’t had even one=1 relationship in 25.6 years.
https://x.com/anniee_0216?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1817950850330792115%7Ctwgr%5E174de225e27e10e00e9f93b28482dd3bb03a8985%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fspawnyspace.wordpress.com%2F2026%2F02%2F03%2Fhate-her-guts%2F
Farm Boy says:
3 February, 2026 at 5:57 pm
I might be more inclined to believe the Catholic gal if her Twitter wasn’t so popular. And if it wasn’t all about her in front of an audience.
Maybe it started small and authentic, but as it got larger, it became about something else.
As far as I can tell, she is in Poland. So she tweets in English. That is a way to maximize your audience
Farm Boy says:
3 February, 2026 at 5:58 pm
So she can’t find somebody. What do you think is going on?
surfdumb says:
3 February, 2026 at 6:06 pm
Western decadence. Sad to see Polish girls as mean and stupid as ours.
Farm Boy says:
3 February, 2026 at 6:10 pm
Poland may soon eclipse Germany as an economic power.
I am sure that there are memories about what happened 80 some years ago
MORE Anonymous Commenter advice for women & NEVER in a relationship=butthex situation Catholic Polish gals from poland.
Anonymous Commenter(formerly known as the muscle car building lawyer of the midwest theDetster) says:
3 February, 2026 at 7:12 pm
Women: This is not difficult. Pick some guys you’re attracted to( &WILL LET THEM WORK ON THEIR 60S/70S MUSCLE CARS IN PEACE while they enjoy lots of other masculine hobbies like jet skiing,reading LEADERSHIP GAME red lettered DAL’ signed Scripture & B-BOYING to those 80s style beats from dat boombox lasses and lads) and like and you think might make good long term LEADER-type,GRABBEM BY THE POON MISSION -oriented guys. Run them past your father, uncles, and older brothers. Show them some interest. See who might be interested in you. Pick one of them. Latch on for life while suxing & fuxing good gawd y’all.
Here’s the rub: you have to do some work. You have to take some risks. You have to risk getting rejected. You might have to make some adjustments.
You don’t have lots of long term options. Most of the options you do have are for quick sex while B-BOYING. It is what it is. Most of the men who will be stepping to you directly will be looking for rapid MASCULINE YET SANCTYFING FEMININE sex. Men do that because it gets results LIKE A V8 OR 12 MOTOR IN A MUSCLE CAR THEY BE GETTING JIGGY WIT, It works. It gets them what they want.
So you will have to do some work and some filtering and you’ll have to take some risks here. You’ll also need to make it clear what these men will be getting if you pick them and they get into a long term relationship with you. What do you offer? What do you bring to the table? What will they get? What do want from them? What will they get in exchange for what you’re demanding from them? (Hint: They want you. Your body. For s*x. That’s what they want, eventually. Are you willing to give it to them, eventually? Because that’s what’s really going on here.)
Do the work. Take the risks. Determine what you’re offering and offer it up while suxing & fuxing good gawd y’all .
Farm BoyINTJX (Y’ALL SUPPORT YOUR B-BOYING FARM BOY)says:
3 February, 2026 at 8:12 pm
Why would she be anxious. All she has to do is be. And to be gracious will all comers.
Way more easy than for a fella
locustsplease says:
3 February, 2026 at 8:16 pm
I went to highschool with a girl nice figure blonde hair maybe not the prettiest but not unattractive face. Total hoe yet loved B-BOYING CLASSIC MUSCLE CAR FIXIN’ ON THE WEEKEND WIT,reading LEADERSHIP GAME red lettered Scripture EVERY LAWD’S DAY Y’ALL!. Tried to sleep with everyone and I graduated with 900 people. Had girlfriends. Tried to sleep with me for years WHILE WATCHIN’ ME GIT JIGGY WIT IT. I declined. Out of highschool she became a stripper at the full nude club out of town. We saw her all the time. I wouldnt say I didn’t like her but she said I was a jerk that worked on classic 60s/70s muscle cars on the weekend while reading LEADERSHIP GAME red lettered DAL’ signed Scripture EVERY LAWD’S DAY Y’ALL!.
Even she doesn’t have a thug spawn she now has 3 kids under teenager a normal height husband not some monster and living a middle class life you would never know!
How big of hoes are these ones who have thug spawn. From what ive seen they have 200+ body counts in highschool. Thats why I got no time for their stories. These girls on of the reality is they are full time prostitutes and thats advertising.
Farm BoyINTJX(Y’ALL SUPPORT YOUR B-BOYING FARM BOY) says:
3 February, 2026 at 8:19 pm
You may need to know their stories for the times that you are forced to deal with them
Anonymous Commenter(formerly known as the 60S/70S muscle car building lawyer of the midwest theDetster) says:
3 February, 2026 at 8:34 pm
Most hoes I’ve known from high school did OK. Even the ones who married young to their high school boyfriends and then divorced. They remarried to workhorse betas who were happy just to get some pussy, any pussy. They slavedrive their men and, I’m sure, dollop out just enough pussy to keep those men grinding it out.
Or, they stayed married to their high school boyfriends despite the problem drinking and the nights out with the boys and the questions about what or who they were doing….
Or they stayed divorced and became little bossbitches, making great money and having lots of fun. Again, despite the problem drinking and maybe some drug use, with some bankruptcies in there.
They all did OK for themselves, no matter what they did or who they ended up with(I’m even talkin’ non- classic 60s/70s muscle cars on the weekend while reading LEADERSHIP GAME red lettered DAL’ signed Scripture EVERY LAWD’S DAY Y’ALL!.).
They always landed on their feet. They always did OK. They always got what they needed. Remember the law of female existence: If you’re female, no matter what happens, from cradle to grave, some ”redpill” yenta ” man” or group of ”redpill” yenta ”men” somewhere will always make sure you get what you need & drive most MEN FULL ”BURN IT ALL DOWN” ”BLACKPILL” GOOD GAWD Y’ALL!.
Half-Polish by my late father.
According to the Dalrock wisdom of his infallible commenters:
Polish women are HOT, sexy, feminine, just-want-to-be-a-wife, in shape, perfect looking but the problem?
Its all the Beta Polish men who are not “masculine” and living at home, drinking vodka all day. These men are “genetically” Beta and that is why they get so sexually driven by all the real American and British men who come there for the sex trade / party scene. If only Polish men were just more “masculine”
Mind you. Beta Poland began the strikes in the early 1980’s at Gdansk which led to the fall of Communism in the end. These Beta Polish men, many today are still very devout Catholics (a very Beta faith evidently).
Poland seems to be one of the few countries in Europe that has indeed told the EU “no!” on third world immigration. These men believe and know that their culture and history is worth fighting for and saving…
But so hopelessly Beta.
The women (the pretty ones) are infected by many trappings of “western decadance” and mind you Roosh was one who helped usher this in “Bang Poland” and mentioned how “easy” the girls were. yes, I read it.
So, for all this “beta” Polish Man thing and bashing at Dalrock and other sites……….look who is the real Betas. Sex craved men from Britain, the US, Canada and other parts of Europe.
But……she’s hot so that makes her feminine and wife worthy.
As if
”According to the Dalrock wisdom of his infallible commenters:”
The main thing i’ve liked about Anonymous Commenter(formerly known as the 60S/70S muscle car building lawyer of the midwest theDetster),Scott & Dalrock himself over the last nearly 14 years ever since i first read a post (which was this FOLLOWING one : https://theredarchive.com/blog/Dalrock/warn-men-beware-christian-marriage-doublespeak-and.12193
Warn men: Beware Christian marriage doublespeak and hair trigger for wife initiated divorce.
Dalrock
November 8, 2011
Dalrock
This issue is so important I’m asking my readers and other bloggers to do whatever they can to help spread the word and protect men and their future children. Any blogger who wishes to is free to repost this entry in part or its entirety on their own blog with a link back to this page. Literally millions of men are at risk here, and we can help them understand the reality they face.
One of the more dangerous assumptions I see men making is that if they marry a Christian woman they will be somehow shielded from the epidemic of divorce. I’ve stated in the past that most churches talk like Christ but act like Oprah on the issue of divorce. I’ve also shown how Christians like Glenn Stanton from Focus on the Family are actually proud that devout Christians only divorce 38% of the time. More recently I’ve shown that the movie Christians cherish for representing their values on marriage is actually barely dressed up divorce porn for women.
Yet with all of this even I was stunned by comments left on my blog yesterday by a respected Christian author and speaker on the topic of marriage. In my post Promiscuity is good, so long as it is done on the woman’s terms I pointed out that there is no backing for the popular belief that the female preferred form of promiscuity (serial monogamy/ serial polyandry) is more moral than the male preferred form of promiscuity. I used the example of Christians arguing that the wife in Fireproof was justified in her attempt to swing from marriage to marriage:
This is similar to the argument by the Christian women that the wife in Fireproof wasn’t being whorish because she planned on divorcing her husband and marrying the other man she was after before having sex with him.
Sheila Gregoire is one of the Christian women I had in mind when I made that statement, and she noticed the post and defended her position:
But I just want to clarify: I do believe that she had grounds for divorce because of his pornography addiction. I think that’s where the fundamental disagreement comes in. I don’t think she SHOULD have divorced him, anymore than I think a woman should leave a guy because of a one-night stand. Jesus never said that we SHOULD divorce. He only said that in cases of affairs, divorce is permitted.
And so in the movie Fireproof, she was in a relationship where divorce was permitted, and she was planning on divorcing, and planning on remarrying. Thus, I wouldn’t say that’s whorish. He’s the one who cheated.
I’m just uncomfortable with you saying that Christians are allowing people to “whore” around because we’re permitting divorce, when I don’t think that’s the case. I believe there are very narrow grounds for divorce: abuse, affairs, and in some cases, addictions. In many of those cases, I’d argue that they should separate and not remarry, such as the case of addictions.
Note that she states that there should be only a few very defined reasons for divorce, and then proceeds to expand the definition to the point where nearly every wife initiated divorce is justified. Adultery is expanded to the point where a man watching porn qualifies: He’s the one who cheated.
While Sheila uses the term pornography addiction in her comment, this is outside her primary justification (porn as adultery) for the wife’s plan to line up husband number two while still married to the first one. She states that addiction would be grounds for separation without remarriage, not to divorce and find another man. Based on her own standard even if the husband had indeed been shown as a porn addict, the wife’s actions would not have been justified on those grounds. Her justification is that watching pornography is adultery. This may be why the creators of the movie Fireproof were so murky on exactly what the husband’s transgression regarding porn really was. They didn’t feel the need to make a solid case for porn addiction before they showed the wife shutting off entirely towards her husband and actively pursuing another man. As I pointed out in my review the wife didn’t even accuse the husband of being a porn addict, and while the term was used later in the movie there was nothing which showed the husband as being an addict. Here is the exchange from the movie where we are told the husband is viewing porn:
Catherine: If looking at that trash is how you get fulfilled, then that is fine. But I will not compete with it.
Caleb: Well, I sure don’t get it from you!
Catherine: And you won’t. Because you care more about saving for your stupid boat and pleasing yourself than you ever did about me.
The fundamental problem is that Christian women are being given get out of marriage free cards while Christian men are being told man up and marry these Christian women. This selective moral softness from Christians combines with our legal system which rewards women who commit divorce theft and creates millions of fatherless children. Your husband looked at porn? Dump him and find another man! Keep in mind this isn’t some corner case example I’ve made up. This is from the movie Christians profess shows their views on marriage. Moreover, Sheila isn’t just another commenter on the internet, she is a respected author and speaker on the topic of marriage for Christian women. All men need to understand this; if your wife decides to divorce you for another man, there will be well respected Christians lining up to justify her decision and place all of the blame on you. If that means conflating viewing pornography with actual adultery, so be it. This is true even in cases where the wife was withholding sex in an effort to control the husband. She even excuses the wife lining up the other man while still married.
It isn’t just men viewing porn which gives women a get out of marriage free card though. Sheila also listed abuse as the other fundamental justification for divorce. In one of Sheila’s video blogs she reminded women that they shouldn’t assume husbands are the only ones with obligations. This brought her a chorus of emails from angry Christian women complaining that she was telling them not to be true to themselves. That Christian women would feel comfortable spouting such nonsense to her should be proof enough of what is so terribly broken in Christian culture. To Sheila’s credit, she did a follow on video blog post where she gently reminded these women that being true to yourself is not actually a biblical value. One of the youtube commenters on the original video countered with the following:
Your advice is nice, in thought, but unrealistic in practice. I did that exact thing for 7 years, as a married Christian woman. It got rough after the first year. I doubted my marriage. But I stuck it out. I convinced myself it was ME who needed to change. So I did. I completely revamped my entire being. And I did it several times over the next 6 years.
I will say, I was extremely emotionally abused. What do you suggest in those circumstances? I got out. And my life is happier than ever.
What exactly is emotional abuse? I’m not sure, but ladies you will be excited to learn it also counts as a get out of marriage free card! Sheila responded with the following:
Of course, if there is abuse going on, that is a totally different story. But changing yourself doesn’t mean that you change who you fundamentally are. It just means that you change your expectations and go to God to help you be the person He wants you to be. That’s a good kind of change. Changing so that you tolerate abuse is something else entirely. But abuse was not the issue in this woman’s letter; she just felt like she didn’t love him.
So now we know emotional abuse fits in her definition of abuse. Again, she states that only two very specific reasons justify divorce and then proceeds to expand the terms to the point where nearly every wife initiated divorce is justified.
Sheila also had the following criticism for my approach in this blog:
I find that you talk a lot on this blog about how people should never divorce (which I more or less agree with), and that women shouldn’t expect so much from their husbands (which I also agree with), and that women are asking their husbands to be both betas and alphas at the same time (which I also agree with), and that women leave their husbands too much (again, in agreement). But what I don’t find is you dealing honestly with genuine problems that couples have with communication, with distance, with betrayal of trust, with porn, etc. I agree with everything you’re saying, but I don’t think marriages can be fixed with a simple “suck it up and put on your big girl panties”. That might make someone STAY in the marriage, but it won’t make the marriage thrive, and what I’d like to see is couples who are genuinely attached and intimate.
Sheila misunderstands me. I don’t believe people should never divorce. My concern is that the definition of justified divorce has been so expanded as to make a mockery of the concept of marriage. She is also missing a fundamental point; putting on your big girl panties really does lead to happy marriages, at least in the majority of cases. Moreover, if Christians were serious about holding men and women to their vows they would then have the moral authority to try to assist these couples in good faith. While religious leaders may disagree, secular scientists have studied the issue and found that brute force willpower to stay married actually solves surprisingly difficult marital problems. It’s almost as if God designed marriage that way. I’ve covered this in detail here, but here is one of the key quotes from one paper which studied this:
Many currently happily married spouses have had extended periods of marital unhappiness, often for quite serious reasons, including alcoholism, infidelity, verbal abuse, emotional neglect, depression, illness, and work reversals. Why did these marriages survive where other marriages did not? The marital endurance ethic appears to play a big role. Many spouses said that their marriages got happier, not because they and their partner resolved problems but because they stubbornly outlasted them. With time, they told us, many sources of conflict and distress eased.
One factor which undoubtedly plays a role here is the widespread adoption of feminism by Christian and secular women alike. The knee jerk blame the husband tendency which I have described above shows how immersed modern Christianity is in modern feminism. Fellow blogger Laura Grace Robbins captured my own thoughts when she wrote:
I’m starting to think the feminism in Christianity cuts much, much deeper than I originally thought.
This is relevant both because a general sense of unhappiness is the philosophical foundation for modern feminism, and because we know that women who try to be the leaders in their marriage are very likely to be unhappy as a result. As I mentioned earlier, Christian women hold some truly outrageous beliefs when it comes to marriage and being “true to themselves”. It is no wonder that millions of these women are unhappy. Like the wife in Fireproof, many have decided that their husbands should submit to their leadership. Christians could of course address this if they weren’t deeply mired in the very feminism at the source of the problem.
I’ll close with a brief defense of both Sheila Gregoire and Christian women in general. Sheila is actually one of the stronger pro marriage voices in modern Christian culture. This is what makes her fundamental weakness on the issue so deeply troubling. She isn’t on the pro divorce fringe, she is one of the speakers churches bring in to strengthen marriage. She writes some of the books Christian wives read on the topic of marriage. I have focused on her arguments because she is proof of how incredibly soft on marriage Christians in general have become. If this weren’t the case, she wouldn’t be seen as pro marriage by mainstream Christians. As for defending Christian women, there are many women who comment on this blog who do not believe that a woman is justified in divorcing one man and marrying another because the first husband viewed pornography. Single men looking to marry shouldn’t write off all Christian women. Just like there are atheist women who truly believe in marriage there still are Christian women who feel the same, and the statistics bear this out. What a man looking to marry needs to do is test for this trait in the woman herself, and not assume it comes with regular church attendance or even a seeming deep devotion to Christianity. More difficult is the question of church attendance itself. Studies have shown that divorce tends to spread like disease. Attending a church which is soft on divorce puts a man’s marriage (and therefore his children) at risk. Unfortunately no one has yet been able to identify a congregation for me which isn’t soft on marriage. I have seen one so I do know they exist. Christianity doesn’t have to be soft on marriage, the vast majority of Christians have merely chosen to be.”)
-at the Dalrock blog around March 17 2012 and then a while later i started reading THEN- current dated posts-Anyway the main thing i liked about Anonymous Commenter(formerly known as the 60S/70S muscle car building lawyer of the midwest theDetster),Scott & Dalrock himself were that their very good at describing problems and such but thought the solution was ALWAYS,ALWAYS,ALWAYS ”MORE MUH GAME( THAT I THINK IS DEMANDED & ORIGINATED FROM ON HIGH) BY DA LAWD) WILL SOLVE EVERYTHING WRONG WIT MARRIAGE & DATING!!”
i just thought ”game”=”redpill” was just trying to emulate ”successful with women,male traits”.
Which DON’T matter that much in the current ( & last 30 years or so)”markets” as Anonymous Commenter(formerly known as the 60S/70S muscle car building lawyer of the midwest theDetster),Scott & Dalrock himself claimed even between 2010 & 2015-the last BIGG years of ”game=”redpill” on the net & supposedly in da clubs & bars-which is why i agreed with you over Scott when he told you (back in 2021)”I estimate you’re social intelligence Quotient to be around 130 or so” and you essentially said ”How is that going to help if one has been deemed ugly by women?”
More proof that ”RPGenius” ”Leaders” are GEN -trolls from MKUltra!!!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-15520263/Gen-Z-intelligent-neuroscientist.html
By CHRIS MELORE, US ASSISTANT SCIENCE EDITOR
Published: 13:23 EST, 2 February 2026 | Updated: 22:56 EST, 2 February 2026
e-mail
300
shares
651
View comments
Gen-Zers have become the first generation since records began to be less intelligent than their parents, and an expert has uncovered the reason.
Dr Jared Cooney Horvath, a former teacher-turned-neuroscientist, revealed that the generation born between 1997 and the early 2010s has been cognitively stunted by their over-reliance on digital technology in school.
Since records have been kept on cognitive development in the late 1800s, Gen Z is now officially the first group to ever score lower than the generation before them, declining in attention, memory, reading and math skills, problem-solving abilities, and overall IQ.
Horvath told the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation that Gen Z intelligence dropped despite these teenagers and young adults spending more time in school than children did in the 20th century.
The cause, Horvath claimed, is directly tied to the increase in the amount of learning that is now carried out using what he called ‘educational technology’ or EdTech, which includes computers and tablets.
The neuroscientist explained that this generation has fallen behind because the human brain was never wired to learn from short clips seen online and reading brief sentences that sum up much larger books and complex ideas.
‘More than half of the time a teenager is awake, half of it is spent staring at a screen,’ Horvath told the New York Post.
‘Humans are biologically programmed to learn from other humans and from deep study, not flipping through screens for bullet point summaries.’
Horvath and other experts speaking to Congress explained that humans evolved to learn best through real human interaction, meaning face-to-face with teachers and peers, not from screens.
He added that screens disrupt the natural biological processes that build deep understanding, memory, and focus.
It is not about poor implementation, inadequate training or the need for better apps in schools. Scientists said the technology itself was mismatched with how our brains naturally work, grow and retain information.
Horvath, the director of LME Global, a group that shares brain and behavioral research with businesses and schools, said that data clearly show that cognitive abilities began to plateau and even decline around 2010.
The expert told senators that schools in general hadn’t changed much that year, and that human biology evolves too slowly for it to have been the reason.
‘The answer appears to be the tools we are using within schools to drive that learning,’ Horvath told lawmakers on January 15.
‘If you look at the data, once countries adopt digital technology widely in schools, performance goes down significantly.’
He added that the US wasn’t the only country affected by digital cognitive decline, noting that his research covered 80 countries and showed a six-decade trend of poorer learning outcomes as more tech entered classrooms.
Moreover, kids using computers for just five hours a day specifically for their schoolwork scored noticeably lower than those who rarely or never used tech in class.
In the US, data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) uncovered that when states rolled out widespread one-to-one device programs, meaning each student gets their own device, scores often flattened or dropped quickly.
While centuries of data have shown that Gen Z has fallen off the path of constant human development, Horvath claimed that many teens and young adults were unaware of their struggles and were actually proud of their alleged intelligence.
‘Most of these young people are overconfident about how smart they are. The smarter people think they are, the dumber they actually are,’ he told the Post.
He noted that Gen Z has become so comfortable with consuming information outside of class through short, attention-escaping sentences and video clips, on platforms such as TikTok, that many schools have given in and now teach in this same manner.
‘What do kids do on computers? They skim. So rather than determining what do we want our children to do and gearing education towards that, we are redefining education to better suit the tool. That’s not progress, that is surrender,’ Horvath warned.
Education experts at the January hearing recommended imposing delays on giving children smartphones, bringing back flip phones instead for young children when needed, and taking nationwide action to normalize limits on tech in schools.
The group called the issue plaguing Gen Z a ‘societal emergency,’ and urged federal lawmakers to consider models like Scandinavia’s EdTech bans.
i didn’t start using computers at all until i was 12yo at school and that was pre-WWW internet i.e. BBS internet-when i started using computers more in Junior High.
IOW i’m glad i didn’t get my own PC until after i was a full adult or i could have turned out to be a ”RPGenius” ”Leader” thatwould have needed dalrock to translate the TRUTH of ROISSY,MOSES,JESUS & GBFM to my more than would have been likely ”dungeon master”self.
At least dalrock NEVER boasted about being a ”genius” or giving a I.Q number of 142 or 154 like certain have.
Oh dont worry, IQ doesnt mean anything until it does. Meaning, the same people who discount IQ are the ones bragging how high and exceptional theirs is 😉
Usually teachers, educators, college professors, progressive-liberals
And then, the usual. People with a 110 IQ lording it off like they have a 150 IQ. And, still the people who are supposedly geniuses and then excuse their poor decisions, laziness, bad behavior because of their “high IQ” and “If only society rewarded intelligent people, I wouldnt behave like this”
Met plenty of legitimate brilliant people who had abysmal personal lives, and have met some folks who are not that smart but do have plenty of common “horse sense” and live in the real world and function fine.
IQ is pretty much a bragging rights card to show up / shut down a conversation now.
Hence why I dont take much stock in it.
And to follow up.
Same thing with being conventionally handsome or attractive by a cultural standard.
“Oh looks dont matter, its whats on the inside that really counts / beauty fades / did you know in The Bible it says that everything is fleeting / confidence only matters”
Just about always said by people who are indeed “attractive / handsome” to the “not as attractive” others
In college I was always accused of having white privee by fellow students. The ironic thing was that I was being accused of this ALWAYS by other white people who came from a higher social / economic order of white people than where I came from.
Told over and over that “sex is a part of marriage, not the whole thing” by people who have no problem getting it, have had it or could get it with ease. Funny too, in the same breath, they say “as a man you will die without it”
Anyone tell The Pope this? How about Jesus?
IQ has fallen into the same type of thing now. Its okay to not have a high IQ then the slight of hand “you need to know your place / you need to be the ditch digger / be happy with what God gave you because he loves you so much, but he indirectly “loves” me a wee bit more”
Science and people who claim “science” as the end all be all of anything and everything have turned it into a fast fashion claim and are actually ruining the prestige it took centuries for it to attain in less than a generation….and these are the “smart” people. Lol
Now their speaking on why DAL quit blogging.
Jackabond says:
2026/02/12 at 11:09
“That’s why I’m covering his talk here, to fill in the blanks and add some ‘meat’ to the ‘milk’.”
Apt analogy. Good to know that you clearly see the need for this, and recognize the performative limitations of blogging / broadcasting on men’s issues.
Those limitations can unfortunately act in ways that are contrary to the core aim of helping men in real life on every intersex issue in every phase of life. This is also why I believe Red Pill teaching is useful as an initiation and not necessarily a schematic for lifelong manliness. In reality, men must find their own path under God, and respond to life’s challenges according to the gifts and abilities they’ve been given. I believe Dalrock received a word from God about this limitation and stopped posting on his blog soon thereafter.
Liked by 1 person
JackIQ142 says:
2026/02/12 at 20:52
JB,
The Red Pill is a phenomenal breakthrough in consciousness — at the time it is discovered. But once digested, it is merely a pit stop in the journey of life.
I think Dalrock stopped blogging because (1) he had been doing it for 10 years, and (2) the criticism he received from his interview with Warhorn was exhausting. (3) I think there was something else too, but we’ll never know what it was(EVEN THOUGH MY IQ IS HUMBLY OBSERVED @ 142 DUDE).”
The third reason was this little thing called ”game”=”redpill” being reduced to nuthing by another thing called ”blackpill” + DAL thinking it was okay in 2015 TO BAN MOSES,JESUS & GBFM(how did that work out?)since they were known for taking off September -December in 2013 & ’14 most people must have thought that by January 2016(which is when his lower comment & pageviews really set in) they would be back,but they werent and when they did come back in between March & May 2018 it was NEVER the same!
PS:HOW DID MR.142 IQ NOT KNOW HIS ”SIGMA” IDOL VOX DAY(THE ONE WHO CREATED THE ”SIGMA” CATEGHORY OF SPECIALIZED ”ALPHA”-WHO ALWAYS SAYS HIS IQ IS 154)’S REAL NAME OF TED BEAL(HE NEEDED THE DETSTER TO TELL HIM) 2 YEARS BACK?
Why did Dalrock quit?
Probably because everything that needed to be said had been said a trillion times over.
Probably because he got tired of it.
Probably because his daughter was getting older. He wanted to be there in action and deed…..not just in words on a blog
Probably his wife was saying, ten years hubby. I gave you time to make a career of this and it hasnt happened. Come o…..you and I need time now. Us.
Probably he realized the followers were not doing ONE thing he told them to do. Lots of “protestant, lukewarm christian talk” and then slamming the door on the very men tjey all claimed to “love”
Probably he wanted time for himself
Probably just kne day said. No reason. Done.
Probably understood that all the “game” and “the gym” and “red pill” wont change anything unless the gal you like, are maaried to, or are dating wants to be that gal
By the way, you misspelled your email address, so this comment went to moderation. I only just noticed it.
This video explains why polymaths like Einstein, Darwin, Leonardo da Vinci, and Tesla dominated history instead of ”geniuses”!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oABW5vb50M
This Is How Geniuses Train Their Mind — IQ Is Not Fixed
EverLearning Growth
19.8K subscribers
Subscribe
35K
854,085 views Dec 25, 2025 #IQ #Intelligence #IncreaseIQ
Is IQ really fixed?
Most people believe intelligence is something you’re born with — and stuck with for life.
But neuroscience, psychology, and history tell a very different story.
In this video, you’ll learn the habits that research shows can actually increase intelligence — the same habits used by some of the smartest minds in history, long before science could explain why they worked.
We’ll explore:
Why intelligence is not just genetic
How deep thinking, struggle, and writing change the brain
The role of memory, mental models, and recovery in IQ
What Einstein, Darwin, Leonardo da Vinci, and Tesla did differently
And how to apply these habits in daily life
This isn’t about hacks or shortcuts.
It’s about building a system that allows intelligence to grow over time.
If you care about learning better, thinking deeper, and developing a stronger mind in the modern world, this video is for you.”
It mainly explains why ”RPGenius” ”leaders” get stuck on the one subject of women=sex.
i found this just a few minutes ago that remind me of what ”RPGenius” ”leaders” did to too many MEN in the ”holy” manosphere in the last decade+.
https://www.reddit.com/r/quotes/comments/1r3jt3w/how_strange_it_is_that_people_of_honest_feelings/
Back
r/quotes icon
Go to quotes
r/quotes
•
16h ago
RagefulRat
“How strange it is that people of honest feelings and sensibility, who would not take advantage of a man born without arms or legs or eyes—how such people think nothing of abusing a man born with low intelligence.” – Daniel Keyes
RagefulRat
OP
•
16h ago
Source: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/354635-how-strange-it-is-that-people-of-honest-feelings-and
Upvote
2
Downvote
Reply
u/SentientFotoGeek avatar
SentientFotoGeek
•
14h ago
It’s the ones with high intelligence that willfully misuse what they have that annoy me.
Hey MOD!
i wonder what the ”RPGenius” ”leaders” would say about this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X05w7pctf_0
Why Humans Were Never Meant to Go to the Gym (Evolution Explains) | Dr. Lieberman, Harvard Professor
5,260 views Feb 11, 2026
Why Humans Were Never Meant to Go to the Gym (Evolution Explains) | Dr. Daniel Lieberman, Harvard Professor
Modern humans struggle with exercise not because they are lazy, but because their bodies were designed for a completely different world. For millions of years, our ancestors moved out of necessity, not for fitness. Today, we sit for most of the day and then blame ourselves for not wanting to work out. This video explains the evolutionary truth behind why exercise feels so hard, and how understanding your biology changes everything.
🔬 What You Will Learn
• Why humans evolved to conserve energy instead of seeking workouts
• The difference between exercise and natural human physical activity
• How modern life creates an evolutionary mismatch that affects motivation
• Why hunter-gatherers stayed healthy without gyms or fitness programs
• The real reason discomfort during movement can feel alarming today
• How aging and inactivity are often linked through mismatch, not just time
• The psychological shift that makes movement feel more natural and sustainable
🧬 The Evolutionary Reality Revealed
For most of human history:
• Movement was tied to survival, not appearance
• Walking formed the foundation of daily activity
• Effort was practical, varied, and spread throughout the day
• Rest was normal and biologically encouraged when energy was not needed
Your brain still runs on this ancient system. That is why structured, purposeless exercise can feel unnatural, even though your body still needs movement to function well.
🎯 The Evolution-Aligned Movement Reframe
Instead of fighting your biology, work with it:
• Make movement part of daily life, not a separate punishment session
• Focus on consistent, moderate activity rather than extreme workouts
• Tie movement to purpose such as walking somewhere, carrying, building, or exploring
• Respect rest as normal, but avoid all-day inactivity
• Think like an ancient human living in a modern world
This is not about gym culture. It is about biological design.
⚠️ Critical Insight: Evolutionary Mismatch
Your body evolved in environments where movement was unavoidable and meaningful. Modern environments remove that necessity while increasing comfort and calorie access. The result is a mismatch between ancient biology and modern living, leading to reduced activity, metabolic strain, and chronic health challenges. Understanding this mismatch removes guilt and replaces it with strategy.
💡 Why This Perspective Changes Everything
When you realize your resistance to exercise is an evolved survival instinct, the solution shifts. The goal is not to force motivation through willpower. It is to redesign your environment and habits so movement feels normal again. Health improves when behavior aligns with biology.
🔍 Topics Covered
evolutionary mismatch, why exercise feels hard, hunter-gatherer movement, energy conservation instinct, modern sedentary lifestyle, anthropology and health, evolutionary biology fitness, natural movement patterns, aging and inactivity, human metabolism evolution, daily movement versus workouts, biology of motivation
⚕️ Educational Disclaimer
This content is for educational purposes only and is not medical advice. Always consult a healthcare professional before making significant changes to physical activity, especially if you have existing health conditions.
💬 Join the Conversation
Do you feel like exercise is a constant battle? Comment where you are watching from and what type of movement feels most natural to you, walking, lifting, sports, or something else.
👍 If this video helped you see exercise through an evolutionary lens, share it with someone who struggles with motivation but wants to understand their body better.
🔔 Subscribe to the channel for science-based insights on how ancient biology explains modern health and how to live in a way your body actually understands.
i mainly like ”RPGenius” ”leaders” who claim they don’t care what women want but then proceed to tell you how much they can lift(like most MEN in history or the ”patriarchy” cared about that).