Joxua: I would love too, I am excited that we are finally getting into my deeper philosophical and psychological theories, I will try to tie things in without getting too far off topic. I recently was studying male and female communication rituals and I read a book called THE GENIUS FACTORY and I came up with some theories to tie what I was studying all in together based on some other patterns that I had already observed to create a historical narrative. I noticed when I was reading the book that their seemed to be this pattern, women rejected the men that were radically intelligent as sexual partners preferring men that were more “normal” or less spectacular, because as one women said, “I don’t want my children to be freaks.” This was indicative to me of a herd mentality, the female mind presupposes a “herd” and wants to fit into that herd perfectly and then once in the herd to socially climb and increase status and rank. The women didn’t want to start off with ridiculous skill or talent that came from the father’s side of the gene pool. This suggested a tacit narcissism on the part of females in general as far as breeding selection goes. I began to extrapolate away from this pattern that had been observed and question myself as to other cultures in which the female does not personally and completely choose her mate for herself and i found some fascinating patterns. Just about every other culture in the world has some manner of marriage selection process where the female is not the singular authority on her mate, why is this I wondered? And I believe I have come up with a solution. When women are left alone in the decision making process for breeding and mate selection they breed for males they can control and in doing so the rob the gene pool of intelligent and talented men, they basically breed stupidity into the gene pool, they breed to make drones.
Lynn: Could you briefly explain your theory on how the male mind and the female mind are one single mind that were compartmentalized by nature to serve different functions in the family unit?
Joxua: Yes, I think we touched on that in another article but I will go over it again quickly. I believe that we have the neural myelination from millions of years of evolution passed on through cellular memory and that was passed on to us because those were the creatures that survived, they had the best patterns and relationships to survive which is why they did survive. All herding creatures and many other mammals in the presence of a threat make concentric circles with the males on the outside dealing with the brunt of the attack, and the females on the inside protecting the babies, and the babies even farther inside. Due to the adverseness of the mind this brief period of time accounts for 90% of our judgements and choices and all people judge in the same way. In a crisis we enter into a state that has been called temporary autism by such authors as Malcolm Gladwell and when that happens we return to the most hardwired of our unconscious programs. When you have a murder suicide attempt like what happened in the batman movie people switch to their most basic instinct their primal programming. 3 men died protecting their girl friends, how many women threw themselves bodily into the line of fire to stop the bullets in order to protect their boyfriends? Have you ever heard of that happening? No, but you do hear about how women will protect their babies, wrapping their bodies around them in jet crashes and what have you, we were wired that way for survival. Women focus on the babies, men protect the herd from natural threats.
Female communication rituals are designed for and effective for talking to children and dealing with other females in the herd. Masculine communication rituals are designed for maximum results in combat and sports, antagonistic functions based on survival. Imagine if the seal team that was taking out bin laden was trying to use female communication rituals, wouldn’t that be awkward? But all humans have the same prejudices when it comes to making judgements between men, women, and children, even men women and children, which indicates to me that we are a single organism and we are of a single mind to a certain extent, we just haven’t learned to live with ourselves scientifically based on a profound understanding of ourselves and our natures, our programming.
Lynn: Brilliant! what does all of this have to do with rape?
“The greatest happiness is to vanquish your enemies, to chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth, to see those dear to them bathed in tears, to clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters.”
This prolific rapist has 16 million descendants living on the planet today. What does that tell us? Rape works. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/02/0214_030214_genghis.html
you can complain all you want if you are a descendant of the western civilization chances are that you have in you DNA that comes from a successful rape. Rome was created by the kidnapping of the Sabine women and using them for breeding stock. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_the_Sabine_Women I think that there were certain types of intelligences that were forced into the same genome by these marriages, that basically intelligence was forced into the human genome through these acts of rape and now that same intelligence is being slowly eradicated and removed by the judgements of women and feminine judgements in general.
Lynn: Wow, rape seems so bad it is difficult to see how it could ever be a positive thing or desirable or permissible even.
Joxua: That is because you are inducing the current environment in which survival is easy. If we lived in ancient times where survival was hard and everything was a struggle and everything sucked all of the time rape wouldn’t be considered such a bad thing. “What are you going to do Friday night Ethel?” “Oh, I don’t know, go down to the watering hole and drink some amoeba water and then starve from a lack of protein, I will probably get raped and maybe try to steal a piece of Grissel from one of those big assholes, what are you doing Lucy?” “probably the same, maybe if we stick together we won’t accidentally piss them off and get killed.” “sounds like a date.”
What you have to remember is that this environment that we live in, civilization, is not a natural environment, it is an unnatural environment. it is only because we have been so good at surviving that we were able to kill off and domesticate nature, and now our dominion over nature is becoming the cause of our demise. Too many stupid, greedy, arrogant, idiots that think that things can’t go back the way they were. They presuppose the existence of this environment when tomorrow we could be living in the stone ages again or worse. history doesn’t have a narrative that it needs to satisfy. If it did that would be evidence of a god. History is telling us a happy story with a happy ending? I don’t think so. History doesn’t subscribe to fairy tales. it is survival of the fittest not survival of the fanciful. Nature is not pleasant, it is not your friend, it is not rational, nature doesn’t care if you are a baby or a lady, it doesn’t care if you have a sweet face or a sexy ass, it doesn’t care if you are a feminist, or a lesbian, or a raw food vegan, nature is self interested and it wants what it wants and if you stand in the way of nature and nature can kill you, it will. Nature doesn’t give a single fuck about you and your judgements unless it has a reason to, unless your survival is attached to its own survival. Nature is perfectly rational in that it is self interested, and perfectly irrational in its treatment of the individual because from its perspective we are unnatural. Nature is a meritocracy of strength, speed, endurance, talent, intelligence, attentiveness and gumption. Nature is an environment that is prejudiced towards masculinity not femininity and not childishness. It is because of this unnatural environment in which we live that we have this false depreciation of masculinity.
Lynn: This reminds me of your term “survival data” and how all living things are “organic computers”. You said something once about how when a man rapes a woman it might be a way of treating her as an equal under a different paradigm or something to that affect do you remember that?
Joxua: Yes, I suggested that when a man rapes he might be treating a woman as an equal under masculine values. I came up with this concept when I was studying the inklings, a writing group made up of J. R. R. Tolkien and C. S. Lewis. I am not sure which one of them said it but they were raised in an all boy school and they remarked that they hated these certain bullying behaviors that were made by the older boys, known as “fagging” and “tarting” in which boys would humiliate other boys by forcing them to do sexual things or they would offer sexual favors as a form of currency. I immediately thought about how men behave in prisons. I thought it would be interesting if this was a natural emergent property of men being isolated and separated from women. I then began to compare it to the value system of ancient Greece and Rome when they were more masculine dominant before their decline. A masculine value system appreciates strength, skill in combat, speed, and rewards this dominant behavior. From the perspective of pure unadulterated masculinity the rapist has earned his bounty.
This same value system existed in early combat as well. It is interesting because many anti theists try to conflate the bibles mentioning of kidnapping and raping women with the existence of the practice, as though the bible being aware of the practice god had somehow sanctioned and created it. This is delusional, conflationary thinking, correlation is not causation and quite frankly if you want to compete you have to be relevant. If the enemy is sacking your kingdoms and carrying off your women and making more soldiers to attack you and carry off your women how are you going to confront that? Your possessions and your people are going to dwindle and you are going to die. So, it was common practice, it was just part of war, you are the victor you get the spoils, if you want another wife you can have her. It is a meritocracy of military prowess, of masculine virtue.
Lynn: Interesting, you had mentioned that rape was quite possibly a recurring theme in our history and caused hybridization and cultural revolution. Could you please tel us something about that?
Joxua: India originally had only one deity and it was a female one, Lakshmi, all of the other deities in the Indian pantheon were invasive deities. It is said that India was invaded by northern tribes and I suspect that those tribes were possibly viking like and had some manner of connection with the Celts in Ireland. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gundestrup_antlered_figure.jpg There are some interesting artifact that show reverence for a shiva-esque figure known are Kern or kernunnos that looks very much like pashupati the form of shiva that governs animals kind of like a tarzan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Shiva_Pashupati.jpg
It is also of interest that India is for the most part vegetarian and eats meat very sparingly, I suspect that these invaders were eventually and slowly weeded out but not without leaving there permanent mark. I think they were essentially exiled over time and forced to move west, I think they were an offshoot of the aghori sect and they became the cult of the augures that worshipped Jupiter and was part of the minoan pre-Greek culture. interestingly enough the created the concept of authority and our entire philosophical, legal, and political structures and even our religious ideas are based on the philosophy of their cult.
The invasion was not entirely bad, there is a comparison of conquest to contribution that is often invoked. Some people say that we don’t historically remember people that don’t contribute anything in their conquest and we do indeed remember this group. They brought an explosion of creativity, curiosity, intelligence, art, literature, experimentation, and thought to the area. They broke people out of their routine, got them to expand their sense of self, to enrich themselves.
Lynn: Fascinating stuff. i believe you were suggesting that their might have even been a period where acts of rape actually created what we now know as human beings.
Joxua: Yes, it is well documented now that the neanderthals and cro magnon interbred for the most part but there is still a place on earth where
people are 100% cro magnon and are not at all hybridised as is the case for most humans on earth and that place is Africa. All people that are not native born to Africa are part neanderthal. http://news.discovery.com/human/genetics-neanderthal-110718.htmI don’t know why we would assume that the marrying of these two genomes of proto-humans would be peaceful and rational happening through Socratic dialogue and under the auspices of reasoned conversation, it seems more than likely that is a fantasy we tell ourselves for our own mental comfort. I am not saying that it was all rape, but it was probably, initially mostly rape. If you think about these two cultures meeting for the first time you imagine that there would be contempt and disgust and curiosity. Much as Africans were treated as a curiosity in the western world and thought of as some manner of animal for the longest time, this same mentality probably was probably common then.
I believe in THE EPIC OF GILGAMESH, which might be the oldest text known to man, there is a story of meeting a creature that would free the animals from the traps that were set to procure food, and it was described as an animal that looked peculiarly human.
“The gods heard their lament, the gods of heaven cried to the Lord of Uruk, to Anu the god of Uruk: ‘A goddess made him, strong as a savage bull, none can withstand his arms. No son is left with his father, for Gilgamesh takes them all; and is this the king, the shepherd of his people? His lust leaves no virgin to her lover, neither the warrior’s daughter nor the wife of the noble. When Anu had heard their lamentation the gods cried to Aruru, the goddess of creation, ‘You made him, O Aruru; now create his equal; let it be as like him as his own reflection, his second self; stormy heart for stormy heart. Let them contend together and leave Uruk in quiet.’
Lynn: Incredibly insightful! I feel like we have exhausted this topic and we should probably not let it run on and bleed over into your other insights so I think we will stop here. Thank you for your participation.
Joxua: You’re welcome.