Wednesday, 26 May 2010

The Amygdala Prison: Women, Self-awareness and SJP

'Absolutely indistinguishable'... 'She looks even better now than she did at 22!'... Yeah, right.

I apologize for not writing more regularly, but the time has been well-spent on thinking and thus not wasted. I want to move beyond the raw ideas of the Anglobitch Thesis (which are now quite well-known and accepted) to a new position where we can create a new standard of discourse. It is like climbing a ladder to a new level, then throwing the ladder away. Now, let's see if I can make up for lost time...

It is common currency in Male Studies that women in general suffer from a crushing lack of self-awareness. This is why women delude themselves into thinking that their sexual allure is irrelevant to their status. They truly believe that they appear in films or acquire unmerited promotions because of innate ability or talent. Let's be frank, if Angelina Jolie or Cheryl Cole were tubby 55 year olds would they be in films or on TV? The question answers itself.

Of course, this complex pattern of female self-delusion works at many levels. Secretly knowing that their sole bargaining chip in the game of life is sexual allure, women develope multiple layers of self-delusion to disguise its loss or absence. Indeed, feminism itself is merely another manifestation of this, in that it pretends female 'achievement' rests on other factors than sexual power over men (intellect, creativity and so forth). However, a cursory glance at the female faces in the media shows only young, pretty ones, completely refuting all such claims. Significantly, once women reach 28 their sexual status falls rapidly and new survival themes emerge - 'I'm everybody's friend!' 'I'm the Earth Mother!' 'I'm a feminist!' 'I'm making jewelry from coke cans!'

Of course, all these desperate personas are lies and self-delusions. This may be adduced from the fact that young, attractive women NEVER scrabble for such personas, since their sex-appeal to powerful males obviates the need for subterfuge. The deeper question asks itself: WHY are women so self-deluded? The answer lies most probably in brain structure. Let's take a look at the brain, especially a portion of it called the amygdala:


In the female brain, the amygdala - a small part of the limbic system associated with instinctive responses to events - is relatively smaller in relation to the cortex. In the pan-Anglosphere matriarchies, this is seen as beneficial, since the puritanical, denatured Anglo-Saxon nations fear ‘instinct’ – just as they fear virility, erotic prowess and maleness itself. The well-recognised fact that the average male IQ is marginally higher than the female instantly refutes any assumption that a large amydgala impairs intellectual function, however.

In truth, the miniscule female amygdala has various pernicious effects - blunting sexual response, stunting individuality and rendering women more pliant to social manipulation. In sum, it makes women less self-aware than men – and infinitely more prone to self-delusion.

In his classic text The Great Sex Divide, Professor Glenn Wilson cites compelling evidence that females try harder in tests when being observed, while observation makes no difference to male performance. In short, the healthy male is a free, autonomous agent, while the female is forever bound within social expectation. And we see this difference reflected everywhere – all trail-blazers and innovators in every sphere are men – partly because males dominate the outer reaches of any bell curve distribution, but mainly because the huge male amygdala liberates men from conforming to petty convention (this is also what American PUAs call 'alpha' behaviour. If anyone ever asks you, a large amygdala = Alpha).

The female's 'dwarf amygdala' also explains why women are typically small-minded and inexorably drawn to authoritarian figures and institutions, including Anglo-American feminism (it is notable that unmanly men show similar conformist tendencies). There are no female Picassos, Isaac Newtons or Bobby Fischers because the puny female amygdala keeps women chained to mundane convention.

Because women lack autonomous inward-direction, they are prone to take received opinion as immutable fact – in short, they lack true self-awareness. This is most perfectly expressed amongst teenage girls – mere programmed jackasses mindlessly repeating whatever inane fad the electronic media feeds them. Even when females reach nominal ‘adulthood’, their attention shifts to the narcissistic, delusional trash pumped out by the NAMWO media – Cosmo, Soap Operas, celebrity magazines, Sex and the City, and a host of similar materials. These items successfully present fairy tales as reality because women – lacking inward-direction and alienated from instinct – simply cannot ‘measure’ reality. The well-attested medical fact that most women who claim to ejaculate are in fact merely incontinent underlines this tragic tendency - women cannot even test the truth of their own bodies, let alone complex media artifacts.


Female self-delusion finds particularly amusing expression whenever women see pictures of ageing female 'singers' and 'actresses'. They invariably say things like,

'She's just as beautiful now as she was when she was 18!'
'She's just as sexy as ever!'

Of course, the female concerned is invariably a hideous old hag, living off distant public memories of her youth and beauty. Brigitte Bardot is a perfect example. Were it not for her peerless prime, she would simply never appear in the media - indeed, someone that repulsive would probably be banned from public life, period. However, recent photos of her haggard older self always elicit an 'oh, she's still so beautiful!' chorus from sundry females, in preposterous denial of the hard physical facts.

It’s time to be topical. With Sex and the City predestined to be one of this summer’s blockbuster movies, we will surely see the same process at work. Anglo-American females will fool themselves that normal, healthy males find women like Sarah Jessica Parker – horsey, irritating and old – as paragons of beauty, in the face of all all objective evidence. Armed with our knowledge of amygdala ratios, we now know why they persist in these ridiculous fantasies.

23 comments:

  1. Whoa, this has to be one of the more strident blog posts I've read this year.

    Why are you so confident that the discrepancy between most male and most female behaviour rests more upon the apparent fact of amygdala size and not on social conditioning?

    ReplyDelete
  2. When I look at women who were hot in their twenties and then look at them today (when they are in their 50' and 60's) I don't know whether or not I should laugh ........ or vomit!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I just looked up the term 'fashionable', in my copy of the Shorter Oxford Dictionary; and its first entry related to something that can be moulded, or changed; the second related to vogue etc.

    But when I looked up the same term in web dictionaries, the second term was virtually the exclusive definition. It is as though the manly pursuits of the artisan over that of the 'bimbo', have become obsolete in the new-speak lexicons.

    Further, consider calling someone fashionable: if it is a heterosexual woman, she would probably be flattered; whereas a man or a lesbian would probably be thinking: "Oh dear, my wardrobe has been lapped by the times again; I'll need to visit Oxfam."

    I may end future 'nowhere' debates with women by blurting out the ambiguity as a Parthian shot: "You're very fashionable!".

    ReplyDelete
  4. *When I look at women who were hot in their twenties and then look at them today (when they are in their 50' and 60's) I don't know whether or not I should laugh ........ or vomit!*

    I'm more inclined to vomit, friend.

    ReplyDelete
  5. *It is as though the manly pursuits of the artisan over that of the 'bimbo', have become obsolete in the new-speak lexicons.*

    But of course. When you change language, you change thought. As the Anglosphere becomes ever more matriarchal, the masculine principle will be systematically excised from language. That is how it goes.

    ReplyDelete
  6. *Why are you so confident that the discrepancy between most male and most female behaviour rests more upon the apparent fact of amygdala size and not on social conditioning?*

    Where did I ever say such a thing? The amygdala plays a decisive role in limiting women's self-awareness, but puritanical Anglo-Saxon cultures foolishly consider this a desirable state. Thus, though the impact of the amygdala in considerable, the Anglo misinterpretation of its significance is also of vast importance. Besides, the Pedestal Syndrome implicit in Matriarchal Anglo culture accentuates its practical effects on pan-Anglosphere women, allowing them to indulge their Will to Folly.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dude, pure gold. Maybe you should smelt it, stamp it and sell it as an investment instrument. Hehehe. It's hilarious. I know what you mean. OH SHE'S SOO BEAUTIFUL! Unless i can get something out of the woman, I usually give it to her straight. Hahahahahaahah!

    ReplyDelete
  8. In short, the healthy male is a free, autonomous agent, while the female is forever bound within social expectation. And we see this difference reflected everywhere – all trail-blazers and innovators in every sphere are men – partly because males dominate the outer reaches of any bell curve distribution, but mainly because the huge male amygdala liberates men from conforming to petty convention (this is also what American PUAs call 'alpha' behaviour. If anyone ever asks you, a large amygdala = Alpha).

    Fucking brilliant, man. Outstanding writing.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This makes me sad. The idea that you as a man think that the only thing a woman has to offer is her sexuality. The only thing sadder is women who think that too

    My main problem with women is when they overly focus on their sexuality in such a way, and looks. That's not to say I'm glorifying fatties or anything else. But don't you think the world is a little more dimensional than the sex game. Sure it's a huge part of it, in many ways we are still animals. But in some ways haven't we risen above that.

    Sure in fields where sex appeal is important like actresses being pretty is pretty much all there is too it. But being pretty is also important for men in those fields, certainly not as much as it is for women, but it definately is important.

    But there are many successful women in professions from engineer to housewife where there looks are hardly what has made them successful. It may have attracted their partner, but being sexually appealing to your partner isn't ALL that is important in life.

    Ah well, I guess I'm naive.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I've read women on Feministing bragging about their larger hippocampi. They think it makes them superior communicators.

    Aren't male brains 13% larger than female brains (on average)?

    ReplyDelete
  11. 卡爾.桑得柏:「除非先有夢,否則一切皆不成。」共勉!.............................................

    ReplyDelete
  12. @Irv: Nah, they just blab incoherently all the time. That's all it means. Unless you find a smart one, then it's a pleasure to listen.

    ReplyDelete
  13. As always, an excellent explanation of why women act the way that they do.

    "amygdala" I am going to look this up on Wikipedia.

    ReplyDelete
  14. 如果成為一支火柴,也要點亮一個短暫的宇宙;如果是一隻烏鴉,也要叫疼閉塞的耳膜。..................................................

    ReplyDelete
  15. For the most part, I agree with this article, however, I do have to say that I HAVE seen several older women who look fantastic even in their 40s.

    But I would say that these ladies are the exception and not the rule. Most of these MILFs only look good because they stayed in shape and ate healthy most their lives, starting when they were young, hot, and sexy.

    And by staying in shape, I mean, lifting a tremendous amount of weights and cardio, not just cardio. I've seen older women who only did cardio their whole lives and they all look like dogshit.

    If a woman wants to look good when she hits her elder years, she better hit those weights and bulk up (or tone, at the very least) those muscles and she better start while young. If she starts while she's middle age, it's too damned late.

    Uh, sorry, the frustrated personal trainer in me took over there for a minute. My point is, women can actually look pretty damned fantastic when they get older, but only under the conditions I just listed.

    Most never will, however, because they are too busy self-deluding their way out of the effort required to do so.

    What most women don't realize is that there is a difference between looking good, and looking good FOR ONE'S AGE.

    They're so stupid they don't see the difference, they think that just because a woman looks good for a fifty-year old, she is just as beautiful as she was at 18.

    She's not.

    You know those hot MILFs I mentioned earlier? Well, as good as they may look in their 40s, they all still looked better in their 20s, its just the nature of the beast. That's mortality for you.

    And that's all there is to it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. i absolutely agree
    Brilliant.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I am a graduate student at Columbia studying neuroscience and stumbled upon this blog due to the author's citation of the amygdala. This is not only a vast misinterpretation of brain science (asserted as if the author were some sort of authority on the subject), but a supreme waste of time. Thank you for wasting five minutes of my life. I will never get them back.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Study a real science, not glorified witch-doctoring.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hilarious, brilliant and incisive. The truth is incendiary.

    ReplyDelete
  20. What an ignorant and arrogant individual the author of this article us

    ReplyDelete