New Year Game Special II: Does Rape Confound Game? A Frank Exploration of Rape and Female Sexuality

Game assumes that women evolved sexual preferences for alpha males (however defined). Unfortunately, this argument assumes that female choice actually mattered for most of human history. However, if men's actions alone decided reproductive outcomes, women simply could not evolve advanced sexual preferences. My recent reading supports the argument that female opinion or choice exerted little or no effect on reproductive outcomes, leaving Game a largely peripheral strategy for achieving sexual success. The whole Sexy Son argument underpinning Game is largely neutralised by the overwhelming evidence from history, genetics and archaeology. Let us proceed to that evidence...

This article suggests that Ghengis Khan is the ancestor of 1 in 12 asiatic males, via conquest and harems:

GENGHIS KHAN has been identified as the most successful alpha male in human history, according to a book by an Oxford geneticist.
The Mongol emperor inseminated so many women in his 40-year career raping and pillaging across Asia that he created a pool of at least 16m male descendants who today carry his Y, or male, chromosome.

British men are now being offered the opportunity of genetic testing by Oxford scientists to see if they have inherited Genghis’s “super-Y”, which conferred such power on its originator.

Bryan Sykes, professor of human genetics at Oxford University and author of Adam’s Curse, a study of the Y chromosome, believes recent migration could have spread a few of Genghis’s super-virile progeny as far as the British Isles.

Sykes, who runs Oxford Ancestors, a commercial enterprise that analyses people’s DNA and traces their geographical origins, said: “Genghis Khan was probably the most successful breeder of males ever, and there is every possibility that men here will carry his chromosome.”



The Y chromosome is passed unchanged from father to son and, in the 13th century, Genghis’s empire stretched from Mongolia to Afghanistan, Russia and Iran.

Oxford scientists took samples of male DNA in 16 locations across Asia and found the same Y chromosome in 8% of the population.

The idea that the chromosome could come from Genghis appeared to be confirmed by the finding that it was carried by a third of the Hazara tribe, which lives on the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The tribe has always claimed to descend from Genghis.

The Mongol ruler was born into a local clan that had lost most of its influence by the time he was in his teens. He set about rebuilding a power base that grew into a 200,000-strong army of legendary brutality.

Entire cities were slaughtered while the Mongol hordes looted their way across Asia. But while Genghis allowed his commanders their pick of the material spoils, he demanded the women were brought to him for systematic rape or to serve as concubines.

By the time of his death aged around 65, Genghis’s empire stretched from the South China Sea to the Persian Gulf.

His four legitimate sons appear to have continued the family tradition of sexual excess and empire-building, as did two of his grandsons: Kublai Khan conquered southern China and founded the Yuan dynasty of Chinese emperors and Batu sacked Kiev and invaded Hungary and Poland.

Their dissemination of Genghis’s chromosome no doubt helped to make it the most successful in history, which is why it appears to be carried by more men on the planet than any other version.

Researchers have also established an apparent link between frequency of sexual intercourse and the birth of sons, which is why Genghis would have produced more male progeny. More boys than girls are born in the first year of marriage when couples are assumed to have more sex.

Other studies have found that frequent intercourse raises testosterone levels, increasing the chances of the Y chromosome being successful.

This link suggests why the Y chromosome is comparatively lacking in variance – Stone Age males competed violently for women, allowing only a small minority of males to mate:

A group of Linearbandkeramik people at Talheim, Germany were previously found to have died at the same time, probably in a massacre, and the authors were able to ask some searching questions of their skeletons. The isotope signatures of strontium, oxygen and carbon, which gave information on diet and childhood region, showed up three groups which correlated with hereditary traits (derived previously from the analysis of the teeth). In the local group, there were many local children but no adult women, suggesting they had been selectively taken alive at the time of the massacre.

This review of Jonathan Gottschall's The Rape of Troy, argues Homer’s Iliad reflects inter-male competition for women during the Greek Dark Ages:

His primary concern is with Homeric society, referring ‘not so much to Homer’s fictional construction as to a specific scholarly reconstruction of the real world from which the epics emerged’ (3). In his first two chapters he synthesises classical and archaeological scholarship to build up a persuasive case for reading the Iliad and the Odyssey as offering a reflection, magnified up to the epic scale, of the society in which the poems were composed. Crucially, this is not the society of Mycenaean Greece itself, with its palaces and treasures signifying rich cities and kingdoms. Instead it is that of Dark Age Greece, an impoverished world of small tribes led by chiefs more like the big men of other pre-state societies than the kings of most translations of Homer. It is a world too of pervasive male violence. In his third chapter, which draws heavily on evolutionary psychology and comparative anthropology, Gottschall argues that this violence is directed above all toward the goal of reproductive dominance in a polygynous society.

The next three chapters concentrate on the epics themselves. Chapter 4 points out the crucial significance of conflicts over women in Homer: the Trojan war itself, fought over Helen; the argument between Agamemnon and Achilles over Briseis that triggers the events of the Iliad; the slaughter of Penelope’s suitors, which marks the crescendo of the Odyssey. Beyond these specific fights over specific women, Gottschall notes the pervasive references in the epic to raiding for women and the culmination of the siege of Troy in the mass rape and enslavement of the Trojan women. Chapters 5 and 6 consider the premium on status among Homeric men and the ways in which the ‘mating preferences’ of women in Homeric society reinforce the culture of male violence ‘through an active system of sexual and reputational rewards to men with powerful bodies, combative dispositions, and courageous spirits’ (117).

Gottschall makes a crucial mistake: the mating preferences of women had no bearing on mating outcomes. Men competed for women in Homeric society, the outcomes deciding male reproductive success. Female choice had little to do with it. The strongest males would gather a harem of females and rape them. Simple as that. At no point does female preference have any influence on events whatsoever. As with the German neolithic massacre, men fought and the conquerors raped the women.

And this piece discusses why prehistoric Indo-European invasion of Europe replaced indigenous male populations while leaving female populations relatively intact:

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml

As it is complex and aimed at scientists, I present the meat of the argument below:

A lot of maternal lineages (mtDNA) also appear to be of Paleolithic origin (e.g. H1, H3, U5 or V) based on ancient DNA tests. What a lot of people forget is that there is also no need of a large-scale exodus for patrilineal lineages to be replaced fairly quickly. Here is why:

Polygamy. Unlike women, men are not limited in the number of children they can procreate. Men with power typically have more children. This was all the truer in primitive societies, where polygamy was often the norm for chieftains and kings.

Status & Power. Equipped with Bronze weapons and horses, the Indo-Europeans would have easily subjugated the Neolithic farmers and with even greater ease Europe’s last hunter-gatherers.If they did not exterminate the indigenous men, the newcomers would have become the new ruling class, with a multitude of local kings, chieftains and noblemen (Bronze-Age Celts and Germans lived in small village communities with a chief, each part of a small tribe headed by a king) with higher reproductive opportunities than average.

Gender imbalance. Invading armies normally have far more men than women. Men must therefore find women in the conquered population. Wars are waged by men, and the losers suffer heavier casualties, leaving more women available to the winners.

Aggressive warfare. The Indo-Europeans were a warlike people with a strong heroic code emphasising courage and military prowess. Their superior technology (metal weapons, wheeled vehicles and warhorses) and attitude to life would have allowed them to slaughter any population that did not have organised armies with metal weapons (i.e. anybody except the Middle-Eastern civilizations).

Genetic predisposition to conceive boys. The main role of the Y-chromosome in man’s body is to create sperm. Haplogroups are determined based on mutations differentiating Y-chromosomes. Each mutation is liable to affect sperm production and sperm motility. Preliminary research has already established a link between certain haplogroups and increased or reduced sperm motility. The higher the motility, the higher the chances of conceiving a boy. It is absolutely possible that R1b could confer a bias toward more male offspring. Even a slightly higher percentage of male births would significantly contribute to the replacement of other lineages with the accumulation effect building up over a few millennia. Not all R1b subclades might have this boy bias. The bias only exist in relation to other haplogroups found in a same population. It is very possible that the fairly recent R1b subclades of Western Europe had a significant advantage compared to the older haplogroups in that region, notably haplogroup I2 and E-V13.

Replacement of patrilineal lineages following this model quickly becomes exponential. Imagine 100 Indo-European men conquering a tribe of 1000 indigenous Europeans (a ratio of 1:10). War casualties have resulted in a higher proportion of women in the conquered population. Let’s say that the surviving population is composed of 700 women and 300 men. Let’s suppose that the victorious Indo-European men end up having twice as many children reaching adulthood as the men of the vanquished tribe. There is a number of reasons for that. The winners would take more wives, or take concubines, or even rape women of the vanquished tribe. Their higher status would guarantee them greater wealth and therefore better nutrition for their offspring, increasing the chances of reaching adulthood and procreating themselves. An offspring ratio of 2 to 1 for men is actually a conservative estimate, as it is totally conceivable that Bronze-Age sensibilities would have resulted in killing most of the men on the losing side, and raping their women (as attested by the Old Testament). Even so, it would only take a few generations for the winning Y-DNA lineages to become the majority. For instance, if the first generation of Indo-Europeans had two surviving sons per man, against only one per indigenous man, the number of Indo-European paternal lineages would pass to 200 individuals at the second generation, 400 at the third, 800 at the fourth and 1600 at the fifth, and so on. During that time indigenous lineages would only stagnate at 300 individuals for each generation.

Based on such a scenario, the R1b lineages would have quickly overwhelmed the local lineages. Even if the Indo-European conquerors had only slightly more children than the local men, R1b lineages would become dominant within a few centuries. Celtic culture lasted for over 1000 years in Continental Europe before the Roman conquest putting an end to the privileges of the chieftains and nobility. This is more than enough time for R1b lineages to reach 50 to 80% of the population.

The importance of male physical prowess in procuring sex is illustrated in the David Lynch movie Mulholland Drive. Film director Adam Kesher drives home to his mountaintop mansion to find his wife in bed with a low class, southern bad-ass. When he tries to deface her jewelery in revenge for his cuckolding, Mr Muscles breaks his nose and kicks him out of his own house. I recall an interesting post on Roissy's blog about the possibility of physical confrontation in pursuit of sex. The post and its responses ended in some confusion, with fighting being accepted as the only option in certain situations, however honed an individual's Game. Speaking bluntly, the schizoid, high-IQ males frequenting Roissy's Blog are certain to come off second-best in physical confrontations with embodied lower-class males (hence their confusion). After all, few middle class Anglosphere males have had a full one on one fight with another male since puberty, so 'fight' really means 'a beating', as in Mulholland Drive.



In sum, Game can be handily undercut by physical prowess, even in a modern context - let alone twelfth century Mongolia. Roissy and other Game experts persistently refuse to address this fact, a telling omission. Within a limited context, their prescriptions have value; beyond the middle class world, they have none. This is subliminally adumbrated by the British lower-class word for middle-class males: 'wankers' (masturbators). Middle class males are thus pithily denigrated as males reduced to masturbating by virtue of their limited physical prowess in intra-male competition for females. Doubtless there is truth in this assessment: middle class, intelligent males across the Anglosphere perpetually lament their sexual disenfranchisment before lower-class, animalistic sociopaths who 'get more ass than a toilet seat'.

If I were a betting man, I would say that Game represents 20% of sexual success, at best. Coercive male power provides the remaining 80% of variance, both historically and in contemporary society. As I argued in my previous New Year post, the evidence suggests that most women find sex revolting. This sexual indifference is exactly what we would expect if female sexual choice never 'evolved'. Never having 'mattered' throughout reproductive history, female sexuality never 'evolved' since there no reason for it to do so.

Males continually project masculine logic onto female sexual preference since male sexuality is eminently logical - men like youth, large breasts, small features and long legs because those are reproductive advantages. Unfortunately, females never had to evolve such clear-cut, logical preferences since intra-male sexual competition obviated such developments. In sum, female sexual choices are illogical because they lack any coherent sexual instinct - which explains the reproductive success of thugs, bums, retards and other male misfits and the relative sexual failure of the intelligent, articulate and successful. It also explains why most 'alpha' theories of Game are unsuccessful in practice, and often confuse sheer physical prowess for complex psycho-sexual traits like confidence and 'social-dominance'.

Though intra-male competition might have been harsh for non-warrior males, at least it ensured the relative fitness of human populations. For evidence of the genetic and social anarchy attendant on allowing inchoate female sexuality free reign, just look around any post-feminist Anglosphere society.

Feminism: Anglobitch Creation or Autonomous Product?

Who is to blame for feminism and its cataclysmic effects? This is one of the great conundrums within the field of Men's Studies. As well as being of intrinsic interest, it is also of great practical importance: for if we cannot identify where the problem lies, how can we possibly correct it? Some say it is men, others women. However, a third possibility exists: society itself. This is because laws and language are systems of information that transcend any individual consciousness.

The Anglobitch Thesis is in many ways far ahead of other MRA concepts, since it stresses the structural aspects of feminism: that is, the cultural aspects. How can we change things? If society is a vast information programme, then it is possible to change it by introducing new data, as one changes software output by inserting different variables. MRA sites, blogs and so forth are already having an impressive effect in this regard.

In our view, Anglo American feminism has become institutionalized via complex, non-linear feedback loops that accentuate behavioural trends implicit in human behavior by virtue of our evolutionary heritage. These have become embedded as socio-cultural memes in law, language and politics as immutable ‘norms’. A good example would be the offhand deference shown to women by the Anglo-American media. This originated in the biological need to safeguard young women in order to expand early hunter-gatherer societies, the first societies in the crudest sense. Then, this tendency was accentuated by non-linear feedback loops to become embedded in communal life.

Beyond this, as true institutions emerged, these norms became embedded in the social nexus at a primal level. These persist as ‘fossil values’ in modern culture, unaccountable 'transparencies' that legitimate offhand devaluation of the male. Anglo American culture above all others promotes female advantage in this manner, because its archaic puritanical assumptions persist as fossils in contemporary, post feminist culture, promoting women on pedestals and vilifying all males as sexualized creatures.

Robert Wright of Harvard: expert Evolutionary Psychologist

Lower class Anglo-American populist culture gives a perfect example of this pernicious process in operation. As Robert Wright of Harvard has shown, lower class families value girls more because a lower class girl can still find a sexual partner despite her poverty - and thus still manage to reproduce. For a lower class male, this is much less likely. This is why lower class women have another child as soon as possible after a boy is born: a boy born in poverty is a biological liability, a waste of time and resources.

Now, it is obvious that contemporary lower class populist culture is deeply misandrist, assuming all males to be rapists, paedophiles and so on. A cursory glance at any lower-class media product will prove this. Now, the lower class media’s owners/managers do not sit arounge their offices saying, “Hey – let’s hate men today!” Rather, the customs and working methods they have developed by trial and error achieve exactly the same result as a carefully-engineered misandrist social programme, albeit unconsciously. In short, the misandrist agenda is amplified by nonlinear feedbacks, becoming embedded in organizational procedures to produce convergent results. At no point, however, did anyone ever consciously plan any of this: it arose entirely by spontaneous, self-organising social processes. In our view, exactly the same process occurs in law, politics and the 'highbrow' media - albeit in a more complex, multi-tiered and symbiotic manner. Indeed, the German scholar Niklas Luhmann claims that the law and other complex institutions are actually self-organising entities in their own right, which spontaneously adapt to (and embody) socio-cultural shifts. It is inviting to think that, in practice, Anglo-American law also embodies unconscious misandry for the same reason.

Niklas Luhmann: expert in complexity-driven social systems

Indeed, if we consider the foregoing discussion carefully, the Anglo-American MRA fixation on ‘conservatism’ to reverse the ills of feminism is entirely mistaken, in that Anglo-Saxon 'conservatism' merely reprises the core values of Anglo culture, which inherently exalt women while denigrating men. Simply calling on that culture for salvation from Anglo feminism is hopeless, since puritanical Anglo-Saxon culture is inherently loaded with vicious misandry in the first place!

Obviously, reprogramming the culture will be no simple task – however, the more difficult path is invariably the most rewarding. Indeed, some of the articles and essays on this blog and our associated Anglobitch site serve as a good foundation for this unqiue conceptual enterprise. A new language of equitable gender relations must be formulated by MRAs from all over the Anglophone nations if the Anglosphere is to survive the depredations of Anglobitch feminism. American pragmatism, British objectivity, Canadian conscience, Anzac verve and Indian spiritual depth must all be mobilized against the fossilized, catastrophically misandrist memes embedded within Anglo culture.


In conclusion, no one party is ‘to blame’ for Anglo feminism. No one is ‘to blame’ for the inherent misandry of Anglo-American institutions. There is no conscious misandrist agenda, only non-linear recursive feedbacks that produce exactly the same effect – giving observers the impression that such a conscious agenda exists, when in fact it does not. The main challenge for Anglo-American MRAs lies in deconstructing the hegemonic memes of the existing culture to challenge its ubiquitous rhetoric of anti-male oppression.

Anglobitch besotted by Multiple Murderers!

Just one by-product of releasing female mate-choice from the grip of patriarchy: women start dating and marrying mass murderers. This article is taken from the Times, London:

A WOMAN is to marry one of the most notorious American killers after seeing his crime in the Oscar-winning film Boys Don’t Cry.

Justine Mirth began writing to Tom Nissen in prison after watching Hilary Swank’s best-actress performance as his victim, the cross-dresser Teena Brandon. Nissen raped and murdered her after discovering that she was posing as a man.

Ms Mirth, a 32-year-old unmarried mother of four from Chicago, has been granted a marriage licence to wed Nissen in the jail waiting room, even though the two have never met. “It sounds weird, but we have a real deep love connection,” she told The Times yesterday. “We understand each other. We really do. He is the love of my life. I am the love of his life,” she said. Nissen is serving a life sentence with no possibility of parole.

Brandon, 21, a woman, lived as a man under the name Brandon Teena and was going out with a woman. When Nissen and John Lotter, a friend who is now on death row, found out that Brandon was biologically female, they raped her and, after she went to the local sheriff, tried to cover up by killing her and two others in a farmhouse in Humboldt, Nebraska, on Christmas Eve 2003.

Nissen confessed to stabbing Brandon but saved himself from the electric chair by testifying that Lotter shot Brandon, her lover Lisa Lambert and their friend Phillip DeVine in the head at close range.

Miss Mirth, who was engaged for 12 years to the father of her four children, said that she had been fascinated by killers since she was aged 4. She even has the word “redrum” — murder spelt backwards — tattooed on her back. She said that she grew up in a small town in Indiana and identified with the characters representing Nissen and Lotter in Boys Don’t Cry.

“They are the kind of people I would hang out with — not that I was involved in crime or anything like that,” she said. “Not everyone who murders someone is a bad person.”

Miss Mirth wrote first to Lotter, on death row. He wrote back and, in March 2004, she flew to visit him in the state prison at Tecumseh, Nebraska. They met, but the relationship failed to ignite.


Miss Mirth turned her attentions elsewhere, writing to Gary Ridgway, the Green River serial killer, who murdered 48 women, and Dennis Rader, the sadomasochistic “BTK” serial killer who is responsible for ten deaths. Neither replied.

She started a correspondence with Nissen in November 2004, and the two began to talk by telephone for the prison maximum of 15 minutes a call. He has told her that he regrets his actions and that he is now a changed man, but he refused to reveal what happened on the day of the murders.

After the wedding, Miss Mirth plans to live near the prison so that she can visit her new husband twice a week.

Thug Future? Memes, Genes and Morrissey’s Dilemma

The anthemic ‘How Soon is Now’ by British Indy band The Smiths neatly describes many a young male’s personal dilemma:

You shut your mouth
how can you say
I go about things the wrong way
I am human and I need to be loved
just like everybody else does

There's a club if you'd like to go
you could meet somebody who really loves you
so you go, and you stand on your own
and you leave on your own
and you go home, and you cry
and you want to die

Here are great sentiments of romantic alienation beautifully expressed – but, as with even the best popular culture – this lugubrious masterwork is entirely bereft of analysis. And the briefest analysis will reveal much about the contemporary Anglosphere - and the poisoned gender-relations that prevail therein. Cool, ruthless analysis also reveals the real root of Morrissey’s romantic displeasure.

As a relatively sensitive, intelligent, literate male in a northern English post-industrial slum, the unfortunate Morrissey presumably grew up surrounded by women of low intelligence and education; and such women are interested in only one thing –thugs. Indeed, most young women are attracted to thugs, whether they hail from slums or salubrious suburbs. So Morrissey’s Dilemma – the reason why he is single, shunned and sexless – really has a rather simple explanation. His intelligence, sensitivity and relatively high level of culture – all factors rhetorically extolled by feminists as ‘appealing’ to women – are actually handicaps in trying to attract an Anglo-American woman from the social mainstream. They are solely interested in two types of males: sadistic, sociopathic thugs and swaggering plutocrats.

Of course, they have a right to their preference. However, the fallout from this aberrant exercise of choice intrudes pointedly upon the freedoms of others. Since the sociopathic male is infinitely more likely to desert his partner and their children, the Anglosphere tax-payer has been left to foot the bill for an ever-expanding underclass - dangerous, crime-prone, moronic, ungrateful, Welfare-dependent and generally cretinous (see Professor Daniel Amneus’ ‘The Garbage Generation’). Low-status women shunning males of high genetic quality for low-IQ sociopaths is surely having a dysgenic effect in the West; declining intellectual and moral standards are self- apparent across the Anglosphere.

Above all, the reflexive Anglobitch preference for moronic thugs is causing a socio-demographic disruption that must bring the West to its knees, if it continues unchecked. ‘Love’ is, in sociobiological terms, a neurological trick played on young men in order that couples can rear fit, healthy children in their prime years. ‘Love’ ensures the young male will stay with his mate when she is pregnant and nursing; one thinks of Jaguar Paw in Mel Gibson’s Apocalypto, overcoming enormous obstacles to rescue his drowning wife and child.

Unfortunately, the male’s autonomic nervous system is primed for this intense bonding process only up to the age of twenty-five; it serves little biological purpose thereafter. With young Anglo-American women choosing to shun ‘boring’ (read focused, intelligent, articulate, educated, solvent) males for dangerous thugs, men of higher genetic potential are reaching their thirties having lost the chance to pair-bond in their prime years. But by that time, the deep feelings they should have experienced in a stable relationship have fled forever; they are no longer ‘primed’ for deep commitment. Given the overtly unfair Divorce laws that presently prevail in the Anglosphere, without the irrational spur of ‘love’ such males are unlikely to contribute their stable, productive genes to a society that has served them so poorly.

But if the brightest and best men withdraw their consent from the Anglosphere – this cultural bloc will not (indeed, cannot) survive. A society comprised solely of low-IQ sociopaths must crumble, sooner or later (and probably sooner). It may well be that patriarchy evolved as a social meme closely associated with advanced civilization; mainly because unchecked female ‘choice’ allows sociopathic genes to proliferate beyond a viable level. Certainly, since the State replaced low-status males as the main underclass family ‘provider’, it is plain that the lower echelons of Anglo-American society have lapsed into widespread sociopathy. Restricting female partner-choice would seem to be the primary cornerstone of all advanced societies; for by limiting the proportion of sociopaths, patriarchy indirectly promotes genes for industry, intelligence and self-restraint. Doubtless this is why regulating female sexuality has always been a primary concern of the Abrahamic religions, intimately associated as they are with Western civilization and its myriad achievements.

Let the Western Power Elites take heed: do you want this ancient English-speaking culture to stand or to fall? It is your choice. Keep the best men ‘on side’ and promote their reproductive success, and our culture might weather the storms to come. Ignore them, and it will crumble in decades - if not sooner.