For all of the so-called advances of modern society, more evidence is surfacing that relations between the sexes are actually regressing back to prehistoric times as an unintentional result of feminism. Here is a perfect example:
About 16 percent of Americans between the ages of 14 and 49 are infected with genital herpes, making it one of the most common sexually transmitted diseases, U.S. health officials said on Tuesday…
About 21 percent of women were infected with genital herpes, compared to only 11.5 percent of men, while 39 percent of blacks were infected compared to about 12 percent for whites, the CDC said. [emphasis added]
The statistics reveal that a small number of (single) men are having sex with a large number of (single) women. The fact that the difference is doubled is astounding. I presume that the rates of other infections that are transmitted only through sexual contact are similar. (Diseases like AIDS do not count because they can be spread through non-sexual means.)
How did Western society get here? As Roy F. Baumeister, a professor of psychology at Florida State University, describes the prehistoric, dating past:
Recent research using DNA analysis answered this question about two years ago. Today’s human population is descended from twice as many women as men.
I think this difference is the single most underappreciated fact about gender. To get that kind of difference, you had to have something like, throughout the entire history of the human race, maybe 80% of women but only 40% of men reproduced…
For women, the optimal thing to do is go along with the crowd, be nice, play it safe. The odds are good that men will come along and offer sex and you’ll be able to have babies. All that matters is choosing the best offer. We’re descended from women who played it safe.For men, the outlook was radically different. If you go along with the crowd and play it safe, the odds are you won’t have children. Most men who ever lived did not have descendants who are alive today. Their lines were dead ends. [emphasis original]
Tens and hundreds of thousands of years ago, the men who “got” the women and reproduced were those who could kill the most animals for food and protect the tribe against competitors the best. The men who were weak, small, dumb, or otherwise unsuccessful did not “get” any women. Biology and economics also played a role, as Baumeister continues to explain:
…most cultures have promoted population growth. And that depends on women. To maximize reproduction, a culture needs all the wombs it can get, but a few penises can do the job. There is usually a penile surplus. If a group loses half its men, the next generation can still be full-sized. But if it loses half its women, the size of the next generation will be severely curtailed. Hence most cultures keep their women out of harm’s way…
Imagine this scenario. After a nuclear holocaust, the ten surviving members of humanity are on an island. There are nine women and one man. There can be nine babies born every nine months. If there are nine men and one woman, only one baby can be born every nine months (and the woman will likely pick the “best” man). Which scenario bodes the best for the survival of the human race?
Here is the unmentionable secret: Women are much more important than men. And this is why people, through the media, tend to obsess over “missing (white) women” like Polly Klaas, Chandra Levy, Elizabeth Smart, Laci Peterson, Jennifer Wilbanks, and Natalee Holloway while ignoring missing men (as well as women of other races). Just remember the international outcry over the murder of Neda Agha-Soltan during the Iranian-election protests.
Article Pages: 1 2
