Sexual Equality is Biologically Impossible

The original article has been replaced with a revised version at the following link:

Why There Are Males & Females (Origin & Evolution of the Sexes)

 

26 thoughts on “Sexual Equality is Biologically Impossible

  1. > Sex chromosomes are designed towards the sexes’ unique specializations — since the XY is designed in accordance with the genetic filter functionality, it has been deliberately left vulnerable to deleterious mutations. That’s the whole point of this article, which you’ve somehow missed.

    Since I am not a big fan of intelligent design theory,so I don’t count deleterious mutations is “designed”.

    >+A gay man does not have a “male body with female brain”
    At least should be a better description than male stereotype.

    >XXY and XYY conditions are abnormalities. Again, the exceptions you mention only make up for about 5% of the population and don’t conflict with the evolution of sex.
    From start to finish,I just want to say there are exceptions.We don’t know the the real population of these abnormalities/exceptions/LGBT people,they have rights to use those gender terms to describe themselves.

    >You can’t change the fact that only one sex can reproduce while the other has valuable genetic material — dichotomous enough and the sexes can only be complimentary.
    It’s more complicated than that in actual situation.
    I keep my mind open ,and don’t think dichotomous is enough for my curiosity.Although what you said is valid in most case of human.(Many microorganism don’t use sexual reproduction)

    1. >Since I am not a big fan of intelligent design theory,so I don’t count deleterious mutations is “designed”.
      Please tell me you’re joking. This entire article is based on the theory of evolution, which is the exact opposite of ‘Intelligent Design.’ The word ‘design’ does not automatically mean I’m invoking ‘Intelligent Design,’ which has nothing to do with any valid science. Creationists did not coin the word ‘design.’

      Once again, your doubts have already been addressed in the article itself. If you’ve bothered to actually read the article or check the references, you might have learned something.

      1. >The word ‘design’ does not automatically mean I’m invoking ‘Intelligent Design’, which has nothing to do with any valid science.

        If you don’t explain well ,I have no obligation to take your definition.I don’t use “design”this word to describe “deleterious mutations”.

        >Once again, your doubts have already been addressed in the article itself.

        Is YOU THINK your article already been addressed everything.Not me.You have to admit people have their rights to don’t want to agree with you completely.

        LOL

        1. I’m not sure you can blame someone for not laying out a cogent argument when you don’t seem to have mastered the language it’s written in.

    1. Yes – and that should tell you something about MRAs. Some MRAs and many new women there now want equality of the sexes – complete equality. They stress that men are too subjected to violence, some want men to be able to wear skirts etc. They use the same terminology, because they are either already subverted or equally delusional as the feminists. WE WILL NEVER TREAT THE GENDERS EQUALLY, BECAUSE WE ARE NOT EQUAL, but different. One stark example is in the Israeli military where women in combat units create much more deaths (500% more) due to the fact that men try to protect their female comrades under any cost endangering the mission and their own lives. The only way to stop that is to exterminate male innate instincts that protect woman and children, which is illusory – also most women would not not be able to be as battle-hardy as most men despite the claims that women are 100% identical to men like a bloody potato-head – exchange the face and the sexual organs and you have a gender-neutral potato-head.

      This does not concern some MRAs, but I’ve seen them speak out against “gender stereotypes” of the most basic kind – most of those stereotypes created by our fundamental biology and not by some patriarchal indoctrination. MRAs thus behave like feminists in many respects – not all mind you, some of their stuff is good.

      1. >They stress that men are too subjected to violence, some want men to be able to wear skirts etc.
        What’s wrong?That’s their rights.

        >They use the same terminology, because they are either already subverted or equally delusional as the feminists.
        Everyone don’t agree with you are feminist,LOL.

        >WE WILL NEVER TREAT THE GENDERS EQUALLY, BECAUSE WE ARE NOT EQUAL, but different.
        http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/30/e8/f3/30e8f34ff9abb6e0e087546c40b38cc5.jpg

        Still person by person.

        >The only way to stop that is to exterminate male innate instincts that protect woman and children
        I don’t see any evidence to proof this.Seem by cultural differences or social pressure.
        Proof:
        http://www.anesi.com/titanic.htm

        >most of those stereotypes created by our fundamental biology and not by some patriarchal indoctrination.
        I disagree at all,the stereotype could be different by different cultural background,the stereotypes is not created by our fundamental biology ,the stereotypes is effected by our fundamental biology.

    2. Just because you see something on a MRA website, it doesn’t mean it’s true. Whether they’re feminist or MRA, all political activists are the same to me. This is why I’m not affiliated with any such group.

  2. A suggestion for improvement:
    You should added “For cis gender people only” in your articles would be better.
    I found your articles isn’t for most gay male.

    1. >You should added “For cis gender people only” in your articles would be better.
      “cis gender” is meaningless terminology from feminist gender theory. In science, a ‘theory’ explains a phenomenon but ‘feminist theory’ doesn’t explain anything at all — it’s pseudoscience.

      >I found your articles isn’t for most gay male.
      This article isn’t about sexual orientation. It is about the design of the sexes as pertains to nearly all species in the animal kingdom, obviously including humans.

      Sexual orientation does not disrupt/change the functional dichotomy of the sexes. Gay males only make up about 2-3% of the population. Homosexual orientation exists because individual reproductive fitness can be sacrificed to increase the fitness of the family or reproductive group. Hence, it’s more common in brothers of male homosexuals than in the general population.

      1. Hehe – got your little feminist trolls already. Cis-gender, not for gays etc. The funny thing is that psychologically even homosexual couples create feminine-masculine inter-gender relationships. That is why some Lesbians and Gays have even started using Game knowledge from PUAs to create a better relationship, because even in their non-reproductive bonds one is more the woman and the other the man.

        Of course – regarding our basic structure & survival of our species – none of it plays any role really.

        1. Having a little different opinion with you is trolling?That seem really like feminazi,I hate them.Not all male have a typical male brain .

          1. Alright, then try not to use their Newspeak. Cis-gender and crap like that are their idiotic terms, that so far have not spread to other parts of the scientific community.

            And homosexuality – even the one observable in the animal kingdom – has no importance on the dichotomy of a species.

            And as far as gays are concerned. Met both Gays and Lesbians who are very Red Pill and question the entire feminist narrative. All data found here on the site equally apply to them.

      2. I agree the “Blank Slate” model is very silly.But not everyone born with a same written slate.You know ,the XY chromosome with relatively large individual differences.I believe “person by person”is more important.Nothing is 100% correct.

        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7456588.stm

        >This article applies to nearly all species in the animal kingdom, obviously including humans. Sexual orientation does not disrupt/change the functional dichotomy of the sexes. Gay males exist because men with same-sex orientation sacrificed their reproductive fitness to increase the fitness of their family or reproductive group.

        http://ultraculture.org/blog/2014/02/21/scientist-threatened-stalked-findings-syngenta-herbicide/

        You can DIY some gay animals by pesticide as well~

        1. The existence of large inter-individual differences is not in conflict here.

          In fact, the strong selection on males due to their genetic filter functionality is precisely why there are large individual differences between males.

          1. >In fact, the strong selection on males due to their genetic filter functionality is precisely why there are large individual differences between males.

            Indeed ,it’s a part of reason.And XY chromosome easier to occur deleterious mutations is another reason.

            > There are little meaningful differences between females because their function is to carry genes across generations.

            Have less risk to get genetic disease but can’t accept new things usually.(Smart phone)

            Of course ,I am not so arrogant to claim this apply to all human.Male body with female brain (Gay),intersex,XXY chromosome,XYY chromosome,etc……. not in these case.

            The perfect dichotomy as the perfect crystal and perfect circle,don’t exist in nature ,it is merely a theoretical idea.

            1. >Indeed ,it’s a part of reason.And XY chromosome easier to occur deleterious mutations is another reason.
              Sex chromosomes are designed towards the sexes’ unique specializations — since the XY is designed in accordance with the genetic filter functionality, it is left vulnerable to deleterious mutations. That’s the whole point of this article, which you’ve somehow missed.

              >Of course ,I am not so arrogant to claim this apply to all human.Male body with female brain (Gay),intersex,XXY chromosome,XYY chromosome,etc……. not in these case.
              +A gay man does not have a “male body with female brain”; XXY and XYY conditions are abnormalities. Again, the exceptions you mention only make up for less than 5% of the population and don’t conflict with the evolution of sex.
              +You can’t change the fact that only one sex can reproduce while the other has valuable genetic material — dichotomous enough and the sexes can only be complimentary. Either way, there is no need for a ‘perfect dichotomy’ because we’re talking about specializations, and the sexes have been retained as useful adaptations through a very long, very brutal evolutionary history.

  3. Are you here ?0.0

    You made a great blog !!! : D
    Unfortunately,many people didn’t read your blog.Your blog is what actually I has been looking for.
    Can you tell me what is the reason you make this blog ?

    1. I’ve been busy/away for more than a month, that’s why the blog has been inactive.

      Thank you for your kind words. I don’t advertise my blog but I’ve had a lot of traffic (and increasing) the last couple months for whatever reason.

      >Can you tell me what is the reason you make this blog ?
      To put it simply, this blog is about why feminism is at odds with reality. I hope you find it useful. 🙂

  4. Keep doing what you’re doing, it’s important. You don’t hold any punches and you identify feminism for what it actually is: pseudoscience. Don’t let allegations of sexism deter you. Feminist ideology is severely flawed and cannot stand on its own feet, that’s why it has to resort to these kinds of attacks.

    Just my own two cents, but feminists don’t actually seem to care about equality. To me feminism has always come across as a persecution based ideology. Feminists are attracted to the movement simply because it allows them to believe they are being persecuted. Persecution brings all sorts of benefits to a person’s sense of well-being, whether the persecution is real or not. All your failures can be blamed on someone else (i.e. patriarchy). It allows one to inflate even the smallest accomplishment into a monumental achievement. With feminism, this false persecution is unified so that there will always be a community that one can turn to for reinforcement (remember the old saying, “misery loves company”). It’s important for feminists to believe that men and women are fundamentally equal in mental disposition and capability. That way they can list all sex differences as gender differences created by an oppressive patriarchy (notice how women are ALWAYS the victims in these instances).

    1. Thanks for your comment. You’ve hit the nail right on the head. All feminism can be reduced to 2 ideas expressed somewhat differently by different feminist groups:
      1) ‘Sameness’ instead of ‘fairness’ / Equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity. By ruling in advance that there are no differences between the sexes, an alternate explanation is needed to explain the stratification of the sexes.
      2) ‘Oppression’ of women: the alternate pseudo-history invented to fill in the gap.

      There are some groups who’ve attempted to distinguish between ‘equity feminism’ and ‘gender feminism’. Unfortunately, this doesn’t change anything — replacing extreme myths with less extreme myths from the same strain does not magically validate a depraved ideology.

      (I’m currently out of station, hence the recent inactivity. I intend to cover these topics in much greater detail soon enough.)

  5. Outstanding article. Would be interesting to see how you stand on the whole r-/k-selection discussion in human mating patterns.

  6. If humans start as blank slates, then how would a population become organized into a society in the first place – to be able to produce “social constructs”?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA *