Muslim “Sociologist”: Females Like Violent Husbands

The terms Muslim and sociologist in the same sentence is freakish enough to be an article all itself, but anyway…

https://www.infowars.com/muslim-sociologist-gives-instructional-video-on-how-to-properly-beat-your-wife/

Now before we react, let’s ask dispassionately: is he wrong?  Do females like violent men?

Many have come to the conclusion that females prefer violent men because those are the kinds of men who are never incel, and conversely, all incels are never those kinds of violent, alpha men.  The thinking goes that if females always go for men who beat them, they must like the beating.  Maybe…but then again, isn’t that kind of like saying that smokers like lung cancer and emphysema, and drinkers like car accidents and cirrhosis of the liver?  Or, do they hate the side-effects, but withdrawal from the buzz is not an option?

I’ve looked at this issue for a while, and I’ve come to the conclusion that is more of a matter of females taking the bad with the good – that is, they don’t want to be beaten by their males the males who own them, but they’re willing to deal with it, in order to secure the genes of males who are violent and dominant generally.  The biological goal for the female is to get a male who beats up other, less attractive males – restraining himself when it comes to her – and sires offspring with her in the form of sons who will do likewise against less attractive males in their own peer group; that’s the ideal, but it doesn’t always work out that way.  Often times, she will also become the target of his angry, uncontrolled fists…but if she can’t find the rare ideal, what else is she going to do?  Accept the genes of a more docile man, who can’t defend himself against the “real men”, and have sons who will become genetic failures in the face of the same circumstances, producing no grandchildren for her?  That’s simply not an option for the human reproductive imperative.  Thus, you could say that [gasp] “violence against women” from their romantic/sexual partners is merely a nasty side-effect that they’re willing to deal with, in order to secure the genes of generally violent and domineering men, in order to have violently-successful offspring.  And just when you thought humanity was past that kind of thing…  Nope, it’s the same as it was in the stone age: violence = success.

So, was it wrong for western civilization to give today’s behaviorally-ballistic females full sexual autonomy, and control over their own reproductive destinies?  After all, the reason that we’ve shifted back to the stone age model of reproductive success is because western culture decided to put females in the driver’s seat of reproductive choice and protocol, right?  You can be the judge of all that.  All I’m doing here is stating the not-so-obvious, yet undeniable: for better or for worse, the result is the devolution of the species.  Cavemen are able to reproduce, civilized men aren’t.  This is how females want it.  They’re the ones in control now.

 

6 comments

  1. I can categorically confirm that what you suspect is in fact true. I had a punch up a few years ago with the ex school bully.

    All that cunt has EVER done is beat people up. Why? Because it’s all he is capable of doing, as he is a cretin of the highest order. He has NEVER had a problem getting women. Never fucking EVER, unlike yours truly. Last time I backed him off; if he comes near me AGAIN, I WILL fucking kill him. And I MEAN I will kill him. Like DEAD.

    Y’know, with all of the shit I am having to deal with right now, I am glad I am single. I have no desire to have to be the entertaining clown for some bitch of a woman.

  2. “This is how females want it. They’re the ones in control now.”

    You mean there was a time once when they weren’t?

    1. Yes, there was indeed such a time. In fact, throughout the majority of history, this was the case. Marriages were either explicitly or implicitly arranged, women were guarded and treated like property. Mind you, there was a difference between treating and mistreating them as such; in the Victorian era, for example, they enjoyed being put on a pedestal much like today, but they also knew their place and stayed in their lane (for the most part).

      What we have today is an odd pole-shift of gender dynamics, where they enjoy nearly or all of the rights, privileges and authority that men do, and quite a few that men don’t, but very little of the responsibility, in just about all areas of modern life. It’s a whacked-out imbalance that won’t sustain, due to its own inherent instability.

  3. And WE are the ones who are supposed to be the misogynists – all because we have had shit luck with the opposite sex, and as a result have developed what I consider to be a completely justified outlook regarding women – and these Jizzlamic clowns get to behave like this.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s