Post: #51

Vicious, now you are that pc hat "ethnic swede" is a term you need to quote because it is a "social construct"? The numbers are straight out of your own Wikipedia link as well as the Swedish census publication cited and sourced on the bottom of your very own link... What is the chip on your shoulder constantly suspecting Heartiste?

Post: #52

(01-21-2013 07:46 AM)Asaxon Wrote:  Vicious, now you are that pc hat "ethnic swede" is a term you need to quote because it is a "social construct"? The numbers are straight out of your own Wikipedia link as well as the Swedish census publication cited and sourced on the bottom of your very own link... What is the chip on your shoulder constantly suspecting Heartiste?

Your putting words he never said into his mouth, and he hasn't posted any links in this thread. Your 1.2 fertility rate statistic was completely made up as well. Like I said, according to the stats Scandinavia's fertility rates are well above average for Europe, so are the UK, Ireland and France because their fertility picked up a couple decades ago, same with America.

If you're worried about European ethnic groups becoming extinct, it's Southern Europe and everything from Germany eastward, especially the FSU that you should be worried about.

Post: #53

You are correct, it was your link, pdog. My bad. This does not change the facts though... 1.8 is not a sustainable fertility rate. I personally do not worry about this at all, could not care less what color hair or if a country has 59 million or 55 million people. I just think the science of blondes becoming rarer and rarer due to interracial procreation and low " blonde" birth rates is irrefutable. I don't get why people get so worked up about this, crying about racial supremacy, being Heartiste fans etc....

Post: #54

When someone claims arabs/immigrants will take over a nation just by looking at a snap shot of current fertility rates then yes I will assume there's an argument about race behind it (or just ignorance).

Please tell me what "science" about blondes becoming extinct is "irrefutable"? I have yet to see anything such that hasn't turned out to be bogus. Related link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearing_blonde_gene

To just say blonds become "rarer" is irrelevant since it's a relative term and even though their numbers might go up they would become rarer if the world's dark haired went up faster. So even though there most certainly are more blonds today than in the 12th century (the vikings hey-day) they are fewer in percentages.

Post: #55

(01-21-2013 08:04 AM)Asaxon Wrote:  You are correct, it was your link, pdog. My bad. This does not change the facts though... 1.8 is not a sustainable fertility rate. I personally do not worry about this at all, could not care less what color hair or if a country has 59 million or 55 million people. I just think the science of blondes becoming rarer and rarer due to interracial procreation and low " blonde" birth rates is irrefutable. I don't get why people get so worked up about this, crying about racial supremacy, being Heartiste fans etc....

Like I said, if you care about white fertility it's not Sweden's 1.8 you should be worried about. Even at 1.8 the population will remain stable for a while in absolute terms before it starts declining, but slowly. As for race-mixing and recessive genes, the number of immigrants and their intermarriage rates are too low for you to be worried about blondes disappearing in the West any time soon. Added to the fact that mixed-race people tend to marry white, so the blonde recessive genes your worried about won't be lost into the ether.

On the train the other night I saw a Black man with his son. His kid had light brown skin, bright blue eyes and caramel coloured curly hair. It's up to you to take a guess as to what his mother must look like, but I don't think your precious blonde genes are in danger. What really tripped me about it though was that the kids Dad looked too dark to be mixed himself.

Post: #56

That 1.8 fertility rate is bullshit by the way, because it averages it with immigrants. What's the rate for native Swedes?

Quote:On the train the other night I saw a Black man with his son. His kid had light brown skin, bright blue eyes and caramel coloured curly hair.

Crazy shit. That means if his son had children with a white woman, his kids could be any color combination. If he had 4 kids, at least one of them would probably be pure white, one would be dark, and the other two light-skinned latino style.

In my own family, because I have Middle Eastern genes in me, both of my white grandparents had a daughter who is darker than most latino's. I have the recessive genes in me to produce virtually almost any skin color. Recessive genes are interesting.

Post: #57

(01-21-2013 02:27 PM)Samseau Wrote:  That 1.8 fertility rate is bullshit by the way, because it averages it with immigrants. What's the rate for native Swedes?

Even if we took this into account how is it relevant what the birth rate is for one particular year? Just in the last 80 years the birth rate has roller coasted between highs of 2,6 (1945) and 1,6 (1983) several times. You can't apply the current birth rate to the future and say "Oh, if it keeps going at this rate the oompahloompahs will be gone by 2XXX" and think that you've demonstrated anything but a thought experiment.

Post: #58

Vicious: I value your posts but the minute Sweden comes up your hamster goes crazy and you revert to blue pill thinking, defending your country at all costs even in the face of sound evidence. Maybe you should take a break from Sweden threads.

Post: #59

(01-21-2013 02:27 PM)Samseau Wrote:  That 1.8 fertility rate is bullshit by the way, because it averages it with immigrants. What's the rate for native Swedes?

About 1.4 after removing the 22% immigrant births.

Post: #60

(01-21-2013 05:33 PM)cibo Wrote:  

(01-21-2013 02:27 PM)Samseau Wrote:  That 1.8 fertility rate is bullshit by the way, because it averages it with immigrants. What's the rate for native Swedes?

About 1.4 after removing the 22% immigrant births.

http://www.thelocal.se/15408/20081103/#.UP3Bg2cVqHc

from the article:

Quote: Swedish-born women reproduced at a rate of 1.82 children per woman.

Quote:According to Statistics Sweden, however, childbearing patterns for foreign-born women are demonstrating a convergence with those of women born in Sweden.

Post: #61

I'm wondering where Thai men come into this. Are they not bringing the goods? Why are their women not interested? This must be causing disruption in their society.

Post: #62

EDIT

Post: #63

(01-21-2013 09:15 AM)P Dog Wrote:  

(01-21-2013 08:04 AM)Asaxon Wrote:  You are correct, it was your link, pdog. My bad. This does not change the facts though... 1.8 is not a sustainable fertility rate. I personally do not worry about this at all, could not care less what color hair or if a country has 59 million or 55 million people. I just think the science of blondes becoming rarer and rarer due to interracial procreation and low " blonde" birth rates is irrefutable. I don't get why people get so worked up about this, crying about racial supremacy, being Heartiste fans etc....

Like I said, if you care about white fertility it's not Sweden's 1.8 you should be worried about. Even at 1.8 the population will remain stable for a while in absolute terms before it starts declining, but slowly. As for race-mixing and recessive genes, the number of immigrants and their intermarriage rates are too low for you to be worried about blondes disappearing in the West any time soon. Added to the fact that mixed-race people tend to marry white, so the blonde recessive genes your worried about won't be lost into the ether.

On the train the other night I saw a Black man with his son. His kid had light brown skin, bright blue eyes and caramel coloured curly hair. It's up to you to take a guess as to what his mother must look like, but I don't think your precious blonde genes are in danger. What really tripped me about it though was that the kids Dad looked too dark to be mixed himself.

Black genes are usually dominant over white gene's, when a black person has a child with a white person there is no telling how the child will turn out.
As for the whole blonde Sweden thing, from what I saw most seem to be bottle blondes as in peroxide.

Post: #64

(01-21-2013 05:05 PM)Roosh Wrote:  Vicious: I value your posts but the minute Sweden comes up your hamster goes crazy and you revert to blue pill thinking, defending your country at all costs even in the face of sound evidence. Maybe you should take a break from Sweden threads.

What sound evidence? Seriously.

I'm being rational, I'm presenting hard data, I'm not getting into name calling and I don't hold grudges. To say I "revert to blue pill thinking" because I hold a contrarian view is doing the forum a disservice.

The only hamster here the way I see it is this:
A lot of people in the manosphere are fixated with Sweden. Because they have read something, somewhere on the interweb (thus it must be true) about Sweden being the most feminist country in the world. They then make the nation their straw man. If they could only prove that somehow Sweden is a society in free fall, rotten from within and without any hope of alleviation on the horizon then it would follow, in their minds, that feminism is responsible. They can then feel good about themselves for having "proof" that feminism is toxic.

I agree with the last 3 words in the paragraph above. The rest is just intellectual slacking and fallacious logic however and I can't imagine that the fast jolt of feeling good about another example of feminist failure should trump facts.

Post: #65

(01-21-2013 06:13 PM)cibo Wrote:  Missed the last bit but we can assume if everyone has a birth rate of 1.82, then the native births are relative to the immigrant size of 14%, making the native born 1.56 but probably a bit lower since the even though they're converging, there's differences among groups. So Im feeling the number is around 1.5

Dude, it's obvious that you didn't even read the article you misquoted to prop your own agenda.

The article clearly stated that "everyone" has a fertility rate of 1.88

Quote:Sweden’s overall fertility rate in 2007 was 1.88 children per woman

and that "the native born" have a fertility rate of 1.82

Quote:Swedish-born women reproduced at a rate of 1.82 children per woman.

Post: #66

(01-21-2013 06:31 PM)the_conductor Wrote:  
Dude, it's obvious that you didn't even read the article you misquoted to prop your own agenda.

The article clearly stated that "everyone" has a fertility rate of 1.88

Quote:Sweden’s overall fertility rate in 2007 was 1.88 children per woman

and that "the native born" have a fertility rate of 1.82

Quote:Swedish-born women reproduced at a rate of 1.82 children per woman.

Shit, you're correct. I saw the overall average is 1.82 not that it was for native sweds.

Post: #67

EDIT: Nevermind, I'll respect Roosh wishes, he's paying the bandwidth.

Post: #68

I've read somewhere that the Swedish men who marry Thai girls are usually farmers from remote areas who cannot get a wife otherwise. No Swedish city girl wants to live in some bumfuckenberg village and grow potatoes, so they import Isaan wives. It's not a middle class thing in Sweden to import a Thai wife, hence it possibly could attract the feminist rage (feminism is a middle class movement hating on the less educated lower class workers and farmers).

Post: #69

(01-20-2013 01:50 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

(01-20-2013 08:50 AM)Architekt Wrote:  Also, I don't understand how the news that your men are marrying outside your country indicates anything other than the fact that your countrywomen are of a lower calibre.

This is what I meant earlier by intellectual slacking. There are tons of reasons. Preference for a certain look or physical attribute, access to citizenship in a sub-tropical country, availability of better looking women to what your own age/look/shape would garner etc etc

(01-20-2013 12:39 PM)Samseau Wrote:  So, it appears what Harry says is correct, in that Thai women are often seen as victims and there is general outrage, but Harry appears incorrect in saying that all of Sweeden will jump on the anti-Thai women bandwagon.

The quoted portion above from Stockholm U shows that the intellectual elites do not seem to mind having Thai massage parlous and mixed asian/white babies running around.

I did find that link but the only thing available is just a summary of the study, the data and study itself is not available online so I couldn't do anything with that.

Look, I'm not saying HH is wrong only that I find no material that supports his assertion. Show me the data and I won't be late to deliver the mea culpa.

It will be like IMBRA in the US - they'll say they're doing it to protect women, but the real purpose/effect will be to hammer the competition and limit men's options. Much like hypocritical prostitution laws to "protect women" by making a class of vulnerable outcasts.

Post: #70

(01-21-2013 06:11 PM)Surreyman Wrote:  I'm wondering where Thai men come into this. Are they not bringing the goods? Why are their women not interested? This must be causing disruption in their society.

I've never been to Thailand specifically but sometimes when I go abroad I feel sorry for the local guys. They don't know about game, they are unemployed and poor and live in repressive countries. An idea I have is to write a short game ebook and then hand it out for very cheap to help them bang some tourists girls. It would even things out a bit.

Post: #71

(01-21-2013 09:53 PM)dirtypurist Wrote:  I've read somewhere that the Swedish men who marry Thai girls are usually farmers from remote areas who cannot get a wife otherwise. No Swedish city girl wants to live in some bumfuckenberg village and grow potatoes, so they import Isaan wives. It's not a middle class thing in Sweden to import a Thai wife, hence it possibly could attract the feminist rage (feminism is a middle class movement hating on the less educated lower class workers and farmers).

It's not really like that. You'd be surprised to say all kinds of different guys with foreign wifes. Hell, even I am contemplating it and since I learned game it is very easy for me to get girls there now.

"Even if we took this into account how is it relevant what the birth rate is for one particular year? Just in the last 80 years the birth rate has roller coasted between highs of 2,6 (1945) and 1,6 (1983) several times. You can't apply the current birth rate to the future and say "Oh, if it keeps going at this rate the oompahloompahs will be gone by 2XXX" and think that you've demonstrated anything but a thought experiment".

Ok this is a bit unfair of me since Vicious dropped out of the thread it's clear that the birth rate has fallen since 1945 (just like in the rest of the West) and we all know the reason for that. Personally I can't imagine anything that could happen to make it go back to 2,6 now.

Post: #72

(01-21-2013 10:26 PM)solo Wrote:  

(01-21-2013 09:53 PM)dirtypurist Wrote:  I've read somewhere that the Swedish men who marry Thai girls are usually farmers from remote areas who cannot get a wife otherwise. No Swedish city girl wants to live in some bumfuckenberg village and grow potatoes, so they import Isaan wives. It's not a middle class thing in Sweden to import a Thai wife, hence it possibly could attract the feminist rage (feminism is a middle class movement hating on the less educated lower class workers and farmers).

It's not really like that. You'd be surprised to say all kinds of different guys with foreign wifes. Hell, even I am contemplating it and since I learned game it is very easy for me to get girls there now.

"Even if we took this into account how is it relevant what the birth rate is for one particular year? Just in the last 80 years the birth rate has roller coasted between highs of 2,6 (1945) and 1,6 (1983) several times. You can't apply the current birth rate to the future and say "Oh, if it keeps going at this rate the oompahloompahs will be gone by 2XXX" and think that you've demonstrated anything but a thought experiment".

Ok this is a bit unfair of me since Vicious dropped out of the thread it's clear that the birth rate has fallen since 1945 (just like in the rest of the West) and we all know the reason for that. Personally I can't imagine anything that could happen to make it go back to 2,6 now.

Probably not, but these things fluctuate. Fertility rates swung from under a little under 2 to over 3.5 in America between the Depression and 1950's. Gen X are having more children than the Baby Boomers did. Even Russia's fertility rate has improved a little recently. It's really hard to guess how fertility will change over time. Vicious hinted at this, but we humans aren't very good at predicting the future.

Post: #73

Birthrates can change, but that doesn't change WHO is reproducing. If the majority of births come from immigrants or Swedes marrying non-Swedes, then the Swedes of the future will look completely different than they do today.

Post: #74

MILFs in Sweden should always be happy that men in Mediteranean South are always ready to welcome them.No worries about Thai invasion.