Post: #1

Do you guys get this from others when you discuss your views?
Red pill views are based on biology, so many people are reminded of Nazi Eugenics by any insinuation that there are standards of health in the human race, that men and women have different organs. Simple realities like that make people uncomfortable.
It's bizarre that this is used as an accusation because everybody is for eugenics in some way. If you find it difficult to look at a severely deformed person, and would rather look at an attractive face, you are a eugenicist on a basic level. When you select people to mate with you are practicing eugenics, even if your braiin convinces you that it's love or fate. If you think it's a good idea to find a cure for Downs Syndrome you are pro eugenics.
The natural process does say that certain people are winners and others are losers. if a woman doesnt have a child before menopause, she is not really useful to the species anymore (with the exception of helping her nieces/nephews). That's just the hard truth.
Our culture as a whole seems to be abandoning everything for fantasy.

Post: #2

Some more context?

Post: #3

(06-25-2013 02:12 PM)ghostdog Wrote:  Do you guys get this from others when you discuss your views?
Red pill views are based on biology, so many people are reminded of Nazi Eugenics by any insinuation that there are standards of health in the human race,
Our culture as a whole seems to be abandoning everything for fantasy.

The key to this is to totally and exclusively focus on the positive things you want in your own children, and keep your mouth shut about other people's lives and reproductive choices. That, more than anything else, is none of your business unless you want to join some racist fringe group. All arguments like "those ______ people shouldn't reproduce" end up in total ugly arguments at best, and ovens full of howling, terrified innocents about to be murdered at worst.

You can say, cautiously, you want to have children with a woman who is tall, or some other characteristic, but you even have to watch that-- for instance if you say blond.

The great Jimi Hendrix's mother was a total alcoholic waste from what I read. Sometime very illustrious people come from humble backgrounds. He was the greatest American instrumentalist of the 20th century.

You are right, Germany's brutal slaughter ruined the image of controlling someone else's reproduction indefinitely.

For all practical purposes, give up on controlling others and focus making yourself an example of someone who should reproduce. Cure cancer or something. I don't think you would get a lot of flak for advocating prevention of Down's disease. What people freak out about is if you want to kill the people with Down's disease.

Great quote from Morcheeba's BIG CALM:
"We all love looking down."

Post: #4

When infertile couples and lesbian couples seek out sperm donations, what kind of men do they seek as donors?

Do they just leave it to chance? Or do they specifically choose tall, Nordic blonde men who went to Ivy League colleges? It's the latter, of course. Overwhelmingly, in fact.

When people call you a eugenicist, you need to mention this. Then you need to say that what you preach is merely a philosophy, the people who truly practice eugenics in real time are the lesbians and infertile couples. Have your friends take it with them.

Addendum: I agree everyone is for eugenics in some way. You can also ask the women why they're not racing to breed with Stephen Hawking or the men why they're not down with that fat woman from "Mike and Molly."

Post: #5

(06-25-2013 03:06 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  The key to this is to totally and exclusively focus on the positive things you want in your own children, and keep your mouth shut about other people's lives and reproductive choices. That, more than anything else, is none of your business unless you want to join some racist fringe group. All arguments like "those ______ people shouldn't reproduce" end up in total ugly arguments at best, and ovens full of howling, terrified innocents about to be murdered at worst.

You don't have to even go as far as saying "_____ shouldn't reproduce" to be a eugenicist these days. I never say anything blatant like that, but I have suggested mental differences between men and women.
Anti-feminism says that there are objective standards in nature, and this makes people disturbed already.
That men and women are different and that mating is about reproduction are controversial things to say in this day and age. It has gotten that retarded. Yes the eggs of a 42 year old are terrible, and you can't change that. The more people deny basic stuff like this the more I feel like society is legitimately batshit insane.

Quote:For all practical purposes, give up on controlling others and focus making yourself an example of someone who should reproduce.

Isn't this what people naturally do anyway? No matter how egalitarian they are they're still eugenicists with their own mating choices.

Quote:I don't think you would get a lot of flak for advocating prevention of Down's disease. What people freak out about is if you want to kill the people with Down's disease.

It's interesting with Down's disease half of the advocates want to say that the Down's kid is no different from anybody else, and the other half want research to prevent Downs. So which one is it?

Post: #6

(06-25-2013 03:26 PM)ghostdog Wrote:  You don't have to even go as far as saying "_____ shouldn't reproduce" to be a eugenicist these days. I never say anything blatant like that, but I have suggested mental differences between men and women.

Oh yeah, I've run into THAT one!! hAha..

I think politically, the only thing to do is make believe that the only difference between men and women is their sex organs except when you're banging them and they want to call you "daddy."

There's another quote I like but I can't find the source of, something like:
"Women should be treated like children, to do so flatters both them and ourselves."

I think it's a good prescription, dote on her, be stern with her, spank her.

Look, one of the difference between men and women is that women can't objectively look at themselves, they personalize everything.

What they "feel" is the truth as far as they are concerned. There's a good side to this as well, they don't murder as many people as men do.

But if they're incapable of rational thought, isn't it absurd to try to convince them of that fact, lloollxzllzl-- they can't understand it because they're not rational!!

"Mark Twain: Never try to teach a pig to sing, it's very frustrating and it greatly annoys the pig."


lllzzzoozollsllalal

Sorry I can't offer a better solution, "against stupidity the Gods themselve struggle in vain" Goethe.

Post: #7

To me red pill thinking is accepting reality on reality's terms. There's a huge gulf between having a preference for certain genetics in a mate and thinking a certain portion of the population shouldn't be reproducing. The former is red pill, you're acknowledging that people tend to desire certain traits in their mates more than others. The latter is not red pill because you're now inflicting your ideas on how the world should work on a world that probably isn't going to pay attention. That's as naive as a blue pill thinker believing his wife will remain faithful to him simply because she took an oath in front of a priest.

Post: #8

(06-25-2013 03:12 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  When infertile couples and lesbian couples seek out sperm donations, what kind of men do they seek as donors?

Do they just leave it to chance? Or do they specifically choose tall, Nordic blonde men who went to Ivy League colleges? It's the latter, of course. Overwhelmingly, in fact.

When people call you a eugenicist, you need to mention this. Then you need to say that what you preach is merely a philosophy, the people who truly practice eugenics in real time are the lesbians and infertile couples. Have your friends take it with them.

Addendum: I agree everyone is for eugenics in some way. You can also ask the women why they're not racing to breed with Stephen Hawking or the men why they're not down with that fat woman from "Mike and Molly."

This is a really good point.

Post: #9

Nobody calls me a fizzle! Well except that one guy but after today nobody calls me a fizzle!

Post: #10

(06-25-2013 02:12 PM)ghostdog Wrote:  Red pill views are based on biology

lulz

Red Pill acknowledges biology- specifically it acknowledges hypergamy.

Everything else is what we bring to the table in terms of our own ideas and politics.

WIA

Post: #11

If somebody called me a eugenicist, I would take it as a compliment. I am, of course, against forced sterilization or genocide of an entire race, but I would support, for example, sterilization as a condition to receive welfare, as I believe they do in India or at least in some parts of it. For example, a 16 year old slut shits out a bastard, applies for welfare. Guess what, bitch, get sterilized before you get any handouts.

Post: #12

Quote:Do you guys get this from others when you discuss your views?

Nope I don't because I ascribe to Law #38 from Robert Greene: "Think As you Want But Behave Like Others". It's one of my Top Five Laws from that book.

They might as well call you homophobe or racist/sexist b/c the blue pills use those to frame the other as someone whose opinion is worthless. It's all pathoss, 0 logos. Why are arguing with women?

Arguing with women is like meeting your friends at the basketball court with a baseball bat and cleats on.

Quote:The natural process does say that certain people are winners and others are losers. if a woman doesnt have a child before menopause, she is not really useful to the species anymore (with the exception of helping her nieces/nephews). That's just the hard truth.

Women and liberals don't seem to get this. I view all women as unintelligent, vain, and nothing but a hole for me to nut in; my success has increased. If sexbots or artificial wombs are invented/sold women would be obsolete.

When you mention this, I bet they argue with you more vehemently? Like Roissy's says: closer you get to her damaging her value the louder she gets.

Quote:Our culture as a whole seems to be abandoning everything for fantasy.

Bill Mahr has a stand-up where he's feminine values are America's values. That's why. A wife only sees the paycheck, not that her husband works 8 hrs a day at a place he hates with some psychopath for a manager piling more work on him.

We've crossed the estrogen-laden Rubicon. My advice mouth the platitudes or say nothing.

Post: #13

The problem with eugenics is regression to the mean, not morality. Own it.

Post: #14

You'd probably find most of those throwing out accusations are the ones most affected by your words/ideas.

Post: #15

(06-25-2013 03:12 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  When infertile couples and lesbian couples seek out sperm donations, what kind of men do they seek as donors?

Do they just leave it to chance? Or do they specifically choose tall, Nordic blonde men who went to Ivy League colleges? It's the latter, of course. Overwhelmingly, in fact.

When people call you a eugenicist, you need to mention this. Then you need to say that what you preach is merely a philosophy, the people who truly practice eugenics in real time are the lesbians and infertile couples. Have your friends take it with them.

Addendum: I agree everyone is for eugenics in some way. You can also ask the women why they're not racing to breed with Stephen Hawking or the men why they're not down with that fat woman from "Mike and Molly."

I would take it one step further, I don't even consider those people looking for only well educated/healthy sperm donors to be eugenicisits. If someone is a doctor and runs a fertility clinic and every time a customer asks him for sperm from a doctor, he supplies his own seed, then THAT would definitely be actively practicing eugenics.

Post: #16

(06-26-2013 04:52 AM)Architekt Wrote:  You'd probably find most of those throwing out accusations are the ones most affected by your words/ideas.

Well I don't talk about this with 30+ year old women, but several of my friends graduated from the humanities and get morally appalled.
It's like talking to someone who just got out of cult.

Post: #17

(06-25-2013 07:37 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  If somebody called me a eugenicist, I would take it as a compliment. I am, of course, against forced sterilization or genocide of an entire race, but I would support, for example, sterilization as a condition to receive welfare, as I believe they do in India or at least in some parts of it. For example, a 16 year old slut shits out a bastard, applies for welfare. Guess what, bitch, get sterilized before you get any handouts.

Exactly my point, the US spends more on educating children fathered by sub 70 IQ dropouts, which has done little to improve their academic performance.
Twin studies a adoption studies have established over and over again, and the correlation between genetic similarity and cognitive abilities give you the same story.
There are 7 Billion people on this planet, and not every single one of them has the same brain.
FACT: : Post baby boomer US is NOT going to have the kind of money to keep up this dumbfuckery.
The stupid ass leftists believe that I have to no right to persuade these dumb sluts to stop having kids, but they have the right to COERCE ME, through their votes, to pay for their kid's upbringing?
Fuck NO.

Post: #18

Nah, man. Pro-Choice is the word now.

Post: #19

I will continue to say that xyz in society should not reproduce because the simple fact remains that if a couple or single parent happens to be ill-equipped to bring a child into the world (time, financial, environmental, intellectual resources not solidified), they probably shouldn't reproduce.

An aborted kid might screw up one or two people, but a child brought up shitty can (and statistically does) fuck up many people's lives.

Interesting discussion fellas.

Post: #20

(06-25-2013 07:37 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  If somebody called me a eugenicist, I would take it as a compliment. I am, of course, against forced sterilization or genocide of an entire race, but I would support, for example, sterilization as a condition to receive welfare, as I believe they do in India or at least in some parts of it. For example, a 16 year old slut shits out a bastard, applies for welfare. Guess what, bitch, get sterilized before you get any handouts.

Quite a harsh condition in my opinion. Anyone can be down on his luck for a while in his life.

I would agree with no child support after the second child. Don't know the law in the US but in most Northern European countries it can be quite worth your while to have lots of babies.

Post: #21

(06-27-2013 07:41 PM)Neil Skywalker Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 07:37 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  If somebody called me a eugenicist, I would take it as a compliment. I am, of course, against forced sterilization or genocide of an entire race, but I would support, for example, sterilization as a condition to receive welfare, as I believe they do in India or at least in some parts of it. For example, a 16 year old slut shits out a bastard, applies for welfare. Guess what, bitch, get sterilized before you get any handouts.

Quite a harsh condition in my opinion. Anyone can be down on his luck for a while in his life.

I would agree with no child support after the second child. Don't know the law in the US but in most Northern European countries it can be quite worth your while to have lots of babies.

There is a difference between being down on luck and being a parasite. I know that in Europe there are families where multiple generations are on welfare. I believe everybody would be better off if this kind of people were sterilized.

Post: #22

(06-27-2013 09:05 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  There is a difference between being down on luck and being a parasite. I know that in Europe there are families where multiple generations are on welfare. I believe everybody would be better off if this kind of people were sterilized.

Bro, that's the norm in many towns and cities in the UK. I had no idea it wasn't so prevalent in the US? Damn, I gotta get my green card!

There was a TV series made over here called Shameless. Honest to God, it was so close to the truth it was uncomfortable. I think they made a US version too?

Post: #23

Goldinboy nailed it on the head.

Either sell your soul and preach along with the choir, acting and thinking differently. People tend not to look too deep into your actions as long as the sounds coming out of your mouth match their world view.

Or just keep your mouth shut if you have personal ethics.

There is NOTHING to be gained from discussing anything like this with people not aware of their own innate irrationality, e.g with the ability to introspect.

Post: #24

(06-26-2013 11:27 AM)Quintus Flaminius Wrote:  

(06-25-2013 07:37 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  If somebody called me a eugenicist, I would take it as a compliment. I am, of course, against forced sterilization or genocide of an entire race, but I would support, for example, sterilization as a condition to receive welfare, as I believe they do in India or at least in some parts of it. For example, a 16 year old slut shits out a bastard, applies for welfare. Guess what, bitch, get sterilized before you get any handouts.

Exactly my point, the US spends more on educating children fathered by sub 70 IQ dropouts, which has done little to improve their academic performance.
Twin studies a adoption studies have established over and over again, and the correlation between genetic similarity and cognitive abilities give you the same story.
There are 7 Billion people on this planet, and not every single one of them has the same brain.
FACT: : Post baby boomer US is NOT going to have the kind of money to keep up this dumbfuckery.
The stupid ass leftists believe that I have to no right to persuade these dumb sluts to stop having kids, but they have the right to COERCE ME, through their votes, to pay for their kid's upbringing?
Fuck NO.

You're free to be an anarchist who doesn't accept the government's authority to tax you, and refuse to pay some or all taxes.

You can campaign for different policies.

You can go to countries that don't have welfare, but most of them are quite poor and your living standard might go down.

You can rant and scream, I think that is the most fun. It's what I do!

Post: #25

(06-25-2013 09:00 PM)lurker Wrote:  The problem with eugenics is regression to the mean, not morality. Own it.

That's not actually a problem, if you keep up the eugenics program long enough, as the mean shifts.