Forewords

Some males do not deserve females. They are not financially responsible. They can't make a lot of money. They are abusive, violent, and evil. Some don’t even want to get laid and prefer women just for tortures like the middle age monks and serial killers. Yet, those males got females! If they do not get females their kind would have gone out of the gene pool for a long time.

Some might think “What do women look in such male?” Well, there are reasons to believe why such males may be attractive. I’ll explain latter. However, this book is more comprehensive than just sexual selection. Women choosiness is just one important factor. The main reason why women choose such males is not because the women really choose.

Women are “rationed” to those males. Women tend to “get along” or sometimes even support whatever rationing schemes males make toward them due to their relatively weaker power, and a process similar to family altruism.

So the next time you hear a sob story about a serial killer that had an abusive dad, that beat him up when he was a kid, etc. I partially agree when some lawyers argue that we should not put such males in electric chair. Such males should not have been born in the first place. That’s another story.

Latter we’ll see that if all sex acts are consensual, then only top 20%-30% of males’ population will actually get laid often enough to produce offspring. Those are usually the richest ones. This has been the way it works in the past.

Of course, the other males won’t just have it. Hence, in ancient time, the best and brightest among our ancestors aim for power rather than productively create wealth. They’ll use their political power to trick the rest into jihad, celibacy, or whatever so the others don’t complaint too much.

This explains why feudalism, rather than libertarian capitalism, is the common social structure in the past. This explains how we could have lived in a much more abundance life if we can motivate our best and brightest to use their superiority to make money productively rather than to rule violently.

In all societies, males then ration females somewhat proportional with their relative political power. In democratic countries, one man one vote soon leads to one man one wife and various romantic indoctrinations to promote and enforce monogamous life long marriage.

These arrangements ensure that even the poorest dumbest ugliest males will be able to get a female despite their lack of capability to afford kids or attract females. Societies then simply claim that “love is blind” and “men are equal”

Removing those restrictions will enable females to aim for the most desirable males (often =richest) eliminating all motives for lack of productivity. Even your genes can be “changed” by recombining it with those having better genes in a sexual relationship.

Allowing most consensual offers will then improve wealth and prosperity. This in turn will reduce the need for government to support parasites and failures. So anyone tired of paying huge tax to support welfare program might be interested in this more enjoyable welfare alternative.

What I mean by consensual here is fully consensual. Prohibition or excessive government’s regulation of some consensual act can be seen as an enforcement of the alternative. The “desired” alternative is then not really consensual.

Prohibition or excessive regulation of information aimed at a group of people, such as the young, to limit the groups’ capability to make well informed decisions should count as forceful deception too. Hence, such acts are not fully consensual.

For example, prohibition and heavy discouragement of prostitution and free sex in many cultures pretty much enforce the alternative: life long monogamous marriage. Forceful indoctrination of romance combined with prohibition from watching porn for the young male also forcefully encourage monogamous females’ rationing schemes. That structure is not the type that would naturally pops out a lot under a less regulated system.

The “desired” alternative act explains away a lot of morality standard we see in most society. Basically morality standards, often made by males, serve two functions, females rationing and mutual male’s genocide. We’ll use three commonly used tests to show that. Later we’ll see that there are indeed many more humane alternatives, all of which are politically incorrect.

In brief, our preferences are decided by many factors. Some preferences are so strong, they are decided straight by our genes, which means are inherited. Preferences that lead to more offspring in the past and so evolutionary “proven,” are the kind of preferences that are strong and common today.

The main ones are simple. For males, that means aiming to mate with a large “quantity” of females. For females that means aiming to mate with a high “quality” males. Here, quantity and quality is loosely defined and latter we’ll see that it’s not really the most appropriate words.

Reproduction is not the only way we promote the interest of our genes to reproduce. For most of us, promotion of social values that promote the interest of those that are similar to us, while depriving others of such advantages is an even more efficient way. This explains away various morality standard developed in most societies.

We’ll delve further to other related topic on my website. We’ll see how the relationship between males and females are analog with other type of relationships and you can use the analogy from the ideas to other fields.

There are many many more than this. So tune on, the show is on.

Check out more about this in http://genepoolsurvivalguide.com

Send comments, affiliate partnerships offer, and questions to webmaster@genepoolsurvivalguide.com. Read my first e-book on how to learn math at http://howtolearnmath.com