Notes about Sexuality and Religion

by Warren Perkin.

Since the 1950s, the wealthy and powerful have sought to make acquaintance of Ms Patterning, with the ulterior motive of using her in fulfilling their goals. She finds herself
overjoyed that her own mission in life, to end the domestic drudgery of her fellow females, has finally caught the attention of the world’s movers and shakers, filling her with the self
important righteousness on which a left brain thrives. It should really be called lefteousness. Enjoying the time, attention, and, of course the sponsorship of her new friends, she plots her next move – how best to use this relationship? She believes that she’s in control.

But, she doesn’t realise that she’s not dealing with the usual strata of men, the right brain romantics. Men who become wealthy and powerful become wealthy and powerful for a reason. This increased their status, and allowed them greater range of mating opportunities, that’s for sure. But, they were also driven to amass material wealth… well… because they like material wealth. These guys are much more left brained than the usual crew. These guys are ruthless.

Feminists have never been afraid to mingle with the hated ‘Patriarchy’, so long as they could extract resources and believe themselves in control.

https://j4mb.org.uk/2024/09/04/warren-perkin-ms-patterning-shes-making-mgtow/

Pg 6
Females are their own special interest group. They have a 4x ‘in-group’ preference for the views of other women (4), leading to outcomes which will benefit their own sex. On a decision making panel, female views will prevail, because, far from oppressing women, men will always defer to them (5). With 50/50 M/F representation, the male logic which gave us science and enlightened progress doesn’t stand a chance. Feelings and emotions will take centre stage, rules and regulations will proliferate, aimed at promoting a spurious ‘equality’ which doesn’t exist, and has never existed. Female behaviour, and its underpinning morality and ethics, are entirely at odds with their male equivalent, because, bottom line, their reproductive strategies are diametrically opposed.

Male values evolved from a dominance hierarchy which males impose only on other males while we seek the status necessary to impress females and garner a mate, thus forming a reproductive unit. Men and women have been playing this game for the past 50,000 years, around 800 lifetimes. Fully 650 of those lifetimes were spent in caves. The work of Denise D Cummins (University of Illinois) has indicated that the continual need to survive within dominance (status) hierarchies conferred a ‘deontic advantage’ in male reasoning (6), which eventually laid the groundwork for
civilisations and Enlightenment. But, women can gain reproductive advantage by subverting the cognitive functions shaped by status hierarchies, through using deception to flout social
norms. They tend not to worry unduly about the implications of these deceptions for men.

Female morality tends to be utilitarian and naturalistic. There is a tendency for the ladies to assume whatever is beneficial to women is therefore good for humanity. This wasn’t so much
of a problem during the cave-dwelling period, or the Dark Ages, the Middle Ages, even all the way through to the early 20th century, when the domain of most women was in the home.
But, from the 1950s onwards, women have been encouraged to make incursions into the previously male-dominated workplace, where they soon found fault in men being there. They weren’t all that impressed with his deontic, idealistic morality either, as it conferred no female advantage. So – they set about altering this state of affairs. The results are coming in, and they’re not good.

Pg 13
Ms. Patterning, the prototypical feminist, has been male brain patterned while still embryonic, possibly caused by her mother suffering congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Now an adult woman who is competitive, and dedicated to her career, Ms Patterning is revolted by the thought of heterosexual intercourse, and equally disgusted by the passive acquiescence of her fellow females to their roles as wives and mothers. She has made it her mission in life to have other women follow her example. In doing so, she has caught the eye of some very powerful men, who have assisted her for their own purposes and benefit. And, to succeed, Ms Patterning must tell lies. She must misdirect women, denying them their very essence, and, in so doing, she must deny the obvious, telling
a different story, the one where male and female brains are identical, and that gender is a construct of ‘The Patriarchy’, fabricated for women’s oppression. She must make women afraid of men, painting them as predators, filling women with guilt and shame should they succumb to their own heterosexual urges, and making the world a dangerous place for young men in the process.

Pg 25
Unwanted women will never stop hating men, and they aren’t too keen on the perceived capitulation of fellow females to the abhorred sex. Jealous of the ease with which femininity can get what it wants so easily, with minimal effort, Ms Patterning encourages the sisterhood to throw off the yoke of male oppression – a concept which must seem laughably alien to any moderately attractive woman, yet all too real in the everyday life of Ms Patterning. Possibly, somewhere, deep within her psyche, she knows that she has singularly failed in her evolutionary prerogative to bear children. Spite becomes her only refuge, and she wants the attractive women to share her misery.

Pg 29
The modern feminist wants the power of a man, the privileges of a woman, and the accountability of a child.

Pg 30
Schopenhauer (33) had this to say, way back in 1851:

‘Women are inferior to men in matters of justice, truth, and conscientiousness. It will be found that the fundamental fault in the character of women is that they have no “sense of justice”. From that fundamental defect springs falseness, faithlessness, treachery, ungratefulness. In a court of justice, women are more often found guilty of perjury than men. It is, indeed, to be generally questioned whether they should be allowed to take an oath.’

Pg 58 – 59
It would be some time later before Roy Baumeister would take a different viewpoint, applying simple economic theory to sexual interactions, publishing his ground-breaking paper on ‘Sexual Economics’ in 2004 (73). It would be amiss to attempt any alternative summary of this work other than the original precis, below.

A heterosexual community can be analysed as a marketplace in which men seek to acquire sex from women, by offering other resources in exchange. Societies will therefore define gender roles as if women are sellers and men buyers of sex. Societies will endow female sexuality, but not male sexuality, with value (as in virginity, fidelity, chastity).

The sexual activities of different couples are loosely interrelated by a marketplace. Instead of being fully separate or private, each couple’s decisions may be influenced by market conditions. Economic principles suggest that the price of sex will depend on supply and demand, competition among sellers, variations in product, collusion among sellers, and other factors.

Research findings show gender asymmetry (reflecting the complementary economic roles) in prostitution, courtship, infidelity and divorce, female competition, the sexual revolution and changing norms, unequal status between partners, cultural suppression of female sexuality, abusive relationships, rape, and sexual attitudes.

Pg 63
Courtesy of feminism, the sexual revolution, for men, was a flash in the pan. ‘Anything goes…’ has been replaced by ‘That is not acceptable…’ Through their powerful political and legal allies, women have regained control of the sexual marketplace.

Pg 67
The Abrahamic religions, Christianity, Judaism and Islam, once insisted on circumcising all male members (no pun intended). The foreskin is a natural roller-bearing, allowing a man to pleasure himself easily. Its removal renders such an act much more difficult, inconvenient, even painful, without some lubricant. Consequentially, he is much more likely to stick it in crazy and become a father, thereby making it much less likely that he will commit acts of sedition, and generating more followers of the ‘Pay Now, Live Later’ scam. For Church and State, what’s not to like..?

Pg 128 – 129
It’s foolish to imagine that there are no inherent consequences associated with the new trend for late motherhood. The powerful oestrogen of a teenage mother would give rise to male offspring with a functional right-hemisphere conscience, but who were, nonetheless, very left-brained. As such, when those boys grew to maturity, they’d be more inclined to seek resources, thus increasing their status, and their own reproductive potential. It would be far easier for them to attract women. A right-brained male dreamer would have to exhibit advantages such as good looks or obvious intelligence, to keep him in the running. It was my strong suspicion that late mothers of male children are more inclined to give birth to boys who are right-hemisphere dreamers. The raddled old oestrogen of the mothers can’t template us for the left-brain characteristics which used to prevail.

Download: 240904-ms-patterning