Category Archives: Science

False Advertising: Women Hide Their True Faces with Makeup

Are you sure that chick your with is hot? Or is it all paint and plastic?

Are you sure that chick your with is hot? Or is it all paint and plastic?

Maybe first dates need to involve going swimming. The deception is real, gentlemen.

If ever there was a palpable demonstration of women’s innate tendency to dissemble – disguise or conceal themselves and their true feelings – it plays out with the unbelievable amount of makeup Western women wear. A man doesn’t know what kind of creature is really under there until all the war paint is washed off. Just look at the demonstration above. That chick goes from a 4 on a good day without makeup to a 7 or 8 with it. (She loses points for having a flat chest).

Obviously, wearing makeup is a woman’s attempt to raise her sexual market value, no matter what women say. (As always, watch what women DO not what they SAY). Makeup is such an obsession that American women spend nearly $500 billion a year on cosmetics. They then laughably say they don’t want to be judged on physical beauty, proving both the concept of the hamster rationalization and female susceptibility to groupthink correct at the same time.

Psychology today has its own theory about why women wear makeup.

Beyond any attractiveness measures, cosmetics may help women create certain favorable social perceptions. Indeed, a recent experiment revealed that women pictured wearing cosmetics were evaluated as healthier, more confident, and even having greater earning potential than the same women wearing no makeup.

Make no mistake, social creatures they are, women have been enhancing themselves in an attempt to catch the eye of an Alpha male and to stay competitive with other women for thousands of years. The history of cosmetics goes back at least 6,000 years and involves every society on earth. Much to the chagrin of feminists, biologically and psychologically women know their appearance is what counts to men, and men could give a rat’s ass about their college degree and all the YouGoGrrl careerism they’re flaunting. It always has been and always will be this way.

Makeup hides women’s facial flaws and enhances their two most important facial features: eyes and lips.

Science confirms what we in the manosphere already know. The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology found women wear “romantic red” lipstick to attract men. Specifically, red lips subconsciously advertise to potential mates that another kind of lips are also of high quality. Current Anthropology did a scientific study and found females wear makeup to advertise their fertility, hide their age, and retain neotany, or juvenile features in the adult animal. In other words, old women want to be able to compete with nubile 20-year olds. It’s the desperate female attempt to fight the effects of The Wall and the loss of social capital and power.

It all goes back to youth, fertility, and beauty, the holy trinity of female sexual market value. Of course, the sexual market is the granddaddy of all other markets. Even the New York Daily News got the memo:

Women know this intrinsically and they understand that the mouth and eye region are the two most powerful parts of the face for communication. This is why women innately seek to highlight their eyelids by wearing mascara and eye shadow, and their lip region by wearing lipstick and lip liner. The additional of color to these importance facial areas increased the non-verbal femininity cues perceived by others.

But, as Western women’s attitudes make them repellent towards most men, are they overcompensating by wearing too much makeup? The Atlantic found an interesting little nugget:

People thought the [American] models looked best when they were wearing just 60 percent as much makeup as they had applied.

The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology did a study of makeup and attractiveness and found a plausible reason why Western women cake it on:

Taken together, these results suggest that women are likely wearing cosmetics to appeal to the mistaken preferences of others. These mistaken preferences seem more tied to the perceived expectancies of men, and, to a lesser degree, of women.

So, women are wearing too much makeup, and they’re doing it to meet the perceived expectations of men. Yep, we have a case of overcompensation here since bitchiness and frigidness and carousel riding drives quality men away. Feminism has not been kind to women, especially the dupes that believe in it.

Alicia Keys has been pushing a no-makeup campaign in an effort to stay in the headlines

Alicia Keys has been pushing a no-makeup campaign in an effort to stay in the headlines

Foregoing Makeup

Some women like Mila Kunis (Jackie on That 70s Show) are calling for women to post no makeup selfies and eschew makeup, no doubt in a bid to get attention in the cutthroat and sociopathic PR game. Alicia Keys also put out the Strong, Independent Woman propaganda when she did a photo shoot without makeup.

[I was] the strongest, most empowered, most free, and most honestly beautiful that I have ever felt.

Keys has even started a no makeup campaign and has created controversy because of it. Read: As her star fades, this is her attempt at staying in the news. Keys posted this after her recent makeup-free appearance at the VMAs.

Y’all, me choosing to be makeup free doesn’t mean I’m anti-makeup.

Whatever. Feminists want women to stop wearing makeup altogether and here we are just trying to find some balance between no makeup and face fraud. Why must women choose one extreme or the other in so many things they do rather than trying to achieve a sense of balance?

A little makeup goes a long way. It’s just that makeup application become such a deceptive art in modern times a man can be dating a dog without knowing it. Nothing wrong with being sexy and alluring, but when it gets to the point the woman with the makeup looks nothing like the one without it, we have a problem.

When I worked in the news business it was amazing to see our female “stars” without their face paint on. Well, maybe amazing isn’t the word for it. It was horrifying. Every single female anchor easily got their SMV cut in half without makeup on.

It certainly is interesting to know what’s lurking behind all those cosmetics. Just be prepared when your “catch” takes them off. Women have been wearing so much makeup for so long when a man sees her true face he’s almost as horrified as when a woman stops acting and her real personality comes out.

Time for a swim?

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.


The Chrysler Turbine Car Reflects Bygone Era of American Greatness

Chrysler achieved the feat of putting a jet turbine engine in a car in the 1960s

Chrysler achieved the feat of putting a jet turbine engine in a car in the 1960s

Imagine, a jet-powered car. Chrysler made it a reality back in the 1960s, even though the idea was unfortunately short lived. The Chrysler Turbine is just what the name says – a jet turbine powered car. It’s quite a remarkable engineering feat, and not only reflects an era when not only the chrome was thick and the women were straight (Michael Savage’s great line) but an era when American car companies were fearless instead of gutless.

Jay Leno has one of the last surviving Turbines. You can watch Leno driving his Turbine around as well as demonstrating a cool, vintage technical video about how the Turbine works on YouTube. It sounds like a jet sitting on the tarmac when he fires it up and whisks away in it. Leno says of the Turbine:

Most were destroyed by Chrysler for tax and liability reasons, which is a shame, because to this day everyone who rides in a Turbine says, “Whoa, this feels like the future!” You turn the key and there’s a big whoosh and a complete absence of vibration… I think it’s the most collectible American car—it was so different. Most of all, the Chrysler Turbine is a reminder that all the cool stuff used to be made in the U.S. I hope it will be again.

The jet engine theme carries over to the rear of the Chrysler Turbine

The jet engine theme carries over to the rear of the Chrysler Turbine

Other than a couple handfuls of survivors (nine in total), all Chrysler Turbines were recalled and crushed. Perhaps because a turbine engine, once realized and after a few generations of engineering could likely eliminate the need for most mechanics. The turbine engine only used 1/5 of the number of moving parts as a regular car engine, and turbines are dead reliable as they power jet aircraft all over the world. Of the 1.1 million miles of driving accumulated by testers, downtime on the cars stood at only 4% and was the result of owners incorrectly using leaded gas. The Chrysler Turbine could also use just about any type of fuel, an engineering feat that surely upset the Seven Sister oil companies of the day. Gasoline, kerosene, jet fuel, vegetable oil, and even Tequila – as demonstrated by Mexico’s then-President Adolfo Lopez-Mateos – could power the Turbine.

The Turbine is all the more impressive since Chrysler engineers worked hard to have cool exhaust coming out of the back of a very hot engine, and succeeded as exhaust gas temperatures were LOWER than other automobiles of the day. Also in the “cool” department, the Turbine does not have a traditional “coolant temp” gauge, it has an inlet temp gauge which reads 500, 1000, 1500, and 2000 degrees Fahrenheit. Performance and fuel economy from the engine was good for its day, and continued refinement of the design would have no doubt advanced the design.

Other than the engine, everything else about the Turbine is pretty much stock 1960s Chrysler, except the body of the car which was manufactured in Italy. Its design is not gaudy but elegant, another impressive achievement in an era in which automotive styling could in your face. The project was totally abandoned by 1977.

The Chrysler Turbine is a symbol of time when America was self-confident in its ability to do just about anything, like put a man on the moon, and the car reflects that pride. It also reflects the ballsy nature of men who ran corporations back then. They were fearless and willing to try new ideas instead of rehashing old ideas in pursuit of quarterly profits. How unfortunate for us the micromanagers and bean counters took over.

The fear of failure is worse than failure itself. Something we should remember as men and as a nation. While the car was never a commercial success, perhaps because it was so costly, the idea was sound and continued development of the Turbine should have continued. The shelving of this idea by Chrysler means the dominance of a 100-year old design, the internal combustion engine continues to this day. How many more great ideas were shelved because of the influence of big oil companies?

For now, all we can do is enjoy this little slice of history and wonder about what might have been.

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.

The Carousel Effect: DNA from Previous Sex Partners Could Affect Future Offspring


The DNA from previous sex partners has been shown to influence offspring from future fathers in other species

If the controversial revelations in Sperm Wars revealing the harsh truths about just how tricky women’s fertility can be and how promiscuous the history of the human species has been were not enough, here’s another bombshell that just dropped. When a woman breaks up with a man she has had sex with, or is a frequent carousel rider, there’s speculation among genetic researchers based on genetic testing that something of her former partners could affect any future offspring she has with her new partner. Call it nature pre-cucking Captain Save-a-Ho.

The idea is referred to as telegony, and has been around since Greek times, but was struck down around a century ago by modern science. However, science is always moving and changing. Shockingly, a new study from Australian researchers and reviewed by English researchers reveals ancient wisdom may challenge the accepted wisdom from the ministers of promiscuity and the pro-carousel brigade. As reported by Medical Daily:

[Telegony] was first proposed by the Greek philosopher Aristotle and was accepted as science until the early 1900s when it was disproved and replaced by more modern genetic theory. Unfortunately, the theory was largely used as a fear tactic to prevent women from copulating with different races or lower classes, but the study suggests the theory may have some elements of truth — for flies, at least.

Pro-feminist propaganda aside, even that article admits the hypothesis may have some legitimacy in humans. It just can’t bring itself to criticize the 1960s idea that women should sleep around as a way of “empowering” themselves. Amazingly, in flies, the traits of males the female has previously mated with can be transmitted to future offspring sired by other males. Dr. Angela Crean, lead researcher on the gene research project a the University of New South Wales in Australia explains:

We found that even though the second male sired the offspring, offspring size was determined by what the mother’s previous mating partner ate. Our new findings take this to a whole new level — showing a male can also transmit some of his acquired features to offspring sired by other males.

Of course, this finding has a long way to go from being proven to be the case in humans. However, just as a Marxist lobotomy removed many of the teachings and ancient wisdom from the Overton Window of acceptable discourse, ideas taken for granted in the Bible that forms the basis of the world’s three major religions, could the traditional prohibitions on female promiscuity be validated once again, this time by science?


Research shows genetics of offspring may be more complicated than just a simple sperm and egg

What About Mammals

Beyond flies, there is precedent for the effect of telegony occurring in other mammals, the Class humans belong to. Crean continues:

There is no evidence of such effects in humans, but there has not been any research on this possibility in humans. There is a potential for such effects in mammals. For example, there is a lot of fetal DNA in maternal blood during pregnancy, and this could potentially play a role in such effects. There is also evidence in mammals that seminal fluid affects offspring development, so semen from one male could potentially influence the development of eggs fertilized by another male (which is what we think is happening in flies).

So, whether it be demographics showing a dying population (and a spiritually dead one at that) in the West, religious prohibitions on female carousel riding going back 5,000 years, or emerging science showing that female promiscuity might just be affecting the genetic material of future offspring she has with any future Beta male once she gets off the carousel, there are a lot of negative effects when it comes to a culture letting women run wild, well beyond the sexual jungle and disincentive for male participation it creates.

There are tantalizing suggestions that the first father of a woman’s children may determine at least some of the traits of all of her children. It truly could be first come, first served in nature. And another scientific dagger in the heart of women’s lib, beyond the fact Oxford anthropologist J.D. Unwin revealed any society that does not practice monogamy ultimately declines in his seminal but totally ignored (today) work Sex and Culture. Crean goes on:

We know that features that run in families are not just influenced by the genes that are passed down from parents to their children. Various non-genetic inheritance mechanisms make it possible for environmental factors to influence characteristics of a child. Our new findings take this to a whole new level – showing a male can also transmit some of his acquired features to offspring sired by other males.

Call it nature cucking Betas and men who don’t dominate their partner’s sexuality. This is amazing research, and lends credence to the idea of K-selected societies practicing female chastity while r-selected societies do not. Dr. Stuart Wigby at Oxford University told the press:

This particular mechanism would be unlikely to apply to mammals such as humans because of differences in reproductive physiology compared to insects. However, other researchers have suggest that mechanisms exist that could in principle result in telegony in humans; for example because mothers carry fetal DNA in their blood during pregnancy.

Reality, once again it seems, could be stranger than fiction. Another reason to avoid long term commitments with Tinder and carousel-riding discards, as if a man needed more reasons.

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.

Ozone Layer “Hole” Big as Ever: Was It All Just Another Myth


It seems Mother Nature will be alright without crushing government interventions

Remember the infamous ozone “hole” that was supposed to fry the planet with lethal doses of UV radiation all because of human-produced CFCs? Nearly 30 years after the banning of CFCs by the Montreal Protocol the hole is bigger than ever. The fourth largest hole on record just occurred just last October, just after the frigid Antarctic winter. Well, hole is actually a misnomer as it’s really a slight seasonal thinning of the ozone layer over Antarctica. Most troublingly, the appearance of the ozone hole out of nowhere in 1978 coincided with the expiration of an important big business CFC patent even though this organic compound had been in use since the 1930s!

In any case, the political sophists who write articles for mass consumption for the lamestream media, maybe by accident, at least went so far as to give us a half truth about how the ozone hole forms. This revelation interferes with not just one, but two major scares being pushed by corrupt government officials and adherents to the environmental religion. The Weather Network wrote:

Why did the ozone hole grow so large this year? It was a combination of just how persistent ozone-depleting chemicals are in the atmosphere, and just how cold the atmosphere got over Antarctic during the past month.


The ozone hole peaks during the Antarctic winter (June-September in the Southern Hemisphere)

What? The ozone hole is dependent on cold temperatures? Yes. It is also a function of the lack of sunlight for 6 months over Antarctica as ozone is an unstable molecule that regularly falls apart and becomes regular old oxygen. Ozone regenerates from atmospheric oxygen only in sunlight. Some scientists now say the ozone hole has likely always been there, and it does show a correlation with changing seasons – at polar latitudes a correlation with 6 months of sunlight and 6 months of darkness. It is also correlated with temperatures that are much, much colder over the South Pole than the North Pole. Further, the fact the atmosphere got so cold as to help destroy ozone goes against the “hotter planet than ever” global warming polemic. So, there are major problems with yet another leftist doom and gloom narrative brought on by the ozone-destroying extreme cold over Antarctica.

Clyde Spencer explains how the ozone generation-destruction cycle is deeply connected to sunlight, seasonally changing temperatures, and the seasonal presence or absence of the Antarctic polar vortex. Additionally, the Antarctic polar vortex is much stronger and more persistent than the Artic polar vortex – meaning the often Antarctic is “cut off” from areas of the atmosphere where ozone is being generated.

From my reading on the subject, the bulk of Earth’s ozone is created in the equatorial stratosphere. It moves polewards both because of a lesser partial pressure of ozone at higher latitudes, and also because of equatorial heating and cooling at the poles. In any event, ozone has a relatively short half-life, and in the absence of sunlight, there is no new ozone created at the poles in the Winter to replenish what naturally decays. As I remarked in a previous post, anomalously high concentrations are routinely recorded outside the Antarctic circumpolar vortex. I’m not sure of the exact mechanism that stalls the migration, but the evidence is visible. As to the photolysis and catalytic destruction when the sun first comes up over the horizon, I’m pretty sure it happens, but the effect is probably overemphasized. The Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer was unable to measure Winter ozone levels because it required sunlight, something in short supply over the South Pole in the Winter. So, what we see is during the earliest possible measurements, there is low ozone which continues to decrease in concentration until the vortex breaks up and the ozone sitting outside the vortex can mix with the depleted air. Once the sun gets high enough in the sky, it is capable of actually producing some ozone over the pole, although it is by then also supplemented by ozone from lower latitudes as it is free to migrate into that area in the absence of the vortex.

The above explanation was left as a comment to an excellent article by Dr. Tim Ball entitled The Ozone Scare Was A Dry Run For The Global Warming Scare. Dr. Ball explains this idea in that article:

There is not now and never was a “hole in the ozone.” The phrase was a public relations construct to mislead and exploit fear as the basis for a political agenda. The procedure used in the exploitation of environmental and climate for a political agenda is to take normal patterns and events and present them as, or imply, they are abnormal. It works because most people don’t know what is normal. Global warming became the largest exploitation of this practice, but it was based on the knowledge gained from reported ozone depletions over Antarctica. The ozone deception served as a forerunner, a practice run, for the global warming deception to follow.

The global warming deception is one of the linchpins to global government, as revealed by Lord Christopher Monkton in his reporting of what is actually being discussed at the annual global warming conferences. Contrary to counter propaganda telling us what a success global governments’ ozone layer intervention was that’s being put out this summer, the hole has not been fixed by eliminating a cheaper, more effective and easier to use refrigerant called Freon. And as we will see, its replacement Puron is anything but pure.


One of the biggest ozone holes ever recorded just happened over Antarctica, contradicting the old narrative that it would be in the process of disappearing by now

Record Ozone Hole After Last Winter

Despite the fact the ozone hole expanded to a 4th largest on record extent of 28.2 million square kilometers just last winter, propagandists and sycophants adhere to a narrative that the ozone hole is slowly healing. The consumption of ozone depleting substances has plummeted since 1987, yet now we are supposed to believe the chemicals are “long-lived” even though the people pushing the ozone hole polemic said the hole would fade away by 2030 to 2050. We are only 13.5 years away from 2030, and if anything the size of the hole has stabilized. Illustrating the media echo chamber in full effect, and the predilection of media to take the “official” word claiming the sky is purple in the face of evidence from the peons telling them that it’s blue, the National Geographic says its right on pace with the expected timeline, in the face of contradictory evidence.


The size of the ozone hole has stabilized around an average of 20-25 million km for 25 years

Vox (another echo chamber blog) reported just this month the ozone hole is healing despite the size hole stabilizing around a large mean over the past 20 years, and the fact we just had one of the largest holes on record. This graph using data from NASA and the European Environment Agency shows the hole has stabilized around a mean of 20-25 million square kilometers since 1992.

The data pre-1992 is highly suspect because CFCs have been used worldwide and released into the atmosphere since the 1930s, so why did the hole just magically appear in 1978 out of nowhere? Perhaps because a major chemical company needed a crisis? The critical DuPont manufacturing patent for Freon (“Process for Fluorinating Halohydrocarbons”, U.S. Patent #3258500) was set to expire in 1979. That is quite an interesting coincidence! Nonetheless, leftists are doubling down on their narrative that humans are bad and a gigantic, crushing, oppressive government is needed to save the world.

The new government-approved “environmentally friendly” Puron refrigerant is a potent greenhouse gas that was developed as a replacement in an age in which we are supposed to be worried sick about global warming. (Notice how PR flacks mangle words like “pure” into a product that is anything but pure!) The Marxist media never brings the fact up we are mass producing a greenhouse gas far stronger than CO2 as an “environmentally friendly” replacement. The duplicity and hypocrisy is astounding.

The important concept to take away from all this is there are a lot of questions that need to be raised about the ozone hole scare, as well as the seemingly unending list of scares that could have been invented out of whole cloth by a corporate-government complex that lives and dies by the adage you have to create problems to create profit. Scaring the shit out of the population also helps a corrupt government legitimize itself as it gets the public to trade away freedom for the illusion of safety. (75% of the population of the United States now realizes its government is corrupt in the latest Gallup polling data.) As Mark Twain said, It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. Not to mention the vanishing ice age and acid rain environmental crises of the 1970s and 1980s.

It looks like have been had yet again in the age of propaganda. But, people are quickly waking up from the mass delusion created by the centralization of communication centered around the Television Age. The creation of problems like this for the fun and profit of psychopathic government officials and CEOs begs the question: How deep does this ozone… er… rabbit hole go, Alice?

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.

Thoughts on Freedom: Imagine Domesticating the Dog Today


The lovable dog could not be domesticated today without issues

Man’s best friend. Many people seem to love dogs more than other people. There are understandable reasons why. Dogs are loyal, they don’t backstab you like people, they’re always happy to see you, they love your attention, and many of them are obedient. They’ve been a part of the human family for 20,000 to 40,000 years, assisting the earliest hunter-gatherers in their quest to find food. You may already know dogs are direct descendants of wolves. In fact, the animals are so genetically similar they’re not known as different species and when they breed together the taxonomy merely changes from Canis Familiaris to Canis Lupus Familiaris.

Obviously, they weren’t always domesticated animals. Dogs are descended from gray wolves, and the two animals diverged during the Last Glacial Maximum when much of Asia was a cold tundra and ice froze much of the planet. Fossil evidence takes us back at least 36,000 years to the Goyet dog found in Belgium, a Paleolithic dog which would resemble a wolf more than a dog. Without dogs, and the men who took risks domesticating them from wolves, Greger Laron of the Oxford School of Anthropology say we would have never seen the success we enjoy today.

The dog was the first domesticant. Without dogs you don’t have any other domestication. You don’t have civilization. Remove domestication from the human species, and there’s probably a couple of million of us on the planet, max. Instead, what do we have? Seven billion people, climate change, travel, innovation and everything. Domestication has influenced the entire earth. And dogs were the first. For most of human history, we’re not dissimilar to any other wild primate. We’re manipulating our environments, but not on a scale bigger than, say, a herd of African elephants. And then, we go into partnership with this group of wolves. They altered our relationship with the natural world.

But, imagine in this day of timidity, groupthink and squelching of originality, what if one did something as “crazy” as bringing a wolf into their home to keep as a pet. Underwear would be soiled, the vultures in the news media would swoop in and do their usual curiosity seeking nonsensical stories criticizing the “dangers” of having this animal around, and bureaucrats would be be falling over themselves to pass a law or send in a SWAT team to solve this insidious problem!

As we continue with this thought experiment, dog domestication will be a proxy to help us illustrate the high cost of groupthink, centralized power, and committee decision making, which are not always best for our species. Governments are the most insidious groupthinkers on the planet, who use force to crush behavior that deviates from the corporate propagandized hivemind, especially in Anglo America.


Wolves and dogs are genetically very similar

Impossible Today

The domestication that was easy for our ancestors to realize would difficult if not impossible today. Sure, living conditions have changed, but what if someone wanted to disconnect from the corporate lifestyle of mindless consumption and return to a closer relationship with nature? Keeping a wolf as a hunting companion or for defense would either be illegal or it would be politically incorrect.

Quite simply, there are just too many laws on the books. Estimates of the numbers of regulations micromanaging lives in the “free” country of America range from 10,000 to over 300,000. In fact, some efforts to count all the laws have failed. Ronald Gainer, a retired Justice Department official undertook an effort to count all the rules that boss people around under threat of fines and imprisonment “for the express purpose of exposing the idiocy” of the system. He couldn’t count them all. John Baker, a retired Louisiana State University law professor said:

There is no one in the United States over the age of 18 who cannot be indicted for some federal crime.

That is chilling when one considers the gravity of the statement. It wasn’t supposed to be this way. With that many rules anyone knows there will be laws on the books keeping people from owning wolves as pets, even a rural area. In fact, One Green Planet researched the issue and found:

There are many legal issues involved with keeping a wolf in the U.S. It is felt that wolfdogs are not only the most misunderstood animals in the U.S., but also the most mismanaged. Though some feel they are wonderful pets, many opponents argue that they are unpredictable, impossible to train and inherently dangerous. Because of this, having a wolf or wolfdog as a pet is illegal in many places and is often associated with many rules in others – and with good reason.

Not just one, but many generations of wolves would have to be kept, bred, and domesticated to accumulate the slow change in behavior needed to turn dangerous wolves into lovable dogs. Out of the question in modern day America. Where does personal responsibility and decision making factor into an equation like this? Does it even count anymore? Or are we all part of a socialist collective now? Why is the omnipotent state bossing everyone around? Why do people try to use the government to control other people while whining when they get controlled by it? If nobody else is getting hurt, why does the government need to come in like thugs and tell people what to do, as in the case of busting in like storm troopers to stop the sale of raw milk.

By stifling originality, screaming, flopping on the floor, and foaming at the mouth each time someone thinks, acts, or behaves differently in society we are ultimately hurting our species. As with domestication (which only serves as an example) discoveries and original thoughts cannot made when people act like drones whose activities have been preplanned and prearranged for them on a daily basis. The point of this discussion is not to suggest that everyone rush out and get a wolf and try to domesticate it, it’s to illustrate that originality, independent thought, and personal freedom led to success in our species, but are now stifled.

Domesticating dogs, easy to do in our history, would be virtually impossible to realize today without careful planning when in the past it came about organically. H.L. Mencken wrote this fabulous piece about how many freedoms had already been lost three-quarters of a century ago; he’d probably have a heart attack if he woke up in today’s police state.

The American of today, in fact, probably enjoys less personal liberty than any other man of Christendom, and even his political liberty is fast succumbing to the new dogma that certain theories of government are virtuous and lawful, and others abhorrent and felonious. Laws limiting the radius of his free activity multiply year by year: It is now practically impossible for him to exhibit anything describable as genuine individuality, either in action or in thought, without running afoul of some harsh and unintelligible penalty. It would surprise no impartial observer if the motto “In God we trust” were one day expunged from the coins of the republic by the Junkers at Washington, and the far more appropriate word, “verboten,” substituted. Nor would it astound any save the most romantic if, at the same time, the goddess of liberty were taken off the silver dollars to make room for a bas-relief of a policeman in a spiked helmet. Moreover, this gradual (and, of late, rapidly progressive) decay of freedom goes almost without challenge; the American has grown so accustomed to the denial of his constitutional rights and to the minute regulation of his conduct by swarms of spies, letter-openers, informers and agents provocateurs that he no longer makes any serious protest.

This is the problem with authoritarianism and trying to use the government to protect everyone from themselves. This thinking turns the government into everyone’s mommy and daddy instead of expecting people to become adults. And as this simplistic illustration shows, the domestication of the dog would be impossible today without reams of paperwork, media snooping, sheeple criticism, flailing of the arms, and possible fines and arrests.

Self-ownership, minimum government and maximum freedom are what we should be moving towards rather than the specter of Big Brother style authoritarianism in the 21st century. Who knows what other great advancements we are missing out on by turning people into servants of innumerable laws rather than free people who act of their own volition? It worked in the past. It can work again.

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.

The Frightening Great Filter Hypothesis and the Future of Man


The Great Filter hypothesis tells us most species may self-destruct or be subjected to a catastrophe that makes them go extinct before colonizing other planets, putting our long-term survival in doubt

The Great Filter hypothesis is one of the most terrifying ideas in science. It is the idea there is a future event humanity will be subjected to that will lead to it to devolve to a more primitive state, or lead to its extinction. Upon reaching this filter, which screens out most civilizations in the universe from higher planes of existence, humanity either survives as a non-technological civilization (i.e. returning to the cave dwelling life our ancestors or as drones on a human tax farm) or dies out.

We often discuss problems related to sexual selection on men’s web sites, but what is seldom discussed is how these ideas could tie in with the larger schemes of science and life in the universe. The Great Filter is a hypothesis that ties up these loose ends. The textbook definition of the hypothesis follows:

The Great Filter concept originates in the argument that the failure to find any extraterrestrial civilizations in the observable universe implies the possibility something is wrong with one or more of the arguments from various scientific disciplines that the appearance of advanced intelligent life is probable; this observation is conceptualized in terms of a Great Filter which acts to reduce the great number of sites where intelligent life might arise to a tiny number of intelligent species.

Remote sensing in the 21st century is revealing thousands of worlds which are in the astronomical “Goldilocks” zone. These planets are similar to earth, in that they are not too hot like Venus, nor too cold like Mars, but have conditions that are “just right” for life to form. While this initially seems encouraging in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, it actually provides some worrisome implications:

The main counter-intuitive conclusion of this observation is that the easier it was for life to evolve to our stage, the bleaker our future chances probably are.

Enrico Fermi was the first to notice the seeming lack of civilizations in the universe once radio astronomy began. In our own galaxy there are some 400 billion suns. Based on what we have seen with the distribution of organic molecules throughout the universe it should not only be possible but probable that life exists elsewhere in the universe. Life arose on earth almost immediately after it formed, which makes it seem like life forms easily in the universe. However, we aren’t finding life in the universe despite exhaustive searches and improving remote sensing technology. This suggests that perhaps some 9 out of 10 societies could be self-destructing once they reach our level of technology.


Prey species are r-selected while predators are K-selected; pushing humans towards r-selection could be turning us into prey for the elite

r/K Selection

It has been said everything we see as progress in the human world is due to runaway sexual selection, and particularly K-selection as it builds up sophisticated societies. The opposite, r-selection tears down sophisticated societies. As explained in The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics:

One strategy, named the r-strategy, imbues those who are programmed with it to be averse to all peer on peer competition, embrace promiscuity, embrace single parenting, and support early onset sexual activity in youth. Obviously, this mirrors the Liberal philosophy’s aversion to individual Darwinian competitions such as capitalism and self defense with firearms, as well as group competitions such as war. Likewise, Liberalism is tolerant of promiscuity, tolerant of single parenting, and more prone to support early sex education for children and the sexualization of cultural influences. Designed to exploit a plethora of resources, one will often find this r-type strategy embodied within prey species, where predation has lowered the population’s numbers, and thereby increased the resources available to its individuals.

The other strategy, termed the K-strategy, imbues those who pursue it with a fierce competitiveness, as well as tendencies towards abstinence until monogamy, two-parent parenting, and delaying sexual activity until later in life. Obviously, this mirrors Conservatism’s acceptance of all sorts of competitive social schemes, from free market capitalism, to war, to individuals owning and carrying private weapons for self defense. Conservatives also tend to favor abstinence until monogamy, two parent parenting with an emphasis upon “family values” and children being shielded from any sexualized stimuli until later in life. This strategy is found most commonly in species which lack predation, and whose population’s have grown to the point individuals must compete with each other for the limited environmental resources that they are rapidly running out of.

The sexual jungle unleashed on our species by feminism is making each passing generation more r-selected. As humans seem to be subject to cyclical forces in history, one must wonder what the future of our species holds since, according to Spengler, we are on the downswing of the great historical sine-wave, making a sharp turn towards r-selection.

No society that has remained civilized has lifted restrictions on monogamy and female sexuality, as anthropologist J.D. Unwin found when he studied 80 tribes and 6 civilizations across 5,000 years of history. Will we recover? Or will the traps presented by our technological advancement and evolutionary baggage put our continued well-being in jeopardy? As astrophysicist Carl Sagan warned:

We’ve arranged a global civilization in which most crucial elements profoundly depend on science and technology. We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster. We might get away with it for a while, but sooner or later this combustible mixture of ignorance and power is going to blow up in our faces.

Indeed, we may have arrived at a moment in history in which our science and technology are more advanced than our capability to manage them safely.


Given the ease with which life arose on Earth, it should be common the Universe

The Drake Equation

The Great Silence, or the lack of detectable signs of intelligent life in the universe suggests that we are unique, and alone. Back in the 1960s, astrophysicist Frank Drake proposed an equation to estimate the number of societies that might exist in the universe. Its variables are the number of stars in the galaxy, the number of those stars that have planets, the number of those planets that can support life and the number on which life actually arises, the number of planets on which that life becomes civilized, and of those civilizations how many go on to survive across stellar evolutionary and geological timescales.

Using this imperfect equation, Drake came up with a very rough estimate of anywhere from 20 to 50,000,000 societies potentially existing in the Milky Way galaxy. If that is the case – where the hell is everybody? Either intelligent life is exceedingly rare or exceedingly short-lived on evolutionary timescales.

Using radio waves seems like the most common sense method of broadcasting one’s presence to the universe. Radio telescopes from Aricebo in Puerto Rico to the Very Large Array in New Mexico to the new Allen Telescope Array north of San Francisco have been scanning, unsuccessfully so far, for alien radio signals. It is thought a signal intended to show intelligence and be understandable by virtually any species will broadcast a series of prime numbers. Sagan detailed this method of alien communication in the 1970s.

It is easy to create an interstellar radio message which can be recognized as emanating unambiguously from intelligent beings. A modulated signal (beep, beep beep… ) comprising the numbers 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, for example, consists exclusively of the first 12 prime numbers—that is, numbers that can be divided only by 1, or by themselves. A signal of this kind, based on a simple mathematical concept, could only have a biological origin.

Preliminary results have not been very encouraging, as we have found nothing except silence and a “Wow!” signal in the 1970s that ended up being interstellar noise. This is where The Great Filter hypothesis comes in.


Well over 99.9 percent of all species that have ever lived on Earth are extinct

How This Relates To Us

Scientists say we could be at the most crucial stage in our long-term survival as a species: the stage at which start conducting interplanetary and interstellar colonization. Many societies could have developed up to our point in the universe and fallen apart soon after. It is interesting to note the U.S. has long led scientific exploration of space, but since the sexual revolution took root we now hitch rides on Russian rockets in order to fly humans into space. Perhaps other species also reach this point, only to pull back instead of continuing to advance.

Once reaching the point of being prosperous, societies ease restrictions on sexuality. This is risky business because sexual selection is the engine that drives evolution to high levels of intelligence. Since the sexual revolution the West has seen falling birth rates, the exile of the father from the family, and the rise of degeneracy. This turn away from civilization and towards pre-civilized modes of living should not come as a surprise to scientists. J.D. Unwin found in his anthropological survey:

The whole of human history does not contain a single instance of a group becoming civilized unless it has been absolutely monogamous, nor is there any example of a group retaining its culture after it has adopted less rigorous customs.

After unleashing all restrictions on female sexuality, men adapted to the drastically altered sexual environment by learning Game. As we have seen happening in the West, this environment ultimately leads to an 80/20 rule of most females being monopolized by a small percentages of males. Beta males, the bedrock of building and maintaining society then check out of doing grunt work since the sexual market is the granddaddy of all the other markets of man. Environmental conditions that led to the development of high intelligence and a high culture then self-destruct, causing the society to fall apart. As the conditions of the sexual marketplace shift away from K-selection and male investment in society, we fail to pass through The Great Filter.


Implanted RFID chips are closer to reality than you might think

Technological Enslavement

Another worrying way the Great Filter could screen out humans from long term survival is the coming possibility of technological enslavement. With the advent of ever cheaper, smaller, and faster computer chips it is plausible that the human race will be enslaved by an elite, becoming little more than pawns on a world tax farm, rather than continuing to advance.

Perhaps this is why an elite lifted limitations on female sexuality in the first place. Knowing man becomes feral after monogamy is abandoned, and is not able to organize the way he would have in an orderly, monogamous society, the deck is stacked so humanity cannot avert the threat of technological enslavement.

Forces are already at work to eliminate cash completely and put all money and all documentation on a GPS-trackable RFID chip that will be implanted into our hands. Japan is conducting its own experiments in this vaunted “cashless” society by using fingerprints. In any case, our lives are increasingly managed by computers and micromanaged by a government that manages the computers. As the Financial Times warned:

The anonymity of cash helps to free people from their governments.

Aaron Russo warned us about this agenda over 10 years ago.

All money will be in your chips. And so, instead of having cash, any time you have money in your chip, they can take out whatever they want to take out whenever they want to. If they say “you owe us this much money in taxes,” they just deduct it out of your chip, digitally.

Work on the implantable RFID chip proceeds at a rapid pace. The only real boundary now is engineering social acceptance of an electronic dog collar. Using social engineering, Cultural Marxism and total financial control (all of which are advancing at a rapid rate) the human species could be transformed into docile servants of the state. In this view, the world population ends up being dominated by a small elite, with human “batteries” powering an economic system they profit from. This warning, as pessimistic as it, is falls in line with history. As Aristotle observed 2,000 years ago, the natural state of man is slavery, and the masses believe authority figures over their own sense of reason as shown in the Milgram experiment. Politicians know this, which is why they lie in our faces and get away with it as they lead us to slaughter.


Was baking a cake for family really such horrible oppression, and is licking the boot of a corporate paymaster a better life for women

What Worked In The Past

What these dystopian views have in common is they’re all illustrations of the value of patriarchy and the risks that come with discarding it. Patriarchy, with its paternity guarantees for men and provision of a role in society other than that of a sperm donor and child support check-writer has led civilization to greatness in the past. The decision to abandon patriarchy is having profound implications, and it is not leading us to a better place as a society or as a species.

The sexual revolution brought on the law of the jungle as monogamy was discarded as a relic of the past, and brought on an 80/20 phenomenon, making most males useless and turning the human species more feral with each passing generation. What incentive does a man have to give a damn about society or sacrificing for the betterment of his offspring if he is no longer offered a seat at the table of the human family? Man is also becoming easier to boss around as r-selection breaks down the family, the building block of civilization. Bossing him around is much harder to do strong families are headed up by a respected patriarch. The solitary individual is much more desirable to an autocratic society.

Perhaps the human species’ Great Filter has arrived de-civilizing feminism, technological enslavement, or both. With a 99.9% extinction rate of all species on the planet across a span of 4.5 billion years, the odds of long-term prosperity, freedom, and survival are not in our favor. Personally, I would prefer extinction to enslavement.

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month. This The New Modern Man article originally ran on Return of Kings.

Women Will Do Anything for an Alpha – Including Having Sex with Other Women


No fantasy is too outlandish when women are trying to please an Alpha male

A sexual jungle has been unleashed on America and Europe by feminism. A new study gives us another example of what it’s like to live in this jungle: the Alpha male gets a harem and women are willing to have sex with each other to keep him satisfied. Beta males and those lower on the totem poll don’t fare so well when this is the situation. As pointed out before here at TNMM, this causes society to de-civilize.

The new study which is dissected in this article compliments another study published last year which also found that women are either bisexual or gay but never straight. This confirms selection pressure on women in the history of the human species to get along with, and even sexually pleasure other women in the harem of Alpha males. The University of Essex found:

In tests, those [women] saying they were only interested in men were strongly sexually aroused by videos of naked men — and women.

The media responded by writing headlines slanting the story towards the gay agenda, headlines such as: Women ‘all bi or gay’. This shows us those who control the narrative in the West want the sexual market to skew even farther away from any sort of common sense. What these studies actually reveal are facts about women which have historically led to cultural enforcement of monogamy and restrictions on the wild, base natures of women, in order to build up society instead of tearing it down.

After all, what man wants to work hard if there is no cultural or sexual incentive for him to do so? Most men are minimalists by nature and can get by without the McMansion, luxury sedan, and other wasteful consumerism women cherish.


The left consistently pushes a gay agenda while relentlessly suppressing heterosexuality

Exposing the Agenda

While the left-leaning newspaper The Sun used the studies of male and female sexuality to push the LGBT bacon cheeseburger agenda, the truth of the matter is it reveals politically incorrect, harsh facts about women we in the manosphere discuss all the time. From the article:

Psychologist Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa believes that evolution has led to women becoming open to intimacy with both genders. He claims that sexual fluidity is a means of “reducing conflict and tension among co-wives in polygynous marriages.”

In short, women are hypergamous and would rather screw a Machiavellian, narcissistic, psychopathic bad boy who gets what he wants, even if that means being part of his harem and, what the hell I’ll even have threesomes or orgies with other women to make him happy. Meanwhile, Johnny 9-to-5, who may be a really, really nice guy, good provider, and potentially good father gets no action other than that provided by Rosy Palm.

Dr. Kanazawa, from the London School of Economics and Political Science, explained: “The theory suggests that women may not have sexual orientations in the same sense as men do. Rather than being straight or gay, to whom women are sexually attracted may depend largely on the particular partner, their reproductive status, and other circumstances.”

Women want to screw and attach themselves to a winner. As Anglo American culture has completely released constraints on female sexuality, crushed Beta males under its heel with an oppressive government that enslaves them with child support and alimony payments (after all, the sweet little lady couldn’t help it that she tripped and fell on another man’s Johnson) and prevents them from seeking any sexual gratification thanks to Puritanical laws on prostitution, men subjected to this cultural insanity are disenfranchised sexually. Since the sexual market is the granddaddy of all human markets, droves of men have no reason to participate when female sexuality is monopolized by a small minority of men.

Learning Game is a solution to the problem of incel these men are subjected to, however it will ultimately lead to an “arms race” among those in the know. The men who know Game, over time, will have to work harder and harder for less and less return.


Female sexual orientation has evolved to be looser than male sexual orientation

Women’s Sexual Orientation Looser than Men’s

Men show much lower tendencies to stray into homosexuality than women do. Women are, after all, much more susceptible to persuasion and control than men are. Women continue to skew more and more bisexual since the sexual revolution of the 1960s.

Experts collected data over ten years focusing on the sexual orientation of Americans, grouping them into different ‘waves’. Participants were asked to categorize themselves as: 100 per cent straight, mostly straight, bisexual, mostly gay or 100 per cent gay. Analyzing the data allowed researchers to compare how flexible men and women were when it came to sexual attraction.

Using pupil dilation tests, which reveal if a subject is sexually aroused by imagery, men and women were subjected to a series of erotic photography. The findings showed men are generally not sexually aroused by other men, however women were aroused by both men and women.

Of course, since women can never be blamed for anything in Anglo America, perfect angels that they are, the article bent over backward trying to lay the blame on men. As is typical, the fact women choose sex partners and it is men who are chosen is completely forgotten.

Dr. Kanazawa believes that women have had to evolve to deal with the experience of men having more than one partner. He claimed: “Even though humans have been mildly polygynous throughout evolutionary history, polygynous marriages are often characterized by conflict and tension among co-wives. I propose that occasional sex among co-wives may have reduced such conflict and tension, and increased their reproductive success. Female sexual fluidity may have evolved as an adaptation to facilitate it.”

SpermWarsIt would be more accurate to say: Because of female hypergamy and refusal to settle for anything less than a man who gives them bragging rights to their female friends, women’s instincts have led them to deal with, and happily accept the experience of top Alpha men they are attracted to having more than one partner.

Women will persecute a Beta male for the same infidelity. Nature is not kind to the nice guy.

Indeed, along with other wonderfully controversial facts, the book Sperm Wars by Robin Baker lends credence to the concept that women have adapted to have fluid sexual orientation.

Modern evidence suggests that, more often than not…bisexuals are born, not made.

It is not hard to see how this tendency in women led to the mythical Sodom and Gomorrah, which was later destroyed by God. Societies that do not practice restraint and allow women to orbit Alpha males while neglecting all other males do not stay civilized long.

Regardless of your religious beliefs, the story is a telling summation of the societal cost of unleashing primitive instincts on society rather than trying to constrain them. The instincts lead to temporary sexual satisfaction, but will ultimately negate the long-term fulfillment a family will bring.


Women choose and men get chosen, the only power men have is manipulating the choosing process

Adapt or Die

This study reveals one of the most in your face realities about the sexual and psychological nature of women yet.

Imagine, women evolving to be bisexual in nature only because in the feral history of the human species, before civilization tried to harness these primitive sexual forces, only so they could please the top male who subjugated and dominated all the other males in society. After all, dominance hierarchies are the norm in our species. Winner take all, including all the puss.

The choices left for the man who does not wish to become a genetic dead end are either to go to the dark side and develop Dark Triad traits of Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy, or become a master at Game, or leave for a more traditional culture in which hypergamy and an ability to resource provision will be of benefit.

Adapt to the de-civilizing society you are in or die – genetically, anyway. That, or clean house politically, purging the leaders that did this to you.

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »