Huh? Who knew that repressing your natural sexual desires leads to faggotry?
That means that not forcing ourselves onto women freely causes 'faggotry' too since it is a totally natural desire that a lot of animal species, ie. many
primates, engage in to secure reproductive success, why the double standards when it comes to foids being restricted from slutting around, which has never lead to any benefit of any sorts?
Obviously, because it is necessary to restrict both female and male sexuality to create a non-hypocritical (and especially an advanced non-primitive) society, which is something Islamic texts and legal constructs advocate for, though they are not exactly perfect since Islamic sociosexual attitudes are a bit hypocritical regardless if it's a promiscuous socially destructive person who desires to have their legal rights revoked in an ideal society, still having the same rights as their opposite, and this has historically led to the
decline of one of the most successful civilizations of Islam, the Abbasids.
Historically, the more severe the restrictions placed on female sexuality and partly male sexuality in any particular historical civilization, the more advanced that civilization was likely to be according to Oxford anthropologist
J.D Unwin.
You have to realise that sociosexuality is genetic and inborn, and homosexuality is a naturally maladaptive adaptation to the environment.
But It is quite obvious that you have 0 understanding of sociosexuality because you're being hypocritical and contradicting yourself by indirectly saying that repressing your natural desires leads to homosexuality, which is
demonstrably false, yet those who are accursed with maladaptive genetic traits that they are born with are not supposed to act on their own 'natural desires'?
A thousand years of inbreeding and child rape will do that to people
Marrying women off early to guarantee the highest likelihood of them being virgins and for a father to save his resources is not 'rape' in any sense of the term and has been a very low risk high reward type of method historically for a father to retain his full honour for giving birth to a daughter (Almost every non-primitive culture has utilised this method), and you should have no problem with it unless you are a gynocentric cuck which unfortunately most incels here are, despite claiming to be muh 'based and blackpilled', yet unashamedly still kowtowing themselves partly and blindly to the status quo and having at least some form of 'mob mentality' due to under-analysing their own attitudes to sociosexuality and then further fueling it out by unempathetically dousing the anger from their own lack of understanding of other's eccentric viewpoints, and this is one of the leading factors to the decline and the 'brain drain' of this forum.
Both your definitions are contemporary subjective versions of what they once were. Muhammad's marriage to Aisha was far from the concept of 'rape' at the time and in any logical definition at all since Muhammad had been offered her father's hand, and in a healthy society, women should have the least choice, because the more female sexual choice is unrestricted, the more the male equivalent to
deserves to be unrestricted, otherwise it leads to cucked societies where men oppress their own sexuality for the benefit of women, who get given the green light to indulge in their base prospensities.
And if you are to define menarche as biological adulthood, then Muhammad had consummated the marriage only afterwards. Early arranged marriages like these were commonplace particularly in successful ancient cultures such as the
Romans, many Bronze age civilisations such as the
Indo-European Hittites, the Ancient Greeks, and many other
pre-contemporary pre-industrial civilisations.
The concept of biological adulthood has been debated by scientists because adulthood/childhood are both social constructs, thus the ongoing debate over which hallmarker biological stage ie. thelarche be defined as the start of it, so this muh 'child' shit is completely subjective and has never applied to the social institution of marriage until the last 200 years or so when sociosexual attitudes began to change due to female supremacist puritanism that had a hysterical attitude towards prostitution and of coercive marriages under a certain amount of rotations around the sun, which of course, has resulted the
inflation of the unrestricted price of pussy and has been a contributing factor to laxed attitudes towards female sociosexuality, particularly under a specific age, which has resulted in the artificial rise of inceldom due to increase of female promiscuity along
with exaggerated hypergamy)
The opposite female sexual selection is male sexual selection, which can be defined as a man freely picking and choosing and forcing himself onto females or a female, and this would be detrimental to successful historically male co-operative societies that have had restricted their own sexuality for the favour of also repressing their female counterparts by punishing them for transgessing into hypocrisy that has been the formula for a prosperous and strong culture, such as in
Medieval France or
Rome. Women who were promiscuous in the past have either been forced into prostitution to destroy their hypocritical sexual attitudes, or at
worst subject to filicidal/honor killings, and were seperated from virgin, married or widowed women.
Free-for-all male sexuality still arguably has unlike unrestricted female sexuality, resulted in economic/civilisational developments such as the
Creation of Rome which have greatly increased life expectancy and increased survivability of the human species, unlike the sexual choices women make in societies where they are empowered which actually cause
dysgenic traits to arise in a gene pool, and which also have no impact on the survivability of offspring because they do not only choose not to have children until the last second before their menopause, but also repeatedly cull them before they make it out of the womb.
Furthermore, Islam prohibits inbreeding in the classical sense to marriage and has a limit up to an uncle's daughter/son or an aunt's son/daughter, but this sort of close kin marriage have been the norm in the past. It is reported that 80% of marriages throughout history are
purported to be either between first cousins, or second cousins, and there was a common trend for close kin marriages in rising cultures
such as in the Greek Bronze age, and most of them didn't turn out to be homosexuals, but people with a normal sexuality and with, since repetitive cousin marriage didn't have any ill effects until the effects of modern medicine which took away the natural effects of
purifying selection and perpretated in making individuals with recessive alleles that result into congenital deformities live and reproduce, when they otherwise probably would have died out early in their lifespan, and the ones remaining would have more chances of harboring few deletrious alleles and be more likely to be more immune to the complications of consanguineous reproduction and for their offspring to be the same
Sociosexuality is genetic. There is a reason why certain people have differing disgust sensitivity,
for example.
Multiple studies have been done on homosexual individuals sharing genetic markers such as the
Xq28 and MAGE variants and certain features on chromosome 8, as well as the
INAH 3 neuron. There have also been meta analyses of twin studies that have determined that a gay man is much more likely than a straight man to have a gay brother.
