Richard Dawkins on male sexual attractiveness

[incel4life]

In a society where males compete with each other to be chosen as he-men by females, one of the best things a mother can do for her genes is to make a son who will turn out in his turn to be an attractive he-man. If she can ensure that her son is one of the fortunate few males who wins most of the copulations in the society when he grows up, she will have an enormous number of grandchildren. The result of this is that one of the most desirable qualities a male can have in the eyes of a female is, quite simply, sexual attractiveness itself. -Richard Dawkins

 

[EthnicelNL]

Richard Dawkins is a huge fucking cuck himself iirc

 

[Deleted member 8353]

Richard Dawkins is a huge fucking cuck himself iirc

This.

He'll criticize something, and then go on to mimic that very thing with his own actions. Pop culture atheists are the scum of the earth.

 

[Opus132]

Having children is not the motivation for sex. It is the experience itself. Why do you think abortion is so popular in an age which is ruled by hypergamy? What alternative reality does Dawkins live in, exactly, where women aren't screwing around for the sake of screwing around while avoiding pregnancy at all costs?

Evolutioncels don't really know what they are talking about. They have this retarded idea the purpose of human existence is to procreate and they try to interpret human behavior through that lens alone, which most of the times translates in trying to make a square fit into a circle. Do you suppose anyone is thinking of children while they are having sex? How many of you desire women purely because you want to "propagate" your genes? Be honest now.

We Godcels had it right all along:

https://archive.org/details/MetaphysicsOfSexJuliusEvola

 

[TrueAlphaMale]

This is all good and shit but how do you explain chad fathers with incel kids?

 

[incel4life]

Having children is not the motivation for sex. It is the experience itself. Why do you think abortion is so popular in an age which is ruled by hypergamy? What alternative reality does Dawkins live in, exactly, where women aren't screwing around for the sake of screwing around while avoiding pregnancy at all costs?

Evolutioncels don't really know what they are talking about. They have this retarded idea the purpose of human existence is to procreate and they try to interpret human behavior through that lens alone, which most of the times translates in trying to make a square fit into a circle. Do you suppose anyone is thinking of children while they are having sex? How many of you desire women purely because you want to "propagate" your genes? Be honest now.

We Godcels had it right all along:

https://archive.org/details/MetaphysicsOfSexJuliusEvola

Read this:

http://www.mikraite.org/Human-Evolution-td17.html

 

[Modus Coperandi]

I don't really understand public atheists.
what's the point of hating religion?
so many people need it to cope, why try to take it away? I don't get it. It does literally nothing evil in our current time.
must be only for the moneyz.

 

[_incelinside]

Genetic Recombination. Top tier guys have mediocre parents. And top tier parents have mediocre offspring

 

[incel4life]

I don't really understand public atheists.
what's the point of hating religion?
so many people need it to cope, why try to take it away? I don't get it. It does literally nothing evil in our current time.
must be only for the moneyz.

This thread has nothing to do with atheism. Richard Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist. He is very knowledgable about human behavior.

 

[Opus132]

But not knowledgeable enough not to be a cuck.

 

[Deleted member 8353]

He is very knowledgable about human behavior.

Yet not introspective enough to check his own.

The man just bothers me to no end, perhaps because he's pretty close to being my antithesis, but I suspect it's just due his own hypocrisy and lack of awareness.

 

[CyborgIncel]

Having children is not the motivation for sex. It is the experience itself. Why do you think abortion is so popular in an age which is ruled by hypergamy? What alternative reality does Dawkins live in, exactly, where women aren't screwing around for the sake of screwing around while avoiding pregnancy at all costs?

Evolutioncels don't really know what they are talking about. They have this retarded idea the purpose of human existence is to procreate and they try to interpret human behavior through that lens alone, which most of the times translates in trying to make a square fit into a circle. Do you suppose anyone is thinking of children while they are having sex? How many of you desire women purely because you want to "propagate" your genes? Be honest now.

We Godcels had it right all along:

https://archive.org/details/MetaphysicsOfSexJuliusEvola

Every desire a person can have is a result of our biological reality. Reproduction is not the direct cause of everything but rather the indirect one down the line. Life is just an autocatalytic reaction - the purpose of life is to propagate more life. Therefore life put in order certain mechanisms that ensure that propagation indirectly. Because sex is required for reproduction, life associates dopamine release with sex to make all living beings want sex because we're addicted to dopamine. When you look at a baby, certain neural paths get activated which your body recognizes and because of that secretes oxytocin, and since you're addicted to oxytocin, you'll be more likely to take care of that baby.
So you see, living being don't have sex and raise kids because they have the concious objective of reproduction, but because they have the unconcious objective of chasing after certain chemicals. But life itself absolutely functions based on the reproductive imperative which is how evolutionary biologists want to explain behaviour.

 

[Redpill Robert]

Richard Dawkins is pleb-tier. My favorites though are the intellectually pubescent neckbeards, 'foids, and normies who've clearly never actually read a serious book in their lives who all of a suddenly start acting like they're some well-read intellectual just because they read one of Dawkins' books or some other atheist or pop-science book.

 

[Deleted member 8353]

Every desire a person can have is a result of our biological reality. Reproduction is not the direct cause of everything but rather the indirect one down the line. Life is just an autocatalytic reaction - the purpose of life is to propagate more life. Therefore life put in order certain mechanisms that ensure that propagation indirectly. Because sex is required for reproduction, life associates dopamine release with sex to make all living beings want sex because we're addicted to dopamine. When you look at a baby, certain neural paths get activated which your body recognizes and because of that secretes oxytocin, and since you're addicted to oxytocin, you'll be more likely to take care of that baby.
So you see, living being don't have sex and raise kids because they have the concious objective of reproduction, but because they have the unconcious objective of chasing after certain chemicals. But life itself absolutely functions based on the reproductive imperative which is how evolutionary biologists want to explain behaviour.

Liberation from the need fulfillment process should be the main goal of existence. The self-perpetuation of life isn't an intrinsic good, the brain just floods us addictive chemicals to have us believe it is, and to associate it with a positive.

 

[CyborgIncel]

Liberation from the need fulfillment process should be the main goal of existence. The self-perpetuation of life isn't an intrinsic good, the brain just floods us addictive chemicals to have us believe it is, and to associate it with a positive.

What would that liberation constitute of? If you're just going against reproduction, you're not doing a good job liberating yourself of all the chains life has thrown on you.
True rebellion would be commiting suicide and ending this charade we call existence, but I think mass shooters are the vangaurd in the rebellion against life. I liked how Jordan Peterson (even though I thoroughly dislike him) correctly recognized that mass shooters aren't fueled by hatred of people, but by hatred of being itself (and hatred of God, he would also say).

 

[Deleted member 8353]

What would that liberation constitute of? If you're just going against reproduction, you're not doing a good job liberating yourself of all the chains life has thrown on you.

I'm trying to become a volcel

True rebellion would be commiting suicide and ending this charade we call existence, but I think mass shooters are the vangaurd in the rebellion against life. I liked how Jordan Peterson (even though I thoroughly dislike him) correctly recognized that mass shooters aren't fueled by hatred of people, but by hatred of being itself (and hatred of God, he would also say).

I think you're correct in a general sense about suicide, but going ER is pointless, as it doesn't really change anything. While I might be able to understand their feelings, it doesn't make them right.

True rebellion would consist of either killing yourself, or ending the game for everyone. Mass shooters empower their hatred regarding how they've been treated in this existence, it's not necessarily directed at this state of existence itself, nor towards it's creator. As these people are still bound by their own attachments to the world, as well their own urges. I think the people you're describing do exist, they're just misguided.

 

[Deleted member 301]

I don't really understand public atheists.
what's the point of hating religion?
so many people need it to cope, why try to take it away? I don't get it. It does literally nothing evil in our current time.
must be only for the moneyz.

True rebellion would consist of either killing yourself, or ending the game for everyone. Mass shooters empower their hatred regarding how they've been treated in this existence, it's not necessarily directed at this state of existence itself, nor towards it's creator. As these people are still bound by their own attachments to the world, as well their own urges. I think the people you're describing do exist, they're just misguided.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones

 

[EthnicelNL]

This is all good and shit but how do you explain chad fathers with incel kids?

Just lousy low iq parent. Being a Chad doesnt mean youll be a great parent.

 

[Deleted member 8353]

View attachment 25267

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones

Be fair to @Modus Coperandi as these are not the religious people he is referring to, and Jim Jones is precisely the sort of misguided individual that I was referring to previously, so good example if anything.