Bloody shovel

Don't call it a spade

On bare branches

My last post about Arab sexual dynamics has been criticized (here by TGGP), for asserting the Bare Branches theory. That’s the theory that says that a surplus of single men in a society causes crime, instability, general havoc in short. I honestly wasn’t thinking about that (I’m most interested in understanding why Arab females wear burkas and love it) but I guess the criticism is fair and deserves responding.

Well the Bare Branches theory is pretty mainstream, nowadays used to explain quite different circumstances: one being the China-is-going-to-hell meme. Theory says that selective abortion has caused tens of millions of single males who won’t be able to form families, so they will grow frustrated wreak havoc, and eventually be used by the evil commies in a war against Taiwan. The other bare-branches everyone cares about are of course the Arabs, who according to western bleeding-heart liberals, grow into jihadis out of sexual frustration.

Well TGGP quotes Jason Malloy on how the Bare Branches theory is false. Jason Malloy is the kind of guy we all wish had his own blog, alas we can only read him through comments on others. He’s good, and he quotes real data. We rightists tend to like data because in general the data agrees with us, in HBD, Game, welfare, social policy in general. Still statistics are raw data, and don’t explain the mechanism of it. You need a theory for that. And while quoting historical British data is better than being Matthew Yglesias, its still prudent not to make any assertions about human nature based on Anglo data alone. Societies tend to differ in many ways.

The mechanism behind the Bare-branches-are-good theory must be, as I see it, that a lack of females creates greater competition against males, who are forced to behave well to get a female. There’s too good examples, the Chinese coolies in America, almost all male, and very well behaved, versus modern American blacks, who enjoy a surplus of females, and can consequently get away with slacking and crime in general. Well I that’s a good point. Men don’t just get frustrated, give up, and start to wreak havoc. They are most likely to strive to gain an income, then use it to get a bride, if later on life. In the end, women being women, they want primarily financial stability, so if there’s a surplus of males, they can bargain better status. 20 year olds males have almost never in history been all sexually satisfied, the fact that all men should be married is a quite recent meme coming from a modern tendency to idealize the 50s.

Anyway to the point, on my last post I was not arguing about Arab males being violent because of the sex-ratio. First of all Jason Malloy on his post does quote his sources as saying that polygamy does correlate with violence, saying that polygamy programs for being a cad. Well a cad without access for females is a very unlucky dude. But I wasn’t talking about that either, in fact I wasn’t talking about the sex ratio at all.

The sex ratio doesn’t matter these days, as the pairing mechanisms in modern societies are utterly broken. China has a very famous male surplus, yet there are millions upon millions of spinsters (called 剩女, shengnü, leftover women) who simply refuse to marry. Again it looks like Arab countries have their own problems with spinsters too. There’s a strong correlation between economic growth and spinsterhood (or catwomanhood as Roissy would say). As they aren’t in peril of starving anymore, and family won’t pimp them out, they’d rather stay single than marrying a beta.

Islam has a very strong mechanism to shield women from unwanted male advances, those being by definition advances by beta men. Women in western countries wear revealing clothes only to be able to ride the cock-carrousel. As there is no cock-carrousel allowed in Arab countries, what do they do? Wear burkas. As they would rather be invisible than be subject from the looks of betas.

As for TGGP’s contention that conversion to Islam is more common in males, well I remain sceptic. I see little advantage in converting to Islam, besides the odd spiritual guy who wants out of hedonism and needs something to pray to.

2 responses to “On bare branches

  1. namae nanka December 16, 2011 at 19:13

    “Jason Malloy is the kind of guy we all wish had his own blog, alas we can only read him through comments on others. ”

    coldequations on blogspot. Though, it appears to be private now.

    “I see little advantage in converting to Islam, besides the odd spiritual guy who wants out of hedonism and needs something to pray to.”

    can confer advantage in marriage cases.(heard about this long ago, dunno if true or just feminists wankering in advance)

Please comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s