Women of the world, take over

FourthBase · Post by **FourthBase** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:55 pm

Stephen Morgan wrote:
FourthBase wrote:Many of today's humans descended from killers. But absolutely not ALL of us, and in my opinion not even most of us.
I seem to recall reading that half of the population of Asia is descended from Genghis Khan. Still, most of us aren't killers ourselves. Even in world war two most troops fired high on purpose because they couldn't cope with taking a human life. Those who missed and killed someone generally ended up severely traumatised, except for the psychopaths.

Top Secret

Damn...good points Morgan.

Who are the common ancestors for whites?
And would we all be actually descended from them or just related?

It makes evolutionary sense that the vast majority of us are endowed with at least some capacity for killing, even if the capacity is tiny and only able to be summoned in the most extreme defensive circumstance. Maybe the trick of the PTB is to create the illusion or even come close to creating the reality of that circumstance in order to summon it from us unwillingly. Kind of makes me think of the deluge of simulated violence on TV and film, but that's another subject another thread...

Stephen Morgan · Post by **Stephen Morgan** » Wed Oct 31, 2007 1:23 pm

FourthBase wrote:Damn...good points Morgan.

Who are the common ancestors for whites?
And would we all be actually descended from them or just related?

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_083b.html:

Pedigree collapse explains why it's so easy for professional genealogists to trace your lineage back to royalty--go far enough back and you're related to everybody. For that matter, you're probably related to everybody alive today. Some geneticists believe that everybody on earth is at least 50th cousin to everybody else.

Puts those bloodlines people into perspective.

It makes evolutionary sense that the vast majority of us are endowed with at least some capacity for killing, even if the capacity is tiny and only able to be summoned in the most extreme defensive circumstance. Maybe the trick of the PTB is to create the illusion or even come close to creating the reality of that circumstance in order to summon it from us unwillingly. Kind of makes me think of the deluge of simulated violence on TV and film, but that's another subject another thread...

The way the military do it is to get people to shoot each other with fake bullets. There was a documentary about this on Channel Four a few years ago. Like heavy paint balls. Then when the time comes they're ready. There's no such easy fix for the psychological trauma it causes, though.

FourthBase · Post by **FourthBase** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:18 am

The way the military do it is to get people to shoot each other with fake bullets. There was a documentary about this on Channel Four a few years ago. Like heavy paint balls. Then when the time comes they're ready. There's no such easy fix for the psychological trauma it causes, though.

Paint balls, hmmm.

POV shoot-em-up games probably just as effective.
Especially in the future as the "action" is more literal, a la Wii.

Stephen Morgan · Post by **Stephen Morgan** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:28 am

FourthBase wrote:Paint balls, hmmm.

POV shoot-em-up games probably just as effective.
Especially in the future as the "action" is more literal, a la Wii.

The Wii will be more like it. With normal PC games, like Doom and so on, you don't actually running around pointing a gun at real people and pulling the trigger. It's increments, people can be taken from one step to the next, getting used to shooting computer people, then real people with lasers, then paint balls, then bullets. It becomes a routine action.

theeKultleeder · Post by **theeKultleeder** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:33 am

I'm playing Jedi Outcast right now - it's an FPS based in the Star Wars universe. It's hella fun. Also, the Halo campaign mode - so I'm not in the arena shooting at people.

You guys make important and valid points. I just wanted to add that I enjoy some of this stuff.

chillin · Post by **chillin** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:37 am

Cheers Mate!

My friend and I used to play Starcraft frequently.

yathrib · Post by **yathrib** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:50 pm

For white Europeans, Muhammad and Charlemagne, due to the marriage of a Carolingian prince and and Spanish/Moorish princess who converted to Christianity. I'm a little foggy on the details, but there was an article about it in the Atlantic several years ago.

To paraphrase "The Life of Brian:" "So next time you go on about the bloody Arabs, just remember you *are* one!"

FourthBase wrote:[

Who are the common ancestors for whites?
And would we all be actually descended from them or just related?

FourthBase · Post by **FourthBase** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:55 pm

Wow. That's really not a long time ago. Now imagine for a moment that in 500 years all humans could trace their lineage back to, say, Dennis Kucinich.

FourthBase · Post by **FourthBase** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:28 pm

Bump, for Nemo and pop, among others.

FourthBase · Post by **FourthBase** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 2:21 pm

Bump, with an admonition to ignore the flaming.

In any plausible prehistoric matriarchy scenario, predating the point at which male humans figured out the basic causality of procreation and therefore lineage and therefore the incentive to control females, there would have been a lot of this, among many other types of Bonobo-esque group sex:

(Pardon me for posting a link to porn, but there's a purpose to it)

[clip of woman enjoying double penetration removed by me, per admin request]

(The purpose: This is what feminism also looks and sounds like. Depending on how you judge porn, and what porn you're judging: Sometimes the truth can be uglier than you wish, sometimes the truth can be sexier than you imagine.)

FourthBase · Post by **FourthBase** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:41 pm

So some of you think that the porn clip was inappropriate, eh?

Well, what's new. Once again, you failed to understand the point.

barracuda · Post by **barracuda** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 8:10 pm

FourthGrade wrote:Once again, you failed to understand the point.

Shouldn't that read "points"?

FourthBase · Post by **FourthBase** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 8:16 pm

Post by **Jeff** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 8:41 pm

I suppose I ought to spell it out in the posting guidelines, but I don't want links to hardcore porn here, whatever the point.

FourthBase · Post by **FourthBase** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 8:44 pm

Jeff wrote:I suppose I ought to spell it out in the posting guidelines, but I don't want links to hardcore porn here, whatever the point.

Well, except if it's hardcore death porn. Right?
And maybe hardcore fear porn is okay, too. Right?

Whatever, if I'd known sex porn was verboten, I wouldn't have posted it. Mind you, it was one freaking link, to one clip, to prove one point. Oh wait, more than one point? I still don't get that question.