August 2022 – Page 19 – Toms Blog on Life

Hamberger Meat

Chef Jamie Oliver has won his battle against the world’s largest food chain McDonalds. Oliver proved that burgers are made from the fat parts of meat washed with ammonia hydrogen, then used as “meatballs” in hamburger filling. Prior to this process, this meat was no longer fit for human consumption.

What sane person would put this meat in a child’s mouth?

On another initiative, Mr. Oliver showed how chicken nuggets are made: after selecting the “best parts”, the rest: fat, skin, cartilage, feces, bones, head, legs, the MEC smoothie shell canica – an understatement used by scientists s and engineers in the field of food, then dough is white, refreshed and repainted, soaked in flour and partially dehydrated burnt oil, i. i.e. with carcinogenic toxic chemicals (even the UN/WHO/World Health Organisation (NOT) global agenda admitted trans fats can cause cancer… ).

The food industry uses ammonia-hydrogen as an antibacterial agent, which has allowed McDonald’s to use in its burgers unfit for human consumption.

But what is even more worrying is that these ammonium and hydrogen-based substances are considered legal ingredients in the food industry’s manufacturing process, with the blessing of health authorities World Cups. So consumers will never know what substances are being introduced in our foods!

J Stopl writes:

He is quite right if you correctly understand what he means by that.

This will be rather long answer, because this is a very complex issue. One of the most important differences between the sexuality of men and women is that since women can get pregnant, there is much higher risk connected with sex for women than for men. When woman got pregnant in the prehistory, she needed men to care for her, protect her and took care of food and such for her and the baby. That is the reason why women have evolutionary hardcoded onto them that they are much pickier than men in choosing their sexual partners. Men did not have this problem, they are just biologically programmed to spread their seed. But women had to be careful. You want good genes for your offsprings and capable father to take care of you and your child, so you raise the chances of survival for your genes. So it is not the case that men like sex more than woman, quite the opposite. Women can reach much more intense and diverse levels of sexual pleasure, because nature had to compensate for the risks connected with having sex and motivate woman to do it anyway. This is key to understand what comes next. Natural result of this evolutionary pickiness of women is the fact that through out prehistory of human kind, relatively small part of men got most women and significant amount of men never manage to reproduce. That is the reason why all of us have much more female ancestors than male ancestors. Rather small amount of strongest, most attractive and capable men just reproduced with many woman. So polygamy.

Now this was probably sustainable during the prehistory and it was also good for the gene pool, because only the best genes reproduced. But it is unsustainable in any kind of larger civilisation, because you can not have very functional civilisation with large chunk of males not having any sex and prospects of reproducing. They will rather burn everything to the ground than to live in such an environment. That is why most civilisations regulated sexual behaviour in one way or another. And one of the most successful ways of doing that was monogamy, which was promoted by christianity. The very strict rules in regards to monogamy that christianity promotes are first and foremost very effective way of distributing sexual partners to almost everyone. Think about it. The ban of premarital sex, ban of abortions, illegality of divorces, very high legal or societal disdain for promiscuity, promotion of sex as a way of reproduction and not just pleasure, all of those concepts are in one way or another aim at strengthening of the nuclear family unit. Because it was incredibly good for the stability of the society. When you look at Islam, where polygamy is common, it does not take a genius to figure out that for every high status male who has seven wifes, there are six lower status males who has none. That can not help the stability of any society.

But in recent centuries, literally every single one of those legal and cultural norms, that incentivised monogamy, fell apart. Divorces got legal and then even socially totally acceptable and are now basically just simple administrative act. When I listen to stories of my grandmother, who grew up on the Moravian countryside around WWII, the norms were very different. When a girl was not married around her’s 20 something, she was considered weird. When woman got a divorce, she was then considered problematic, damaged goods. There was a stigma connected to it. Premarital sex is an absolute standard today, which takes away the incentive to get married in the form of sex. Ban of abortions ensured that when woman got pregnant, she needed to keep the child and that motivated her to get married so she is not a single mother. And there were high levels of cultural disdain for promiscuity which is now totally normalised, and if one looks at big parts of modern culture, even glorified to be honest. Both for men and for women. My grandmother told me that when some girl from her trade school (she must have been around 17, so year 1952 in the communist Czechoslovakia) had “something” (I do not know if it was sex or some lesser intimity) with some boy she just met at some kind of dance party, her and her girlfriends just did not speak with that girl anymore. They just considered her to be a slut.

Now, I am of course aware that all of those reforms had good and moral reasons. When you have an alcoholic husband who beats you, it is horrible not to be able to get a divorce. There are life situations in which no one can blame a woman for getting an abortion, for example after a rape. And the cultural disdain for promiscuity was often full of hypocrisy and fakery. I understand all this. But it is also important to understand that those norms were not here just to promote patriarchy or whatever, but they all had an important civilisational role. The broad introduction of the contraception pill in the 1960’s basically took away the risk of pregnancy from casual sex and the massive entering of women into the workforce made men less necessary to women as providers for the families. And when all of this combines, we are getting back to the prehistoric model. According to the data, around 30% of American man in the age bracket 18–30 are basically sexless. I am not sure about the data in the European countries, but it won’t be that different IMO. It went up three times in the last 30 years, but it literally skyrocketed after Tinder became the single biggest way of meeting people. The data from the Tinder are clear. Women pass on circa 95% of men on Tinder and swipe right on the 5%. Man pass on circa 47% of women on Tinder and swipe right on 53%. That is the evolutionary pickiness distilled to the basics, since it is purely about the looks on Tinder.

According to the data, the bottom 80% of men are fighting over the bottom 22% of women and the top 78% of women are fighting over the top 20% of men. In the past, women were motivated to settle down and get married. Even if the guy from her village who wanted to marry her was not the most pretty or the brightest, it was still better to settle down with him then it was to stay single. This is gone. Woman are not incentivised by the society to settle with less attractive guy just to settle down. Why would she? She is biologically programmed to pursue the best genetic material there is. There are also other factors in play, like the digitalisation of the human interactions. People are far less likely to just casually meet, young men are increasingly spending time playing video games and are also getting huge amounts of arousal from watching porn, which is incredibly easy to reach. Now you might say that after centuries of social norms being set up to redistribute sexual partners to men, the coin finally turned and it is time for women to be the masters of the sex market, right? You go queen! Well, not really.

The situation is also bad for women and does not bring them happiness. Here is why. In today’s hook up culture, it is totally normal and easy for women to have casual sex with very attractive men. They just find her on Tinder and if there is no other more attractive option, they have sex with her. So young women can have number of high value male sexual partners. But while the female very likely wants to take these “relationships” further, the males very likely do not. Why would they? These high value males are the true winners of the current situation. They are not motivated to settle, they are having sex with many beautiful women on regular basis. So for them the women is just one of many, it does not mean that much. But for the women, unless she is off the charts model material, it creates unattainable standards of what kind of men they desire to settle with. Now contemporary women is expected to study at an university and then pursue a career for some time before settling down to have children. It is usually around 30 years of age. So she starts to look for the partner to settle down with, but she is in her early 30’s and she wants only very attractive guys, because her previous sexual experiences gave her the impression that she can get these kind of guys. They had sex with her right? So she has a chance. And then there are other factors in play.

It is backed by the data that women usually need men that is at least as inteligent and successful as her for the relationship to work. Relationships where the women makes more than the men rarely lasts. So our hypothetical women in her early 30’s needs very attractive men that is educated and makes at least as much, but ideally more, than her. So basically very small percentage of really high value males. But there is the catch. She is competing for this males with younger girls in their early 20’s. They do not have university degree or the career, but it is proven by the data that men do not care at all about that. Men do not look for extensive levels of intelligence and career success in woman. And those young women are in the peak of their reproductive health. That, translated into normal language, means that women in their early 20’s are much more attractive than women in their 30’s. That is just hard biology. So women are increasingly unable to find partners to settle with, because their standards are just too high. There is increasing number of women in their 30’s and 40’s that are unhappy, because they just can not find the “right guy”. Because they are not motivated by the societal norms to settle, even if it means lowering their standards. They are, on the other hand, incentivised by the popular culture (by it pop music or movies and tv shows) to try as much as possible and just find the one, ideal men. But the probability that she will succeed is very low, unless she is just really smoking hot, model material.

Thus you have increasing numbers of young dudes that are in involuntary celibate (incels), because no woman wants to have sex with them. And you have increasing number of childless women that do not settle down and marry, because she just can not find the “right guy”. And women in their early 40’s are the largest users of antidepressants, because at this age women start to realise, that they just missed it and they will remain childless. This presents huge problem for the society. Do you really think that society with 30+ % of men that are not seeing any prospects of finding a sexual partner will remain stable and functional? Think twice. When you read the incel forums, you can see incredible amount of hate towards the world. Most of them would rather see it burn down than to just make peace with it. What percentage of American school shooters would do what they did if they had a girlfriend? This is what Jordan Peterson means by enforcing monogamy. He does not mean to enforce it through the state giving sexual partners to men. That is absurd. He means that society upholds values that promotes monogamy and marriage and offers incentives to get married, even if it means that your husband won’t be the biggest alpha male in the town. But I think that there is literally zero chance of doing that in today societal atmosphere. Most people are absolutely unaware of these issues and just think that it is the fault of the guys that are having no sex (which in some cases of course is, no doubt about it). But there are larger societal forces in play. So I think that these things just have to play out and when young people see the damage it will do onto the society, they will return to more traditional norms. I think we can already see glimpses of that among the younger generations.